Reclaiming the Prophet

[Gregory Matthews]

Reclaiming the Prophet:  An Honest Defense of Ellen White's Gift is one of the more important books related to Ellen White.  The following link will allow you to read that book on-line.  In addition, it will allow you t download a digital Copy of the book. 

https://spectrummagazine.org/reclaiming-the-prophet/

 

[Gregory Matthews]

The following is a listing of the Table of Contents

PART ONE Who Was Ellen White? 17

 

CHAPTER ONE ELLEN WHITE WAS A WOMAN Terrie Dopp Aamodt 33

CHAPTER TWO EMBRACING ELLEN WHITE: WHAT HER DEFENDERS AND DETRACTORS MISUNDERSTAND Jonathan Butler 51

CHAPTER THREE MESSENGER WITH A NEW ENGLAND STYLE Gilbert M. Valentine

PART TWO How to Read Ellen White 73

CHAPTER FOUR THE PROPHET AS PREACHER Paul E. McGraw 85

CHAPTER FIVE ELLEN WHITE AS A DEVOTIONAL WRITER Denis Fortin 97

CHAPTER SIX “GOD WANTS US ALL TO HAVE COMMON SENSE”: ELLEN WHITE’S GUIDELINES FOR INTERPRETATION Eric Anderson

 

PART THREE How to Believe In Ellen White 111

 

CHAPTER SEVEN WHAT MY TEACHERS NEVER TAUGHT ME George R. Knight 125

CHAPTER EIGHT TURNING POINTS Donald R. McAdams 149 CHAPTER NINE ELLEN WHITE FOR TODAY: A TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY AFFIRMATION Ronald D. Graybill and Lawrence Geraty 157

AFTERWORD WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? Niels-Erik Andreasen 173

APPENDIX ELLEN WHITE FOR TODAY: AN APPEAL 174 CCONTRIBUTORS 176

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

 

 

[Hanseng]

Ellen White produced at least two good books, Ministry of Healing and Education. She also penned some good ideas on healthy eating, some points of which are being continually validated by modern science, e.g., the two meal a day plan with no snacking. Nathan Pritikin, pioneer of modern dietary reform, considered her inspired, even though he didn't agree with everything she wrote. He so stated in a Ministry magazine interview with a LLU physician. The book, Great Controversy, serves as a good introduction to narrative church history.

 

For those things I am grateful.

[Gregory Matthews]

The Great Controversy is a book that shows substantial dependence on the historians who we -re available to Ellen white during the time that she wrote.  Today, it is thought by some SDA Scholars that Ellen White got that historical information second hand from Uriah Smith, and not directly from the historians.

 

[Hanseng]

18 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

Today, it is thought by some SDA Scholars that Ellen White got that historical information second hand from Uriah Smith, and not directly from the historians.

 

I'd be interested in learning more about White's dependence on Smith for her Reformation views. Most histories depend on,  preferably, contemporary accounts of the events being considered. Neither Smith nor EGW were around when the Reformation took place. Both would have to depend on others such as Johannes Sleiden, who was alive during the Reformation era. D'Aubigne cites him in his works.

Great Controversy often cites the historians quoted from. D'Aubigne was a favorite. He wrote about 12 volumes in two sets, History of the Reformation and History of the Reformation in the Time of Calvin. Both are mostly narrative histories, not really dealing with the theological issues. For the theology, Melanchthon's Commonplaces and his Apology to the Augsburg Confession clearly spell out the issues. Luther's commentaries and sermons rather than his polemical works are also useful. Wylie's history of Protestantism, also a narrative, is cited in the Great Controversy. I appreciate EGW introducing me to those authors

Probably the best modern Reformation scholar, a voluminous author, is Alister McGrath.

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Forgive me, I was not very clear:  There is much in The Great Controversy that seems to come from historians writing in the time of Ellen White.  Early on, it was thought that Ellen White had read those publications and copied form them in what she wrote.  In more recent times some SDA scholars believe that Uriah Smith had included material from those  historians in some of what he wrote and that Ellen White had included material that he had published in her writings.  IOW, her citations were second hand from Uriah Smith and not directly from the historians.

[Hanseng]

13 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

IOW, her citations were second hand from Uriah Smith and not directly from the historians.

Whatever roll Smith played in GC, may be a matter of interest to some; however, not sure what it says about the book in its entirety. I was reading through D"Aubigne's histories when I came across one of my favorite quotes from Great Controversy regarding the Augsburg Confession. II immediately thought EGW was a dirty rat, plagiarizing historians and taking credit as an inspired writer. That seems to be, more or less, the current that runs through Adventism in these times. When I checked the passage in GC, I noticed that it was immediately followed by the appropriate reference in D'Aubigne's work. Not sure why I hadn't noticed it before. It was right in fromt of my eyes.. At least in this case, the use of another author was properly referenced.

The EGW signed intro to "The Great Controversy" includes the following: 

"This history I have presented briefly, in accordance
with the scope of the book, and the brevity which must necessarily
be observed, the facts having been condensed into as little space as
[xii] seemed consistent with a proper understanding of their application.
In some cases where a historian has so grouped together events
as to afford, in brief, a comprehensive view of the subject, or has
summarized details in a convenient manner, his words have been
quoted; but in some instances no specific credit has been given, since
the quotations are not given for the purpose of citing that writer as
authority, but because his statement affords a ready and forcible
presentation of the subject. In narrating the experience and views of
those carrying forward the work of reform in our own time, similar
use has been made of their published works."