Introduction
I accidentally stumbled across some failed prophecies of Ellen G White (EGW) in August of 2023 while helping answer some questions some youth had posed to their local church. That started a long journey for me, because I remembered that one of the reasons I had stopped believing in her the first time was because of some very unscientific writings that I was encouraged to read in my youth.
Now, after a year of studying this subject, I’m ready to open up about my findings, and not in a way that just repeats what some others have said.
This shouldn’t be confused with me being against the teachings of the church. I am with the SDA church on 26 of her 28 fundamental beliefs, but I am concerned with what is being done with the efforts to establish EGW as a prophet and proof that God has rejected His other churches.
But what proof is a prophet if they are found to be presumptuous? Wouldn’t that be the pride of men, and not of God?
And if you say in your heart, ‘How will we recognize the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ When the prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and the thing does not happen or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you are not to be afraid of him.
The Slawson Scam
I want to share some backstory to these sections because the experiences I’ll recount have deeply shaped the person I’ve become and the way I’ve learned to think.
When I was growing up, there was a man named Dr. Slawson who was somewhat of a whispered legend within certain circles of our Adventist community. We lived near one of the Seventh-day Adventists biggest boarding schools, so the community was larger than most.
Dr Slawson claimed to have discovered a cure for cancer, but according to his story, he had been imprisoned by powerful interests who stood to lose money if his findings became public. Despite this, Dr. Slawson continued his work in secret, diagnosing and treating cancer by analyzing saliva samples.
One weekend, my mother and stepfather made the five or six hour journey out to the desert in eastern Washington to visit him. Dr. Slawson was very old and lived with his wife in a dilapidated single-wide trailer on a remote and rural property. During our visit, he captivated my mother with his scientific “gift” and recounted the tale of being unjustly imprisoned for attempting to help people—just as he claimed he intended to help us.
Before we left, my mother and stepfather provided a saliva sample for testing. My mother was particularly concerned since a doctor said they thought maybe they saw something in a CT scan.
Two weeks later, Dr. Slawson contacted us with alarming news: my mother had cancer. He also tested other members of our family, revealing that they were at high risk for cancer due to the presence of specific cells in their saliva. Concerned for our health, my family began purchasing his treatments—expensive bottles of tincture, primarily made of grapeseed extract. These weren’t just for us; we also bought them for my grandparents.
It might be worth noting that further scans ended up showing the doctors hadn't seen anything concerning.
Dr. Slawson also had an array of machines he wanted to sell. These devices were incredibly expensive, so my family didn’t purchase one for several years. Eventually, though, my grandfather decided to pitch in, and the family acquired a machine that Dr. Slawson claimed would protect us from cancer-causing agents in our food. According to him, placing items like eggs on top of the device would “zap” them, making them safe to eat.
This machine became a fixture in my grandparents’ house, where I grew up. It sat on the kitchen counter and was used weekly to “treat” our food. Whenever it was turned on to “zap” our eggs, it gave us a sense of reassurance—a belief that we could eat without worry.
As a child, about as tall as the countertops, I found the device fascinating. To me, it was a mysterious, high-tech contraption. But as I grew older and began to understand basic scientific principles, I started to question its validity. The more I learned, the clearer it became that one had to suspend belief in the laws of science to trust that it worked as claimed.
The machine itself was a tan box fitted with dials and powered by a low-voltage direct current supply. It featured two rows of dials that could be individually adjusted. Along with the device came a list of numbers handwritten on a piece of paper. Each number corresponded to a specific effect the machine was purported to achieve—such as “killing cancer cells in eggs.”
There were two wires, one black and one red, extending from the device, each clipped onto opposite sides of a flexible copper sheet where the food was placed. This is where I began to realize something was wrong. How exactly was electricity supposed to pass through the food, especially when it was merely sitting on top of the copper sheet, much like a bird perched on a powerline? This defied the basic laws of electricity.
One day, when nobody was home, I decided to open the device to see for myself what was inside. Surely, I thought, Dr. Slawson must have included something—anything—that would resemble a legitimate invention. To my disappointment (though not surprise), all I found were resistors wired in parallel. There was no hidden technology, no intricate design.
The amount of electricity reaching the wires had to be negligible, especially given the seven or eight resistors in series. This was evident because the wires never produced so much as a spark, even when touched together. But more importantly, the entire concept was flawed—electricity doesn’t flow through items sitting on top of a copper pad unless there’s a grounding mechanism.
When my mother found out what I’d done, she was outraged. Dr. Slawson had made the family promise never to open the device, insisting that his “technology” had to remain secret. Because he was seen as a man of God, my family wanted to honor that request.
The entire ordeal was a sham—a means for a struggling man to make a living. Dr. Slawson had clearly been imprisoned for scamming people, not for curing cancer. He wasn’t helping anyone; he was exploiting their trust. This became even more obvious after his death, when another man surfaced with similar claims and devices. However, his products and tinctures were so absurdly expensive that even the most devoted followers began to question his sincerity. Eventually, they concluded that he too must be a fraud.
The takeaway here is simple: blind faith isn’t always enough. Sometimes, we need to look inside the box to ensure we’re getting what we’ve been promised. For me, this lesson extended to Ellen G. White. I had always believed—until I saw signs that something might be wrong. That realization led me to investigate more deeply, and eventually, I knew I had to speak up.
Something to Be Concerned About
Summary
If you say that the Lord said, or that he sent you his angel to tell you something [which is still the Lord said by extension], then it must come true, otherwise you have been under the influence of or have taken part in being a lying spirit.
We are liberated from fearing such a prophet, and unfortunately in this scenario, EGW was so specific, that what she said can’t be undone. While I do believe she said most things in accordance to the Bible, her words can no longer be considered infallible, since here we can establish that she has spoken presumptuously.
And if you say in your heart, ‘How will we recognize the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ When the prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and the thing does not happen or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you are not to be afraid of him.
Setting Time Limits on Christs Return
The first time I spoke to an SDA pastor about EGW having a specific prophecy that didn’t come true, he said something like, “as long as EGW doesn’t say, ‘the Lord said’ , then I suppose it’s okay [if she gets it wrong]”.
Regarding this idea that we can just assume it’s okay to fail a little bit in prophecy: where do we draw the line between when she says the “Lord said”, and not? Is it when EGW says “I was shown” as if she received something from the Holy Spirit, or is it when she receives a vision from an angel from God who brings the message personally? Is this in the name of the Lord?
This first example of a getting a prophecy wrong will be regarding a direct message from an angel in vision that EGW believed was an angel from God, though the implications were evident from the beginning that she should have not just received it without question. This didn’t just happen once, so I will speak of it in context of the group of events.
Ellen White told several groups of people that she had a vision of those people specifically still being alive when Jesus came back, and she did this over tens of years in time.
The most striking account was at an Adventist conference in 1886. Here it is in her own words, and there is no way in her language to try to say that the interpretation of words is incorrect, because she was so specific.
I have studied this with some who try to defend it, and we’ve read the entire chapter together to be sure. This isn’t taking it out of context. If anything I think there are other signs in this particular chapter that show she did not have the right spirit with her, but it’s outside of the scope of this document.
The following quote was taken directly from the book Testimonies from the Church Volume 1, page 131:
“I was shown the company present at the Conference. Said the angel: “Some food for worms, [Sister Clarissa M. Bonfoey, who fell asleep in Jesus only three days after this vision was given, was present in usual health, and was deeply impressed that she was one who would go into the grave, and stated her convictions to others.] some subjects of the seven last plagues, some will be alive and remain upon the earth to be translated at the coming of Jesus.”
1T 131.3
A Repeated History
This is not the only time that Ellen White failed in regards to prophecies of those living right then being part of the hundred and forty four thousand, as she believed it.
She wrote in the Review and Harold in 1888:
“The hour will come; it is not far distant, and some of us who now believe will be alive upon the earth, and shall see the prediction verified, and hear the voice of the archangel, and the trump of God echo from mountain and plain and sea, to the uttermost parts of the earth
In the Ellen White Biography (this is an official book provided by the Ellen White Estate), a colporteur named Haskell who went on to become a Baptist preacher, listed out his reasons for leaving her team while she was in Australia, many reasons of which are also relevant to other discussions. In regards to this subject today, reason number 9 on Haskell’s list is quite relevant since it shows that she had a habit of still telling visions of those present being part of the 144,000 (Revelation 14:1-5).
Quoting reason number 9:
“9. That in some meeting where a number of the brethren were, myself [Haskell] included, you saw that we all would live till the Lord would come and that we would all be saved, but many are dying, to our confusion.
Why This Was Antibiblical
Let’s break this down, because I have had a lot of people try to discredit it without even thinking it through.
Context here is the people present at the conference, not some other group. She says that some will die, some will die in the seven last plagues (referencing those who were alive that day), and most importantly that some would remain alive upon the earth until the return of Christ.
I’ve spoken with people who say say it meant that Christ would raise these people from the grave before he returns so that the prophecy can be fulfilled, but I reject that, because she said they would remain-upon-the-earth until the return of Christ. Secondly, the EGW Estate nor the church has taken that stance because they can’t defend it.
There is a major red flag here, because she never took her words back. The Ellen White Estate [and by extension the SDA church] argues that this is merely a conditional prophecy, but this position is unfaithful for several reasons.
- 1. It was not brought to her attention at a later date that the promise had been reversed. She took these statements to the grave, and never recanted them, unlike biblical prophets like Moses and Jonah who were shown the conditions had changed due to certain matters.
- 2. We were warned by the mouth of Jesus that no man, nor angel, nor the Son of God knows the time of Jesus’ return.
- Matthew 24:36 says, “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.
- We should look at this as a test of our faith in the words of Christ first, and Ellen second.
- Matthew 24:36 says, “But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only.
No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
- 3. Jesus re-confirms this in Acts 1:7, and even tells us that the Father has set the time of Jesus’ return, it is not a day that will change, for the word he uses in Greek (ἔθετο) means that the day was put in place, fixed like a nail. It is a day predestined. If it has been destined for a specific day since the time of Jesus, then anyone who says something else is not in accordance with the Bible.
- Acts 1:6-7 says, “So when they came together, they asked Him, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
Jesus replied, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed (ἔθετο) by His own authority.
- Acts 1:6-7 says, “So when they came together, they asked Him, “Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?”
- 4. Jesus had already said, “Be on the alert then, because you do not know the day nor the hour.” (Matthew 25:13), so there was really no point in hearing from an angel that the time would happen within the lifetime of EGW. It defied the purpose of what Christ was telling us, that every generation should be prepared.
- 5. This defence of saying that this was merely a conditional prophecy and clearly acceptable also sets a new precedent for the Bible. It’s literally antibiblical.
- If God not coming back was due to the unfaithfulness of a few people as they claim, then we must rejoice and praise God for the sins of those people because only through their unfaithfulness did we receive a chance to also be born and go to heaven. Right? Because then God was willing to end it early. To believe this is to say that God had no plan on allowing those who are alive today an opportunity to enter heaven.
- But this contradicts Psalm 139:13-16, which says, “For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body; all the days ordained for me were written in your book before one of them came to be..”
- And John 10:27-29 witnesses to this, saying, “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of my Father’s hand.”
- This conclusion is entirely unbiblical, because Jesus said the reason for his return is that no good man should be left alive upon the earth unless he returns at that time. So how can Ellen White remain faithful in her statements? How can the church argue against the logic of Jesus? Has God lengthened the days that he said must be cut short? Did he prevent the wicked from becoming wicked?
- Matthew 24:22 says, “And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect’s sake those days shall be shortened.”
- Shall we then conclude that God changed his mind and decided to save many more generations purely based on the unfaithfulness of the Adventist church in the 1800s?
- If God not coming back was due to the unfaithfulness of a few people as they claim, then we must rejoice and praise God for the sins of those people because only through their unfaithfulness did we receive a chance to also be born and go to heaven. Right? Because then God was willing to end it early. To believe this is to say that God had no plan on allowing those who are alive today an opportunity to enter heaven.
Why The Churches Argument Is Weak
In further examining the church and it’s stance that this was a conditional prophecy, and not a mistake. To claim that a failed prophecy can be held under a conditional context, then it still must remain within pre-established biblical teachings.
I have read many commentaries by Adventist scholars on this particular failed prophecy of EGW, but the argument is weak. They claim verses such as in 2 Peter 3:12, which says, “as you anticipate and hasten the coming of the day of God, when the heavens will be destroyed by fire and the elements will melt in the heat.”.
Can we except that this means some people were never written in Gods book before they were born, the way Psalms say? Can we assume Jesus never said the day was fixed? The statement in 2 Peter 3:12 must still be held in context of the words of Jesus first, and not EGW first. The time is fixed, and all we can do is do our part along the way.
God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
The same goes for their claims that many prophets got things wrong. For example: many believed Jesus would return during their lifetimes. Paul for example was one who was almost certain.
Then we who are alive, who are left, will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.
Yet Paul never says anything that defies Deuteronomy 18:21-22. He never says that those living at that moment would never die. He only says “we who are living”, as in to represent himself as a living man as an example of a living individual at the return of Christ; he was one of the living who anticipated his soon return.
He is not the first to do this. It is a figure of speech.
It is not the dead who praise the Lord, those who go down to the place of silence;
it is we who extol the Lord, both now and forevermore.
Praise the Lord.
When Israel couldn’t enter Canaan, God told Moses about it. When Nineveh wasn’t destroyed, God told Jonah why. So why did EGW take this particular prophecy to the grave without a follow up? For a prophet to be a prophet we should take seriously at all times, there has to be follow up.
Ellen White never repented of her prophecies that some alive during those events would be alive when Christ returned. She really believed it, but this also shows her willingness to speak messages that God never gave to her.
Why My Argument Stands Firm
And if you say in your heart, ‘How will we recognize the word which the LORD has not spoken?’ When the prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and the thing does not happen or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you are not to be afraid of him.
Recently it has been put forth that my use of Deuteronomy 18:21-22 in the case of Ellen White is inappropriate since Deuteronomy is only speaking about prophets who lead people away from God. However, to the contrary, a close read of Deuteronomy 18:9-22 builds us a different picture.
Please open your own Bible, and lets break this down into it’s parts:
- Deuteronomy 18:9-14
- Discusses “Spiritualism forbidden”
- Deuteronomy 18:15-19
- Discusses “Gods promise to send true prophets
- Deuteronomy 18:20
- Discusses “Consequences for speaking in Gods name presumptuously, or in the name of other gods”
- Deuteronomy 18:21-22
- Discusses “How to tell if the prophet who speaks in Gods name has not spoken presumptuously”.
Based on its position, my context of Deuteronomy 18:21-22 is being used properly in this case. The context is of defining which prophets speaking in the name of God are not presumptuous.
Ellen White bears the burden of proof. So do those who use her words to believe that they have been found more faithful, and that proof is in that their church has her for their prophet. While God may wink at their ignorance, it will not continue to be profitable to those who believed in a presumptuous writer.
Solely based on the subject covered in this document do I believe I am doing the right thing. There are other reasons, and with those I am confident that Ellen White, who in her own words “work includes much more than [a prophet] signifies”, has been self-deceived.
Conclusion
Ellen White’s claim to being a messenger for God must be evaluated against the same biblical standards applied to anyone else who makes such a claim. How much more should this scrutiny apply when the church declares her a prophet?
Ellen White has written many valuable and spiritually profound things. Understood as a Christian author and servant of God, her writings carry both influence and power. When we live by the principles in her writings that align with the Bible, they can bring great benefit to our lives.
However, holding her as a prophet is being used to create distinctions among Christ’s followers, leading to divisions rather than unity. If she is a faithful prophet then one has little choice but to accept this. She has said it herself.
Through certain passages in her books, Seventh-day Adventists are being elevated to a position of preeminence in God’s house, which calls for careful reflection.
I have been witnessing a change happen with the church over my lifetime. Watching prominent 3 Angels Broadcasting Network (3ABN) pastors commonly leads to statements about Adventism being God’s one and only church.
I have sat in Sabbath school class and listened to group discussions about how all of the other churches are full of demons. They base this on quotes from Ellen, and proceed unopposed.
Meanwhile teachers share with the young people how proof that they have found the only true church is because they have a prophetess.
Have they truly been given the authority to be as they say, or is this basing this on pride in a somewhat unfaithful servant of God?
I feel they haven’t been doing their homework properly, and it’s beginning to show.
That said, I might ask: was there a way they could have approached this more faithfully?
Why is it that no one can truly be deemed faithful simply by practicing Adventism, knowing that such practice will ultimately count for nothing in the end? Lest anyone should boast. Are we not saved by grace, bearing witness to a God who overlooks genuine ignorance among His followers?
Why not instead receive the Holy Spirit as our guarantee, finding confidence that we cannot get closer to God’s truth than through His grace? There is no sin in thinking this way—indeed, it is a path of trust and surrender.
I believe many Adventists share this understanding. Having been one myself, I know many who feel the same. Yet, there remains an element of pride rooted in doctrines established before Ellen White during the Millerite movement—doctrines that sometimes attempt to exclude other Christians from the grace of God by promoting the “better works” of a new group.
We must remember that the wheat and tares will be sorted at the proper time, and not all fish caught in the nets will be fit for the kingdom of heaven. While we are called to help distinguish truth from error, Jesus instructed us to leave the ultimate sorting for the end. Our focus should remain on faithfulness, humility, and grace.
But he said, ‘No, lest while you gather up the tares you also uproot the wheat with them. Let both grow together until the harvest, and at the time of harvest I will say to the reapers, “First gather together the tares and bind them in bundles to burn them, but gather the wheat into my barn.” ’
*Sorting within our own church congregations by their individual leaders is to be practiced as necessary, intentionally for the improvement of those who have been sorted, and for the protection of our fold.
There is an idea within the church that one can do the work of God, and yet it is impossible to be unfaithful in that same work. Ellen White herself acknowledged this many times, stating that she could either do the work of God or the work of Satan, but not both. On this point, we should agree: she cannot do both simultaneously. However, she could transition from one to the other if she is not careful. Even Saul, who prophesied while filled with the Holy Spirit (1 Samuel 19:23-24), later lost his way through presumptuous actions.
I fear the church may be at risk of losing its foundation by attempting to establish Ellen G. White as a prophet to be feared. If the church promotes its prophet as a definitive sign that it has been chosen by God above all others, then she must meet a standard that commands reverence and fear. Anything less risks being rooted in pride rather than humility and truth.
Whenever you are invited by someone to a wedding feast, do not take the place of honor, for someone more distinguished than you may have been invited by him,
What the Seventh-day Adventist church gets right is God’s call to repentance. The time is fast approaching when everyone will be judged according to their deeds. However, please guard your heart against the self-glorifying belief that Adventists are the only true faithful ones. Such pride is not profitable and only serves to create division. It’s important to remember that every church, to some degree, contains error.
There are other Sabbath-keeping churches that also preach repentance and faithfulness to God, yet I’ve heard some Adventists label them as “belonging to Babylon” simply because they are not part of their group. This attitude mirrors the jealousy of Jesus’ disciples when they complained about someone casting out demons in Jesus’ name but not being part of their circle. Such a mindset accomplishes nothing and is equally unprofitable.
Follow God and keep His commandments. In doing so, there is protection, as shown throughout the book of Deuteronomy. Obedience is a sign of belonging to Him. Keep His commandments through the Spirit, understanding that no one can keep them perfectly. Yet perfection is not the goal—it is our willingness and effort that matter.
Be watchful and alert to the devil’s schemes. Recognize your sin, and confess it to Jesus as soon as it happens so you do not forget. Jesus is faithful to not only forgive those who come to Him in this way but also to cleanse them.
Hope for the best, strive to learn from the best, and always test the spirits (1 John 4:1). Discernment is key in navigating truth and error, both within and beyond the church.
When the prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, and the thing does not happen or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you are not to be afraid of him.
Where Do We Go From Here?
In this document, I’ve shared one of the first discoveries that led me to believe Ellen G. White deserves to be measured carefully against God’s word. I plan to continue writing about what I’ve found, and when this process is complete, I will still believe there is goodness in the Seventh-day Adventist church. I hope you will too.
The problem I’m addressing is that it is unbiblical to judge others based on our own performance, gifts, or role in God’s work. Too often, human intuition is mistaken for divine inspiration, and this can lead us astray.
I am not suggesting that anyone stray from the ways of Jesus. God’s people—His pueblo, His village—are not confined by borders or denominational lines. The Bible is clear: they are those who obey His word.
One of the hardest challenges I faced after making these discoveries was learning to reconcile my beliefs and remain true to them, including the conviction to keep the seventh-day Sabbath. I also had to learn to walk on my own, without the false comfort of believing I belonged to an especially chosen church. It can feel like a dark and uncertain place. Where does truth begin from there? It begins with the Way—the way that always was and always will be. Even if we don’t understand it perfectly, we must recognize that we never did, even when we thought we did.
It is possible to go through this process while remaining within the Seventh-day Adventist church. There is a growing movement within the church that echoes these sentiments. Scholars, conference leaders, and writers have begun addressing these issues in university papers, SDA magazine articles, and other forums. Don’t be afraid to stay if you feel God is leading you to do so.
Feel free to reach out to me—I may have experiences and insights to share. My life will always be tied to the Seventh-day Adventist church through my family, and I remain connected to its community.
I will share more thoughts on these matters in the future. For now, I invite you to continue exploring what I’ll share in further writings. I aim to approach these discussions with respect and without regret.
Above all, I am a brother in Christ, and I will always stand with those who are saved through His grace.
