Armchair Theologian

The teachings of Ellen White on health reform are all over the map.  It is hard to get a clear vein of thought on what it is that she wanted to convey at any particular time.  But since I established HERE that she taught all of her words written down on any letter or book  were inspired that means everything is on the table.  There is a very clear teaching in her writings that eating meat is a sin.  Below is a list of her statements to this effect.

“The simple grains, fruits of the trees, vegetables, have all the nutritive properties necessary to make good blood. This a flesh diet cannot do.” – Ellen White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, 322

“The eating of flesh meats has made a poor quality of blood and flesh… Flesh meats will depreciate the blood.” 2T 61, 368

“Flesh meat…is…corrupting to the lifeblood coursing through the veins.” MM 310

“The light has come to me for many years that meat eating is not good for health or morals.”- Ellen White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, Pg 413

“…meat eating deranges the system, beclouds the intellect, and blunts the moral sensibilities.” 2T 64

“You place on your table butter, eggs, and meat, and your children partake of them. They are fed with the very things that will excite their animal passions, and then you come to meeting and ask God to bless and save your children. How high do your prayers go?” —2T, p. 362.

“Those who digress occasionally to gratify the taste in eating a fattened turkey or other flesh meats, pervert their appetites, and are not the ones to judge the benefits of the system of health reform. They are controlled by taste, not by principle.” — – Ellen White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, Pg. 399.

“No man can become a successful workman in spiritual things until he observes strict temperance in his dietetic habits. God cannot let His Holy Spirit rest upon those who, while they know how they should eat for health, persist in a course that will enfeeble mind and body.” – Ellen White, Counsels on Diet and Foods, Pg 55

Notice she says “God cannot let His Holy Spirit rest upon those who…”.  Why is it that God cannot do that?  I thought he could do anything.  If she is saying that he won’t rather than is not capable then the problem is just as bad because she is teaching that you cannot be saved unless you submit to health reform.

God gave the light on health reform, and those that reject it reject God.” — Series B, No. 6, p. 31. EGW address to the General Conference in Oakland, published in the General Conference Bulletin, 1903, pp. 84-88.

“God has written His law upon every nerve and muscle, every fiber and function of the human body. The indulgence of unnatural appetite, whether for tea, coffee, tobacco, or liquor, is intemperance, and is at war with the laws of life and health. By using these forbidden articles a condition of things is created in the system which the Creator never designed. This indulgence in any of the members of the human family is sin. . . . the eating of food that does not make good blood is working against the laws of our physical organism, and is a violation of the law of God. The cause produces the effect. Suffering, disease, and death are the sure penalty of indulgence.” EV 265-266

The above quote is crucial in understanding her teachings on diet.  Notice she says that if you are “eating food that does not make good blood” you are in “violation of the law of God“.   What else can this be except sin?

Add this to the other quotes above teaching that:

• meat blunts the morals,
• those who do not submit are rejecting God,
• your prayers don’t go high if you eat eggs,
• controlled by taste not by principle
• corrupting the lifeblood

Taken as a whole or in part it is clear that she teaches it is a sin to eat meat.  Modern SDA will argue that eating meat doesn’t become a sin until the health message was received and given to the world by Ellen White.

The problem is that they claim her message came from God.  God knows everything and would know what is sin and what is not sin.  All we need to do on this is to observe Christ.  Surely Christ would not have sinned and he would have known with or without Ellen White’s health message whether or not it is lawful to eat meat.

“Then came the day of Unleavened Bread, on which the Passover lamb had to be sacrificed.   So Jesus sent Peter and John, saying, “Go and prepare the Passover for us, that we may eat it.” Luke 22:7-8 ESV 

“See my hands and my feet, that it is I myself. Touch me, and see. For a spirit does not have flesh and bones as you see that I have.” ; And when he had said this, he showed them his hands and his feet. ; And while they still disbelieved for joy and were marveling, he said to them, “Have you anything here to eat?” ; They gave him a piece of broiled fish, ; and he took it and ate before them.” Luke 24:39-43 ESV

Above we see that Jesus ate lamb and a broiled fish.  Note that the latter is after the Resurrection, in his Glorified Body.  When put together with the teachings of Ellen White we can only assume that she either believed Jesus to be a sinner, or that he wasn’t aware of what sin is.

“There is a boy here who has five barley loaves and two fish, but what are they for so many?” Jesus said, “Have the people sit down.” Now there was much grass in the place. So the men sat down, about five thousand in number. Jesus then took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed them to those who were seated. So also the fish, as much as they wanted.  And when they had eaten their fill, he told his disciples, “Gather up the leftover fragments, that nothing may be lost.” John 6:9-12 ESV

Above we see Jesus fed the five thousand with many pounds of fish.  If this were a sin then Jesus would have been causing people to sin.  If we put this together with the teachings of Ellen White the only logical conclusion is that Jesus was a mass sinner who encouraged others to do the same, or he was simply ignorant of what is sin.

It doesn’t end there, we see also that Ellen White was guilty of eating meat.  She even did so after receiving the health message.

“Mary, if you can get me a good box of herrings, fresh ones, please do so. These last ones that Willie got are bitter and old. If you can buy cans, say, half a dozen cans, of good tomatoes, please do so. We shall need them. If you can get a few cans of good oysters, get them.” —Letter 16, 1882

“Christmas morning we all took breakfast together—James Cornell; Florence and Clara, their two girls; Brother and Sister Moore and their three children; Sister Bahler and Etta, a girl living with them; and Sister Daniells, our cook, Father, and myself. We had a quarter of venison cooked, and stuffing. It was as tender as a chicken. We all enjoyed it very much. There is plenty of venison in market. (Written December 26, 1878, from Denison, Texas, to “Dear Family at Battle Creek–Willie, Mary, Aunt Mary, Edith, Addie and May, and Brother and Sister Sawyer.”)” —Manuscript Releases, Volume Fourteen, p. 318. Letter 23, 1878.

“I do not preach one thing and practice another. I do not present to my hearers rules of life for them to follow while I make an exception in my own case….” —Selected Messages Book 2, p. 302. Letter 12, 1888.

Clearly, Ellen White taught that both herself and Jesus Christ were sinners.  I don’t personally have a problem believing that Ellen White was a sinner and I don’t believe that SDA struggle with this either.  But to teach that Jesus was a sinner would mean that we would have no atonement, no sinless sacrifice as the propitiation of sins.

The truth is that we were warned this would happen a very long time ago by Paul.

“Now the Spirit expressly says that in later times some will depart from the faith by devoting themselves to deceitful spirits and teachings of demons, ; through the insincerity of liars whose consciences are seared, ; who forbid marriage and require abstinence from foods that God created to be received with thanksgiving by those who believe and know the truth. ; For everything created by God is good, and nothing is to be rejected if it is received with thanksgiving, ; for it is made holy by the word of God and prayer.” 1 Tim 4:1-5 ESV

That passage fits Ellen White to a tee.  She was a messenger of a very deceitful spirit, be it her own imagination or that of a demon.  She taught abstinence from food that God had made clean and created to be received.  She is a false prophet and you need not fear her.  There are enough laws in the Bible we don’t need more, to do so is blasphemy as one has to put themselves in the place of God to make laws of God.

One of the oft reported claims in SDA is that Ellen White is only inspired in her books, not in her letters.  Or they might narrow it further and say that only books written after a certain date are inspired.  Or they might claim that she is inspired when she is correct and it is her own opinion when she is incorrect.

I understand the need for many to keep lowering the bar on the inspiration of Ellen White.  But the fact is that she claimed for herself a very high level of inspiration.  Ellen White was clear that every letter from her pen was a precious ray from the throne.  She did not distinguish between one kind of writings or another.  She did not give a date to mark when her letters became inspired, and that those prior were not.  Ellen White claimed that everything she wrote was inspired, all of it.

“I wrote many pages to be read at your camp meeting. Weak and trembling, I arose at three o’clock in the morning to write you. God was speaking through clay. You might say that this communication was only a letter. Yes, It was a letter, but prompted by the Spirit of God, to bring before your minds things that had been shown me. 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.” (EGW, Selected Messages, bk. l, p. 27.)

This raises some obvious problems though when we start comparing the teachings of Ellen White to herself.  If we are to understand that everything she wrote is inspired as a precious ray from the throne why does she contradict herself?  That would be saying that God contradicts himself.

“Men need to understand that Deity suffered and sank under the agonies of Calvary. Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 7, p. 907.

“The Deity did not sink under the agonizing torture of Calvary, yet it is nonetheless true that “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting  life.”  Seventh-day  Adventist  Bible Commentary, Vol. 5, p. 1129.

She is saying that Jesus both did and did not sink under the agonies of Calvary.  I’m sorry but you cannot have both, they are mutually contradictory.  Both statements cannot be inspired, one of them has to be wrong.

“God loves honest-hearted children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . . The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and He has promised that they shall be in His kingdom. But wicked children God does not love. . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient and fretful, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong.”  Ellen White, An Appeal  to  Youth,  Battle  Creek  Michigan.  Steam Press, 1864, pp. 42, 62.

“Do not teach your children that God does not love them when they do wrong; teach them that He loves them so that it grieves His tender Spirit to see them in transgression.” Signs of the Times, February 15, 1892

Which is it? Does God love children who are doing wrong or not?  You cannot have it both ways.  Ellen White is wrong on one of these and the fact is that she claims both statements are inspired.

“The news of man’s fall spread through heaven—every harp was hushed. The angels cast their crowns from their heads in sorrow. . . . A council was held to decide what must be done with the guilty pair.” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 44.

“The instant man accepted the temptations of Satan, and did the very things God had said he should not do, Christ, the Son of God, stood between the living and the dead, saying, “Let the punishment fall on Me.”  Seventh-day Adventist  Bible  Commentary,Vol. 7a, p. 1085.

“While Moses was shut in the mount with God, the plan of salvation, dating from the fall of Adam, was revealed to him in a most forcible manner.” SelectedMessages, Bk. 1, pp. 231-232.

“The words, “Mine hour is not yet come,” point to the fact that every act of Christ’s life on earth was in fulfillment of the plan that had existed from the days of eternity.” The Desire of Ages, p. 147.

So…. was the plan of salvation from eternity past or was it determined at a point of time in heaven?  Is she saying heaven itself exists in space and time rather than outside of it?  Both teachings seem to be conveyed here.  Again, by her own claim of inspiration she conflicts with herself.

“The sacrifice in behalf of man was full and complete.The condition of the atonement had been fulfilled” Acts of the Apostles, p. 29.

“To the angels and the unfallen worlds the cry, “It is finished,” had a deep significance. It was for them as well as for us that the great work of redemption had been accomplished. They with us share the fruits of Christ’s victory.” The Desire of Ages, p. 758.

“Now while our great High Priest is making the final atonement for us, we should seek to become perfect in Christ.” The Great Controversy, p. 623.

Is the atonement full and complete?  Or is Jesus still working on it?  Again, Ellen White teaches both.  These are contradictory teachings that neutralize each other.  She cannot be inspired in both of them unless you are saying that God makes mistakes.  This isn’t even a paradox, its just a flat out inconsistency.

“Those who labor with their hands must nourish their strength to perform this labor, and those also who labor in word and doctrine must nourish their strength; for Satan and his evil angels are warring against them to tear down their strength. They should seek rest of body and mind from wearing labor when they can, and should eat of nourishing, strengthening food to buildup their strength . . .I saw that your views concerning swine’s flesh would prove no injury if you have them to yourselves; but in your judgment and opinion you have made this question a test, and your actions have plainly shown your faith in this matter. If God requires His people to abstain from swine’s flesh, He will convince them on the matter. He is just as willing to show His honest children their duty, as to show their duty to individuals upon whom He has not laid the burden of His work. If it is the duty of the church to abstain from swine’s flesh,God  will  discover  it  to  more  than  two  or  three.” Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, pp. 206-207.

“Pork although one of the most common articles of diet,is one of the most injurious. . . . God never designed the swine to be eaten under any circumstances.The heathen used pork as an article of food, and American people have used pork freely as an important article of diet.” Selected Messages, Bk. 2, p. 417.

“But God never designed the swine to be eaten under any circumstances.” Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 4a, p. 124.

“The eating of pork has aroused and strengthened a most deadly humor which was in the system. . . . Never should one morsel of swine’s flesh be placed upon your  table.”  Testimonies  for  the  Church,  Vol.  2,p. 94.

So which is it?  Is pork nourishing or not?  Many have fairly pointed out to me that in Vol 1 of the testimonies she leaves it open and had not received the health message yet.  I respect that to a point.

But the fact is she declares the eating of pork nourishing none the less.  Where as in other writings she is clear that it should never be eaten and is “deadly” to the system.  Both of these teachings cannot be inspired, pork cannot be both deadly and nourishing at the same time.

“The Lord first established the system of sacrificial offerings with Adam after his fall, which he taught to his descendants. This system was corrupted before the flood by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God, and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel.” Spiritual Gifts, Vol.3, p. 301, 1864 edition.

Any student of scripture knows that the Tower of Babel was built many years after the flood.  It was not built before the flood at all.  Here with her inspired pen, the precious rays from the throne as she claims, Ellen White is contradicting scripture.  Does God contradict himself?

Those who accept Christ, and in their first confidence say, I am saved, are in danger of trusting to themselves.. . . Those who accept the Saviour, however sincere their conversion; should never be taught to say or feel that they are saved. This is misleading.  No sanctified tongue will be found uttering these words till Christ shall come, and we enter in through the gates into the city of God . . . As long asman is full of weakness—for of himself he cannot save his soul—he should never dare to say, “I am saved.”Selected Messages,      Vol. 1, p. 314.

“I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life.” 1JN 5:13 ESV

Either the Bible is true or Ellen White is, you cannot have both on this one.  Why would Ellen White contradict the Bible if all of her words are precious rays from the throne?  Obviously the source of Ellen White’s writings are not God.

“Those who are living upon the earth when the intercession of Christ shall cease in the sanctuary above are to stand in the sight of a holy God without a mediator. Their robes must be spotless, their characters must be purified from sin by the blood of sprinkling. Through the grace of God and their own diligent effort they must be conquerors in the battle with evil. While the investigative judgment is going forward in heaven, while the sins of penitent believers are being removed from the sanctuary, there is to be a special work of purification, of putting away of sin, among God’s people upon earth.”  The Great Controversy, Pg. 425 Ellen White

“…And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.” Matt 28:20 ESV

“For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus” 1TI 2:5 ESV

“But as it is, Christ has obtained a ministry that is as much more excellent than the old as the covenant he mediates is better, since it is enacted on better promises.” Heb 8:6 ESV

“For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, ; not a result of works, so that no one may boast.” Eph 2:8-9 ESV

“and be found in him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which comes through faith in Christ, the righteousness from God that depends on faith” Php 3:9 ESV

Ellen White says that we stand before God without a Mediator, and that you are saved by your own works.

The Bible teaches that Christ will always be with us, and that he is our mediator.  It also teaches that we are saved by faith, not of works, and that the righteousness of God is what stands in our place, not our own righteousness.  These teaches conflict on some very serious points.  If Ellen White is inspired then that means the Bible is wrong.  If that Bible is inspired that means Ellen White is wrong.  Both cannot be true at the same time.

The standard of a Prophet of God is absolute perfection in prophecy.  Ellen White has simply failed this test.  She contradicts herself and she contradicts the Bible.  We need not fear her.

“And you may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.” Deut 18:21-22 ESV

This is one of the stranger teachings of Ellen White.  We have to test it though, because she did claim that every time she put pen to paper it was a “ray” from the throne of God.  In order to provide proper context I am going to quote the preceding paragraphs.

Above, notice that she is giving us a breakdown on the state of the planet after the Flood.  I would challenge anyone to prove these claims in the Bible.  Where does it say that the mountains were in perfect symmetry before the flood?  Where does it say bodies, trees, and precious metals were blown around and buried?  This isn’t in the Bible at all.

As absurd as my objections may sound, the fact is that Ellen White is making Biblical claims.  It is fair to ask for scriptural support for said claims.  Below we see that she continues her teaching in explaining how the flood brought about volcanoes:

“At this time immense forests were buried. These have since been changed to coal, forming the extensive coal beds that now exist, and also yielding large quantities of oil. The coal and oil frequently ignite and burn beneath the surface of the earth. Thus rocks are heated, limestone is burned, and iron ore melted. The action of the water upon the lime adds fury to the intense heat, and causes earthquakes, volcanoes, and fiery issues. As the fire and water come in contact with ledges of rock and ore, there are heavy explosions underground, which sound like muffled thunder. The air is hot and suffocating. Volcanic eruptions follow; and these often failing to give sufficient vent to the heated elements, the earth itself is convulsed, the ground heaves and swells like the waves of the sea, great fissures appear, and sometimes cities, villages, and burning mountains are swallowed up.” Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 108-109

We can see from Ellen White’s teaching that she is claiming volcanoes as a post flood judgment.  I don’t know of anything in the Bible that teaches that, but this is what she is claiming.  She seems to feel the need to give details though, and these can be tested.

Let’s breakdown her claim point by point:

“The coal and oil frequently ignite and burn beneath the surface of the earth”

I am understanding this as the primary cause of Ellen White volcanoes.  It seems this event of coal and oil burning together underground is said to start a chain reaction resulting in a volcanic eruption.

“Thus rocks are heated”

“limestone is burned”

“iron ore melted”

“the action of the water upon the lime adds fury to the intense heat”

“and causes earthquakes, volcanoes, and fiery issues”

“As the fire and water come in contact with ledges of rock and ore, there are heavy explosions underground”

What does burned limestone look like?  She cannot mean that the limestone is melted, because she juxtaposes the burning of limestone against the melting of iron.

Why does water add intense fury to heat?  I thought it would reduce heat.  How does a reduction in heat underground cause an earthquake?  I thought that had something to do with tectonic plates.  Do you have to deny tectonic plates altogether to be an SDA?

Why does water and fire coming into contact with rock and ore cause explosions?  I genuinely do not know if that is true or not.  It just sounds weird.

I am obviously not a geologist, and I cannot afford to pay one to send me commentary on this specific teaching of Ellen White, nor can I find one that has already been done.  I can perform a lay analysis though and will provide one.  Her claim is that this process of volcanic eruptions starts with the mixing of coal and oil, that of course burns underground.  I cannot verify that but lets presume the claim is true.  If that were the case we would expect to see coal and oil wherever volcanoes are found.  This is easy to do, coal and oil are very valuable and the locations they exist can be displayed on a map.

A very popular volcanic formations is the pacific ring of fire.  You probably heard about it as well in your high school geology class.  This is a chain of active volcanoes circling the pacific ocean.  See the picture below that I found on Wikipedia.

Source: Wikipedia

Next is a picture that gives us a graph of all volcanic activity

Source: Wikipedia

Next is a picture of coal deposits around the globe, also found on wikipedia.

Source: Wikipedia

And below is yet another picture from wikipedia mapping out the oil reserves across the planet.

Source: Wikipedia

Some important things to notice are that we find coal and oil in many places with no or very few volcanoes.  Take a closer look at the middle of Russia, eastern Europe, and the middle east.  We also see these deposits in high quantities along the Atlantic coast, yet we don’t have an Atlantic ring of fire.

Furthermore, one would expect that if Ellen White were correct we would find large quantities of oil and coal along the pacific ring of fire, yet we don’t see any more there at all, in fact there seems to be almost no coal along the west coast of the Americas.  How can such a critical element required for volcanoes be lacking on the pacific ring of fire?

There is simply no connection between oil and coal, with volcanoes.  You have to know that if there were this would be proclaimed from the rooftops by SDA as proof of Ellen White.

The only logical conclusion is that Volcanoes simply don’t work the way that Ellen White said they do.  She was a false prophet end of story.

“And you may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.” Deut 18:21-22 ESV

If you came here actually curious how volcanoes work and are feeling a let down right about now I found a pretty decent article HERE that you can look at.

The Shut Door is a twisted doctrine that defined the first few years of the believers who eventually became Seventh-Day Adventists.  To summarize, after Jesus did not return on Oct 22, 1844 many of those who had believed he would then changed their minds and confessed that the “door” to mercy and grace had shut.

In my opinion part of their reasoning for doing this was bitterness.  Many of these poor folks had sold their farms and possessions as a show of faith that the Lord was to return.  They had nothing except each other and probably developed this view in the face of friends and family who had mocked them during the advent movement leading up to 1844.  They must have simply taken a measure of comfort in the idea or hope that they were secretly right all along and that those who had mocked them would be the ones who would truly suffer outside the “shut door”.

We see this reflected in the writings of Ellen White even many years after 1844.

“I was shown that the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, relating to the shut door, could not be separated. . . I saw that the mysterious signs and wonders and false reformations would increase and spread. The reformations that were shown me were not reformations from error to truth, but from bad to worse, for those who professed a change of heart had only wrapped about them a religious garb, which covered up the iniquity of a wicked heart. Some appeared to have been really converted, so as to deceive God’s people, but if their hearts could be seen they would appear as black as ever. My accompanying angel bade me look for the travail of soul for sinners as used to be. I looked, but could not see it, for the time for their salvation is past.” Present Truth, pp. 21-22, August, 1849

Notice above that Ellen White is teaching five years after the closing of the door that those converting to Christianity are simply false converts.

“The time for their salvation is passed”

Her husband, James White recounts his experience of the visions Ellen White received in and around 1844 regarding the shut door.

“When she received her first vision, Dec. 1844,she and all the band in Portland, Maine, (where her parents then resided) had given up the midnight-cry,and shut door, as being in the past. It was then that the Lord shew her in vision, the error into which she and the band in Portland had fallen. She then related her vision to the band, and about sixty confessed their error, and acknowledged their 7th month experience to be the work of God.” James White, A Word to the Little Flock, Pg. 22 1847

Even later Ellen White defines the doctrine of the shut door that was held by the early Adventists.  Later on this page she rebukes it as being error, obviously due to the passage of time since 1844.

“I did hold in common with the advent body that the door of mercy was then forever closed to the world.” Ellen White, {Ms4-1883, par. 20}

But the critical thing about the above quotations is we have an early Adventist definition of the Shut Door doctrine.  Later this doctrine morphed into what is now the Investigative Judgement.  If you study this further you will see a great deal of similarities in the language that frames both of them.

Obviously the Shut Door doctrine got long in tooth as time passed.  I think even for the laity they would be observing those around them years and years later as the bitterness passed and it would be hard to write them all off as damned.  Also, what about your own children?  SDA then and now believe in the doctrine of Age of Accountability.  So what of your small children in 1844 who were becoming teenagers and were asking to be baptized?  Should you consider them damned or do they get a special dispensation?

What ended up happening was Ellen White later denied the shut door doctrine entirely.  Instead of saying it was given to her by vision she claims it was corrected by vision.

“For a time after the disappointment in 1844, I did hold in common with the advent body that the door of mercy was then forever closed to the world. This position was taken before my first vision was given me. It was the light given me of God that corrected our error and enabled us to see the true position.” Ellen White, {Ms4-1883, par. 20}

“This position was taken before my first vision was given me”

Notice she is accepting that she held to the doctrine but is clarifying that it was only because the truth hadn’t been given to her in vision yet.

For many years this was the official position of the SDA Church.  They taught their laity that Ellen White hadn’t received the shut door in vision, she simply agreed with others in her day and then later corrected them by vision.  This worked out for SDA until the 1980’s when the oldest letter sealed in the White Estate was discovered and distributed.

Unfortunately the last few pages of the Elder Bates letter are still missing, but we do have the first three pages.  I will provide a transcript of the letter and the photo copies in this blog post.  You can find the source I got them from along with the story of how they were obtained HERE.

Dear Brother Bates:

As James is at work and sisters are from home thought I would employ myself in writing a line to you. My health is quite good for me. My faith is still strong that that very same Jesus that ascended up into heaven will so come in like manner as He went up, and that very, very soon. I have had many trials of late; discouragement at times has laid so fast hold upon me it seemed impossible to shake it off. But thank God, Satan has not got the victory over me yet, and by the grace of God he never shall. I know and feel my weakness, but I have laid hold upon the strong arm of Jehovah, and I can say today I know that my Redeemer liveth, and if He lives I shall live also. Oh how good it would be to meet with a few of like precious faith to exhort and comfort one another with words of holy cheer from the word of God. The sheep are now scattered, but thank God, they are about to be gathered to a good pasture.

Oh how sweet it will be to meet all the blood-washed throng in the city of our God. ‘Tis then we’ll sing the song of Moses and the Lamb as we march through the gates into the city, bearing the palms of victory and wearing the crowns of glory.

Brother Bates, you write in a letter to James something about the Bridegroom’s coming [synonymous with Shut Door], as stated in the first published visions. By the letter you would like to know whether I had light on the Bridegroom’s coming before I saw it in vision. I can readily answer, No. The Lord showed me the travail of the Advent band and midnight cry in December, but He did not show me the Bridegroom’s coming until February following…

Something important to understand for context is that Elder Bates was a strong believer in the Shut Door doctrine.  He was unsure though as to whether Ellen White had received it in vision or had read about it first.  In this letter Ellen White conveys her story to assure Elder Bates that she received the vision from God before it comes to her from any other source.

…Perhaps you would like to have me give a statement in relation to both visions. At the time I had the vision of the midnight cry[more shut door language] I had given it up in the past and thought it future, as also most of the band had….

Just to make this clear “band” does not mean music band.  She means the “little flock” or group of early Adventists.  Here she is speaking of a time after the great disappointment but before the shut door vision.  This would be December of 1844.

…I know not what time J. Turner got out his paper. I knew he had one out and one was in the house, but I knew not what was in it, for I did not read a word in it. I had been, and still was very sick, I took no interest in reading, for it injured my head and made me nervous…..

Above she is making it clear that she had not read J. Turner’s paper on the shut door as it was known that she had it before receiving the vision.  Whether or not she read the paper isn’t material.  What does matter is that she is making it clear she did not read it as evidence that the shut door vision is from God not man.  To put it bluntly, Ellen White is endorsing the teaching and saying it was received straight from God to her in vision.

…After I had the vision and God gave me light, He bade me deliver it to the band, but I shrank from it. I was young, and I thought they would not receive it from me…

This is the vision she is talking about with regards to the shut door,  she gets clear about it later.

…I disobeyed the Lord, and instead of remaining at home, where the meeting was to be that night, I got in a sleigh in the morning and rode three or four miles and there I found J. T. He merely inquired how I was and if I was in the way of my duty. I said nothing, for I knew I was not. I passed up chamber and did not see him again for two hours, when he came up, asked if I was to be at meeting that night. I told him, No. He said he wanted to hear my vision and thought it duty for me to go home. I told him I should not. He said no more, but went away. I thought, and told those around me, if I went I should have to come out against his views, thinking he believed with the rest. I had not told any of them what God had shown me, and I did not tell them in what I should cut across his track.

All that day I suffered much in body and mind. It seemed that God had forsaken me entirely. I prayed the Lord if he would give me strength to ride home that night, the first opportunity I would deliver the message He had given me. He did give me strength and I rode home that night. Meeting had been done some time, and not a word was said by any of the family about the meeting….

Above I see a lengthy explanation that seems to be driving home the point that she did not converse with J. Turner about anything related to his teaching or to her visions.  In the context of the letter this is showing that her aim is to demonstrate to her reader the independent veracity of her visions.  Notice she was clear that she didn’t attend the meeting at her house and didn’t speak about its topic with him.  We see that later.

…Very early next morning J. T. called, said he was in haste going out of the city in a short time, and wanted I should tell him all that God had shown me in vision. It was with fear and trembling I told him all. After I had got through he said he had told out the same last evening. I was rejoiced, for I expected he was coming out against me, for all the while I had not heard any one say what he believed. He said the Lord had sent him to hear me talk the evening before, but as I would not, he meant his children should have the light in some way, so he took him. There were but few out when he talked, so the next meeting I told my vision, and the band, believing my visions from God, received what God bade me to deliver to them.

The view about the Bridegroom’s coming I had about the middle of February, 1845.

While in Exeter, Maine in meeting with Israel Dammon, James, and many others, many of them did not believe in a shut door. I suffered much at the commencement of the meeting. Unbelief seemed to be on every hand. There was one sister there that was called very spiritual. She had traveled and been a powerful preacher the most of the time for twenty years. She had been truly a mother in Israel. But a division had risen in the band on the shut door. She had great sympathy, and could not believe the door was shut. (I had known nothing of their differences.) Sister Durben got up to talk. I felt very, very sad. At length my soul seemed to be in an agony, and while she was talking I fell from my chair to the floor. It was then I had a view of Jesus rising from His mediatorial throne and going to the holiest as Bridegroom to receive His kingdom. They were all deeply interested in the view. They all said it was entirely new to them. The Lord worked in mighty power setting the truth home to their hearts. Sister Durben knew what the power of the Lord was, for she had felt it many times; and a short time after I fell she was struck down, and fell to the floor, crying to God to have mercy on her. When I came out of vision, my ears were saluted with Sister Durben’s singing and shouting with a loud voice.  Most of them received the vision, and were settled upon the shut door. Previous to this I had no light on the coming of the Bridegroom, but had expected him to this earth to deliver His people on the tenth day of the seventh month. I did not hear a lecture or a word in any way relating to the Bridegroom’s going to the holiest…..

Above we see a clear view of her vision in 1845.  She has identified this vision as teaching on the shut door, a doctrine that Elder Bates believed in, and has juxtaposed it against a dissenting sister who repented and then received the shut door teaching.

I can only imagine how fearful this band felt that morning.  They had just received what they believed was a heavenly message that all but a chosen few in their viewing was going to hell.  There was no need to evangelize or consider the next day as each of them were soon to be taken in the second coming.

From our perspective though we see a doctrine that Ellen White is endorsing with heavenly vision, “precious rays from the throne” as she puts it in one of her other letters.  According to this doctrine, nobody today could possibly be saved!  The door shut in 1844 and that’s it folks.  This puts someone who holds to Ellen’s visions in a precarious position.  The only logical conclusions are:

1. She made it all up,
2. She hallucinated the vision,
3. or received it from Satan.

Any of those three would prove her a false prophet.  This is no simple matter, before this letter was found SDA had a thin case but after it was discovered the whole world knows the truth now.  The only equivalent to this in Mormonism would be discovering proof that Joseph Smith forged the signatures of those who claimed to witness the golden tablets.

 “And you may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.” Deut 18:21-22 ESV

I am going to include the rest of the letter so that nobody can claim I am taking it out of context.  But if you want to skip it go ahead, it is not relevant to the point of the Shut Door.

…I had but very few privileges in 1842, 3 & 4. My sisters both went to the camp meetings in New Hampshire and Maine, while my health prevented me from going to but one, in Maine. I know the light I received came from God, it was not taught me by man. I knew not how to write so that others could read it till God gave me my visions. I went to school but very little on account of my health. I do not think I went to school a day after I was twelve years old, and did not go then but a few days at a time, when sickness would cause me to take my bed for weeks and sometimes for months. The first I wrote anything that could be called writing was after I had been sick the prayer of faith was put up for me, and healing” [here the sheet ends, and the remainder of the letter is gone.] —E. G. White, Letter 3, 1847, Manuscript Release #281—4

There is a great deal more one can study on this topic.  I have simply tried to present the details of the facts which matter the most.  Below are photocopies of the Elder Bates letter for anyone that wants to see it in her own handwriting.

As stated earlier you can find the sources I used and the photocopies I obtained HERE.  I recommend taking a look either way as they go into greater depth on the other issues going on in Ellen Whites day as well as the discovery of the Elder Bates letter in the 80’s.  My post only covers the most important issues regarding the Shut Door.  If this is the first time you have heard of this I know you are going to want to know everything.

If you would like to see more on my studies of my journey out of Adventism you can find them HERE.

One of the prophecies of Ellen White was that Old Jerusalem would never be rebuilt.  To be sure we should look at her statements in full context.

“Then I was pointed to some who are in the great error of believing that it is their duty to go to Old Jerusalem,  and think they have a work to do there before the Lord comes. Such a view is calculated to take the mind and interest from the present work of the Lord, under the message of the third angel; for those who think that they are yet to go to Jerusalem will have their minds there, and their means will be withheld from the cause of present truth to get themselves and others there. I saw that such a mission would accomplish no real good, that it would take a long while to make a very few of the Jews believe even in the first advent of Christ, much more to believe in His second advent. I saw that Satan had greatly deceived some in this thing and that souls all around them in this land could be helped by them and led to keep the commandments of God, but they were leaving them to perish. I also saw that Old Jerusalem never would be built up; and that Satan was doing his utmost to lead the minds of the children of the Lord into these things now, in the gathering time, to keep them from throwing their whole interest into the present work of the Lord, and to cause them to neglect the necessary preparation for the day of the Lord..” Early Writings, p. 75

What stands out above is first that she is rebuking those who would go to Israel and preach the Word.  This is very troubling, preaching the Word to the Jewish people is a very important thing to do.  We are charged by Christ to do this everywhere and to everybody.  But apparently Ellen White believes there just isn’t enough time to suffer the Jews and I take offense to that even though I myself am not Jewish.

Second she states that “Old Jerusalem never would be built up”.  This is a testable claim.  Before getting started though we should try to define what Old Jerusalem is.

“The Old City (Hebrew: העיר העתיקה‎, Ha’Ir Ha’Atiqah, Arabic: البلدة القديمة‎, al-Balda al-Qadimah, Turkish: Kudüs, Armenian: Երուսաղեմի հին քաղաք, Yerusaghemi hin k’aghak’ ) is a 0.9 square kilometers (0.35 sq mi) walled area within the modern city of Jerusalem. Until 1860, when the Jewish neighborhood Mishkenot Sha’ananim was established, this area constituted the entire city of Jerusalem. The Old City is home to several sites of key religious importance: the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque for Muslims, the Temple Mountand Western Wall for Jews and the Church of the Holy Sepulchre for Christians, It was added to the UNESCO World Heritage Site List in 1981.” – Wikipedia

There is actually a distinction between Old and New Jerusalem.  Since the above article identifies the Dome of the Rock as part of Old Jerusalem I will try to focus on that area. Let’s post some pre 1948 pictures of Israel to establish a baseline.

And if you observe the picture below, you will see a modern electrical grid and other vast improvements have been added to that same area of the city.

Not only does this meet the definition of building up Old Jerusalem, it surpasses it.  When Ellen White made her prophecy there was no electricity in Old Jerusalem.  But above we find that such improvements have been added.

Not just electricity either, it turns out they have added a modern plumbing system in Jerusalem as well.  Not only can it be used for the basic necessities of life, but it appears they know how to have some fun with it.

In addition to this Israel has a modern military defending Jerusalem, complete with Iron Dome.  This sophisticated system can intercept and destroy missiles intended to harm their people right out of the sky.

The fact is that Ellen White is simply wrong.  Old Jerusalem was more than rebuilt, they improved upon it.  To claim otherwise has to invoke some kind of bizarre special pleading.  Keep in mind that Mormons make the same leaps of logic and reason to appeal for Joseph Smith’s false prophecies.

One of the interesting things found in the writings of Ellen White is the prophecy given by her that the United States would be invaded during the Civil War.  This is given by her in the form of a dire prophetic warning.  Read the following excerpt from Volume 1 of Testimonies to the Church.  Attempt to read it as someone who doesn’t know the outcome of the war.

“Said the angel: “Hear, O heavens, the cry of the oppressed, and reward the oppressors double according to their deeds.” This nation will yet be humbled into the dust. England is studying whether it is best to take advantage of the present weak condition of our nation, and venture to make war upon her. She is weighing the matter, and trying to sound other nations. She fears, if she should commence war abroad, that she would be weak at home, and that other nations would take advantage of her weakness. Other nations are making quiet yet active preparations for war, and are hoping that England will make war with our nation, for then they would improve the opportunity to be revenged on her for the advantage she has taken of them in the past and the injustice done them. A portion of the queen’s subjects are waiting a favorable opportunity to break their yoke; but if England thinks it will pay, she will not hesitate a moment to improve her opportunities to exercise her power and humble our nation. When England does declare war, all nations will have an interest of their own to serve, and there will be general war, general confusion. England is acquainted with the diversity of feeling among those who are seeking to quell the rebellion. She well knows the perplexed condition of our Government; she has looked with astonishment at the prosecution of this war—the slow, inefficient moves, the inactivity of our armies, and the ruinous expenses of our nation. The weakness of our Government is fully open before other nations, and they now conclude that it is because it was not a monarchial government, and they admire their own government, and look down, some with pity, others with contempt, upon our nation, which they have regarded as the most powerful upon the globe. Had our nation remained united it would have had strength, but divided it must fall.” Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 259

What stands out for me is a few themes.  First of all we see a bold declaration from an angel that “This nation [United States] will yet be humbled into the dust”.  This isn’t a conditional statement either, notice there is no warning to stand for or against slavery to stave off this dire end.  It is simply a declarative statement of the future.

After that we get some dialogue describing the current state of mind in England.  I don’t know if Ellen White means the thoughts and feelings of the English in general, or if she is providing insight into the council of the Queen.  This isn’t clarified.

“England is studying”

“She is weighing”

“She fears”

“Other nations are making quiet yet active preparations for war”

“A portion of the queen’s subjects are waiting”

Above we see that this anthropomorphic England is weighing the pros and cons of going to war.  Ellen White then moves from the present to the future in her narrative by saying the following.

“if England thinks it will pay”

This would appear at first to be presenting a conditional prophecy.  Presumably if England wants to go to war then she will.  If she doesn’t want to go to war then she wont.  Fair enough, the problem is that Ellen White then declares that England will go to war by using the word “when“.

“When England does declare war, all nations will have an interest of their own to serve, and there will be general war, general confusion.”

Putting both statements together the only possible conclusion is that Ellen White is saying that England will think about and then come to the conclusion that going to war will “pay” because she qualifies it in time by using the word “when”.  Thus the decision process is already resolved later in the scope of her prophecy.  Had she instead said “If England…” then one could claim a conditional prophecy.  But since she declares “When England…” we have a declarative statement of what she foresees will happen in the future.

Putting that together with the angelic declaration that America will be ground into the dust, a referent which can only be tied in the text to England invading the states, one is left with the conclusion that Ellen White predicted such an event as if it was set in stone.  Either Ellen White got it wrong or the messenger speaking to her changed their mind.  Either has profound implications as to the source of her visions.

As to what happened in history we can discern whether or not England invaded America by doing a little Research:

“The United Kingdom and its empire remained officially neutral throughout the American Civil War (1861–65). It legally recognised the belligerent status of the Confederacy; it never recognized it as a nation and never signed a treaty or exchanged ambassadors.” – Wikipedia

“Altogether different [than the British attitude to the Schleswig-Holstein crisis] was the tone adopted by the British Government in relation to the great civil war which broke out in the United States of America early in 1861. There the attitude assumed was one of determined neutrality. The Southern States declared their right to separate themselves from the union and form a distinct confederation. Their ostensible reason for doing so was the claim of the central government of the whole body to exercise over the separate states a larger control than it was entitled to in the eyes of those states. The immediate cause was the growing determination of the Northern States to abolish slavery.

British neutrality
The Northern States denied the right of secession, claiming that the union was a “federal” one, in which case the attempt at separation is rebellion. The Southern States claimed that the Union was a “confederation” from which any member is entitled to separate itself. Hence the names “Confederates” applied to the Southern States and “Federals” applied to the Northerners. The British Government declined to judge between them.” – Britain Express

“The civil war was fought between the Union states (Northern states) of the United States and the states of the Confederacy (Southern States). There were many causes of the civil war, including differences between northern and southern states on the idea of slavery, as well as trade, tariffs, and states rights.” – Civil War Facts – History Net

The fact of the matter is that Ellen Whites prediction simply didn’t come true.  Unless one can find proof that England did invade the states and that it was covered up or something I am going to have to leave it right there.

“And you may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.” Deut 18:21-22 ESV