Test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world.
It is impossible to do an evaluation of the doctrine of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary and the investigative judgment without, at the same time, evaluating the writings of Ellen G. White. We will soon see that the two cannot be separated. This, however, will raise major questions in the minds of many SDA readers. They will ask of me, “Who do you think you are? Who set you up to pass judgment on the ‘Lord’s messenger’? Why should I even read this book? I know Ellen White supports the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary and the investigative judgment and I trust her to be the Lord’s messenger; why should I disregard what she has written and believe you? Are your credentials better than hers? Do you claim to be a prophet? Have you had visions from the Lord? Have you talked with angels and has God shown you the future, as was the case with Ellen White?”
These are vitally important questions, not only for SDAs, but also for the evangelical reader. Actually, there are three questions that must be addressed at the very outset: (1) What is our ultimate source of authority? (2) Should we evaluate the writings of one who alleges to have been the Lord’s messenger, professes to have had visions from God, claims inspiration, and purports to write with the authority of God? If so, upon what basis? (3) What is truth?
What is your ultimate source of authority?
The first issue is authority. This must be settled in the mind of the reader once and for all. If we do not agree here, there is no further dialogue. What is the final authority for the Christian? Evangelicals will immediately answer, “The Bible and the Bible only.” Most SDAs will give the same answer. However, with SDAs, the answer does not necessarily mean the same to them as it does to the evangelical reader. Let me explain.
For example, point number one in the Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists states:
The Holy Scriptures are the infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the test of experience, the authoritative revealer of doctrines, and the trustworthy record of God’s acts in history.
However, having stated this, we now turn to point number 18 in the same statement of beliefs where we read:
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.
Now we see that SDAs have two sources of authority, two sources of truth: the Bible and the writings of Ellen G. White. The last part of point number 18, however, seems to say that the Bible is the higher authority. Ellen White, herself, has written statements which corroborate this.
But God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms.—Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain “Thus saith the Lord” in its support.1
This appears to be one of the places where her writings make clear that the Bible, and the Bible only, is to be the final test of all doctrine and experience. However, please note how SDAs have interpreted “the Bible, and the Bible only.”
When we claim to stand on the Bible and the Bible alone, we bind ourselves to receive, unequivocally and fully, all that the Bible teaches.…We do not, then discard, but obey, the Bible by endorsing the visions [of E.G. White].2
The Scriptures are emphasized as our only rule of faith and practice. This, however, does not nullify the importance of the visions of Ellen White or make her any less inspired than were the Bible writers.3
The Seventh-day Adventist community has recently released The Study Bible,4,5 which was printed by the Review and Herald Publishing Association, a leading book printer owned and operated by the SDA church. This Bible is sold in Adventist Book Centers throughout the country, and carries this introductory note:
God in his goodness has once again caused “the testimony of Christ” to be confirmed in his church, so that we “come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Cor 1:6-7). His last day remnant people have had restored through the ministry of Ellen G. White, “the testimony of Jesus” which is “the spirit of prophecy” (Rev 12:17, 19:10). To combine this inspired commentary with the Scriptures themselves is the purpose of this present volume.
It is the heartfelt and earnest prayer of the publishers, that this inspired Word, with its accompanying inspired commentary, will go out into all the world and prepare a people for the great day of God.
The Study Bible lists hundreds of references and quotations from Ellen White which are intended to guide the Adventist reader in his search for truth.
In the Adult Sabbath School Lessons for October to December 1994, on the topic of The Three Angels’ Messages, we find this quote:
We understand that this gift [spirit of prophecy] has been in a special sense manifested through the writings of Ellen White, whose work functions, not as another Bible, or supplement to the Bible, but as an inspired commentary designed to lead us to a clear understanding of Scripture.6
In practice, how does an “inspired commentary” work? If the Bible and the writings of Ellen White disagree, which one should be the final authority? We see the confusion already. If the “inspired commentary” of Ellen White gives a particular interpretation, then a “good Adventist” would be duty bound to take the interpretation of the “inspired commentary” over, say, an uninspired commentary by some scholar. Therefore, in practice, many SDAs give her writings supreme authority.
At this point it should be noted that there are many statements in the writings of Ellen White which would disagree with the above premise.7 But there are also statements which would uphold it.8 In practice what usually happens is that the person teaching will quote Ellen White, choosing the particular statement designed to substantiate and give credibility to what he is teaching.9 The supreme authority of Ellen White is usually cited in the context of defending the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary and the investigative judgment, a doctrine which cannot otherwise be proved.10,11
One must, however, in his search for truth, reach a conclusion as to what is his final and ultimate authority. I trust that you, the reader, will have concluded by this time that the Bible and the Bible only is the ultimate source of authority.
Should we evaluate one who claims to be “the Lord’s messenger”?
The answer is evident. In writing to the Corinthians, Paul gives this instruction for evaluating prophets:12
And let two or three prophets speak, and let the others pass judgment (1 Cor. 14:29).
In the closing counsel of his first letter to the Thessalonians, Paul again addresses the church with respect to evaluating prophetic utterances. He says:
Do not despise prophetic utterances. But examine everything carefully; hold fast to that which is good (1 Thess. 5:20 -21).
“Examine” is in the imperative mood. Not only does Paul say that we should let others pass judgment, but he commands the church to examine everything carefully and to keep that which is good. It is implied that if, under examination, some prophetic utterance is found to be spurious, it should be rejected.
John wrote:
Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God; because many false prophets have gone out into the world (1 Jn. 4:1-3).
Scripture is replete with instructions for evaluating people who allege to be given signs, wonders, dreams, and prophetic utterances from God.13 Therefore, we conclude that not only is it permissible to carefully examine the messages of one who claims to speak with God’s authority, but we are commanded to do so. As we do this, we are not making any assertions of equality or superiority to the prophet or “Lord’s messenger.” Rather, we are only doing our duty as intelligent Christians, comparing these writings with the supreme authority—the Bible.
What is truth?
This, too, seems like a simplistic question. Truth is the real state of things. Truth is what is. “Thy Word is truth.14 However, before we start on our journey of evaluating truth we must clearly have in mind the difference between truth and error. At this point, we are not yet concerned with defining theological, doctrinal, or propositional truth. Rather, in this chapter, we want to clarify our communication by defining what is truth.
For example, if my destination were Tucson, Arizona (which is south of Phoenix), and I leave Phoenix, Arizona driving north on Interstate 17, and two and a half hours later I find myself in Flagstaff, would I have been going the right direction? Most would immediately answer, “No.” But, how would you answer if I told you that we had a splendid drive, went through beautiful Sedona, and were taking the scenic route to Tucson? Would we be going in the right direction then? Again, most—I hope—would say we were not going in the right direction. But, let’s say that I am the bus driver, and you are a passenger. When we reach Flagstaff, I realize that I am going the wrong direction. However, most of my passengers really don’t know where they are, and it is getting late. I know that you will soon be sleeping, so I retrace my path, go back to Phoenix, and this time go south on Interstate 10, and in another two hours we are in Tucson. When we get into Tucson, you wake up, and I tell you that you can be thankful that I knew the way from Phoenix to Tucson, and drove you to Tucson without going the wrong way. Would that be truth or error? If you say, “Error,” we will understand each other throughout this book. If you say, “Truth,” we are already in trouble!
Progressive truth
The following discussion on progressive truth is brought out here at the beginning before we start our study. We will soon find that there are numerous statements in the writings of Ellen G. White, including her early visions, that are clearly erroneous. Later, many of these statements were changed or reinterpreted. We will find that often the early statements stand in direct contradiction to her later statements. Many in the Adventist church explain this by using “progressive revelation.” Therefore, it is vitally important that we understand exactly what is, and what is not, progressive truth or progressive revelation.
What progressive revelation is
Progressive revelation has two nuances of meaning. Progressive “truth” changes for two reasons. The first is that a specific truth may no longer have application. In Noah’s day the truth was, “A flood is coming; get into the ark.” That was truth then. While this record remains true today, it is not applicable truth today. Two things must be said about this first nuance of meaning. (1) The truth involved was applicable to specific circumstances. (2) Under those specific circumstances, the truth was indeed truth and not error.
The second nuance of meaning in progressive revelation is that not all truth is given at one time, but it is given in incremental steps. The important thing to recognize is that the additionally revealed truth does not contradict the former truth. For example, there are many Old Testament prophecies which point forward to the first coming of Christ. These prophecies, by themselves, are only hints of the reality. But, when the reality comes, these prophecies are still truth and become a part of a larger truth. It is important to recognize that this part of truth is still truth and not error. In other words, progressive truth is an unfolding of truth, not a progression from error to truth.
What progressive revelation is not
Too often error has gone undetected because it is wearing a garment labeled “progressive truth.” Are the following illustrations truth or error?
If I told you clearly that I was going to purchase a new, green Dodge in two days and then came home with a used gray Ford in ten days would that be truth? I hope you will say, “No, you did not tell the truth.” Now, let’s say that what I told you really was the truth, because the green Dodge is a gray-green, and while I said it was new, I did not mean “brand new.” The gray Ford is a greenish-gray, and it is only slightly used and looks much like the new Dodge. I really did buy the car in two days. I just did not fill out all the paper work or write a check for it until ten days later; therefore, I really did tell you the truth. Now what would your answer be? I hope you say, “No, you still did not tell the truth, and you are trying to deceive me into thinking you are telling the truth, when in reality, you are not.” If this is your answer, we can proceed. If you say this last illustration is truth, we are really in trouble!
Picture a continuum from black to white, with varying shades of gray between the two. Black is almost the same as the darkest gray, which is almost the same as the next lighter shade of gray. At the other end of the continuum, we see that the lightest shades of gray are almost white. When moving from one end of the continuum to the other, in small, incremental steps, there is very little perception of change. However, does that make black white, or white black? If you say, “No,” we will understand each other. However, if you say, “Because the black on the continuum changes into white without sharp lines of demarcation between the two, then black must be the same as white, because this is progressive revelation,” we are again in trouble. This would not be progressive “truth” but deceptive error. Even if error and truth are connected by a number of intermediate gradations, that does not make error into truth. Evaluating truth and error requires clear and precise thinking, especially so when the two are connected by a number of intermediate or contrary positions.
Chapter Summary
- The Bible is the ultimate authority and must stand over, and judge all post-canonical prophetic writings, utterances, and experiences.
- The New Testament commands Christians to carefully evaluate the prophetic messages of those who claim to speak for God.
- Truth is the real state of things. Truth is what is. Truth is the ultimate and objective realty. One cannot go one direction and be going another direction at the same time.
- While there may be a special message or aspect of truth that is only applicable to a certain set of circumstances, or to a particular point in history, that truth is never error.
- Progressive revelation is truth being revealed in increments. However, incremental truth is not error, nor do later revelations contradict former revelations.
- Progressive revelation is not a continuum from black to gray to white. Black is not white, nor is white black, even if they are linked by bands of gray. Neither is error truth, nor truth error, even if they are linked by a number of intermediate positions. Progressive truth cannot be internally inconsistent or contradictory.
Endnotes
- Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 595.
- Uriah Smith [renowned, early Adventist leader and contemporary of Ellen White], Review and Herald, 1886-1-13, as quoted in Ministry, 1980-10-54.
- Ministry, 1980-10-54.
- Published by a conservative Historic Adventist group. Some Evangelical Adventists privately renounce it.
- The Study Bible, (Harrah, OK: Academy Enterprises, Inc., printed by R & H Publishing Association, Hagerstown, MD, 1993).
- Erwin R. Gain, Editor; Brian Jones, Principle Contributor, Adult Sabbath School Lessons, Teacher’s Edition, Three Angels’ Messages—Last Call for Heaven, (Nampa ID: Pacific Press Publishing Association), p. 133.
- “The Spirit was not given—nor can it ever be bestowed—to supersede the Bible; for the Scriptures explicitly state that the word of God is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. Says the apostle John, ‘Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.’ 1 John 4:1. And Isaiah declares, ‘To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.’ Isaiah 8:20.” Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, vii. “Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light [in context, Ellen White is referring to her own writings] to lead men and women to the greater light. O, how much good would be accomplished if the books containing this light were read with a determination to carry out the principles they contain! There would be a thousandfold greater vigilance, a thousandfold more self-denial and resolute effort. And many more would now be rejoicing in the light of present truth.” Ellen G. White, Review and Herald, 1903-01-20.
- “I have the most precious matter to reproduce and place before the people in testimony form. While I am able to do this work, the people must have these things, to revive past truth, without one heretical sentence, in that which I have written. This, I am instructed, is to be a living letter to all in regard to my faith.” Ellen. G. White, Nov. 16, 1905, addressed to “My dear Granddaughter Mabel.” Notice the date of this letter. It was written after the large majority of EGW’s books and articles were published. Therefore, it includes most of her writings.
- For example, see the approximately 200 Ellen G. White quotes which have been marshaled to support the teachings of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary and the investigative judgment listed in Adult Sabbath School Lessons, Three Angels’ Messages.
- For example, the October 1980 Ministry, quoted earlier, listed statements supporting the view that the writings of Ellen White should be included within the term, “The Bible, and the Bible Only” and also referred to her writings as an “inspired commentary.” This was a special issue of Ministry devoted to the topic of “Christ and His High Priestly Ministry,” published when the biblical support for the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary and the investigative judgment was being questioned by Dr. Desmond Ford and others.
- There are some Adventists, such as Bill Shea and the late Dr. G. Hasel, who claim to be able to support the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary and the investigative judgment from the Bible. However, other Adventist scholars question their methods of typological interpretation. The late Dr. Raymond Cottrell, Adventist’s leading scholar on Daniel, stated, “Obscurantism [deception] has characterized the official response of the church to every question raised with respect to the traditional interpretation of Daniel 8:14.” Dr. Cottrrell includes the names of Shea and Hasel as practicing obscurantism. See: “The Sanctuary Doctrine, Asset or Liability”, www.lifeassuranceministries.com/art.html.
- The biblical definition of a prophet is one who speaks for God. A prophet’s message may or may not include predictive content. See Ex. 4:14 –17; 7:1.
- 13. See Deut. 13:1-5; 18:20 –22; 1 Ki. 13:11-26; Jer. 23:16, 25-32; Ez. 13:2; Mt. 7:15-20; Mt. 24:10 -12; 2 Pet. 1:20 -2:1; 1 Jn. 4:1-3; 1 Cor. 14:29 -32.
- 14. Jn. 17:17.
- 2. How Dare You? - October 2, 2025
- 1. Sliver in the Foot - September 25, 2025
- 28. Does the Letter of Colossians Refer to the Sabbath? - September 18, 2025