Chapter 15 — Sola Scriptura and Ellen G. White: Historical Reflections

Alberto R. Timm

Seventh-day Adventists have always subscribed to the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura (by Scripture alone). ^{1For a more in-depth study of the various nuances of the sola Scriptura principle, see, e.g., Keith A. Mathison, The Shape of Sola Scriptura (Moscow, Idaho: Canon Press, 2001); E. Edward Zinke, “Faith-Science Issues: An Epistemological Perspective,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 15, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 63-90; Rolf J. Pöhler, “Adventisten, Ellen White und das Sola-Scriptura-Prinzip,” Spes Christiana 17 (2006):45-68; Joel R. Beeke et al., Sola Scriptura: The Protestant Position on the Bible (Orlando, Fla.: Reformation Trust, 2009); Graham Cole, “Sola Scriptura: Some Historical and Contemporary Perspectives,” Churchman 104, no. 1 (1990): 20-34; Aleksandar S. Santrac, “The Sola Scriptura Principle in the Current Debate,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 24, no. 1 (2013): 107-126; Kwabena Donkor, “Contemporary Responses to Sola Scriptura: Implications for Adventist Theology,” Reflections—The BRI Newsletter 41 (January 2013): 5-8; John C. Peckham, “Sola Scriptura: Reductio ad absurdum?” Trinity Journal 35NS, no. 2 (Fall 2014): 195-223. See also G. R. Evans, Problems of Authority in the Reformation Debates (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).} As early as 1847 James White stated that the Bible is “a perfect, and complete revelation” and “our only rule of faith and practice.” ^{2[James White], in James White, ed., A Word to the “Little Flock” (Brunswick, Maine: [James White], 1847), 13.} Statement 3 of the 1872 A Declaration of the Fundamental Principles Taught and Practiced by the Seventh-day Adventists affirmed that “the Holy Scriptures, of the Old and New Testaments, were given by inspiration of God, contain a full revelation of his will to man, and are the only infallible rule of faith and practice.” ^{3A Declaration of the Fundamental Principles Taught and Practiced by the Seventh-day Adventists (Battle Creek, Mich.: Steam Press of the Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, 1872), 5.} And in 1884 Ellen White added, “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.” ^{4Ellen G. White, The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4: The Great Controversy Between Christ and Satan From the Destruction of Jerusalem to the End of the Controversy (Oakland: Pacific Press®, 1884), 413.}GOP 289.1

At the same time, Seventh-day Adventists also accept the writings of Ellen White as an end-time manifestation of the true gift of prophecy. But some critics argue that the acceptance of those writings undermines the Seventh-day Adventist claim of strict adherence to the sola Scriptura principle. D. M. Canright, a longtime critic of Adventism, went so far as to claim that Seventh-day Adventists have “another Bible”—Ellen White’s writing—and “they have to read our old Bible in the light of this new Bible.” ^{5D. M. Canright, Seventh-day Adventism Renounced After an Experience of Twenty-eight Years by a Prominent Minister and Writer of That Faith (Chicago: Fleming H. Revell, 1889), 136. Cf. William H. Branson, In Defense of the Faith: The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism. A Reply to Canright (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald®, 1933), 327-367.} Dale Ratzlaff, another vociferous critic, stated that Seventh-day Adventists have two equal “sources of authority, two sources of truth: the Bible and the writings of Ellen G. White.” ^{6Dale Ratzlaff, The Cultic Doctrine of Seventh-day Adventists (Sedona, Ariz.: Life Assurance Ministries, 1996), 33. (Italics original.)} Some helpful studies have responded to these criticisms, ^{7See, e.g., T. Housel Jemison, A Prophet Among You (Mountain View, Calif.: Pacific Press®, 1955), 371; Arthur L. White, “The Position of ‘The Bible, and the Bible Only’ and the Relationship of This to the Writings of Ellen G. White,” at www.andrews.edu/library/car/ (accessed Dec. 2, 2014); Herbert E. Douglas, Messenger of the Lord: The Prophetic Ministry of Ellen G. White (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 1998), 408-433; Merlin D. Burt, “Ellen G. White and Sola Scriptura” (paper presented at the Seventh-day Adventist Church and Presbyterian Church USA Conversation, Office of the General Assembly PC [USA], Louisville, Ky., Aug. 23, 2007), at adventistbiblicalresearch.org (accessed Dec. 2, 2014); Jud Lake, Ellen White Under Fire: Identifying the Mistakes of Her Critics (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®, 2010), 132-178; George R. Knight, “Bible, Ellen G. White’s Relationship to the,” in Denis Fortin and Jerry Moon, eds., The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia, 2nd ed. (Hagerstown, Md.: Review and Herald®, 2013 [2014]), 647-649; R. Clifford Jones, “Ellen White and Scripture,” in Merlin D. Burt, ed., Understanding Ellen White: The Life and Work of the Most Influential Voice in Adventist History (Nampa, Idaho: Pacific Press®; Silver Spring, Md.: Ellen G. White Estate, 2015), 45-54.} but there is room to further assess the relationship between the sola Scriptura principle and the writings of Ellen G. White from a broader historical perspective.GOP 289.2

The present article surveys basic concepts related to (1) the Roman Catholic claim to being the only true interpreter of Scripture; (2) the Protestant response through the sola Scriptura principle; (3) new hermeneutical alternatives that undermine that principle; (4) Ellen White’s reemphasis of the sola Scriptura principle; and (5) how she uses it in her expositions of Scripture. Such concepts can provide a useful framework for understanding Ellen White’s crucial end-time role in uplifting the sola Scriptura principle.GOP 290.1