 GCO Mission and Goals | GCO Ministry Testimonials | Projects | Resources/Donations/Contact | SEARCH | |
Ellen White’s Alleged Vision of the Destruction of Corporate Adventism
Presenter: Arthur L. White, Introduction by Kevin D. Paulson
Location: Internet
Delivery: 2006-05-31 15:04Z
Publication: GreatControversy.org 2006-05-31 15:04Z
Type: Paper
URL: http://www.greatcontroversy.org/gco/rar/awkp-apocryphalvision.php
Introduction
By Kevin D. Paulson
For some time, in the ranks of conservative Adventists, the report has been circulating of a vision allegedly received by Ellen White at the Loma Linda railroad station, claiming to forecast the demise of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination in the context of the coming time of trouble, including the sweeping aside of all church leaders currently in position when this happens.
Reports of this vision have apparently been around for several decades, perhaps longer. The following account of this purported vision, sent to the present writer by Mrs. Pauline Maxwell of the Ellen G. White Estate Branch at Andrews University, was apparently written by a theology major at Southern Missionary College (now Southern Adventist University) in the midst of theological controversy on that campus during the early 1980s:
Brother Will Ross (now deceased), about 1908, while in Loma Linda and living near Sister White .... would frequently accompany her in her walks, and would discuss the message and future events. On one of these walks together, and while waiting at the Loma Linda railroad depot in the company of Sister McEnterfer and Elder D.E. Robinson (her granddaughter’s husband), Sister White related to the three of them about the storm of persecution that was coming upon the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Will Ross relates:
Sister White told us, as we three stood there on the railroad depot platform, that a terrible storm of persecution was coming, just like a windstorm, that blew down every object that was standing. There was not a Seventh-day Adventist to be seen. They, like the disciples, forsook Christ and fled. ALL WHO SOUGHT POSITIONS WERE NEVER SEEN ANYMORE. After the storm there was a calm. Then the Adventists arose like a great flock of sheep that were without shepherds. They all united in earnest prayer for help and wisdom, and the Lord answered them by helping them choose leaders among them, who had never sought positions before. They prayed earnestly for the aid of the Holy Spirit which was poured out upon them, making them fully ready for service. They then went forth ‘fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners’ to give the message to all the world.
I was astonished, and asked if it applied to Loma Linda, as we were looking that way. Sister White replied to my question by stating that it applied to the entire denominational world. It so stunned me, that I do not ask more questions (Will Ross, Boulder, Colo. (1).
I first became aware of this alleged vision soon after the above account was written. It was shared with me by a layman in California, who also seemed convinced of its authenticity. Soon after I started graduate school at Loma Linda, a pastor’s wife admonished me with this purported Ellen White statement, particularly with the part about leaders who sought office being swept aside. Since I was active in student government at the time, and encouraging other faithful Adventist young people to pursue similar goals, this lady felt I needed to hear that according to this alleged Ellen White vision, seeking office was a bad thing.
As will be noted in the letter reproduced below from Arthur White, three points in the above report can be quickly discounted. First, Will Ross couldn’t possibly have been “living near Ellen White” while living in Loma Linda in 1908, since at that time Ellen White was living in Elmshaven—several hundred miles away—in Northern California. Secondly, because of this, it would have been impossible for him to “frequently accompany her in her walks.” Thirdly, since at this time Ellen White was in frail health and did very little walking as a means of exercise, for anyone to say he “frequently” accompanied Ellen White in her walks at this time, would be questionable even if he did live close to Ellen White’s home.
Certainly Ellen White has written that in the end-time shaking process, the great majority of professed Seventh-day Adventists will apostatize. The above account written by the SMC student in 1981 quotes two Ellen White statements which he claimed supported the message of the alleged Loma Linda vision:
Those who have rendered supreme homage to ‘science falsely so-called,’ will not be the leaders then. Those who have trusted to intellect, genius, or talent, will not then stand at the head of the rank and file. They did not keep pace with the light. Those who have proved themselves unfaithful will not then be entrusted with the flock. In the last solemn work few great men will be engaged .... Chaff like a cloud will be borne away on the wind, even from places where we see only floors of rich wheat (2).
The great issue so near at hand will weed out those whom God has not appointed and He will have a pure, true, sanctified ministry, prepared for the latter rain (3).
But any careful comparison of the above statements with the alleged Loma Linda vision will quickly see the difference. The above statements say only that unfaithful leaders will not in the end stand at the head of God’s church. By contrast, the alleged Loma Linda vision implies that no leaders at all will be left standing when the storm of persecution passes, and that the scattered Adventists who survive the storm will be “like a flock of sheep without shepherds” (4). One begins to understand why this alleged vision has remained popular among conservative Adventists who have found themselves—rightly, to be sure, in many cases—disappointed with the weak performance of so many church leaders.
Statements such as the following are indeed sobering:
Soon God’s people will be tested by fiery trials, and the great proportion of those who now appear to be genuine and true will prove to be base metal .... To stand in defense of truth and righteousness when the majority forsake us, to fight the battles of the Lord when champions are few—this will be our test (5).
I have stated before them (God’s people) that, from what was shown me, but a small number of those now professing to believe the truth will eventually be saved—not because they could not be saved, but because they would not be saved in God’s own appointed way (6).
We would be foolish to pretend that such phrases as “the great proportion,” “the majority,” and all but “a small number” will not include—in all likelihood—the great majority of leaders as well as laity at that time. But certainly none of these statements even remotely imply that all denominational leaders at that time will be found unfaithful. A single statement—and an undocumented one at that—is hardly sufficient to warrant such a drastic conclusion.
Moreover, for the statement in question to claim that “there was not a Seventh-day Adventist to be seen” following the storm of persecution, that “they, like the disciples, forsook Christ and fled” (6), moves far outside the predictions of Inspiration about the end-time shaking. While the inspired pen is clear that the great majority will prove faithless at that time, Inspiration is equally clear that a small company will in fact prove faithful (7). For this purported vision to allege that those upon whom the Spirit is poured out in latter-rain power had but moments before, in the midst of the storm of persecution, proved cowardly as did the disciples of old, flies directly in the face of inspired assurances that the faithful at this time will have gained the victory over every sin and withstood every spiritual test in advance of the sealing and latter rain (8).
If those Seventh-day Adventists who receive the latter rain and are finally sealed must be completely victorious over sin before this happens, it makes no sense to claim these very victorious saints will forsake their Lord in cowardly fear when faced with the final persecution. No inspired statement, anywhere, makes any such assertion.
Equally dangerous, from the present writer’s view, is the assumption this alleged vision creates that the seeking of church offices at any level is to be shunned by the faithful. This assumption would seem to contradict the apostle Paul, who declared to Timothy, “This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work” (1 Timothy 3:1), then goes on to list the qualifications such a one must fulfill (verses 2-7). Note carefully that the apostle doesn’t say, If a man desire the office of a bishop, under no circumstances choose him. Despite the selfish motives which often attend the desire for office within the church, certainly none can claim such motives inevitably attend such desires. At a time when many of the faithful—pastors as well as laity—are too often reluctant to step forward and accept positions from which significant reform could be initiated, the notion that such pursuits will supposedly disqualify leaders from service in the last days is no help whatever to the church’s prosperity.
Finally, the servant of the Lord is crystal clear regarding unauthenticated reports of what she has said or done:
Do not give credence to unauthenticated reports as to what Sister White has done or said or written. If you desire to know what the Lord has revealed through her, read her published works (9).
Considering how the Bible repeatedly affirms how two or three witnesses are needed to establish matters (Deuteronomy 17:6; 19:15; Matthew 18:16; 1 Corinthians 14:29; 2 Corinthians 13:1; 1 Timothy 5:19; Hebrews 10:28), a mere single statement based on one elderly man’s memory can hardly be considered authenticated.
An interesting footnote to the paper written by the SMC student noted above is the fact that despite this student’s conviction that apostasy was so deeply entrenched on his campus, with faithful students pressured by heretical teachers to remain silent in order to get called to ministry, soon thereafter the president of the college—who had steadfastly protected faculty sympathetic to the New Theology—would himself be forced to resign (10), followed by three prominent religion professors who were promoting false doctrine (11). Two of these teachers have since become pastors of Sunday-keeping churches (12). Thus, despite this student’s fear that the forces of apostasy were in total control, with the faithful presumably helpless before their power, it was the straying teachers themselves—along with their protector in the college presidency—whose denominational careers would soon end.
What follows is a letter written by the late Arthur L. White, who for many years served as Secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate. This letter, though sent to me by Mrs. Pauline Maxwell from the White Estate Branch at Andrews University, is not presently found on the White Estate Web site. It is therefore reproduced below in its entirety, with no editing save the italicizing of Ellen White book titles. It addresses the authenticity of the alleged Loma Linda vision, in the light of simple rules of evidence as well as the consensus of Ellen White’s writings on the outcome of the shaking and the future of the church.
Will Ross Report of Interview With Ellen White On Coming Persecution
Prepared by Arthur L. White
Ellen G. White Publications. Office Document
You have made inquiry concerning a report which has come to your attention relative to a coming storm of persecution as reported by a Will Ross. One of our brethren who knew Brother Ross has added details of the conversation and seeming confirmation.
I would point out that in the first place we are dealing with a statement based entirely upon the memory of one man. We have recounted to us from time to time what individuals are quite certain they have heard Sister White say. We must judge these statements in the light of what we have from the pen of Ellen White, rather than purely upon the memory of the individual who makes them. This is especially so if it comes to us from only one witness. We must say, in a general way, that we believe that through the years as Mr. Ross ponders the conversation with Sister White some of these matters have developed in his mind, bringing in details that were most likely not a part of the conversation. We say this kindly and without questioning the Christian experience or the integrity of Brother Ross. But we make the statement purely on the basis of our knowledge of the frailty of the human memory and of the particular problems that arise in this given instance.
But before I go into that, let me tell you that for years we have had to contend with what is the memory of one of our older ministers of what Sister White is supposed to have said concerning a series of articles that was written. She is reported to have said to the author of these articles certain things about the position taken which the author of the articles denies entirely, and tells us that Sister White said something entirely different. This does not call in question the integrity of the men, but it does lead us to be guarded as to that which is based upon memory.
It is stated in the document you sent to us that Mr. Ross lived near Ellen White and often walked with her, and the year is given as 1908. This incident was supposed to have taken place at Loma Linda. According to our records Ellen White was in Loma Linda in the year 1908 from August 27 to September 5, a period of ten days. In 1907 she was at Loma Linda for a few days in April, two or three weeks in October, and just a few days in December. These were hurried trips made by Ellen White. She was residing in her home at Elmshaven. So it could hardly be said that Mr. Ross lived near Ellen White. Also, these were in the later years of her life and Ellen White did not do much walking from the standpoint of walking as exercise at this time. She often went out in a carriage drive. At this particular time she was 80 years of age.
The point I am endeavoring to make is that as time goes on matters of this kind tend to blur in the memory. Some things stand out in great boldness and other things rather disappear. Copies of the statement from Mr. Ross which we have indicate that this was written out 36 years after the event which he reports. If this is so, it adds to our problem of lapse of time and unreliability of memory.
Let’s come now to the statement itself and examine it more carefully. It is stated that in 1943 D. E. Robinson, in visiting Colorado, was contacted by Brother Ross and he was asked if he remembered “when he and Elder Robinson and Sister McEnterfer were standing on the depot platform visiting with Sister White, and she related to them about the terrible windstorm of persecution that was coming upon the SDA church.” Elder Robinson replied, “Yes, Brother Ross, I remember it.” Now, we do not question Elder Robinson’s memory of having a conversation with the people who are named, at the time which is indicated. But as to the details, we have no witness from Elder Robinson. Elder Robinson was connected with this office for many years, and he ever understood the experience of the church in its latter days to be different from that which is described here.
For these reasons, and for reasons which we shall state, I must point out that we in this office cannot accept this report as being a correct representation of what Mrs. White may have said. It is said in this report that two of Mrs. White’s secretaries were present, Sister McEnterfer and Brother Robinson. Neither of these individuals, in the years following, said anything about this conversation. I was closely associated with Elder Robinson, who worked in our office for many years subsequent to Mrs. White’s death, and he did not understand Mrs. White’s teachings at all as they are set forth in this statement which has come to us based upon memory many years after a conversation.
I am sure that you will understand that we must confine ourselves to statements Sister White has made in such a form that we know they have come to us in an authentic manner. She withheld nothing from the church that the church should have and we need not depend upon someone’s memory for some startling account of that which is to take place, especially when that account is so at variance with Mrs. White’s teachings.
Sister White, of course, has written of the storm which is coming. You will find reference to this in Selected Messages, Book 2, in Chapter 48, under the title, “A Work of Purification Needed,” beginning on page 376. On page 380, we read these words:
Satan will work his miracles to deceive; he will set up his power as supreme. The church may appear as about to fall, but it does not fall. It remains, while the sinners in Zion will be sifted out, the chaff separated from the precious wheat. This is a terrible ordeal, but nevertheless it must take place. None but those who have been overcoming by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony will be found with the loyal and true, without spot or stain of sin, without guile in their mouths (Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, Book 2, p. 380).
You are of course familiar with her statement which appears in Early Writings concerning the shaking time. This begins on page 269. There is no place in Sister White’s writings where she indicates that the church will be broken up into independent atoms or that its organization will be destroyed.
There come to my mind such statements as these, found in Selected Messages, Book 2, pp. 68-69. Speaking of the church, she says:
I know that the Lord loves His church. It is not to be disorganized or broken up into independent atoms. There is not the least consistency in this; there is not the least evidence that such a thing will be.
These words were penned in 1893. In 1907 Ellen White wrote:
While there have been fierce contentions in the effort to maintain our distinctive character, yet we have as Bible Christians ever been on gaining ground (Selected Messages, book 2, pp. 396, 397).
In the same book, written in 1893, Sister White describes several situations which she was called upon to meet where individuals were advocating that the church would go to pieces. You will find these on pages 64-66, but I call attention to one statement in particular. She writes of:
One, Garmire, advocated and published a message in regard to the loud cry of the third angel; he accused the church in a similar manner to what you are now doing. He said the leaders in the church would all fall through self-exaltation, and another class of humble men would come to the front, who would do wonderful things. This man had daughters who claimed to have visions.
This delusion was opened to me .... The word of God came from God to me, ‘Believe them not; I have not sent them.’
Then Sister White, in her last message to the General Conference in session in 1913, expressed many times her confidence in the triumph of the church. She made no reference to a situation like that which has been reported to you in the statement from Brother Ross. Her last message to the General Conference in session carried the title, “Courage in the Lord.” You will find it recorded in Selected Messages, Book 2, pp. 402-408. But I think particularly of this statement in this important message:
When in the night season I am unable to sleep, I lift my heart in prayer to God, and He strengthens me and gives me the assurance that He is with His ministering servants in the home field and in distant lands. I am encouraged and blessed as I realize that the God of Israel is still guiding His people, and that He will continue to be with them, even to the end (Selected Messages, book 2, p. 406).
I would like to direct your attention, too, to the entire chapter appearing in Selected Messages, Book 1, beginning on page 176, entitled “The Peril of Extreme Views.” This was written to a Seventh-day Adventist minister, and she says:
You will take passages in the Testimonies that speak of the close of probation, of the shaking among God’s people, and you will talk of a coming out from this people of a purer, holier people that would arise. Now all this pleases the enemy (Selected Messages, Book 1, p. 179).
But turn and read the entire message and you will find that the whole spirit of this and the other messages from Sister White’s pen do not give support to this report which has come to you as written by Mr. Ross.
I am glad that you have written to us about this matter. We ask that you do not use this letter as a message from Ellen White indicating the experience which is before the church. We would urge you to turn to her counsels as we find them in her books. She has not withheld that which is essential for our welfare or our knowledge of events which are to transpire.
Arthur L. White
Washington, D.C.
November 22, 1971 GCO
References
- Thomas Tucker, “ARE YOU AFRAID TO SPEAK UP DURING THE PRESENT CONTROVERSY? AFRAID YOU MIGHT NOT GET A ‘CALL’??” (capitals original).
- Ellen G. White, Testimonies, vol. 5, pp. 80, 81.
- ________, Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 385.
- Tucker, “ARE YOU AFRAID TO SPEAK UP DURING THE PRESENT CONTROVERSY? AFRAID YOU MIGHT NOT GET A “CALL”??” (capitals original).
- White, Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 136.
- Ibid., vol. 2, p. 445.
- Ibid., vol. 5, p. 209.
- Ibid., vol. 1, pp. 187, 188; vol. 5, pp. 214-216; Early Writings, p. 71.
- Ibid., vol. 5, p. 696.
- Jerry Gladson, A Theologian’s Journey from Seventh-day Adventism to Mainstream Christianity (Glendale, AZ: Life Assurance Ministries, 2000), p. 188.
- Ibid., pp. 191, 192, 221.
- Ibid., pp. 298, 299, 317, 318.
