ELLEN WHITE'S PROPHETIC CONTRADICTIONS AND FOOLISHNESS!

We have seen how Ellen White contradicts both Scripture and herself and will show that even more so. Let’s begin with a statement from the Publisher’s Preface to her book. Sketches from the Life of Paul:

"The writer of this book, having received special help from the Spirit of God, can throw light upon the teachings of Paul and their application to our own time, as no other authors are prepared to do. She has not suffered herself to be drawn aside to discuss theories, or to indulge in speculation. No extraneous matter is introduced. Consequently, much that is contained in other books, which is interesting to the curious, and has a certain value, but which is after all little more than theory, finds no place in this work.”

One has but to read the book to see the nonsense of that statement. It is especially ludicrous because of Ellen White’s extensive borrowing from others, which we will look at in the next chapter. Ellen White was quite prone to speculation, theories, and curious renderings. Let’s look at a few of these: 

“As Adam came forth from the hand of his Creator, he was of noble height, and of beautiful symmetry. He was more than twice as tall as men now living upon the earth and was well proportioned. His features were perfect and beautiful. His complexion was neither white, nor sallow, but ruddy, glowing with the rich tint of health. Eve was not quite as tall as Adam. Her head reached a little above his shoulders. She, too was noble — perfect in symmetry, and very beautiful.” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 34.

 This sounds like Joseph Smith’s description of the inhabitants of the Moon. It also is very much like Smith’s rewriting of the Bible, the "inspired translation.” You will notice how she adds to the Bible text. Nothing of that sort is found in the Scriptures. But they claim that since she was inspired, she saw things not revealed in the Scriptures. But what does that do to their claim that she did not add to the Bible? There’s more: 

“Angels of God visited Adam and Eve and told them of the fall of Satan, and warned them to be on their guard. They cautioned them not to separate from each other in their employment, for they might be brought in contact with this fallen foe. If one of them were alone, they would be in greater danger than if both were together.” Ibid., p. 39. 

Of course, nothing in the Scriptures can even hint at anything like this. It is pure speculation. But there’s more.

“Eve wandered away from the side of her husband and was gazing with mingled curiosity and admiration upon the fruit of the forbidden tree. Satan, in the form of a serpent, conversed with Eve. The serpent had not the power of speech, but Satan used him as a medium. It was Satan that spoke, not the serpent. Eve was deceived and thought it was the serpent. This serpent was a very beautiful creature with wings; and while flying through the air his appearance was very bright, resembling the color of burnished gold. He did not go upon the ground, but went from place to place through the air, and ate fruit like a man. Ibid, pp. 39-40. 

All of this is speculative, curious, theorizing, and imaginative, but not according to Scripture. In fact, Genesis 3:6 says — 

". . . she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat.” It does not say she "wandered away from the side of her husband,” but rather that he was "with her.” On page 42 of the same book, she says: “I saw a sadness come over the countenance of Adam. He appeared afraid and astonished. A struggle appeared to be going on in his mind. He told Eve he was quite certain that this was the foe that they had been warned against. If so, that she must die. She assured him she felt no ill effects, but rather a very pleasant influence, and entreated him to eat. Adam regretted that Eve had left his Side, but now the deed was done. He must be separated from her whose society he had loved so well. How could he have it thus? His love for Eve was strong. And in utter discouragement, he resolved to share her fate. He seized the fruit and quickly ate it, and like Eve felt not immediately its ill effects. Adam disobeyed and fell.” 

More speculation, of course. Now notice how she put the same circumstances later in the 1887 edition of Great Controversy, p. 352: 

“Eve yielded to temptation, and through her influence, Adam also was deceived. They accepted the words of the serpent, that God did not mean what he said; they distrusted their Creator, and imagined that he was restricting their liberty and that they might obtain great light and freedom by transgressing his law.” 

Here Ellen White is both guilty of being deceived and rebelling against God. But in 1864, in the preceding quotation, Adam was completely aware of what he was doing, and the consequences, and yet ate out of love for Eve, fearing he would lose her if he didn’t. Here’s another statement from her: 

“The news of man’s fall spread through heaven — every harp was hushed. The angels cast their crowns from their heads in sorrow. All Heaven was in agitation. The angels were grieved at the base ingratitude of man, in return for the rich bounties God had provided. A council was held to decide what must be done with the guilty pair. The angels feared that they would put forth the hand, and eat of the tree of life, and thus perpetuate a life of sin." Spiritual Gifts, Voi. 3, p. 44.

One has only to compare this with the account in Genesis to see that not only nothing happened as she described it, but it contradicts the statements concerning the Godhead in action in those passages. In the Preface of Volume I of Spiritual Gifts dated 1858, Ellen White says: 

"Yet no man has a right to alter the word of God . . . Prophesyings which contradict the plain and positive declarations of the word are to be rejected.” 

Yet, we find her contradicting and adding to that Bible. 

A more serious contradiction appears in Ellen White’s teachings about the fall of man. In 1858 she said, writing in '’The Plan of Salvation”: 

“Sorrow filled heaven, as it was realized that man was lost, and the world that God created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and there was no way of escape for the offender, The whole family of Adam must die, I saw the lovely Jesus, and beheld an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon his countenance. Soon I saw him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the Father, the anxiety of the angels seemed to be intense while Jesus was communing with his Father, three times he was shut in by the glorious light about the Father, and the third time he came from the Father, his person could be seen. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble, and shone with benevolence and loveliness, such as words cannot express. He then made known to the angelic host that a way of escape had been made for the lost man. He told them that he had been pleading with his Father, and had offered to give his life a ransom and take the sentence of death upon himself, and through him, man might find pardon.... Jesus bid the heavenly host be reconciled to the plan that his Father accepted. ... Said the angel, think ye that the Father yielded up his dearly beloved Son with- out a struggle? No, No. It was even a struggle with the God of heaven, whether to let guilty man perish or to give his beloved Son to die for them.” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1 , pp. 22, 25, 26.

 You see, among other things, the position clearly stated that after Adam and Eve sinned a plan had to be formulated to save man from sin. Jesus is pictured as originating the plan and then having to go three times to the Father and talk Him into it! And the Father found it difficult to decide whether to let a guilty man perish or allow His Son to die for man. In addition, one might note the misconceptions concerning the Godhead. Not only is none of this found in Scripture, but is contrary to what is taught there, but compare this quotation of 1858 with the next one from 1898. We get an entirely different story: 

“The plan for our redemption was not an afterthought, a plan formulated after the fall of Adam. . .. God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence and made provision to meet the terrible emergency. So great was His love for the world that he covenanted to give His only begotten Son ...” Desire of the Ages, 1956 printing, pp. 3-4

“Before the foundations of the earth were laid, the Father and the Son had united in a covenant to redeem man if he should be overcome by Satan. They had clasped their hands in a solemn pledge that Christ should become the surety for the Human race,” Ibid., p. 824. 

Here the plan was formulated before the world was formed, and the Father is pictured taking a different part in that plan than in the previous position. First, it’s one way and then the other, and all are supposed to be by the inspiration of God! But, while we are on some things from Desire of the Ages, let’s notice another item or two: 

“All this displeased His brothers. Being older than Jesus, they felt that He should be under their dictation. They charged Him with thinking Himself superior to them and reproved Him for setting Himself above their teachers and the priests and rulers of the people. Often, they threatened and tried to intimidate Him; but He passed on, making the Scriptures His guide,” p. 62. 

“His brothers, as the sons of Joseph were Called, sided with the rabbis. They insisted that the traditions must be heeded as if they were the requirements of God .... “p. 61, 

Again, comparison with the Bible text shows what additions to it she makes here. I presume she is contending that Joseph was married to someone else before Mary and had several male children by that marriage. What was that claim again about her not "theorizing?” 

In the next quotation please note that there is only one Herod spoken of; the nouns and pronouns all indicate this: 

“Herod’s heart grew still harder, and when he learned that Jesus had arisen, he was not much troubled. He took the life of James; and when he saw that this pleased the Jews, he took Peter also, intending to put him to death. But God had a work for Peter to do, and sent his angel and delivered him. Herod was visited with judgment. God smote him in the sight of a great multitude as he was exalting himself before them, and he died a horrible death;” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 71. 

It was Herod Antipas who had a part in the trial of Jesus but Herod Agrippa I who put James to death, imprisoned Peter, and was struck down by God. Adventist apologists have tried to cover up this historical blunder by saying that Ellen White was talking about the same "evil spirit” that was in all of the Herods so that their wicked acts were as though there was but one person. But that isn’t what she says; that’s just a flimsy coverup. 

The role of Satan, not only in Genesis, but in other places in history as well, receives center stage with Ellen White. The following statement concerning the temptation of Jesus is interesting; 

“Satan hoped to conquer him through this powerful medium and laid his plans accordingly. As soon as Christ’s long fast commenced, he was at hand with his temptations. He came clothed in light, claiming to be an angel sent from the throne of God to sympathize with Christ and relieve him from his suffering condition, He represented to him that God did not desire him to pass through the pain and self-denial which he had anticipated. He claimed to bear the message from Heaven that God only designed to prove the willingness of Christ to endure his test. Satan told him that he was to set his feet on the blood-stained path, but not to travel it, that, like Abraham, he was tried to show his perfect obedience. He claimed to be the angel who stayed the hand of Abraham, as the knife was raised to slay Isaac, and that he had now come to save the life of the Son of God, deliver him from a painful death by starvation, and assist him in the plan of salvation.” Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 2, p. 90. 

“As soon as Christ began his fast, Satan appeared as an angel of light and claimed to be a messenger of heaven. He told him it was not the will of God that he should suffer this pain and self-denial.” Christ Our Saviour, p. 45. 

When we take all this nonsense and compare it with the Bible's account of the temptation of Jesus we find something quite different. Ellen White not only adds to the Bible, she contradicts it: 

“Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted by the devil. And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he afterward hungered. And the tempter came and said unto him, If thou art the Son of God, command that these stones become bread ” Matthew 4:1-3.

 The Bible presents Satan coming to tempt Jesus after the forty days of fasting, whereas Ellen White has him appearing at the beginning of that time. It will also be seen in Matthew 4 that the approach of Satan is nothing at all like she describes it. But, the additions of Ellen White are revered by Adventists as the voice of God. In fact, if you could listen in on some of their conversations you would find, in nine out of ten, a common statement cropping up. It may vary slightly but is essential as the following: "The Bible is so hard to understand. Thank God for Sister White because she makes it so plain." Indeed, Adventists more often than not will use Great Controversy or Desire of the Ages or some like the work of Ellen White in their devotionals. It is like the Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses, or Christian Scientists, for it is not what the Bible teaches but rather what their "inspired" leaders say it teaches. Their primary study is not the Bible, but their "inspired" leader’s comments on the Bible. 

In 1849, at the close of a broadside that contained several instructions from her "visions," Ellen White said: “If any among us are sick, let us not dishonor God by applying to earthly physicians, but apply to the God of Israel. If we follow his directions (James 5:14-15), the sick will be healed. God’s promise cannot fail Have faith in God, and trust wholly in him ...” January 31, 1849. 

Some followed this instruction with unwelcome results and later she had to change this position. This statement was deleted from future publications, even though most of her writings were printed in a single volume in 1851 as her "Experiences and Views" Several years later Ellen White was accused of having caused the death of an Adventist woman who refused medical help. Ellen White protested her innocence by pointing out, first, that she was over a hundred miles away at the time, and had not learned of the illness until after the death. Secondly, she claimed that she received a vision, ("I was shown”), that those involved had been lacking in judgment in giving their influence against her getting medical aid. "I saw that they had carried matters to extremes and that the cause of God was wounded and our faith reproached, on account of such things, which were fanatical in the extreme.” She goes on to say: 

“We believe in the prayer of faith; but some have carried this matter too far, especially those who have been affected with fanaticism. Some have taken the strong ground that it was wrong to use simple remedies. We have never taken this position, but have opposed it. We believe it to be perfectly right to use the remedies God Has placed in our reach, and if these fail, apply to the great Physician, and in some cases the counsel of an earthly physician is very necessary. This position we have always held.’’ Spiritual Gifts, Vol . 2, pp. 134-1 35. 

When you compare this statement with the one from the 1849 Broadside you find quite a change in positions. For her to claim she has "always held” the position of obtaining help from an "earthly physician” when needed is simply not so. Yet, this is the "inspired prophetess” of God. It is also strange that she was so "down” on the medical profession at the beginning, and went on to establish a basis for the Adventist medical schools. 

One of the most outlandish and nonsensical positions taken by the "Spirit of Prophecy” was in regard to the origins of some races of man. In the quotations, the word amalgamation refers to sexual intercourse and its results. Here’s what she says concerning conditions before and following the Flood: 

“But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere. . . . Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men,” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, pp. 64, 75 (1864).

That is quite unbelievable, and certainly not believed by Adventists today. The statements were later dropped from any publication, but from the beginning caused a stir. Modern Adventists have reinterpreted the statements to explain away what she said. (A discussion of the controversy leading to that change is found in Spectrum, Vol. 12, No. 4, June 1982, pp. 10-17). In 1868 Uriah Smith, editor of the Review and Herald at the time, wrote a defense of the visions of Ellen White. This was printed in booklet form that same year under the title The Visions of Mrs, E. G. White. It was very warmly praised by James White in the Review and Herald on August 25, 1868, and he and Ellen took 2000 copies to camp meetings that year. Smith took the position on these amalgamation statements as referring to sexual relations between men and animals that produced different races of man. That was his defense of Mrs. White on the point. Smith says, after quoting what we noted in the reference above: 

“But does anyone deny the general statement contained in the extract given above? They do not. If they did, they could easily be silenced by a reference to such cases as the wild Bushmen of Africa, some tribes of the Hottentots, and perhaps the Digger Indians of our own country, etc. Moreover, naturalists affirm that the line of demarcation between the human and animal races is lost in confusion. It is impossible, as they affirm, to tell just where the human ends and the animal begins. Can we suppose that this was so ordained of God in the beginning? Rather has not sin marred the boundaries of these two kingdoms?" The Visions of Mrs. E. G. White, p. 103. 

Obviously Smith, and most Adventists for many years, believed just what Ellen White plainly said. And with the endorsement of James White, it is evident that she did say it. Another interesting position taken was that acquired conditions or characteristics could be passed on to one’s children in various ways. Ellen White was especially opposed to tight-laced corsets for women. She gives her endorsement to the following: 

“ But my waist is naturally slender,' says one woman. She means that she has inherited small lungs. Her ancestors, more or less of them, compressed their lungs in the same way that we do, and it has become in her case a congenital deformity. This leads us to one of the worst aspects in the whole matter — the transmitted results of indulgence in their deadly vibe” Health Reformer, Vol. 6, No 5, 1871, p. 157. 

It should be apparent that such practices on the part of ancestors are not inherited. It is the same basic position of evolutionists as to how evolution operates.