1871-1888 Affirmations

Three years later, in 1873, at another General Conference session, it was voted “That our confidence is increasing in the gift of the Spirit of prophecy which God has so mercifully placed in the third angel’s message; and that we will endeavor to maintain an affectionate regard for its presence and its teaching; and we hereby request our Executive Committee to prepare or cause to be prepared a work giving our reasons for believing the testimonies of Sister White to be the teachings of the Holy Spirit.” ^{19The Review and Herald, November 25, 1873.}MOL 430.1

Here were strong, hardy, resilient men and women, living in the swiftly changing turbulence of the nineteenth century, sensitively aware of those who challenged the presence of “prophets” in modern times—here were men and women fully aware of what they were voting, on the basis of their Bible study and their own experience. They knew of what they were professing.MOL 430.2

One year later, in 1874, George I. Butler, president of the General Conference, wrote several powerful articles for the church paper, but written with the general public in mind. The lead sentence was: “Perhaps there is nothing in this age of the world that excites greater prejudice than the claim that visions and miraculous manifestations of God’s Spirit are to be witnessed in our time.” He than proceeded to examine the claims of contemporary prophets including Swedenborg, Ann Lee, Joseph Smith, and the Spiritualists. His argument for the legitimate claims of Seventh-day Adventists for Ellen White has rarely been surpassed. ^{20The Review and Herald, May 12, 19, 26; Jude 2, 9, 1874.}MOL 430.3

In 1883, Butler, as president of the General Conference, had an excerpt from Uriah Smith’s book, Objections to the Visions Answered, printed in the church paper. The article began: “Every test which can be brought to bear upon such manifestations, proves these genuine. The evidence which supports them, internal and external, is conclusive. They agree with the Word of God, and with themselves.”MOL 430.4

After reviewing the various objections to Ellen White’s writings, Smith concluded: “This covers the whole ground of the opposition; for we have never known any objection to arise which could not be traced to one or the other of these two sources. The opposer is always a person who has either been reproved for wrongs himself, or is in sympathy with those who have been so reproved, or he is a person who is openly hostile to the positions of S. D. Adventists as a whole. But neither of these positions is, in our mind, very well calculated to enlist the sympathy of any sincere lover of honesty and uprightness, or any true friend of the cause.” ^{21The Review and Herald, August 14, 1883.}MOL 430.5

Probably to firmly establish the truths expressed by Uriah Smith, in that same issue Butler wrote: “They [the visions] have exerted a leading influence among us from the start. They have first called attention to every important move we have made in advance.... We have found in a long, varied, and in some instances, sad experience, the value of their counsel. When we have heeded them, we have prospered; when we have slighted them, we have suffered a great loss.... The majority of our people believe these visions to be a genuine manifestation of spiritual gifts, and as such to be entitled to respect.... When we have Scripture and uniform experience in their favor, we have a strong case.” ^{22Review and Herald Supplement, Aug. 14, 1883. However, one year later, in a series of “maverick” articles for the church paper, G. I. Butler, still president of the General Conference, “meticulously argued that parts of the Bible were less fully inspired than other parts. Even though Butler himself did not abandon any essential characteristic doctrine, Ellen G. White in 1889 vigorously opposed his proposal, and it does not appear to have been openly adopted by any contemporary Seventh-day Adventist writer.” Mervyn Maxwell, “Brief History of Adventist Hermeneutics,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, Autumn, 1993, p. 212.}MOL 430.6