There has been some discussion of EGWs position on the deuterocanonical books. This discussion springs up from time to time, to include the present. However, in my opinion, it has never become a major discussion. In addition, I do not see an agreement on this subject as to what her position actually was on those books.
I am aware that some see a similar connection between the writings of EGW and Paradise Lost. I do not see major agreement as to that being a source. I do not think it would be anything more than a point of interest if it should be decided to have been a source for some of her writings.
I consider the major contributions that the 2022 book on EGW and the Historians has made to our understandings of the role and ministry of EGW to the SDA denomination is now available to the average member and is not restricted to scholars, include:
* An understanding that much of EGWs writings were not based upon visions that she had received.
* An understanding that EGW used editorial assistants that had a much greater role in the production of her writings than had previously been understood by the common SDA member.
* A greater understanding of her writings having a basis in secular authors.
* Publication of how denominational leaders on various levels responded, both pro and con, to the unfolding revelation of this material. As examples, I include in this Robert Olson, whom I knew very well, and Arthur White, whom I knew less well. NOTE, both have died.