I owe this to my christian friends and family.
Introduction
I was raised as a Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) Christian. Ellen G. White (EGW), one of the church’s founders, is considered a prophet by the church, as it is one of their 28 fundamental beliefs.
During my teenage years, it troubled me deeply that I was more familiar with Ellen G. White’s writings than with the Bible itself. I think it goes to show how much the church leans on her writings, especially in some circles.
Many years later, in 2023, I stumbled upon some of Ellen G. White’s failed prophecies while assisting with questions posed by young members of their local church. This discovery profoundly disturbed me, especially since I had grown up believing, due to SDA television programs, that Ellen G. White had never issued a failed prophecy—unlike other historical figures, such as Nostradamus.
This revelation marked the beginning of a profound journey for me. It recalled an earlier discomfort in my youth when I stopped regarding Ellen White as a prophet due to encountering scientifically inaccurate teachings in her writings. Over the past year, I’ve dedicated myself extensively to studying this topic and reflecting deeply upon my findings. Now, I feel compelled to speak openly about it.
The Bible is explicit in its criteria for true prophecy: a prophet must not speak presumptuously about future events. Even if they accomplish great deeds for God, their prophecies must be accurate, or they are not genuine prophets and thus not to be followed.
In this Part 1, we will examine what I consider to be Ellen G. White’s clearest and most undeniable prophetic failure. Her prophecy’s details are explicit enough that attempts to explain them away with elaborate interpretations or subtle reasoning are insufficient.
Indeed, both the SDA Church and the Ellen White Estate have attempted to address this particular prophecy through extensive writings—even dedicating an entire book to its defense—but their justifications fail to withstand critical scrutiny.
If you wish to delve directly into the discussion of the prophecy itself, please skip ahead, past “The Slawson Scam,” and begin reading at “A Deadline on Christ’s Return.”
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 in some of these documents because these experiences have helped shape the person that I am. I am not looking to behave dishonestly nor to find a reason why we should not follow God. To the contrary I am looking for the God of love and righteousness.
When I was a small boy 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 high-school boarding schools located in Washington state, so the community was larger than most, and as such had more identifiable culture.
Dr Slawson claimed to have discovered a cure for all forms of 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 had recently 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 grape seed extract– which I have nothing against. These purchases weren’t just for us; we also bought them for my grandparents.
It might be worth noting that further CT 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 counter tops, 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 with clips that could be attached 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 power line? 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 this man must be a fraud.
The takeaway here is clear: while many matters depend on personal faith, it is essential to exercise caution in deciding who we follow. The mere fact that individuals were following someone previously entangled with the judicial system should have prompted deeper scrutiny and investigation.
However, within the SDA community, there can sometimes be groups with a perspective that views outsiders—including the government—as inherently part of an evil system or even a tool of the devil.
For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, I was in Peru and personally encountered several Adventists who had hired hackers to fraudulently insert their names into government vaccination records. They believed the pandemic signaled some sort of pre apocalyptic event and that the vaccine itself was part of a sinister plot. My conversations with these individuals were direct, not hearsay.
I firmly believe that true faith would have been demonstrated by trusting that if the vaccine were indeed part of an evil plan and if the government mandated its administration, God would protect His followers from any harmful effects if it aligned with His will. Furthermore, we are generally encouraged to respect and follow governmental mandates, provided they do not directly conflict with our core spiritual beliefs.
"Let everyone be subject to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. Consequently, whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves."
My point is that sometimes in Adventism I see that maybe some start to believe that the rules don’t apply to them, as though they are above the same sort of scrutiny that is applied to others through their beliefs
Even when the faith is ours, we must behave faithfully. We must be willing to accept biblically established principals in subject matters, otherwise what we share with others may not be profitable.
"If anyone builds on this foundation [which is Christ] using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames."
A Deadline on Christ's Return
Summary
Ellen G. White (EGW) explicitly claimed on multiple occasions that Christ would return within her lifetime. While it may have been acceptable to hold this as a personal belief, on at least one occasion she went further, asserting that an angel from God had revealed to her the exact individuals who would still be alive and who would never experience death before Christ’s return. However, this prophecy failed to materialize, and all those individuals have since passed away.
The fact that she made such claims more than once demonstrates that she was capable of speaking from her own thoughts rather than divine revelation. According to the Bible, a prophet who makes presumptuous claims about the future is not to be feared or followed.
Interestingly, the Bible does not label such an individual explicitly as a “false prophet,” perhaps acknowledging they may have genuinely contributed positively to God’s work. However, they remain accountable for their presumptuous declarations.
We are freed from following or fearing presumptuous prophets, yet EGW is often presented within the SDA church as evidence that this denomination alone is specially chosen by God, to the exclusion of all other churches. (This assertion has been stated openly in my presence within the church, even after I initially wrote this document.) Anyone observing the SDA 3-Angels Broadcasting Network (3ABN) for a brief period will inevitably encounter this very narrative.
TODO: Link a relevant YouTube video here.
This is where my great concern for the SDA church is coming from. It is pride that is the driving force behind this sort of dialogue, and the reason I can not support the churches effort. Nobody, whether individual or organization should ever self promote themselves to the best seat in the house, lest they be dishonored. That’s what Jesus taught us.
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.
A Failed Prophecy
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?
Let’s let EGW answer this for herself. She says the visions are direct communications from God.
As inquiries are frequently made as to my state in vision, and after I come out, I would say that when the Lord sees fit to give a vision, I am taken into the presence of Jesus and angels, and am entirely lost to earthly things. I can see no farther than the angel directs me. My attention is often directed to scenes transpiring upon earth.
Personally I believe the line is drawn at someone telling us about the future. That's where the bible draws the line.
They may get the past incorrect and there's no skin off their back for that, but a prophet is supposed to be able to accurately predict what will happen, since only God knows the distant future.
Let’s get into this first example of a prophecy gone wrong. It 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 EGW 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
Why This Doesn't Pass the Test Against Scripture
Let’s fully digest this statement from EGW regarding Christs return during the lifetime of those present at the conference with her, 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.
- 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.
- Is it not a test of our faith to see if we will believe a message from an angel with a message contrary to the bible? And will not proof be that the prophecy won’t come to pass?
- Jesus re-confirms this in Acts 1:7, and even tells us that the Father has firmly 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. - Revelation 9:15 appears to reaffirm this fixed date, stating, “And the four angels who had been kept ready for this very hour and day and month and year were released to kill a third of mankind.”
- 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 also informed us more than once to always be on the alert, because we don’t know the day nor the hour of his return (Matthew 25:13 and Matthew 24:42).
- There was really no point in hearing from an angel that the time would happen within the lifetime of EGW or her peers, and especially since Jesus warned us nobody would know including Christ himself. It defied the purpose of what Christ was telling us, that every generation should be prepared, and that it would be a surprise. For most, it happens through death, that’s their final opportunity.
We should take the opportunity to look at this as a test of our faith in the words of Christ first, and Ellen White second.
No wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.
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.
This same belief is implicated indirectly during EGWs first vision from her book Early Writings, in sections such as Early Writings Page 34.1 where she says that God tells his saints the day and hour of his return.
From the beginning she worked this into the fabric of her teachings, but it is contrary to biblical teachings, even from Jesus himself.
I’m going to stay with the words of Jesus. Even he is not one who will tell us about that day.
Why The Churches Argument Is Weak
In further examining the church and their stance that this was merely a conditional prophecy, and not a mistake: The common defense is to say that this was merely a conditional prophecy and clearly acceptable. They say that it is due to the unfaithfulness of Adventists themselves.
This conceptual argument pre-dates their work, as this method of blaming it on faithfulness comes directly from EGW herself. In the book Evangelism: (EV 695.3), SDAs are presented as God’s last stand, and since they weren’t found ready to do his work, he’s just going to wait on them.
Yet the New Testament is clear that God is ready to choose someone else in our place if we are found unfaithful, and Jesus was pointing to a definite end that we needed to be prepared for in both Matthew chapters 24 (time of the end) and 25 (parable of the 10 virgins).
If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root, do not consider yourself to be superior to those other branches. If you do, consider this: You do not support the root, but the root supports you. You will say then, "Branches were broken off so that I could be grafted in." Granted. But they were broken off because of unbelief, and you stand by faith. Do not be arrogant, but tremble. For if God did not spare the natural branches, he will not spare you either.
This way of blaming the SDA body for a lot of disappointment seems to ingrained at an institutional level. Here’s why it doesn’t exactly add up.
If God not coming back was due to the unfaithfulness of the Adventist 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 this age early–
Adventists believe no new children will be created after heaven, so literally you and I shouldn’t exist except that early Adventists and SDAs alike were just too unfaithful.
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.”
These claims fit more in the hand of someone trying to do a cover-up on faulty predictions than the stark warning from Christ that anyone could end up like the 10 foolish virgins at his return.
To claim that a failed prophecy can be held under a conditional context, then it still must remain within pre-established biblical teachings.
This includes claims to verses used in other arguments, such as in 2 Peter 3:9 and 3:12
Beloved, do not let this one thing escape your notice: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping His promise as some understand slowness, but is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish but everyone to come to repentance.
But the Day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar, the elements will be destroyedd by fire, and the earth and its works will be laid bare.
Since everything will be destroyed in this way, what kind of people ought you to be? You ought to conduct yourselves in holiness and godliness 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. But in keeping with God’s promise, we are looking forward to a new heaven and a new earth, where righteousness dwells.
In the aforementioned links SDA leaders are claiming that 2 Peter chapter 3 is evident that we are the ones in control of when Christ returns through our works. Yet the logic is clear in what Peter is really saying, that we can only participate in the ripening of the time.
God the Father knows exactly how long it is until the time is ripe, and as such we need not fret if we are holding onto the promise today, and each and every day.
The idea that the coming day of God solely depends on Adventists actually pre-dates Adventism, as Millerism (which SDAs were born out of) belied the same, that only they would be chosen. There is dialogue as such from Millerite friends of EGW while see was a Millerite herself in Part 2 of this series.
The statements in 2 Peter 3:9 and 12 must still be held in context of the words of Jesus first, and not EGW first. The time is fixed (Acts 1:7), and all we can do is do our part along the way. With this, we can have participated-in and thus hastened the coming of the Son of Man (Mat 24:39).
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 and specific details on why. When Nineveh wasn’t destroyed, God told Jonah why.
I’m sure many will be willing to take blanket claims from EGW that all of God’s promises and threatening are conditional, but how is that faith in harmony with the Psalms that tell us our names were written in Gods book from the beginning? Can we assume Jesus never said the day was fixed?
Shall we believe that an angel speaking to EGW had news about something even Jesus was not at liberty to have knowledge of?
God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.
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.
Conclusion
Ellen White bears the burden of proof. So do those who use her words to teach that Seventh day Adventists have been found more faithful, and that EGW being a prophet is proof that their church is God’s sole chosen bride. There is no net profit for those who believe in a presumptuous prophet if they use it as a source of their pride.
Other than that, go in faith, and ask God for guidance.
"If anyone builds on this foundation [which is Christ] using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, their work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each person’s work. If what has been built survives, the builder will receive a reward. If it is burned up, the builder will suffer loss but yet will be saved—even though only as one escaping through the flames."
EGW wrote many profitable things, but one must be careful and sort truth from error. Life is often too complicated for blanket statements or blanket solutions. I can’t support the SDA church when a fundamental belief is that EGW is just a prophet since this lends to the need to never being able to admit that there has been a mistake.
I’ve began to realize that it has more to do with pride than zeal for uprooting darkness. Even pastors within the SDA church who understand this and others to be failed prophecies have told me the church is in a bad spot, because if the church admits she’s wrong then she was the one who said she was chosen above others – and for that the shame would break her.
The identities of these pastors will be kept safe with me, but i can point you to scholarly articles from within the church that state the same.
That and there are many who will will want to keep living like nothing was wrong in the first place.
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 true 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 reap the reward of their individual choices. 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 forever keep them perfectly, remembering our personal willingness and effort matter. We will receive perfection as a remittance for continual admittance of our sin through Jesus Christ
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.
The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; A broken and a contrite heart, God, You will not despise.
