Ellen G. White and Her Critics

Three Conclusions That Follow

Let us summarize these three quotations: EGWC 490.1

1. In the first statement Mrs. White declares that she is not dependent in any way on “brethren and sisters” for information when she writes a testimony to “reveal hidden sins.” Obviously, it would be deceitful for her to pose as a revealer of “hidden sins” if she had received her information from “brethren and sisters.” EGWC 490.2

2. In the second she declares, regarding a particular testimony that she sent to the Battle Creek church, that she was not “influenced” to write as she did “by letters received from members of the church.” Then she makes clear that even if she had been informed of the conditions by letters from church members, that would not invalidate the testimony she wrote. And she cites the case of Paul, who wrote First Corinthians at least partly as a result of information sent to him by brethren. (1 Corinthians 1:11.) Paul did not claim to have received a special revelation that disclosed the Corinthian church’s sins, or a special revelation at the time that guided his pen in correcting those sins. But it never occurs to those who believe in the Bible that his letter should be discounted, considered a fraud, because he was “influenced” to write as a result of information brought to him by “the house of Chloe.” EGWC 490.3

3. In the third she deals with the broad principles that govern her writing of testimonies to individuals and church organizations. In this she frankly declares that such testimonies may be written “in response to some question, statement, or appeal from churches or individuals.” And she explains the relation of such testimonies to special revelations from the Lord. EGWC 490.4

It is evident that critics use the word “influenced” in describing the contact of anyone with Mrs. White, because of the evil import that attaches to that word. They would make it appear that if someone said something to Mrs. White about another person and Mrs. White then wrote a testimony to that person, she was therefore “influenced” to write as she did. That kind of reasoning would indict the apostle Paul as well. The critic apparently would have us conclude that Mrs. White should have lived in a vacuum, with no earthly contacts. We do not know how he could draw that conclusion from reading the Bible, certainly not from reading Paul. EGWC 490.5