Ellen White for Today: An Appeal

Seventh-day Adventists face a crisis. Over the last fifty years, Ellen White has lost much of her influence among us.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://spectrummagazine.org/news/2023/ellen-white-today-appeal

As opposed to all those other Christians that say put the Bible second? The only reason someone would even suggest that she said to put the Bible first is because they were putting EGW first. And you do know that you can find those statements as well for instance when she says of those who doubt her testimonies she declares they are not right!

From my observation, almost every doctrinal problem (excluding the current gender confusion Trans issues or female pastors’ question) has its origin with Ellen White. When you look at that Adventist offshoots that are anti-trinity it is because of EGW writings. Last day expectations, Sunday laws, sanctuary doctrine, remnant church. Even the misuse of Lucifer as Satan is largely due to her acceptance of spurious church traditions. Too numerous to list actually. This in no way is against her as a remarkable person, however, there is a huge difference in how one deals with a remarkable person and how one deals with a prophetic authority, And that will always be the main problem.

I should add one more possibility and that is redefining the meaning of “prophetic authority”. I dislike the constant redefining of things but even if it was possible it would take decades to accomplish.


What do you mean “misuse of Lucifer as Satan”?

Ron, you said it all, now there is nothing left for us to say… :wink:

This article reveals the amount of denialism that is strongly established in Adventism. This is why I believe that Adventism is NEVER going to change and it will be forever a cult of EGW. No hope here.


I have an article on the subject…so do a lot of other people but I like mine best. Here is the general introduction: Adventist Media Response and Conversation: Who is Lucifer (or Satan Misidentified)

"It may come as a surprise to many Christians that to the Jews and New Testament Christians there was no such person as Lucifer. To many Christians Lucifer is equivalent to Satan, the devil. How could it be that the Jews knew nothing of Lucifer, we find it clearly printed in our King James Bible in Isaiah 14. But then again it is not found in most contempary language versions. With the curiously notable exception of the New King James Version.

As way of introduction here is what The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia has to say about Lucifer:

Lucifer, the rendering of the Vulgate for the Hebrew phrase helal (“day-star”) in Isa. 14:12; the verse is rendered in the Authorized Version as: How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning!" The passage in question is a song of derision over the downfall of a Babylonian king; the figure used may trace back to a Hebrew or Babylonian astral myth like the Greek story of Phaethon, in which the day-star is cast out of heaven because of presumption. The term Lucifer is never used in Jewish legend; but Christian writers identified Lucifer with Satan who, according to the gospels (Luke 10:18), fell from heaven like lighting; accordingly, Lucifer became one of the terms for the devil in Christian theology. (Page 229)"


Interesting. At the risk of crossing paths with an apparent hobby horse, I will agree that the idea that Lucifer is also Satan has been part of Christian and even Babylonian mythology for milenia as emblematic of a position shift from a star to representing pure evil. I hardly think Ellen White came up with this idea, but it does give some comfort to those of us who tacitly hold onto some of the Luficerian concepts but bristle when it is called Satanic to hold one’s own consensual desire and pleasure at equal or great regard to traditionalist structures. This idea has been quite useful to me as I have attempted to embrace the full spectrum of sexuality in my own life which is most clearly supported through the Luficerian principles.

Be well.

The Babylonian Astral myth has nothing about Lucifer, the ancient world had a multitude of gods connected to stars and planets like Venus, though of course, it was just a bright star to them, still nothing at all to do with Lucifer or Satan.

I never said Ellen White produced the myth only that because she accepted it, it became the Adventist belief.

1 Like

And since she accepted it, Adventism is duty-bound to defend it. Ellen White played a large and indispensable role in the rise of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Until and unless the church can admit that she was wrong on many points, she will also play a role in the church’s demise.


That’s all? Do not forget her but read her afresh? This is the meeting’s statement? I wished I was there to hear the information behind closed doors.


I know, right?

I mean I haven’t read everything EGW ever wrote.

But I think I get it.

And if I’m denied entry into heaven because I can’t pass a quiz or exam on her writings, then I’ll blame god for not telling me that 100,000 pages of her “stuff” was gonna be on the test!



Thanks Ron for the explanation of the Lucifer thing. Very interesting and revealing. It’s astonishing how many myths became facts in the Christian tradition.
Always learning!

Apparently she never suspected that Lucifer was not an individual thus she never had the need to receive a “vision from God” to support her belief… :wink:


The evidence we have (none) seems to indicate that god is much too busy to follow along behind his “prophets” correcting their mistakes….



Art, KRML*, the Adv Church will never admit to the facts about EGW that are now public knowledge. She will be kept on the pedestal and adored as a saint, keeping the final word on everything.

There may be more meetings like the one reported here in the future. Those people will talk about the fraudulence but will remain members of the Church anyway. Not many have the courage you had, to disconnect from the Denomination and move on. Those people should ask Ted Taliban for a new and big Glacier View, all of them acting as defendants. Then they would all be excommunicated at once, en masse… :wink:

*KRML - Keep Reading My Lips… :wink:


Oh I am sure they recorded every person’s statements/comments and in the interest of full transparency, it will all be transcribed and made public soon, here on Spectrum of course… :wink: :wink:

1 Like

Yes, I should have been more clear, I don’t think there is even one of the issues I listed are original ideas of Ellen White. It is all developed from her prophetic authority. Then they are defended and supported down the line. I would be surprised if anything was original with her, I think that is one of the big differences between her and someone like Joseph Smith. Though I don’t know that much about the Mormon founder to know for sure where he derived some of his idea. It is hard to come up with anything original.

1 Like

According to South Park, he translated The Book of Mormon after staring into his hat.

(I know. That’s Comedy Central but I think their version is supported by Mormon history.)



in fact egw is the primary voice for why anyone in the Adventist church would think to put the bible first…there’s nothing in the bible itself that directs us to put the canon above what it defines as “scripture”, and certainly nothing that defines the canon in the first place…as late as the 16th century, individuals like Luther were quibbling over whether books like Hebrews, James, Jude and Revelation, not to mention Ecclesiastes, most of Esther and parts of Daniel, should be canonized…the bible itself, which lacks the terms “canon” and even “bible” - outside of what is generally translated as “book” - isn’t definitive on what should be given canon status…

personally, i think the implied position of our Church - that egw is inspired, but somehow subservient to the bible - is untenable…while i think it is true that more recent forms of inspiration obviously need to concord with earlier forms if it, and those earlier forms, are genuine, this fact doesn’t make earlier forms more inspired…we don’t see, for instance, any inspired person in the NT downplaying their messages if and when something in the OT was believed to contradict them…in fact it is the case that older inspiration in the OT was reinterpreted to concord with what messages in the NT were saying…it is even the case that a prophet recorded in the NT was pronounced the greatest of all time…

while it’s good that egw is de facto canonical in our Church, perhaps it is time to expand FB#18 to explicitly state that she is on par with the bible writers…saying what we mean, and meaning what we say, is what is needed with the subject of egw, and the subject of the gift of prophecy in general…

Recording in an interest? alarm bells … rather somehwere else … where they are more familiar with … how to write it …: exploring the conscience of other believers to find out if they are in accord with an official version of what they perceive to be truth (step 1) and making sure this group of believers is reduced to a tiny manageable group of conscience purified apologetics (step 2) … :innocent:

1 Like

Sorry, but on this day I will leave the church. It’s that simple.

Adventism is diverse (at least in some parts of the world). It always has been this way. To change that means to create another, foreign Adventism.


is that necessarily a bad thing…i don’t think so…when i left the Church as a 20yr-old, it was the best decision at the time…in retrospect, i’m very glad i made it…

the advantage of formally canonizing egw would be clarity, and consistency…i think an unambiguous FB#18 would compel members to familiarize themselves with egw’s vast output, something which isn’t common now…i suspect the only reason for ambiguity is a collective feeble notion that the charge of cult is being deflected…but i think Adventism should openly own it’s reality, which is Remnant Church status on the basis of being the repository of the spiritual gift of prophecy…it’s time to grow up into our exalted destiny…