How can I confirm or disprove this statement.

I was doing some research on Bible canons and came across this statement regarding Seventh-day Adventist beliefs:[quote]Her (White's) works are held by her followers to be inerrant on matters of doctrine, as is the Bible, though they are on a slightly lower plane of honor than the Bible.

How do I confirm or deny this statement from Adventist sources?

Find more posts tagged with

Seventh-day Adventist Products

Comments

Don

Do a search on "inerrant" and then look at the hits in Adventist Today, an SDA journal.

Lynden O. Williams

Where did you find it MJ? Can you provide a link?

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/820744#Comment_820744

In the meantime this might help. https://www.adventist.org/en/beliefs/church/the-gift-of-prophecy/

Official site of the church.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/820746#Comment_820746

Thanks - that provides me with what I need.

Martin Weber

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/820746#Comment_820746

Thanks, Lynden.

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/821114#Comment_821114

For further information see these documents put out by the Biblical Research Institute. While they are not voted statements, they are reflective of the general church teaching on the matter.

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/821182#Comment_821182

While they are not voted statements, they are reflective of the general church teaching on the matter.

There are the teachings of the church and then there are the members:

There are a range of Seventh-day Adventist thoughts on Ellen G. White
From any given Bible text many sermons could be given as different parts of the texts are emphasized.

There are some that do not accept Ellen G. White as a prophet.
They don’t care what she said on a subject.

Others look to her for her guidance and study her conclusions rather than her every word.
They see her readings and conclusions as true guidance but not the last word. But they also see other sermons in that text and they see that those other readings do not take away from her readings.

But there are others who cling to her every word as coming straight from the mouth of God.
They see her reading of the text as the only one there can be.

For example: there is one story [not a parable but a story] that she concludes means that we should not take our eyes off Jesus – a very true conclusion. A non-sister White telling of that story shows how God uses man as His agent. It sometimes becomes very difficult to show the other possible conclusions once “Sister White” has been seen to speak.

What were her thoughts on her words?
“”At the same time she emphasized her submission to the Bible, which she called “the greater light” (CM 125). “We are to receive God’s Word as supreme authority,” she wrote (6T 402). “The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative, infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the revealer of doctrines, and the test of experience” (GC vii). Therefore, she said, “the testimonies of Sister White should not be carried to the front. God’s Word is the unerring standard.… Let all prove their positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every point they claim as truth from the revealed Word of God” (Ev 256). At a meeting held in the Battle Creek College library on the eve of the General Conference of 1901 she told the leaders, “Lay Sister White right to one side.… Don’t … [ever] quote my words again as long as you live, until you can obey the Bible” (SpM 167).””
From Gerhard Pfandl, “Authority of Ellen G. White and Her Writings,” ed. Denis Fortin et al., The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2013), 628–629.

My reading of that is that she said that if one needs to quote her to prove a point that one has not gotten deep enough into the Bible.

Lynden O. Williams

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/821882#Comment_821882

Well said David

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/821882#Comment_821882

But there are others who cling to her every word as coming straight from the mouth of God.

I may have too many books in my library. While continuing my research on Sister White of the SDA Church I found that there are others that see their leaders as more than their leaders see themselves.

“It’s natural to link papal mistakes with the issue of infallibility. We’ve already given a context that theoretically separates the pope as a man from the pope as the successor to St. Peter making an ex cathedra statement on a matter of faith and morals. In the common opinion of many, however, this is a distinction without a difference: most people do not separate the pope from every statement he utters despite the careful theology behind Vatican I and Vatican II teachings.”
Christopher M. Bellitto, 101 Questions & Answers on Popes and the Papacy (New York; Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press, 2008), 93.

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/822633#Comment_822633

most people do not separate the pope from every statement he utters despite the careful theology behind Vatican I and Vatican II teachings.”

This statement is very regional and ethnic ... and very untrue of my archiodiocese.

Deacon Steve

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/822637#Comment_822637

MJ. What do you mean by regional and ethnic?

MJ. Smith

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/822648#Comment_822648

MJ. What do you mean by regional and ethnic?

Let me give some concrete examples:

in a 3 year program training to lead Bible Study groups, a woman from Argentina who taught religion in a local high school commented that when should first came to North America she scarcely recognized us as "Catholic" because so many practices, especially devotional, reflected cultural/ethnic differences.
when our politically anti-war archbishop was in hot water from the Vatican, the auxiliary bishop sent to replace him received a frosty welcome in much of the diocese. The auxiliary bishop was quite surprised when a conservative logger challenged him on woman priests wondering what theology placed gender over sacrament.
when the Pope went against his advisors on the subject of birth control, much of Western Catholicism simply ignored him ... reminding themselves that a well-formed conscience has precedence.
when the Pope came out against women priest - very strongly so - one of our priests handed out a 45 page treatise in favor of women priests at out Sunday services. I can name some dioceses where he would not have dared to do so ... regional differences.

In the areas where Italians, Poles, Armenians, Irish ... were isolated in a particular section of town with a particular parish reflecting that ethnicity one tends to get more "docile or obedient" Catholics as your religious and secular identities are more closely aligned. For the rest of us, we listen to the Pope and our bishops and make up our own mind - sometimes encouraged to a differing view by our priests.

JohnB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/822655#Comment_822655

MJ, that sounds very much like the English Catholics that I am friendly with and also those that I know of. Very much like most of the old time SDAs in England as well. I can still hear the grunt "That is the American church". And as for varying attitudes (and practises) to the ordination of Women ministers throughout the world . . . ..

In that sense the two groups have a lot in common in their attitudes to their respective 'head office's'. I am not sure if either side would appreciate that comment however [:D]

JohnB

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/821882#Comment_821882

But there are others who cling to her every word as coming straight from the mouth of God.

Fortunately, in the UK they are VERY much of a minority (2% ?) and because of that tend to meet together.much of the time

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/822839#Comment_822839

But there are others who cling to her every word as coming straight from the mouth of God.

Fortunately, in the UK they are VERY much of a minority (2% ?) and because of that tend to meet together.much of the time

Sorry that it took so long but I finally found this published statement on the work of EGW:

February 21, 1899

33rd Session. - WORCESTER, MASS., TUESDAY, - VOLUME 8. SOUTH LANCASTER, MASS. - NUMBER 5

The Daily Bulletin,

PUBLISHED BY THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF
Seventh-day Adventists.

BIBLE STUDY. THE BOOKS OF DANIEL AND REVELATION.
Synopsis of Lesson by Elder A. T. Jones

If we would study the books of Daniel and Revelation, and the book of John, and the rest of the Bible, as we must in order to be Christians, we would not need to be told by the Lord that righteousness by faith is the third angel's message. If we would study the Bible as God calls us to study it, the Testimonies would not need to come to tell us so many things that we are ignorant of. Then we would not need to bolster up the Bible with the Testimonies. The Bible is enough, brethren. The only reason the Testimony comes is that we have not taken the Bible. We can not present the Testimonies to people who do not know anything about the Testimonies. We must preach the word of God. That has strength in it for all people. The prophecies are for those who believe, not for those who believe not. They are given to you and me to teach us, and we are to learn by them. But we are to learn by them what is in the Bible, and then preach that thing from the Bible, and not from the Testimonies. Now I do not think anybody will accuse me of not being loyal to the Testimonies. I hope not, anyhow. {February 21, 1899 N/A, GCDB 46.21}

General Conference Daily Bulletin, Vol. 8 (1899)

[[The Testimonies are nine books published by EGW that summarize her works.]]

Mark

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/831774#Comment_831774

I have appreciated the question and comments made on this thread. Thank you all for enlightening me on some issues.

Rev. 14:6

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/831774#Comment_831774

Great timely quote David. I remember learning that one at seminary. I've enjoyed reading through this thread.

David Ames

https://community.logos.com/discussion/comment/840064#Comment_840064

Great timely quote David. I remember learning that one at seminary. I've enjoyed reading through this thread.

Found this: That other authors have warned their readers to not take their writings as Scripture.

“Yet Augustine himself once urged: “Do not follow my writings as Holy Scripture. When you find in Holy Scripture anything you did not believe before, believe it without doubt; but in my writings, you should hold nothing for certain.” ”

Augustine, "Preface to the Treatise on the Trinity," quoted by Boice, Does Inerrancy Matter? 22