Here is a quote from the thread "Why or why not accept Mrs White as a prophet?"
You may remember this conversation, mainly between JAK, Rosangela, and Green Cochoa, but also including a few others. JAK does a very good job of laying out the objections to EGW.

************************************

OK.

Regarding Ellen White.

First (in no order of importance) let me say the following:

1. I do NOT think EGW is a "false prophet."

2. I do NOT think that EVERYTHING she said, wrote, or was published is or was "inspired gospel" (for lack of a better term) and authoritative. (Recall my "continuum theory" of inspiration.)

3. I DO think she was a godly woman trying her best to do the will of God as she understood it. (In some ways this is the most important point, because it removes any malicious or nefarious motives or intent from her part. She is not a Jesuit sleeper agent, a member of the Secret Order of the Hidden Hand, a tool of the devil...you get the point.)

4. I do think her "theology" (again, for lack of a better term) changed over time. This is both good and bad.

That being said...

These are some of the issues I have with EGW/Mrs. White/"The Pen of Inspiration"/"Spirit of Prophecy"/... I will enumerate each point and give a brief explanation of why I take issue with this, or why it causes me questions.

Again, do not apply priority to any point listed below based on its position in the list. The numbering is only to keep them organized.

1. Baggage. I immediately recognize that this relates to incorrect usage of EGW. In my experience, she is JUST NOT A NICE LADY.

2. Partial "Truth." I have this complaint against the church generally as well.* In the last 15 years or so, I have found that the things taught to me as "Truth" are actually "Truth (as seen by the SDA church through EGW glasses)" Thank God (Literally. Absolutely no blaspheme intended) for the Internet where I can research MANY views on a topic, not just be taught the party line.

3. EGW's changes (discrepancies, you might say) in her theology. If she is inspired, she MUST get it right the first time. Examples include, but are not limited to, the Shut Door doctrine.

4. EGWs use and application by the SDA church. This one is a lot easier to ascribe nefarious motive to.

5. Plagiarism. No matter what your view on this topic, from "She did not plagiarise" to "Everything she wrote was copied," one has to admit she did borrow, sometimes heavily, from other writers without giving proper credit.

6. EGW's support of un-biblical doctrines. Examples include, but are not limited to, the Investigative Judgement (IJ) doctrine.

7. OK. Here it is. She was hit in the head with a rock. This put her into a coma for three weeks. After which she started having visions. To me, this is a no-brainer. ( sorry I couldn't resist.)

8. Evangelism. If, in my discussions with people of other denominations or faiths, I resort to the use of EGW to support any point, and expect them to accept this authority, I must then, as a matter of academic and scholarly honesty, allow THEM to look for support to THEIR guru and accept THAT authority. I have found it far more convincing to simply appeal to one universally accepted authority,** The Holy Scriptures.

Therefore, given the above, there are just too many questions and uncertainties regarding Ellen White for me to either accept or study her writings as inspired gospel/Scripture, or to use her or accept her use to support any point of argument.



*
**By this I intend that most people recognize the place of Scripture in religion and the history of the world. They have never heard of EGW.

There is a Christmas carol that says "we didn't know who you were" The gist of the carol is if we had known that Jesus was the Son of God, they would not have treated Him so wickedly. As if to say since they did not know who He was it was alright to treat others like that.

Sometimes the very thing (knowledge) that we need is the thing that we reject because we just did not realize our need.

The information (my books) that I reference from time to time may be the very thing that you need, but as the Laodiceans think that they have need of nothing apart from what they think that they already have, why should you be any different?

If you want to read a brief Bible study from my book I'll make it available.

I have heard that accusation. But I find many places where proper credit is given. So I don't know what people are talking about concerning that. Could you give 3 examples in her writings where proper credit was not given?

Of all people hit in the head, do none make full recovery?

A. Google "Ellen White and Plagiarism" and spend some time reading the websites you find.

B. I find it unusual that a person would "hear accusations" about a writer they have respect for and then not examine those accusations. Seems like a bit of a "head-in-the-sand" response.

C. Please provide examples of EGW's borrowings where she DID supply credit.

I'm sure some of them do. But when one gets struck in the head and then exhibits textbook symptoms of a brain injury...ya have ta wonder...

And to then take her as your guide to the Bible...Sorry, not for me.

By this "monstrous inhumanity," as Luther afterward styled it, "savoring more of the wolf and the tyrant than of the Christian and the man," were the hearts of children steeled against their parents.--Barnas Sears, The Life of Luther, pages 70, 69. Thus did the papal leaders, like the Pharisees of old, make the commandment of God of none effect by their tradition. Thus homes were made desolate and parents were deprived of the society of their sons and daughters. {GC 82.2}

The grace of God sustained him. During the weeks of suffering that passed before his final sentence, heaven's peace filled his soul. "I write this letter," he said to a friend, "in my prison, and with my fettered hand, expecting my sentence of death tomorrow. . . . When, with the assistance of Jesus Christ, we shall again meet in the delicious peace of the future life, you will learn how merciful God has shown Himself toward me, how effectually He has supported me in the midst of my temptations and trials."--Bonnechose, vol. 2, p. 67. {GC 107.3}

In 1512, before either Luther or Zwingli had begun the work of reform, Lefevre wrote: "It is God who gives us, by faith, that righteousness which by grace alone justifies to eternal life."--Wylie, b. 13, ch. 1. Dwelling upon the mysteries of redemption, he exclaimed: "Oh, the unspeakable greatness of that exchange,--the Sinless One is condemned, and he who is guilty goes free; the Blessing bears the curse, and the cursed is brought into blessing; the Life dies, and the dead live; the Glory is whelmed in darkness, and he who knew nothing but confusion of face is clothed with glory."-- D'Aubigne, London ed., b. 12, ch. 2. {GC 212.3}




Likewise, back at ya.

Could you give 3 examples in her writings where proper credit was not given?

Imagine that! Ellen White knew what was biblically sound and what was human nonsense when she "copied" the right stuff and tossed out the trash. That is incredible! We could sure use her talents now with all the fake news and conspiracy theories that abounds.

Nadi,

You accuse me of not examining the facts. However, with less effort than you accuse me of failing, I demonstrated several references. How do you suggest I go about supporting your negative claim of evidence of absence (Prove martians don't exist)?

I suspect you do not know or concern yourself of what you heard of such plagiarisms and are not familiar with the specifics. Which is why you did not list any. You decided to go with what you heard rather than checking it out. Before I believe someone, they need to show me the data.

Imagine someone finding a gnat in their camel soup.

God is wrapping it up. I wrote this comment in response to Woman's Ordination issue. But in the study I found 4 March 2019. Food for thought!


I appreciate the fact that this conversation has led me to study a little more deeper. It is incredible what God puts in His word for those who take the time to pray and study it. We are not on the same page, probably not even in the same book.

The issue is not the relationship of husbands to wives or visa versa. The point is that before Jesus came: The male priesthood foreshadowed His role in the salvation of humanity. After Jesus fulfilled the law, the necessity of an ordained man as the minister was no longer binding. This principle is the same as in the ancient circumcision debate and the reason that we no longer sacrifice lambs: Jesus fulfilled the law.

Since Christ has made us kings and priests unto God our Father, the role of kings and priests is applicable to all believers unless only men are to be saved, which is not the case. The believers will be kings and priests in heaven. Christ prayed "Thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven." But man (the GC in session) has overwhelmingly voted to disregard God's will that all believers in Christ are called kings and priests.

That vote was in rebellion against what Christ has established and what God has ordained. It is an abomination that will desolate those who remain in rebellion against the will of God.

My current understanding as of Bible study last night and this morning:
The vote against woman's ordination was official Wednesday, 8 July 2015, when God's people set up an abomination in our midst. "From the time that the continual [will of God] shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up [8 July], there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days." That allotted time ended on 18 January 2019 at which time we were at the 9th day in the 10 days of prayer. The text that day: "For I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day" (2 TIMOTHY 1:12). The promise that follows is: " Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days." As I read it the blessing will come on 4 March 2019. That is a few days away.