Just finished the main part of Knight’s book, and one conclusion he draws is that EGW critics and supporters have tended to both argue from a flawed perspective of perfectionism (Knight, 2019, p.62).
I think that the point is a good one. I should evaluate my own understanding of inspiration more cautiously, and use my own lens to view EGW, not necessarily the same lens that Rea or Numbers, or even her supporters, might employ.
In the end, my basic problem with having such a huge body of EGW writings is that they just don’t seem necessary, useful, or even approachable any more. I know that statement might raise some hairs on the neck, but bear with me.
If professional historians spend their entire careers shaping and reshaping their views on inspiration in order to figure out what is what with EGW, is it reasonable to expect the average 9 to 5 Adventist with a career in a completely unrelated field to develop a theory of inspiration in order to safely and appropriatly use EGWs writings?
I barely had time to download and rush through a reading of Knight’s book. In a couple hours I will be back to nursing research, not a study of inspiration, much less a reading of EGW. I triage my time, and EGW is no longer a priority intervention.