A Critique of the Book Prophetess of Health

IV. Importance Of A Proper Concept Of A Prophet And Their Work

Some of the exhibits employed in Prophetess of Health carry weight only in the light of rigid or distorted concepts of inspiration. We freely admit that as we examine closely the mass of material from Ellen White’s pen—vastly more than from the pen of any other author who laid claim to inspiration—material embodying not only writings intended for publication, but sermons, letters, diaries and even the reports of interviews produced over a period of seventy years, there are some problems. These are relatively few, but some problems do exist. We at the White Estate readily acknowledge this, but in the same breath we point out that there is nothing singular about it. What is true of Ellen White’s writings in this respect is equally true of the Bible—there “are some things hard to be understood” (2 Peter 3:16). CBPH 23.7

Some Points We Should Consider

While the limitations of space in this critique do not allow for an extended discussion of God’s communication through His prophets, we should pause here to consider some points in the Holy Scriptures and in the E. G. White writings which may well have a bearing on our observations. CBPH 23.8

The apostle Paul declared that the gift of prophecy, along with other spiritual gifts, would appear in the Christian church “till we all come in the unity of the faith” (Ephesians 4:11-13). Joel particularly specified that “your Sons and your daughters shall prophesy” in anticipation of “the great and terrible day of the Lord” (Joel 2:28-32). Seventh-day Adventists hold that the prophetic gift has been manifested in the life and ministry of Ellen G. White. CBPH 23.9

It is only natural that questions should be raised concerning the relationship between Ellen White and the Bible prophets. How did her life, her inspiration, and her work compare with the inspiration and the work of Isaiah, Daniel, Nathan, Huldah and the other Biblical prophets? CBPH 23.10

She, like them, claimed to speak with divine authority. Her sources of information were similar to theirs. What about the nature of her inspiration,—was it like theirs? It will be instructive to compare Ellen White with the biblical prophets on these and other vital points. CBPH 23.11

Authority

The Bible writers claim, either implicitly or explicitly, that it was the God of heaven who authorized them to bear His messages. Moses wrote repeatedly, “And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, speak unto the children of Israel” (Exodus 14:1, 2; Leviticus 27:1, 2; Numbers 15:1, 2, etc.). It was the word of the Lord that came to Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Isaiah, and the other prophets (Ezekiel 1:3; Jeremiah 1:2; Isaiah 1:2, etc.). Some New Testament authors make no specific claims to divine authority for their works, yet they obviously believed that their writings were commissioned from above. CBPH 24.1

Ellen White also maintained unequivocally that God had spoken through her. “In my books,” she declared, “the truth is stated, barricaded by a ‘Thus saith the Lord.’ The Holy Spirit traced these truths upon my heart and mind as indelibly as the law was traced by the finger of God upon the tables of stone” (Colporteur Ministry, 126. Hereinafter abbreviated CM). “Sister White,” she wrote of herself, “is not the originator of these books. They contain the instruction that during her lifework God has been giving her” (Colporteur Ministry, 125). “God gave me the light contained in The Great Controversy and Patriarchs and Prophets ... these works were not the product of any human mind; they are the voice of God speaking to His people” (Colporteur Ministry, 129). “The Holy Ghost is the author of the Scriptures and the Spirit of Prophecy” (Letter 92, 1900). There was no more question in the mind of Ellen White as to the source of her messages than there was in the minds of the Bible prophets. Like them, she claimed to speak with divine authority. CBPH 24.2

Sources of Information

A variety of sources entered into the material which is now a part of Holy Writ. These included: CBPH 24.3

1. Information supernaturally supplied in visions or prophetic dreams, such as the account of the creation of the earth, the origin of sin and the fall of man, the apocalyptic visions of Daniel and John, and a great portion of the rest of the Bible. CBPH 24.4

2. Genealogical lists, such as those appearing in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. There is no reason for believing that these long lists of names were supernaturally supplied to the Gospel writers. They no doubt used existing official records as their sources. CBPH 24.5

3. Biographies or histories written by others. Luke acknowledges that he studied other works on Christ’s life before he wrote his Gospel. (Luke 1:1-4). An examination of the synoptic gospels reveals that not only Luke but also Matthew used existing historical documents. For example, even a casual reading of Matthew 9:6, Mark 2:10, 11 and Luke 5:24 proves that a decided literary relationship existed between the three authors. The passages in Matthew and Luke are practically identical to the one in Mark, even to the inclusion of the non-literary break in the middle of the sentence. If Mark wrote first, as many scholars believe, then both Matthew and Luke engaged in what we call literary borrowing. It is even possible that all three writers may have used a common source. CBPH 24.6

Many other similar illustrations of this nature could be cited. CBPH 24.7

4. Non-christian literature such as Paul’s quotations in Titus 1:12, and Acts 17:28. Sometimes Paul does not indicate that he is quoting another author, as in 1 Corinthians 15:33, where he uses the language of the heathen poet Menander without a credit line. The passage about Enoch’s proclamation of the second advent (Jude 14, 15) is also found in a pseudepigraphal work of the first century B.C. CBPH 24.8

5. The laws of other nations. As scholars are well aware, the civil code of Israel contained some regulations also found in the code of Hammurabi which was known at least 250 years earlier. Since Moses was one of the best educated men in the world of his day, we must assume that he was acquainted with Hammurabi’s laws, and to some extent embodied their language in delineating certain regulations. For example, the code of Hammurabi No. 14 says, “If a citizen has stolen the son of a citizen he shall be put to death.” In similar vein Moses wrote, “And he that stealeth a man and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death” (Exodus 21:16). The code of Hammurabi No. 196 and No. 200 read, “If a citizen destroys the eye of the son of a citizen his eye shall be destroyed.... If a citizen knocks out a tooth of a citizen his tooth shall be knocked out.” Two and a half centuries later Moses wrote, “Life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (Deuteronomy 19:21). Clearly, Moses was not the first to say some of the things which are recorded in the Pentateuch. (For the Code of Hammurabi, see James B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, pp. 166-1 77.) CBPH 24.9

6. Commonly known facts. It was not necessary for the Holy Spirit to inform Luke that Emmaus was “about threescore furlongs” from Jerusalem, as this was common knowledge, a fact known to everyone who lived in that area. CBPH 24.10

In outlining these sources of the prophets’ information we do not in any way challenge their inspiration. The Holy Spirit led them to record what they did. CBPH 24.11

Investigation of the sources used by Ellen White shows that they were quite similar to those used by the Biblical prophets. Among these the following may be listed: CBPH 24.12

1. Information supernaturally provided through visions and dreams. CBPH 24.13

In her introduction to the Great Controversy Mrs. White states: CBPH 24.14

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.—GC p. x. CBPH 24.15

Most of the material in the Ellen White books appears to have been provided in this supernatural way through visions and prophetic dreams. CBPH 24.16

2. Articles and books written by others. In the same Great Controversy introduction the author states further, CBPH 25.1

The great events which have marked the progress of reform in past ages are matters of history, well known and universally acknowledged by the Protestant world; they are facts which none can gainsay. This history I have presented briefly, in accordance with the scope of the book, and the brevity which must necessarily be observed, the facts having been condensed into as little space as seemed consistent with a proper understanding of their application. In some cases where a historian has so grouped together events as to afford, in brief, a comprehensive view of the subject, or has summarized details in a convenient manner, his words have been quoted; but in some instances no specific credit has been given, since the quotations are not given for the purpose of citing that writer as authority, but because his statement affords a ready and forcible presentation of the subject. In narrating the experience and views of those carrying forward the work of reform in our own time, similar use has been made of their published works.—GC pp. xi, xii. CBPH 25.2

In this passage penned in 1888 Ellen White informs us that, like Moses and Paul, she felt free to use certain existing historical documents. She applied the same principle to religious and health works. CBPH 25.3

Approximately seven percent of her book Sketches from the Life of Paul was drawn from Conybeare and Howson’s Life and Epistles of Saint Paul. Shortly before her own book was published she shared her enthusiasm for Conybeare and Howson with the readers of the church’s principal missionary paper. In support of an advertisement for the book in a February, 1883, issue of Signs of the Times, she wrote, “The Life of St. Paul by Conybeare and Howson, I regard as a book of great merit, and one of rare usefulness to the earnest student of the New Testament history” (The Signs of the Times, February 22, 1883, p. 96). Four months later, in June, 1883, her own volume on Paul was published. CBPH 25.4

Similarly, Mrs. White directed the attention of Adventists to both Larkin B. Coles and Horace Mann before she ever borrowed a line from their works. In 1865 she published articles by both Coles and Mann in her six pamphlets, Health or How to Live. Later she drew passages from their writings into her own works. CBPH 25.5

Why, it may be asked, did the prophets need the help of the Holy Spirit when they were using as sources documents already in existence? The answer is that the guidance of the Spirit was needed in determining what should be selected and what should be rejected. For example, Moses was led by the Holy Spirit to include some of the civil laws which were in the code of Hammurabi, but by no means all of them. The code of Hammurabi No. 210 states that if a man caused the death of a pregnant woman his own daughter should be put to death. This inhumane law is not repeated in the Bible. The inspiration of the Spirit is seen in what is omitted as well as in that which is borrowed. CBPH 25.6

Referring to Ellen White’s instruction along health lines, John Harvey Kellogg wrote, in a statement quoted earlier, “The guidance of infinite wisdom is as much needed in discerning between truth and error as in the evolution of new truths” (Christian Temperance and Bible Hygiene, 4). CBPH 25.7

The Nature of Inspiration

According to Peter, “Prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:21). To what extent did the Holy Spirit control the prophets in their writing? Was every word dictated? Or were the prophets allowed some measure of freedom in selecting words and phrases which seemed suitable to them? ¹ Ellen White answers this question: CBPH 25.8

The Bible points to God as its author; yet it 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 Timothy 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.—The Great Controversy, vii, Introduction. CBPH 25.9

Commenting further on vocabulary and style, she informs us that: CBPH 25.10

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.—The Great Controversy, viii. CBPH 25.11

On the union of the divine and the human, Ellen White comments: CBPH 25.12

The Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God’s mode of thought and expression. It is that of humanity.... It is not the words of the Bible that are inspired, but the men that were inspired.... He Himself, by His Holy Spirit, qualified men and enabled them to do His work. He guided the mind in the selection of what to speak and what to write. The treasure was entrusted to earthen vessels, yet it is, nonetheless, from heaven. The testimony is conveyed through the imperfect expression of human language, yet it is the testimony of God.—Selected Messages 1:21, 26. CBPH 25.13

This is the manner in which Ellen White believed that she herself was inspired. In referring to three companies of women she had seen in vision she declared: CBPH 25.14

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. As I wrote upon the subject of dress the view of those three companies revived in my mind as plain as when I was viewing them in vision; but I was left to describe the length of the proper dress in my own language the best I could.—The Review and Herald, October 8, 1867, 30:257. (See Appendix A). CBPH 25.15

Errors in the Books and Manuscripts

Since the Bible is a combination of the human and the divine, and since everything that is human is imperfect, we may expect that the Scriptures will reveal in some places the defectiveness of humanity. The manuscripts of the Hebrew and Greek scriptures have been preserved through the ages by the providence of God, but they have not come down to us free from error. In His inscrutable wisdom the Lord has permitted occasional slips of the tongue and pen of the author or the copyist to become a part of the Sacred Writings. Here are a few illustrations: CBPH 26.1

1. In Matthew 27:9 we read, “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet.” But the quotation which follows is from Zechariah, not Jeremiah. CBPH 26.2

2. Luke 3:36 adds a second Cainan to the list of the first twenty patriarchs, thus conflicting with the genealogical list found in Genesis 10:24. CBPH 26.3

3. In Acts 7:14 Stephen is quoted as saying that Jacob’s family numbered threescore and fifteen souls at the time they entered Egypt, while Genesis 46:7 puts the figure at three score and ten. CBPH 26.4

There are also “problem texts” in the Bible which cannot be explained to everyone’s satisfaction, such as the imprecatory psalms (e.g., Psalm 109:10-12; 137:8, 9), the hanging of seven men to end a famine (2 Samuel 21), Ezekiel’s temple that was never built, or 1 Corinthians 14 dealing with tongues. CBPH 26.5

Turning to the Ellen White writings, we also find some errors, but this should not surprise us unless we demand more of her than we require of the Biblical writers. Two examples of the type of error or inaccuracy found in her writings are: CBPH 26.6

1. She wrote in The Review and Herald, October 30, 1913, “The love of Christ constraineth us, the apostle Peter declared.” Actually, it was Paul, not Peter who wrote those words in 2 Corinthians 5:14. CBPH 26.7

2. Patriarchs and Prophets, 387, reads: “Eleven days after leaving Mount Horeb the Hebrew host encamped at Kadesh.” The events of the journey described in the preceding chapter make it clear that the journey took much longer. The discrepancy can undoubtedly be attributed to Deuteronomy 1:2 which reads: “There are eleven days’ journey from Horeb by the way of mount Seir unto Kadesh-barnea.” CBPH 26.8

Someone may ask why the Lord did not protect His messages so that they would come to us without any flaws or shortcomings. One answer is that “Faith grows by conflicts with doubts” (Sons and Daughters of God, 191.) Ellen White states, “God gives light to guide those who honestly desire light and truth; but it is not His purpose to remove all cause for questioning and doubt. He gives sufficient evidence to found faith upon and then requires men to accept that evidence and exercise faith” (Testimonies for the Church 5:303). CBPH 26.9

We should not “lament that these difficulties exist,” she says, “but accept them as permitted by the wisdom of God” (Testimonies for the Church 5:706). And so, while we freely admit that the frailties of humanity have entered into the productions of the prophets, both ancient and modern, yet we need not allow this fact to distress us unduly. CBPH 26.10

Writings Not Given Under Inspiration

Did the Bible prophets ever write anything which was not divinely inspired? It is a fair assumption that they did. Daniel, for instance, must have written many letters and other documents of a business nature while in the employ of Nebuchadnezzar. Doubtless many of the Bible prophets engaged in correspondence with friends and wrote other things which were not especially given under the inspiration of the Spirit of God. This was also true of Ellen White. On September 11, 1903, she wrote to her son Edson and his wife: CBPH 26.11

This morning I found your letter under my door. I was glad to hear from you. Yesterday I wrote you a letter on common, everyday topics. This letter will be sent today. I have written a long letter on the subject spoken of in your letter, and have given it out to be copied. This will be sent to you soon.—Letter 202, 1903. CBPH 26.12

Here Ellen White is describing two different letters she had written to Edson. One was a “common” letter, therefore not given under inspiration, while the other was counsel in response to problems he was facing in his missionary activities. CBPH 26.13

At times Ellen White dealt with both common and sacred matters in the same letter. (See T. H. Jemison, Prophet Among You, p. 400.) Where did she and her contemporaries—and where do we today—draw the line between that which was divinely inspired and that which was not? Ellen White answered this question in her discussion of the number of rooms in the Paradise Valley Sanitarium. She wrote: CBPH 26.14

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 knowledge I have obtained of such things I have gained by inquiring of those who were supposed to know. In my words, when speaking upon these common subjects, there is nothing to lead minds to believe that I received my knowledge in a vision from the Lord and am stating it as such. CBPH 26.15

When the Holy Spirit reveals anything regarding the institutions connected with the Lord’s word, 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.—Selected Messages 1:38. CBPH 26.16

Only a small percentage of Ellen White’s published writings deal with common things. For the most part her writings are of a decidedly religious character. She wrote: CBPH 26.17

In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas, they are what God has opened before me in vision—the precious rays of light shining from the throne. It is true concerning the articles in our papers and in the many volumes of my books.—Selected Messages 1:29. CBPH 27.1

Evidence of Divine Inspiration

A compelling conviction of the inspiration of Scripture is supplied by the internal witness of the Holy Spirit in our hearts. With reference to the Scriptures, the Westminster Confession of Faith declares that: CBPH 27.2

Our full persuasion and assurance of the infallible truth, and divine authority thereof, is from the inward work of the Holy Spirit, bearing witness by and with the Word in our hearts.—Philip Schaff, Creeds of Christendom, Vol. III, p. 603. CBPH 27.3

Ellen White says essentially the same thing when she states: Everyone who has passed from death unto life can testify I need help, and I found it in Jesus. “Why do I believe the Bible?—Because I have found it to be the voice of God to my soul.” We may have the witness in ourselves that the Bible is true.—Steps to Christ, 112. CBPH 27.4

A second persuasive argument in favor of the divine inspiration of the Canonical writings is found in the fulfillment of its prophecies. CBPH 27.5

Turning to Ellen White we ask, Does the Holy Spirit speak uniquely and powerfully to human hearts through her writings? Thousands answer, Yes. CBPH 27.6

Additional evidence of Ellen White’s inspiration is found in the area of fulfilled predictions and in the meeting of crisis situations with messages providentially timed to reach the point of need at precisely the right moment. Evidence is found in the success which has attended the work of the church called into being by her messages and nurtured by her counsels. Many exhibits could be presented, but space forbids. CBPH 27.7

A comparison of the ministry of Ellen White with that of the Bible prophets reveals parallels that are truly striking. Her life bears a marked resemblance to theirs. Those who knew Ellen White best when she lived and those who know her best now through her works, are alike convinced that she truly did the work of a prophet. To all who may not be personally acquainted with her writings, the Pauline invitation is extended, “Despise not prophesyings; Prove all things, hold fast that which is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:20, 21). CBPH 27.8

Some Relevant Questions

Having called attention to certain points of interest in connection with the Bible prophets and with the experiences of Ellen G. White, we may well give consideration to some points regarding inspiration and revelation as we look at some of the situations introduced in Prophetess of Health. Readers might well ask themselves: CBPH 27.9

1. Are we bringing a true, valid concept of inspiration to bear in dealing with these situations? CBPH 27.10

a. Do we build on the premise of verbal inspiration—that the prophet mechanically wrote or uttered words imparted by a supernatural power. CBPH 27.11

b. Or is it our understanding that in vision there was imparted to the prophet certain concepts, ideas and information which when not in vision he was to embody in his own words in conveying the message to the people. CBPH 27.12

2. Do we recognize that the prophet must convey his message in the terminology commonly in use and that he may not always have selected the most appropriate or accurate forms of expression? CBPH 27.13

3. Do we accept that the prophet was a human being with the sensitivities and proclivities of humanity? Do we realize that Ellen White did not operate in a vacuum, but was a mother in the home, a citizen in the community, a wife traveling with her husband or others under all conceivable circumstances? And do we recall that she was often hounded by poverty and at times suffered intensely from illness, that she spoke to every type of audience, was in demand for incessant interviews—all the while having many of her words recorded and all of them critically examined? CBPH 27.14

4. Do we recognize that in the case of Ellen G. White she was called to a work which included “More than the word ‘prophet’ signifies?” (Selected Messages 1:32). Her work led her, in an emergency, to conduct a monthly column in the Health Reformer. Under all types of circumstances she mixed with the people in their homes and their work in favorable living circumstances and unfavorable. Do we recognize that under such conditions it was not always possible to reach and maintain the ideal, for example in the matter of her personal diet? CBPH 27.15

5. Are we cognizant of her position with respect to reforms as she counseled that “we would better come one step short of the mark than to go one step beyond it. And if there is error at all, let it be on the side next to the people” (Testimonies for the Church 3:21). CBPH 27.16

6. Is there a tendency with the concept of inspiration we hold, to demand more in the prophet, who was a mortal such as ourselves, than we are justified? Or do we demand more of Ellen White than we would of the Bible prophets? CBPH 27.17

7. Do we accept the proposition set forth by Ellen White relating to her counsels that: CBPH 27.18

a. “Circumstances change the relation of things” (Ms 7, 1904; The Review and Herald, April 24, 1975). CBPH 27.19

b. “Time and place must be taken into account” (Selected Messages 1:57). CBPH 27.20

8. Do we recognize that God leads His people as they are able to follow? That what may be present truth today may not have been present truth a year or two ago, or five or ten or twenty years ago? CBPH 27.21

9. Do we keep in mind that God never gave visions to take the place of initiative, study, or hard work. They were given to make us strong, not weak and dependent. Often His special guidance is shown in calling attention to certain principles without presenting all the details of application. For example: CBPH 28.1

a. God revealed the important place of water in the care of the sick but did not disclose the details of giving baths or wet sheet packs. This could come from study, experimentation and the work of others. CBPH 28.2

b. God called attention to the value of grains, legumes, vegetables, and fruits in the dietary program, but He did not give detailed instructions on the nutritional value of each or how to cook beans or provide a recipe for bread, gems, or nut loaf. CBPH 28.3

10. Do we remember that the prophet, although careful not to set forth his own ideas as divinely imparted instruction, was not deprived of thinking ordinary thoughts, of engaging in ordinary conversations or of taking part in everyday secular activities? CBPH 28.4

Nor would the prophet necessarily remember accurately all details of events in which he may have participated during his life. And this could well account for the possibility of some minor discrepancies in recollection of places and dates of events. She did not claim inerrant accuracy in every detail in her biographical statements. In her preface to Spiritual Gifts, Volume 2, an autobiographical work entitled “My Christian Experience, Views and Labors,” published in 1860, she states: CBPH 28.5

In preparing the following pages, I have labored 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 endeavoring 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. (Emphasis supplied). CBPH 28.6

The appendix appearing in the first 400 copies carried this statement: CBPH 28.7

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. CBPH 28.8

In none of the score or more books issued during her life did she include such statements as appeared in the Preface of her 1860 autobiography except for the biographical accounts in Early Writings and the Testimonies etc. which represented a different type of writing. CBPH 28.9

By turning to the Comprehensive Index, Volume 3, p. 2950, and the heading, “White, Ellen G. White, Biographical,” it will be found that several times errors occurred in her statements of her experiences based on her memory: CBPH 28.10

She first heard Miller preach in 1840 not 1839. CBPH 28.11

She heard Miller preach again in 1842 not 1841. CBPH 28.12

She was baptized June 26, 1842, at the age of 14 and not 12 as reported in Spiritual Gifts 2:13. CBPH 28.13

She claimed no divine inspiration for biographical statements based on her recalling the events. CBPH 28.14

Clearly, a concept of inspiration which grows out of the facts, not preconceived notions, is essential to finding a satisfactory answer to the “problem” statements in Ellen White’s writings. (See Appendix F, “A Factual Concept of Inspiration.”) CBPH 28.15

Could Ellen White Be Depended On To Tell The Truth?

Scattered through Prophetess of Health are insinuations that Ellen White was not always strictly truthful—that is, she prevaricated when this seemed expedient in making a point or meeting an awkward situation. As noted earlier this is a viewpoint which dominates the book as effort is made to counter her claim to divine origin of her teachings on health. CBPH 28.16

The implications are serious for it is logical to conclude that a prophet would tell the truth. Could it be that, as Prophetess of Health insinuates, the one who wrote, “God despises misrepresentation and prevarication” (Evangelism, 132), held a double standard: One she taught and another she followed? CBPH 28.17

This brings us to the proposition of Ellen White’s integrity. Would one who counseled: “Be straight and undeviating. Even a slight prevarication should not be allowed” (My Life Today, 331), dissimulate? “Even life itself,” she wrote at one time, “should not be purchased with the price of falsehood” (Testimonies for the Church 4:336). And she pointed out that: CBPH 28.18

Falsehood and deception of every cast is sin against the God of truth and verity. The word of God is plain upon these points. Ye shall not “deal falsely, neither lie one to another.” “All liars shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death.” God is a God of sincerity and truth.—Ibid. CBPH 28.19

The charge that Ellen White deviated from the truth is a serious one and before accepting it the thoughtful reader will carefully ponder its implications as touching all her writings and ministry. First he will ask, why should she attempt to avoid the truth? What did she have to gain? Then, knowing the nature and influence of these writings, he will pause before passing judgment. He will ask: Are her writings as a whole characterized by misrepresentations and a shady use of the truth? If, as her work is presented in Prophetess of Health, there is an apparent distortion of truth, can it be that some facts have been overlooked or omitted, or is there projected a misconception of inspiration? When all the facts are brought forward will this make a difference in judging the point in question? CBPH 28.20

Unfortunately, there are individuals who will receive what is presented as evidence to undercut confidence in the integrity and binding obligation of the Spirit of Prophecy counsels, yet the conscientious seeker of truth will hesitate to allow his confidence to be influenced by anything short of proven facts. He will approach carefully unsustained assertions and assumptions. CBPH 29.1