Lesson 6: “The Prophetic Writings”
COLLEEN TINKER | Editor, Proclamation! |
Adventist, have you asked yourself why Adventism dedicates an entire one-fourth of a calendar year in its official, organized Bible instruction to defend, endorse, and affirm Ellen White’s writings? How is focusing on Ellen’s supposed prophetic gift a form of Bible Study?
Since Adventism spends great energy and develops well-taught arguments to say that Ellen’s writings are not on the “level of the Bible” and are not a form of Scripture, why is an entire quarter’s Bible study effort dedicated to “proving” that she was inspired just like the Bible writers and that her words are as dependable as theirs?
Furthermore, a central argument of defense for Ellen White is the claim that the Bible writers were “not perfect”, that not everything they said was inspired by God, that they used literary borrowing, and that they used literary assistants. In other words, they ascribe to the Bible writers the obvious flaws of Ellen White, and they teach that the Bible is not inerrant or perfect because humans wrote the words. They argue that the Bible, like Ellen, contributes messages that will accomplish their purposes, but they aren’t inerrant.
In other words, Adventism denigrates Scripture and teaches that it contains errors. These attitudes toward Scripture are necessary to affirm the equal inspiration of Ellen White. Adventists are left with two sources of authority, one which they learn is final—the Bible—and one which they learn is necessary in order to understand the Bible.
These arguments are dishonest and crazy-making.
This week’s lessons reveal Adventism’s determination to endorse Ellen to its members, bolstering their arguments and shoring up the props that keep Ellen at the center of the Adventist worldview. The message is clear: if you believe the Bible—you’d better believe Ellen. This lesson demonstrates how Adventism has woven the two together under one rubric: God’s revelation. In practical fact, Adventists can’t separate Ellen from Scripture. They are used together.
How God’s Word Is Written
Sunday’s lesson builds the case that God called the Bible writers to WRITE, citing several Old Testament writers and Paul. The last paragraph says:
Interestingly, all the preserved teachings of Jesus come to us in written form through persons God chose to entrust with those treasured truths. This shows us the confidence God has that divine messages would be faithfully recorded and preserved by His messengers.
The authors’ conclusion is random and speculative: God has confidence that “divine messages would be faithfully recorded and preserved by His messengers”?
No. God did not give His messages supposing that flawed men would preserve them through the ages. God did expect His prophets and apostles to write what He asked them to write, but we can only say that God Himself protected and preserved His word through the millennia. Significantly, this study as is the case throughout the week focusses attention on the imperfections of the men who received messages from God.
The imperfections of the prophets is never the point. The God of the messages is sovereign, and the Bible is His revelation of His own plans and purposes. He never put His reputation in the hands of mere men! He enabled men to deliver His word, but He Himself protects and preserves and confirms it! He has never and will never need a PR team to endorse His word as reliable and divine.
Tuesday’s lesson is devoted to explaining that Bible writers used “literary assistants”, or scribes, who helped them write their letters. The day’s lesson ends with these words:
This suggests that, while remaining faithful to the thoughts and meaning of God’s messengers, the vocabulary and sentence construction might reflect the varying literary abilities of the assistants they employed. It’s the thoughts that are inspired, not necessarily the specific words used to express those inspired thoughts.
Of course, the point is to normalize Ellen White’s use of literary assistants such as Marian Davis and Fanny Bolton. Yet Ellen White herself said that Marian Davis was her “bookmaker” and did far more than a secretary or copyist who never changed her words. She said this of Marian:
“My copyists you have seen. They do not change my language. It stands as I write it. Marian’s work is of a different order altogether. She is my bookmaker. Fanny never was my bookmaker.
“How are my books made? Marian does not put in her claim for recognition. She does her work in this way: She takes my articles which are published in the papers, and pastes them in blank books. She also has a copy of all the letters I write. In preparing a chapter for a book, Marian remembers that I have written something on that special point, which may make the matter more forcible. She begins to search for this, and if when she finds it, she sees that it will make the chapter more clear, she adds it.
“The books are not Marian’s productions, but my own, gathered from all my writings. Marian has a large field from which to draw, and her ability to arrange the matter is of great value to me. It saves my poring over a mass of matter, which I have no time to do.”—101 Questions on the Sanctuary and on Ellen White p. 98.5–7, from Letter 61a, 1900
No Bible writer’s scribe was ever given the job of creating the prophet’s works or of editing the contents and fixing the meaning. Furthermore, God gave the prophets His messages which were fixed in meaning. Scribes were not ghost writers putting together various words of the prophets and coming up with a finished product that the prophet never actually wrote nor which God ever actually said.
Furthermore, Scripture tells us that God DID deliver the words of Scripture, the actual promises, warnings, statements, instructions and meanings. He did not, as the lesson states, inspire the prophets’ “thoughts” and then allow them to express them however they made sense to them.
Paul tells us:
All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be equipped, having been thoroughly equipped for every good work.—2 Timothy 3:16, 17 LSB
God Himself gave the words recorded in Scripture; they are HIS instructions, reproofs, corrections, and teachings. They are not merely the words of men but are the result of God delivering His will and word through men. Like the hypostatic union of God and man in the Lord Jesus, the Bible is a union accomplished by the Holy Spirit of God’s will and word being delivered to humanity through men.
Literary SOURCES?
On Wednesday, again a whole day is spent attempting to normalize Ellen White’s plagiarism. The lesson suggests that Solomon borrowed from Egyptian literature, that Luke, Ezra, and Nehemiah relied on outside documents for their accounts without giving credit, that Jude quoted a non canonical book, that Paul quoted from Greek philosophers—suggesting that they shamelessly used other people’s intellectual property without giving credit.
Yet the biblical writers were not attempting to conscript others’ words as if they were their own. Luke stated that he researched all he could find to write his gospel, for example, never hinting that his words and ideas originated in his own head. When the New Testament writers quoted the Old Testament, they were used as allusions which the audience would know from common exposure and memorization.
Yet Ellen White deliberately used the ideas of other people to write many of her major works, never hinting that they came from anywhere except from God. “I was shown…” was her well known phrase which justified her words.
In 1990 Ministry Magazine ran a report on the Fred Veltman study called “The Desire of Ages Project” in which Veltman was hired by the general conference to determine how much of The Desire of Ages was original material and how much Ellen had copied. In the December, 1990 issue of Ministry, the report draws five conclusions:
- Ellen White used literary sources when writing The Desire Of Ages.… In view of the fact that she employed editorial assistants, our clearest evidence of Ellen White’s literary borrowing comes from her personal diaries and manuscripts.…Implicitly or explicitly, Ellen White and others speaking on her behalf did not admit to and even denied literary dependency on her part.
- The content of Ellen White’s commentary on the life and ministry of Christ, The Desire of Ages, is for the most part derived rather than original.…There is also the matter of plagiarism. We have now identified several of the sources she used. We know the types of literature these sources represent. And we have an idea of the nature and extent of Ellen White’s literary dependency at the level of her original writings.
- The special character of Ellen White’s commentary is to be found in its practical use of Scripture and in its stress on spiritual realities and personal devotion.…Finally, regarding content, how do Ellen White’s writings on the life of Christ compare among themselves?…The very fact that the DA text represents a revision of her earlier work suggests that her writings form a textual tradition.
- Ellen White used a minimum of 23 sources of various types of literature, including fiction, in her writings on the life of Christ.…William Hanna’s popular work was designed to be “practical and devotional.”9 No wonder that parallels from Hanna are to be found in 13 of the 15 DA chapters we investigated.
- Ellen White’s literary assistants, particularly Marian Davis, are responsible for the published form of The Desire of Ages.…It is perhaps more accurate and useful to speak of her creative and independent use of her writings and those of others than to minimize her dependence upon the writings of others.—“The Desire of Ages Project: The Conclusions”, Ministry Magazine, December, 1990, retrieved from https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1990/12/the-desire-of-ages-project-the-conclusions
Ellen White was shown to have borrowed extensively perhaps most of the contents of The Desire of Ages alone. The Veltman Report was done by a friendly source—an Adventist professor of religion at Pacific Union College commissioned by the General Conference. His study, rather than debunking Walter Rae’s infamous The White Lie in which he showed that Ellen White had plagiarized at least 80 percent of the book, actually confirmed that Ellen White had not written the book herself for the most part.
In fact, it is an open question how much of her other books were plagiarized or ghost-written as well. Before he died, Walter Rae also stated that he had research proving that a great percentage of The Great Controversy also was plagiarized—a significant portion of it being taken from the works of her husband James.
The Sabbath School lesson authors at The White Estate are doing what Adventists have done since the early years of the organization. When serious questions have surfaced as to the reliability and true inspiration of Ellen White, from the 1919 Bible Conference held four years after her death and onwards, the Adventist organization has conducted a swift PR campaign to hide the evidence that her testimonies were doubted and likely not inspired.
When, in 1955, Walter Martin questioned Adventist leaders to ascertain if their doctrines were biblical and if Ellen was was the organization’s infallible interpreter of Scripture, the Adventist leaders misled him, played with words, and deceived him. They even wrote Questions on Doctrine to make it appear that Adventism no longer believed the original Ellen White-endorsed doctrines that shaped the organization, but after the book went out of print, they did not reprint it.
When in 1980 Desmond Ford delivered his infamous Glacier View defense, sharing his research proving that the investigative judgment was not biblical, the Adventist organization battened down the hatches and began firing pastors and scholars from Adventist universities who began teaching against the investigative judgment and upholding the verbal revisions published in the then-out-of-print Questions on Doctrine.
This scandal triggered Walter Martin’s discomfort, and in a 1984 series of interviews on the John Ankerberg Show with William Johnsson, Martin said he was re-looking at Adventism because he had begun receiving calls from pastors and teachers who were fired for teaching what Questions on Doctrine had stated.
Yet the organization swept this scandal under the rug as well. By the time Adventist students were studying religion and theology in the early 2000’s, many of them had never even heard of Desmond Ford or of Walter Rae whose The White Lie had made the headlines of the Los Angeles Times on October 23, 1980—barely missing Adventism’s famed great disappointment anniversary.
All to say, this Sabbath School lesson follows in the established denominational footprint: ignore the evidence, pretend the public scandals that showcased Ellen’s deception never happened, and continue to gaslight current believers by creating illegitimate arguments that normalize Ellen’s dishonesty and manipulation.
What Is Real?
In Friday’s lesson the authors continue the standard practice of ignoring the facts that disprove Ellen’s testimonies as God’s words to the church, quoting her and commenting:
What about discrepancies or inaccuracies?
“In regard to infallibility,” she wrote, “I never claimed it; God alone is infallible.”—Selected Messages, book 1, p. 37.
One may encounter certain statements in her writings that are difficult to understand or harmonize with others. Ellen G. White’s humanity was not overridden by her divine calling. Like all of us, Ellen White would grow and mature as well, a growth and maturity that is revealed in her writings.
As already stated, but worth repeating, she also corrected those who believed that every word she wrote came directly from heaven. “There are times when common things must be stated, common thoughts must occupy the mind, common letters must be written and information given that has passed from one to another of the workers. Such words, such information, are not given under the special inspiration of the Spirit of God.”—Selected Messages, book 3, p. 58.
Again we remind you that Ellen claimed differently for herself. Notice this quotation from Testimonies for the Church Volume Five:
“When I went to Colorado I was so burdened for you that, in my weakness, 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 to 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.” (Testimonies for the Church, Volume Five, 67.2)
Ellen White claimed that the things she wrote were all from the Lord; not one article she wrote in her letters and articles came from herself. Furthermore, she claimed scriptural-level authority for her work:
Abundant light has been given to our people in these last days. Whether or not my life is spared, my writings will constantly speak, and their work will go forward as long as time shall last. My writings are on file in the office; and even though I should not live, these words that have been given to me by the Lord will still have life and will speak to the people.—22 Letters and Manuscripts, Lt. 371, 1907, par. 19
Adventist, I beg you: do your own research. Ask God to reveal truth and reality to you. Ask Him to teach you to read and understand His word without the lens of a modern prophet distorting Scripture.
Ellen White was NOT inspired as the Bible writers were. Her testimonies are NOT the words God gave her nor the product of God’s thoughts in her mind. Ellen received her visions and insights from a source other than God.
I believe she WAS a prophet, but she was one of the false prophets about whom our Lord Jesus warned us would come. She teaches another gospel, a fallible Jesus, a humanity that is not spiritually dead by nature. She does not teach the need for a literal spiritual new birth.
Look to Jesus. Let go of Ellen, and find reality and truth and freedom. Look to Jesus who died and fully atoned for your sin. Look to Jesus and see Him shattering your curse of death by rising because His sacrifice had fully atoned for sin. Trust Jesus alone!
Let go of the deception of trying to keep the commandments and especially the Sabbath hours. See that Jesus has inaugurated a new covenant in His blood, and now we answer directly to Him because the Holy Spirit indwells those who believe, uniting us with Christ.
Look away from Ellen, and look away from the law to Jesus. He is all you need. In Jesus you will find the reality of Paul’s words:
But if the ministry of death, in letters having been engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, which was being brought to an end, how will the ministry of the Spirit not be even more in glory? For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory. For indeed what had been glorious, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses [it]. For if that which was being brought to an end [was] with glory, much more that which remains [is] in glory.—2 Corinthians 3:7–11 LSB
This weekly feature is dedicated to Adventists who are looking for biblical insights into the topics discussed in the Sabbath School lesson quarterly. We post articles which address each lesson as presented in the Sabbath School Bible Study Guide, including biblical commentary on them. We hope you find this material helpful and that you will come to know Jesus and His revelation of Himself in His word in profound biblical ways.
- Ellen White’s Secret Writers (Q4 L6) - October 29, 2026
- We Got Mail - October 29, 2026
- Jesus, Not Lifestyle - October 22, 2026