WE HAVE to admit that there are in Ellen G. White's counsels and testimonies some factual details that are not found in the Holy Scriptures. Her view that the saints would pass through the time of trouble in the future, and that therefore those expecting the Lord to come in the seventh month of 1845 would be disappointed, is a case in point. (See A Word to the Little Flock, p. 22.) Some critics have used her extra-Biblical comments as an argument against Mrs. White's work, and some of our members have at times been somewhat confused by it.
In later days, after the doctrinal views of the denomination had crystallized into recorded fundamental beliefs, F. M. Wilcox could write of Ellen G. White's work: "Her writings are in perfect harmony with the statements of divine revelation. She has taken the great principles of truth expressed in the Bible, and drawn them out in finer detail."—The Present Truth, vol. 7, no. 133.
It does not seem illogical, once we have accepted the fact of inspiration through the Holy Spirit, to expect that early written revelations may be confirmed, clarified, and augmented by later revelations. The Old Testament comes alive through the fuller revelations of truth in the New Testament, which dealt with old truths augmented and clarified for a new age. The apostle Paul often took Old Testament statements and used them in an entirely new context. In fact, New Testament writers sometimes used quotations not found in the Old Testament. These may have come from men inspired by the Holy Spirit during the intertestamental period, or in some other pre-Christian age, but they are in the category of extra-Biblical evidence. They may have come from some of the anonymous prophets mentioned in the Bible. They are used in evidence, even though authorship is unknown to us. Some specific instances of New Testament teaching not clearly discernible in the Old Testament are:
1. Genesis 3. The serpent is regarded as a symbol of Satan (2 Cor. 11:3; Rev. 12:9). In the Old Testament the serpent may symbolize one aspect of the work of the Saviour, and also in John 3:14.2. Isaiah 53. The "suffering servant of Jehovah." The New Testament applies this to Jesus of Nazareth (Acts 8:27-35; Mark 9:12; Luke 22:37; Matt. 8:17). But what of Isaiah's words:
"But thou, Israel, art my servant, Jacob whom I have chosen" (Isa. 41:8)? (See also Isa. 41:9; 44:1, 2; 45:4.)
3. Jude 14. "And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these, saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints." (This is not mentioned in the Old Testament, but is found in the Apocryphal book of Enoch 1:9; 14: 22; 40:1.)4. Heb. 1:6. "He saith, And let all the angels of God worship him." (This is not in the Old Testament, but is in the LXX of Deut. 32:43.)
That there are things in the Ellen G. White writings which are old facts or truths used in entirely new contexts, and that they sometimes do not seem to follow the normal principles of hermeneutics, is not denied; but she originates no new doctrine, and her teachings do not conflict with the teachings of the. Bible. We cannot avoid the fact that new ideas and facts appear in her writings. To expect revelations of this nature to conform strictly to the usual principles of exegesis could conceivably lead us into constricting the operations of the Holy Spirit into the too confining channels of human devising. We are not coldly analyzing a scientific problem. We are seeking to understand God's way with men through His Word, and that transcends all philosophy and all rationalization.
Scriptural difficulties can never be mastered by the same methods that are employed in grappling with philosophical problems. We should not engage in the study of the Bible with that self-reliance with which so many enter the domains of science.—The Great Controversy, p. 599.
We ought to remember that all philosophy founders at the cross, and that some things must be accepted on the basis of faith in the special revelation in God's Word, and through His Spirit.
Problems Relevant to Daniel's Prophecies
We are here concerned with: (a) What were the basic interpretations of Daniel's prophecies that our pioneers believed they had found in the Scriptures? (b) What was Ellen G. White's attitude to the Bible evidence found by the pioneers on the sanctuary question?
On (a) above, Ellen G. White stated categorically:
In their investigation they learned that there is no Scripture evidence sustaining the popular view that the earth is the sanctuary; but they found in the Bible a full explanation of the subject of the sanctuary, its nature, location, and services; the testimony of the sacred writers being so clear and ample as to place the matter beyond all question. —Ibid., p. 411.
The context then shows that Hebrews 8:1, 2; 9:1-5; Revelation 11:19 were key passages in convincing the pioneers that Christ's antitypical ministry was in heaven in the true tabernacle. To these and other passages they added certain lessons from the Levitical types to show that—as anciently the sins of the people were by faith placed upon the sin-offering, and through its blood transferred, in figure, to the earthly sanctuary; so in the new covenant the sins of the repentant are by faith placed upon Christ, and transferred, in fact, to the heavenly sanctuary. And as the typical cleansing of the earthly was accomplished by the removal of the sins by which it had been polluted, so the actual cleansing of the heavenly is to be accomplished by the removal, or blotting out, of the sins which are there recorded. But before this can be accomplished, there must be an examination of the books of record to determine who, through repentance of sin and faith in Christ, are entitled to the benefits of His atonement. The cleansing of the sanctuary therefore involves a work of investigation,—a work of judgment. This work must be performed prior to the coming of Christ to redeem His people; for when He comes, His reward is with Him to give to every man according to his works. —Ibid., pp. 421, 422.
On (b) we have her explicit statement that they found "indisputable proof" of the existence of the true sanctuary in heaven (ibid., p. 415). She wrote chapters 22, 23, 24, 25 of The Great Controversy confirming and elucidating pioneer findings on the sanctuary question, as well as many pages elsewhere clarifying obscurities and setting forth the spiritual meanings and implications of the whole subject of the investigative judgment.
Our first pioneers lived in the turbulent atmosphere of the days following the French Revolution. Irreligion produced the reaction that sent men to the Bible in a frantic search for an explanation of their distressing times. Commentators delved into apocalyptic prophecies and came forth with volumes on Daniel and on the Revelation. From the mid-eighteenth to the mid-nineteenth century there was a phenomenal literary output in the field of prophetic interpretation, and it was undoubtedly on the basis of some of this prophetic investigation that Miller and his colleagues were helped to build up their interpretations of the "kingdom prophecies." Even their chronological interpretations were not wholly original, except in the area of the seventy weeks and the 2300 days. It is historically demonstrable that most of our views on the sanctuary question, the Second Advent, the Sabbath, the law of God, conditional immortality, the Trinity, the Incarnation, et cetera, were not originated by us. Rather, we were the inheritors of sacred truths that we revived and clarified under the Holy Spirit's guidance.
Daniel, chapters 2, 7, 8, and 11 engaged the earnest attention of these non-Adventist people. Also the time prophecies—the 2300 days, the 1260 days, "the time of the end," and the end of time—were the substance of much study by Christians of various connections around the turn of the century. Unfortunately, some of the numerous writers on prophecy back there were confused on what they called the kingdom prophecies to be fulfilled through literal Israel, as are some today. Sometimes we may have erred in forgetting that the plans of God might have been accomplished before the crucifixion, had Israel been ready, and that therefore some details of conditional prophecy will never be fulfilled exactly as we may have imagined. But through His church, in another context, God's plans and purposes will unerringly come to pass, and He will be justified before the universe.
We can see clearly in our earliest literature that the fundamental prophetic beliefs of the pioneers, arrived at without benefit of the prophetic gift, were based on (1) the world history of the image of Daniel 2, (2) the four beasts of Daniel 7, (3) the ram and the he-goat of Daniel 8, with the 2300 days of Daniel 8 and 9, (4) the kings of Daniel 11, and (5) the standing up of Michael in Daniel 12.
Stated otherwise, our early believers built up their chronological prophetic interpretations around the history of the nations—Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Persia, Greece, pagan Rome emerging into Papal Rome, and the ten kingdoms preceding the establishment of the everlasting kingdom.
They found in the Revelation certain similarity of phraseology and episode with the book of Daniel, and therefore felt sure that the last book in the Bible was an inspired comment on the earlier prophet. Early Adventist literature, and a great deal of non-Adventist literature, contains many comparisons between the books of Daniel and the Revelation. They saw that Revelation 12 and 13 concerned the agelong controversy between Christ and Satan. In later years we have come to think of Daniel 8 in the same apocalyptic connection as Revelation 12, 13, 14, and therefore of the same cosmic, rather than local, scope. This is one reason we have always rejected the rather localized Antiochus Epiphanes interpretation of the little horn of Daniel 8.
The Sabbath and the Prophetic Gift
An illustration of the way in which basic Bible truth was confirmed by Ellen G. White is found in the acceptance of the Sabbath by the early Adventists. Rachel Oakes Preston brought this truth to the Adventists in Washington, New Hampshire, about the time of the 1844 disappointment. Early in 1845 T. M. Preble's article on the subject, in The Hope of Israel, came into the hands of Joseph Bates, who accepted and began to circulate it among others. Ellen Harmon and James White heard it in New Bedford in 1846, but did not see its importance. (See Life Sketches, p. 95.)
In August of the same year they were married, and about the same time read Joseph Bates's forty-eight-page tract, The Seventh-day Sabbath a Perpetual Sign. Soon after they began to observe the seventh day (see Testimonies, vol. 1, p. 75). Mrs. White's comment later was:
I believed the truth upon the Sabbath question before I had seen anything in vision in reference to the Sabbath. It was months after I had commenced keeping the Sabbath before I was shown its importance and its place in the third angel's message.—Letter 2, 1874, quoted in Ellen G. White, Messenger to the Remnant, p. 34.
For ten years, however, these Sabbath-keeping Adventists observed the Sabbath from 6:00 P.M. Friday to 6:00 P.M. Saturday, James and Ellen White among them. Some urged sunrise to sunrise, some suggested sunset to sunset, others vaguely evening to evening. There was much debate over this question, and much earnest Bible study, till in 1855 at a Battle Creek conference, Ellen White was shown that the sunset time was correct. J. N. Andrews gave much study to this question and had reported the results before confirmation came through Ellen G. White. This is a classic illustration of the way in which Bible study and the prophetic gift have worked together, though not simultaneously, in leading the church into a full doctrinal truth.
The Sanctuary and the Prophetic Gift
The sanctuary truth combines doctrine and prophetic interpretation with similar results. Hiram Edson was impressed the morning after the great Disappointment that the prophecy of the 1844 cleansing was correct as to date, but it was not correct in the event, for the cleansing was the coming of Christ to the final phases of His pre-Advent judgment in heaven. Levitical typology and the Ancient of days vision in Daniel 7 led him to this conclusion. Edson, Hahn, and Crosier, then, for some months studied these basic ideas. Thus the winter of 1845-1846 saw the publication of the Day-Dawn containing these views. In February, 1845, Ellen Harmon had "'a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the holiest as Bridegroom to receive His Kingdom ' " (Ellen G. White, Messenger to the Remnant, p. 37), but the significance of this was not perceived by her at the time. In January, 1846, her first vision was published in the Day-Star, and was the first intimation of the prophetic gift that was to appear among Seventh-day Adventists. The March 14, 1846, issue related her now year-old vision of Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.
Thus was ratified by vision this essential high point of the sanctuary truth which had been set forth on the basis of Scriptural evidence by Bible students, entirely unknown to Ellen Harmon.—Messenger to the Remnant, p. 37.
It should be noted, in view of our experience in this area, that it is unwarranted for us to add to the sanctuary truth matters of major doctrinal importance that are not clearly intimated in the Scriptures.
This brief study of the relative importance of the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy in the development of our doctrines and of our prophetic interpretations, could be continued consistently through all of our major beliefs. It would undoubtedly be true that our original and basic beliefs came from the Scriptures, confirmed and often developed in detail by Ellen G. White writings.
It is doubtful if we could find a single instance where a major doctrine or prophetic interpretation originated with Mrs. White. James and Ellen White took this position.
In our program of public evangelism we have adhered to the principles set forth here, and have drawn wholly upon Scripture to prove the truth of our basic doctrines, using Ellen G. White's writings for devotional and complementary spiritual purposes. The Testimonies and other matters prepared by her for the church only, have always been used for that purpose. In her first book, Experiences and Views (1851), she clearly enunciated the view here taken that the material produced from her visions was not to be a rule of faith, but for the edifying of the church:
I recommend to you, dear reader, the Word of God as the rule of your faith and practice. By that Word we are to be judged. God has, in that Word, promised to give visions in the "last days"; not for a new rule of faith, but for the comfort of His people, and to correct those who err from Bible truth.—Earty Writings, p. 78.