II. Ellen White's Views and Role Regarding the Shut Door

Ellen White, like other Millerite Adventists, took her initial cue on the shut door from William Miller. She did not originate the view. After the autumn 1844 disappointment and previous to her first vision, she, like Miller, believed that probation had closed for the world. She recollected: “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.”^{28Ellen G. White, Ms 4, 1883 (c. 1883); idem, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 63.} Related to this statement is another: “With my brethren and sisters after the time passed in ’44, I did believe no more sinners would be converted. But I never had a vision that no more sinners would be converted.”^{29Ellen G. White to J. N. Loughborough, Lt 2, 1874 (Aug. 24); Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 74.}1EGWLM 47.4

In these two statements Ellen White is saying (1) that her shut-door beliefs did not originate with her visions, and (2) that in accepting Miller's views she believed that probation was closed in the weeks following the autumn disappointment. At some point after that, but before her first vision in December, she adopted a position similar to J. V. Himes's—that the October 1844 date was wrong. She believed that Adventists should look to a future date for the coming of Jesus and resume their proclamation to the world. James White wrote in 1847 about her first vision: “When she received her first vision, Dec. 1844, she and all the band in Portland, Maine, had given up the midnight cry, and shut door, as being in the past.”^{30James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock,” p. 22.} Ellen White also recollected in 1847: “At the time I had the vision of the midnight cry I had given it up in the past and thought it future, as also most of the band had.”^{31Ellen G. White to Joseph Bates, Lt 3, 1847 (July 13).} Her first vision countered this position and confirmed the prophetic significance of the Midnight Cry message. In returning to an acceptance of the October 1844 date, she readopted certain aspects of the shut door that she had previously believed.1EGWLM 48.1

Ellen White's First Visions and the Close of Probation

The written account of Ellen White's visions, the experience of those closest to her, and her own recollections suggest that she did not readopt her initial prevision view that probation had closed for everyone. She declared in 1874: “I never have stated or written that the world was doomed or damned. I never have under any circumstances used this language to anyone however sinful. I have ever had messages of reproof for those who used these harsh expressions.”^{32Ellen G. White, Lt 2, 1874 (Aug. 24).} 1EGWLM 48.2

This statement is, at least to a degree, in line with that of the Advent Mirror, which allowed for the salvation of individuals who had not rejected truth. A second contextual evidence that Ellen Harmon believed that certain people could still be saved is found in the earliest contemporary reference to her visions—the Israel Dammon trial in Maine, as recorded in an area newspaper.^{33“Trial of Elder I. Dammon: Reported for the Piscataquis Farmer,” Piscataquis Farmer, Mar. 7, 1845, pp. 1, 2.} Dammon credited his acceptance of the Bridegroom view to the influence of James White.^{34Israel Dammon, “Letter From Bro. Dammon,” Jubilee Standard, June 5, 1845, p. 104.} Dammon then traveled with James White and Ellen Harmon from Exeter, Maine, where Ellen Harmon had her Bridegroom vision, to Atkinson. In Spiritual Gifts Ellen White gives a lengthy description of the arrest and trial of Israel Dammon.^{35Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts [vol. 2], pp. 40-42.} It is reasonable to presume that Dammon and those with him heard Ellen White tell of her vision and were influenced by it.1EGWLM 48.3

At the trial of Dammon in March 1845, those Adventists who had met with Ellen Harmon and heard her visions testified that neither Dammon nor their group believed that probation was closed for individuals or even small groups.^{36See Merlin D. Burt, “Historical Background, Interconnected Development, and Integration of the Doctrines of the Sanctuary, the Sabbath, and Ellen G. White's Role in Sabbatarian Adventism from 1844 to 1849,” pp. 136, 137.} Isley Osborne, a witness for the defense and an Adventist, was reported to have said regarding Dammon's view of the churches: “He believes there is good, bad, and indifferent in all churches—he thinks it best to come out from them, because there is so many that has [sic] fallen from their holy position.”^{37“Trial of Elder I. Dammon: Reported for the Piscataquis Farmer,” p. 1.} Jacob Mason, another Adventist defense witness, also clarified their position on the churches: “Brother Dammon said the churches were of that description—said they were lyers [sic], rogues, etc. I did not understand him to include all, but individuals.”^{38Ibid., p. 2.}1EGWLM 48.4

Joel Doore, an Adventist from Atkinson, said for the defense: “Elder Dammon said there was [sic] bad characters in the churches; I did not understand him to say all.”^39Ibid. Abel S. Boobar, another Adventist, testified: “Elder D. said the churches were in a fallen state, and he had rather risk himself in the hands of the Almighty as a non-professor, than to be in the place of some of the churches.”^40Ibid. Even James Ayer, Jr., in whose home the meeting was held, understood that it was “members of the churches who he referred to instead of the whole.”^{41Ibid., p. 1.} Thus Adventist witnesses, who had recently heard Ellen Harmon explain her visions, unanimously testified that individuals could still be saved, even from the “fallen” churches.1EGWLM 49.1

One more indication that suggests openness to individual salvation is found in an 1848 issue of the Girdle of Truth, in which Eli Curtis included portions of Ellen White's visions. He wrote: “The ‘great effectual door’ (1 Cor. 16:9) seems to have been closed more than three years since; as our experience very plainly teaches, but not the door of mercy!”^{42Eli Curtis, Girdle of Truth, Extra, second ed., Jan. 20, 1848, p. 31; see also M. C. Truesdale, “Statement,” Aug. 17, 1875, DF 266.}1EGWLM 49.2

These positions show a consistency with Ellen White's later testimony. Contemporaries such as J. V. Himes and those who later became Advent Christians who accused Ellen White of believing that probation had closed did not differentiate among the divergent and changing positions of Bridegroom Adventists regarding the shut door during 1845.^{43For an example, see Wellcome, History of the Second Advent Message, pp. 397, 398.}1EGWLM 49.3

Although Ellen White abandoned her earlier Millerite view that probation had closed for everyone, evidence suggests that as late as the summer of 1847 she likely still believed that evangelistic work for the unconverted world at large was no longer necessary. Otis Nichols, a close friend and supporter of Ellen White, wrote to William Miller on April 20, 1846, that she encouraged Adventists to “hold on to the faith and the seventh month movement, and that our work was done for the nominal church and the world, and what remains to be done was for the household of faith.”^{44Otis Nichols to William Miller, Apr. 20, 1846, letter written on back of broadside To the Little Remnant Scattered Abroad (Aurora University).}1EGWLM 49.4

In writing out her first vision, Ellen White used the expression “the wicked world which God had rejected,” although she did not elaborate on its meaning.^{45Ellen G. Harmon, “Letter to Enoch Jacobs,” Day-Star, Jan. 24, 1846, pp. 31, 32; Ellen G. White to Joseph Bates, Lt 3, 1847 (July 13, 1847). Her first vision was reprinted using the same “wicked world” expression in the broadside To the Little Remnant Scattered Abroad, Apr. 6, 1846, and James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock,” p. 14.} Apollos Hale and Joseph Turner had used the same broad term but in a specifically circumscribed manner when they wrote of “the wicked world” that had “rejected the [Advent] truth” and “turned away their ears with loathing from its warnings and promises.”^{46A. Hale and J. Turner, “Has Not the Savior Come as the Bridegroom?” Advent Mirror, January 1845, pp. 3, 4.} Likewise, William Miller had written of “the wicked world, who had scoffed at the idea of Christ's second coming.”^{47William Miller, Evidence From Scripture and History of the Second Coming of Christ About the Year 1843 (Boston: J. V. Himes, 1842), p. 188.} Ellen White and those closely associated with her may have attached for a time a broader connotation to “the wicked world,” but the designation allows for a less-universal application, as the above examples suggest. Ellen White's own interpretation of the vision, when called upon to explain it in 1883, was that “no reference is made [in the vision] to those who had not seen the light, and therefore were not guilty of its rejection.”^{48Ellen G. White, Ms 4, 1883 (c. 1883); idem, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 64.} The biblical principle that a person is responsible for the light they receive through the working of the Holy Spirit was applied by Ellen White to those who had rejected the Advent experience before 1844. The story of the blind man in John 9 articulates this principle. “Jesus said to [the Pharisees], ‘If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, “We see.” Therefore your sin remains.’”^{49John 9:41, NKJV.} The message and language of Ellen White's first vision remains compatible with this spiritual rejection principle, even though her interpretation and that of her associates may have needed further correction.^{50Herbert Douglass, Messenger of the Lord, pp. 554, 555.}1EGWLM 49.5

In a letter to Joseph Bates on July 13, 1847, she described her February 1845 “Bridegroom” vision. There was a “Sister Durben” who was a “mother in Israel” who did “not believe the door was shut.” After Sister Durben arose to speak, Ellen White received her “Bridegroom” vision. She wrote to Bates that when she 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.”^{51Ellen G. White to Joseph Bates, Lt 3, 1847 (July 13).} While Ellen White did not define how she and those with her understood the shut door at the time of her Bridegroom vision, the vision account itself makes no mention of the door of mercy being closed for the world, but rather depicts the coming of Jesus to the Ancient of Days in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. Her account corresponds closely to the description found in Daniel 7:9, 10, 13, 14.1EGWLM 50.1

It would take more time for Sabbatarian Adventists, including Ellen White, to distinguish between the visions’ confirmation of the October 1844 date as a fulfillment of prophecy and their preconceptions regarding the shut door. As we will observe below, Ellen White's experience with the developing shut-door teaching may be compared to the manner in which she and other early Sabbatarian Adventists came to understand the correct time to begin the Sabbath. Bible writers likewise had misconceptions that were corrected over time.^{52See section “Misconception and Growing Understanding” below.}1EGWLM 50.2

Ellen White's Visions Theologically Undermined Initial Shut-Door Views

Ellen White's position on the shut door was influenced and modified by her second major vision, which she received in Exeter, Maine, in February 1845. Known as the Bridegroom vision, it presented a very different idea than that of Samuel Snow and Joseph Turner in the Jubilee Standard.^{53Samuel S. Snow, “Letter From Br. Snow.”} As noted previously, Snow would argue that Jesus had ended His work as high priest in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary on one day, October 22, 1844. For Snow, Jesus was reigning as king and was no longer a mediator.^{54See Burt, “Historical Background,” pp. 114-117.}1EGWLM 50.3

In contrast, Ellen White wrote of her vision: “There I beheld Jesus, as He was standing before the Father, a great High Priest.”^{55Ellen G. Harmon, “Letter From Sister Harmon,” Day-Star, Mar. 14, 1846, p. 7 (written Feb. 15, 1846).} Even her statements about those who remained “bowed before the throne” in the holy place, where she figuratively saw Satan taking God's place, suggest hope. She wrote: “Satan's object was to keep them deceived, and to draw back and deceive God's children.”^56Ibid.61 The fact that Satan was working so hard implied that there was hope for those who were deceived. She did not specifically define who the “deceived” ones were. Thus in February 1845 Ellen White was suggesting a post-1844 continuing atonement or intercession, which theologically diverged from the restrictive or one-day atonement idea that probation had closed. Her views were more comparable to those presented by O.R.L. Crosier in the March 1845 Day-Dawn, though it is unlikely that she knew, at the time, of this small and obscure publication from western New York.1EGWLM 51.1

The Bridegroom vision also seems to have anchored for Ellen White the idea that those who had willfully rejected light could close their own probation. This “shut door” was limited to those who resisted the Holy Spirit and remained indifferent to Jesus’ move into the Holy of Holies in the heavenly sanctuary.1EGWLM 51.2

Ellen White's time of trouble vision, during the fall of 1845, further confirmed that human probation had not closed. In October 1845 James White was teaching that Jesus would come at the end of the one-year period following the end of the 2300 days. While in Carver, Massachusetts, Ellen White was shown that Jesus could not come yet because the time of trouble had not yet begun.^{57Ibid.; James White, “Watchman, What of the Night,” Day-Star, Sept. 20, 1845, p. 26; James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock,” p. 22.} In this vision Ellen White also clarified that God's people had not yet been sealed. She wrote: “Just before we entered it [the time of trouble] we all received the seal of the living God.”^{58Ellen G. Harmon, “Letter From Sister Harmon.”}1EGWLM 51.3

The time of trouble vision increased James White's interest in the progression of final events. By 1847 he had developed a three-phase time of trouble beginning in 1844 and continuing until the voice of God at the Second Coming.^{59James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock”; see Burt, “Historical Background,” pp. 308-312.} The three phases were the lesser time of trouble, the greater time of trouble, and Jacob's time of trouble. The lesser trouble began in 1844 while Jesus continued His work as high priest. The greater time of trouble, yet future, would begin when Jesus laid aside His priestly robes and probation closed. Then the seven last plagues would be poured out. Jacob's time of trouble would occur just before the Second Coming. Ellen White's vision of a future time of trouble not only protected against time setting but also provided a theological reason for evangelistic outreach until Jesus ended His work as high priest.1EGWLM 51.4

In March and April 1847 Ellen White received visions on the Sabbath. In her Sabbath halo vision of April 3, 1847, at the home of Stockbridge Howland, she again saw Jesus ministering in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. But her vision added evangelistic dimensions even beyond what Joseph Bates had presented regarding the eschatological importance of the Sabbath. She saw Jesus open the ark in the Most Holy Place and remove the Ten Commandments. She observed that the fourth commandment “shone above them all” and had a “halo of glory” all around it.^{60E. G. White, “Dear Bro. Bates,” A Vision, broadside, Apr. 7, 1847, p. 1.} She was then shown that “God had children, who do not see and keep the Sabbath. They had not rejected the light on it.” Then God's people “went forth” and “proclaimed the Sabbath more fully.”^61Ibid.1EGWLM 51.5

This evangelistic call further prepared the way for an understanding of the sealing message and the final collapse of the “probation-closed-for-sinners” view. The Sabbath halo vision so impressed Bates that he published it in a broadside.^62Ibid. It is probable that this vision helped him orient his views on the sealing message and the need to proclaim it throughout the world.1EGWLM 52.1

Finally, Ellen White's January 31, 1849, broadside, entitled To Those Who Are Receiving the Seal of the Living God, and her March 24, 1849, vision of the open door in the Most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary placed renewed emphasis on the importance of outreach and the availability of grace to sinners while Jesus remained in the second apartment of the heavenly sanctuary. In one portrayal she saw Jesus “clothed with Priestly garments. He gazed in pity on the remnant, then raised his hands upward, and with a voice of deep pity cried—‘My blood, Father, My blood, My blood, My blood.’” Jesus’ purpose in this appeal was to delay the release of the “four winds” of trouble until “the servants of God were sealed with the seal of the living God.”^{63Ellen G. White, To Those Who Are Receiving the Seal of the Living God, broadside, Jan. 31, 1849.}1EGWLM 52.2

Repeating a statement given earlier with one additional sentence connects well the foregoing information on Ellen White's progressive movement toward understanding the open door: “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.”^{64Ellen G. White, Ms 4, 1883 (c. 1883); idem, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 63.}1EGWLM 52.3

As Ellen White looked back over her experience leading up to her first vision and then the visions she received in the following months and years, she realized that the visions steadily helped move the “little flock” of early Bridegroom Adventists and then Sabbatarian Adventists toward a more open view. Her visions theologically moved the “little flock” away from the Millerite shut-door view to the Sabbatarian Adventist evangelistic proclamation of the gospel in the context of the three angels’ messages to the entire world.1EGWLM 52.4

A Shut Door for Those Who Had Rejected the 1844 Message

An additional point needs to be considered. Ellen White continued to believe that a specialized group, those who had rejected the full light of the Midnight Cry when it was proclaimed before 1844, had closed their own probation.1EGWLM 52.5

An often-quoted statement from Christian Experience and Views has been used to affirm that as late as 1851 Ellen White believed that the time for the salvation of the world was passed: “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. … 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.”^{65Ellen G. White, A Sketch of the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, p. 27 (Early Writings, p. 45); see also idem, “Dear Brethren and Sisters,” Present Truth, August 1849, p. 22.}1EGWLM 53.1

In 1854 Ellen White clarified what she meant in this statement: “The ‘false reformations’ referred to on page 27 [of Christian Experience and Views] are yet to be more fully seen. This view relates more particularly to those who have heard and rejected the light of the Advent doctrine. They are given over to strong delusions. Such will not have ‘the travail of soul for sinners’ as formerly. Having rejected the Advent, and being given over to the delusions of Satan, ‘the time for their salvation is past.’ This does not, however, relate to those who have not heard and have not rejected the doctrine of the Second Advent.”^{66Ellen G. White, Supplement to the Christian Experience and Views of Ellen G. White, p. 4 (Early Writings, p. 45).}1EGWLM 53.2

Through the remainder of her life Ellen White continued to believe that probation was closed for those who had rejected the 1844 message after understanding its meaning and seen the moving of God's Spirit. In 1883 she wrote: “I was shown in vision, and I still believe, that there was a shut door in 1844. All who saw the light of the first and second angels’ messages and rejected that light were left in darkness.”^{67Ellen G. White, Ms 4, 1883 (c. 1883); idem, Selected Messages, book 1, p. 63.} She compared the 1844 experience with that of Noah, Sodom and Gomorrah, and those who crucified Jesus. These each resulted in a limited close of probation.^68Ibid.1EGWLM 53.3

Misconception and Growing Understanding

A common misconception regarding the gift of prophecy is the belief that prophetic revelation does not allow for correction or growth in understanding on the part of the messenger. Snook and Brinkerhoff both took the position in 1866 that because Ellen White believed in a shut door after receiving her first vision she therefore could not be a true prophet.^{69Snook and Brinkerhoff, The Visions of E. G. White, Not of God, pp. 3ff.} The next year William Sheldon, the first published non-Sabbatarian Adventist critic of Ellen White, also argued similarly that she could not be a true prophet because she did not believe the Sabbath until more than a year and a half after receiving her first vision and then in later years considered keeping the first day of the week as the “mark of the beast.”^{70William Sheldon, Visions and Theories, pp. 3, 4.} Snook, Brinkerhoff, and Sheldon did not understand that while God is careful to make sure that His messenger communicates His intended revelation, He allows for growth in their personal understanding and application.1EGWLM 53.4

Ellen White's growing understanding of the shut door demonstrates how special revelation functioned in her experience. Can a prophetic messenger be allowed time to advance in his or her understanding? Must God immediately correct or remove every preexisting misconception or incorrect idea? Looking at the biblical model, we find that the prophets and apostles did not always have immediate and perfect understanding, and on occasion even misunderstood aspects of what they were shown.1EGWLM 53.5

Daniel is a good example of a prophet needing additional revelations to aid in understanding a vision. After receiving the vision recorded in chapter 8, the prophet “fainted, and was sick certain days;” nor was the vision understood.^{71Dan. 8:27, KJV.} A significant period of time passed between Daniel 8 and Daniel 9. Daniel had studied the prophecy of Jeremiah 25:10-14 and knew that the Jewish captivity would last only 70 years. But as he contemplated the 2300 days/years of Daniel 8:14 he could not reconcile what he was shown with Jeremiah's prophecy. In answer to his prayer recorded in Daniel 9, the angel Gabriel was sent to explain the previous vision and give the prophet “skill and understanding.” This indicates that Daniel initially misinterpreted or misunderstood part of his Daniel 8 vision.1EGWLM 54.1

The experience of the apostles after Pentecost is another example. The apostles held incorrect ideas about God's plan for the conversion of non-Jews. It required a vision, recorded in Acts 10, to make Peter willing to eat with and preach to Gentiles. Yet even after that experience others on the Jerusalem Council were reluctant to accept the conversion of Gentiles to Christianity unless they also converted to Judaism. It took time and new circumstances combined with repeated special revelation from God to correct their misunderstanding. The apostles’ misconceptions and growing understanding did not invalidate the special revelation previously received. The inspired revelation was always trustworthy and true. It was also progressive.1EGWLM 54.2

The apostle Paul sent the runaway slave Onesimus back to Philemon with counsel to treat him like a brother. Paul tempered but did not remove the institution of slavery. Patriarchs in the Old Testament engaged in polygamy as an accepted part of their culture. Even David, who was a man after God's own heart, and Abraham, who was a “friend” of God, apparently engaged in the practice without any thought that it was wrong. They both, with other patriarchs, had the prophetic gift. It is helpful to realize that God does not need to correct every misconception a person has to use him or her to convey special revelation.1EGWLM 54.3

Ellen White's experience was similar to these and other Bible prophets. She wrote of her visions: “Often representations are given me which at first I do not understand, but after a time they are made plain by a repeated presentation of those things that I did not at first comprehend, and in ways that make their meaning clear and unmistakable.”^{72Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, book 3, p. 56.} “For sixty years I have been in communication with heavenly messengers, and I have been constantly learning in reference to divine things.”^{73Ellen G. White, Lt 86, 1906 (Mar. 8); see also idem, This Day With God, p. 76.}1EGWLM 54.4

The interplay between prophetic revelation and mistaken preconceptions is further illustrated in how early Sabbatarian Adventists came to a correct position on the proper time to begin the Sabbath. Both James and Ellen White accepted the Sabbath through reading biblical evidences presented by Joseph Bates in his August 1846 tract, The Seventh-day Sabbath: A Perpetual Sign. Bates, who had traveled the world as a sea captain, understood the effect of latitude on sunrise and sunset. He concluded that evening began at 6:00 p.m. and that this was the correct time to begin the Sabbath.^{74Bates, The Seventh Day Sabbath, p. 32.} His arguments convinced the Whites, who, with most other Sabbatarian Adventists, continued to keep the Sabbath in this way for another nine years. Some, however, suggested that the Sabbath should begin at sunrise, while others thought it should begin at sundown.1EGWLM 55.1

In 1847 at Topsham, Maine, Ellen White had a vision that the sunrise time was wrong. The angel said to her, “From even unto even shall ye celebrate your Sabbaths.” At the urging of Joseph Bates, those present, including Ellen White, interpreted this to mean that the Sabbath should begin at 6:00 p.m.^{75Uriah Smith, The Visions of Mrs. E. G. White, a Manifestation of Spiritual Gifts According to the Scriptures, p. 90.} Ellen White and others drew conclusions from her vision that she had not actually been shown.1EGWLM 55.2

During the early 1850s some expressed further questions on the proper time to begin the Sabbath. In the summer of 1855 James White spoke with J. N. Andrews, who agreed to give the matter thorough study.^{76James White, “Time of the Sabbath,” Review and Herald, Dec. 4, 1855, p. 78.} At a November 1855 conference in Battle Creek, Michigan, Andrews’ research was presented, giving biblical and historical reasons for beginning the Sabbath at sundown rather than at 6:00 p.m. Most were convinced, but some, including Ellen White, believed that her 1847 vision had confirmed the 6:00 p.m. time.1EGWLM 55.3

On Tuesday, November 20, 1855, three days after the discussion of Andrews’ paper at the conference, Ellen White had a vision which corrected her longstanding misunderstanding. “I saw that it was in the minds of some [herself included] that the Lord had shown that the Sabbath commenced at six o'clock, when I had only seen that it commenced at ‘even,’ and it was inferred that even was at six.”^{77Ellen G. White, Testimony for the Church (Battle Creek, Mich.: Advent Review Office, 1855), p. 4; idem, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1, p. 116.} James White wrote of the misunderstanding of Ellen White's 1847 vision with these words: “Some have the impression that six o'clock time has been taught among us by the direct manifestation of the Holy Spirit. This is a mistake. ‘From even to even’ was the teaching, from which six o'clock time has been inferred.”^{78James White, “Time of the Sabbath.”}1EGWLM 55.4

The information on Ellen White's vision correcting her and others’ understanding was published in her first Testimony for the Church. She asked the angel in vision if the “frown of God had been upon His people for commencing the Sabbath as they had.” She was shown the “first rise of the Sabbath” and the nine years since and “did not see that the Lord was displeased, or frowned upon them.” Then the angel explained why: “If light come, and that light is set aside or rejected, then comes condemnation and the frown of God; but before the light comes, there is no sin, for there is no light for them to reject.”^{79E. G. White, Testimony for the Church, p. 4; idem, Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1, p. 116.} Here Ellen White articulated the spiritual rejection principle that a person is not accountable for “light” until it is understood.1EGWLM 55.5

As with her corrected understanding of the time to begin the Sabbath, Ellen White's personal preconceptions or possibly mistaken inferences relating to the shut-door teaching do not invalidate her visions, particularly because it was those early visions that provided a theological orientation resulting in a worldwide evangelistic gospel proclamation. Examples of these types of misconception, however, are rare in Ellen White's experience.1EGWLM 56.1