Accepting the Prophetic Gift: The Years Leading up to 1850
Ellen Harmon received her first vision in December 1844, a few weeks after the Great Disappointment on October 22, 1844. Although many Millerites (particularly Millerite leaders) were skeptical toward such visionary claims, the majority of Sabbathkeeping Adventists that came out of the Millerite movement after the Disappointment accepted her initial visions as genuine and began to defend what they believed to be a true display of the biblical gift of prophecy.GOP 250.1
The reason for this ready acceptance of Ellen Harmon’s visions among Sabbathkeeping Adventists may not be so surprising, after all, if it is examined against the contextual background when the movement appeared. There are at least three general perspectives that may be helpful. One important perspective is the general milieu of the nineteenth-century religious climate in America, which was open to charismatic and visionary experiences. As Nathan Hatch writes: “Scores of preachers’ journals, from Methodists and Baptists, from north and south, from white and black, indicated a ready acceptance to consider dreams and visions as inspired by God, normal manifestations of divine guidance and instruction.” In fact, true conversion at that time was always associated with some kind of outward manifestations of the Holy Spirit. Believers not only “expected” but also “desired” supernatural encounters with God through visions, dreams, supernatural impressions, healings, miracles, signs, and other wonders. Women and children, particularly in the Methodist tradition, were also given the opportunity to participate in worship services as they testified about their conversion experiences, which in many cases were accompanied by intense emotionalism. GOP 250.2
In addition, the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries witnessed the appearance of prophets (or visionaries) of all genders and conditions. Based on a scholarly survey of published sources only (pamphlets, broadsides, newspapers, literary journals, and evangelical memoirs) Susan Juster has identified about 315 men and women who were recognized as prophets in England and North America in the period between 1750 and 1820. Juster notes, however, that the real number is probably much higher since many were illiterate or did not keep a journal. While some made only brief appearances, others left enduring legacies and many followers, “sometimes numbering in the thousands.” Interestingly, there appeared to be at least five prophets in the area of Portland, Maine, and four of them, including Ellen Harmon, were women. It was in such a climate, therefore, that Sabbathkeeping Adventists had to deal with Ellen White’s claim to visionary manifestations and had to consider their truthfulness.GOP 250.3
A second important perspective related to our discussion is the Christian traditions of the early founders of the Sabbathkeeping Adventist movement. Ellen White, for example, grew up as a Methodist, and as noted, emotional services and dramatic conversion experiences were not foreign to her Christian experience. The other two founders, James White and Joseph Bates, came from the Christian Connexion tradition. The goal of this movement was to reform the existing churches from unbiblical customs and to return to the purity of New Testament Christianity. The Christians, as they were commonly called, emphasized the primacy of the Bible. After all, William Kinkade (b. 1783), one of the main founders and a theologian of the movement, wrote that all of his religious beliefs were formed by simply reading the Bible “without note, comment, or marginal reference,” “without the assistance of commentators” or any concordance. Furthermore, according to Kinkade, at the center of the New Testament order was the doctrine of spiritual gifts, including the gift of prophecy. Based on verses such as 1 Corinthians 12:8-12 and Ephesians 4:11-16, he argued for the perpetuity of spiritual gifts until the end of time. Kinkade noted that there was “not a text in the Bible” speaking of God’s intention to remove the spiritual gifts from the church after the apostolic time. This particular point of view, as we will see later, became a major argument used by Sabbathkeeping Adventists in defense of their acceptance of the prophetic gift of Ellen White.GOP 251.1
A third important background perspective in order to understand the context of the Sabbath-keeping Adventist acceptance of Ellen White’s gift was the Millerite attitude toward visions and charismatic manifestations before and after the Disappointment. On the one hand, charismatic expressions and various visionary manifestations were not foreign to Millerite followers, and many of their meetings were accompanied by such activities and excitement. William Ellis Foy (1818-1893), for instance, was a Free Will Baptist minister and a Millerite preacher who claimed to have received several visions during the early 1840s. Ellen White remembered seeing and talking to Foy, and some of their visions seemed to relate the same messages. GOP 251.2
On the other hand, the Millerite leadership was skeptical and condemned such occurrences as dangerous and unbiblical. They even issued general conference declarations stating that they had “no confidence whatever in any visions, dreams, or private revelations.” George Knight is right in pointing out that their rejection, especially after the Great Disappointment, may be seen as a reaction against some extreme forms of religious excitement displayed by the so-called Spiritualizers, as well as by other religious groups such as the Shakers and the Mormons led by a prophetic figure. Ellen White, according to the Millerites, belonged to that category. While Sabbathkeeping Adventists, like the Millerites, did not deny the existence of extreme and false prophetic displays, they were also convinced that there were true occurrences of the prophetic gift. Thus they were set to defend Ellen White’s visions as being genuine manifestations supported by the Scriptures.GOP 252.1
The purpose of their initial arguments, therefore, was twofold: (a) to establish the biblical authority of her prophetic gift, and (b) to distinguish her gift from what they considered “false prophets,” Spiritualizers, and other fanatical elements that existed in abundance during the mid-nineteenth century. Although not all Sabbathkeeping Adventists accepted Ellen White in the beginning, her prophetic influence gradually grew and her gift was progressively received as being genuine and authentic. By the late 1840s the Sabbatarians developed four biblical arguments with some practical applications. A brief overview of each of these initial arguments follows. GOP 252.2
First, they argued that the Bible provided enough scriptural evidence to support the modern display of the gift of prophecy. As early as 1845 James White wrote that there is no safe place for a servant of Jesus Christ to plant his feet, but on the truths of the Bible. It is true we may expect glorious manifestations of God’s Spirit; and I think the Bible warrants us in looking for visions, and those who may be discerners of spirits, even in the last days of time. But in such case we can judge alone by their fruits. There is one Sister in Maine who has had a clear vision of the Advent people traveling to the City of God. GOP 252.3
Again, in 1847, when he published Ellen White’s first vision in A Word to the “Little Flock,” the first joined Sabbatarian publication, James White included more than 80 Bible references within the original text of the vision in order to point out that its message was in accordance with the Bible and its teachings. Not surprisingly, James White’s arguments mirrored his Christian tradition of the “Bible alone” principle and the belief that the Bible supported the modern display of the gifts of the Spirit.GOP 253.1
Joseph Bates also made a similar declaration in his book A Seal of the Living God, published in 1849, when he noted that those who had “no faith in visions . . . may as well say they have no faith in the bible; for some, yea, many of the most wonderful scenes, and also promises made to the church of God have come to us through visions.” Thus, early Sabbathkeeping Adventists believed that the Bible confirmed the modern manifestation of the gift of prophecy and Ellen White’s gift was a part of this phenomenon.GOP 253.2
A second reason Sabbathkeeping Adventists accepted Ellen White’s vision in the 1840s was related to the eschaton or the “last days.” This argument was built upon the Pentecost episode in Acts 2:17-20 in connection with the last days’ prophecy in Joel 2 (see Joel 2:28-30). Contrary to the general Christian belief that the prophetic gift ended with the apostle John, the Sabbathkeeping Adventists argued that the gifts, including the prophetic gift, were to continue until the end of time. It was to be visible in the “last days” of human history, the precise time they believed they were living in.GOP 253.3
James White saw the “last days” argument (based on Joel 2 and Acts 2) as one of the strongest points for accepting Ellen White’s gift. According to his understanding, the prophecy of Joel was not fulfilled in its entirety at Pentecost. He argued that the signs in the sun and the moon were not seen on that day. Nor were there any dreams or visions. Thus only “a part of this prophecy was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost,” and “all” was to be fulfilled in the “last days.” Since James White interpreted “the last days” to be the period when they were living in, he believed that the “time has fully come” when believers were to expect “dreams and visions from the Lord.” Interestingly, a few years later he offered “a reward of $500” to anyone who could “find one text in the New Testament which teaches that the gifts have been by divine authority taken from the church.” Obviously James White believed that nobody could do that and he would not lose his money.GOP 253.4
Like James White, Joseph Bates also affirmed that the Bible was “positively clear” on the fact that God would give visions to His people “in the last days.” Therefore, if Sabbathkeeping Adventists were living in the last days of human history, as they believed they were, then the gift of prophecy, as seen through Ellen White, was to be expected. This argument seemed to become one of the most popular and highly used reasons for justification of the Sabbatarian acceptance of Ellen White ever since.GOP 253.5
A third more practical reason for the Sabbathkeeping Adventist acceptance of Ellen White’s gift developed during this early period was the positive influence of her visions among believers or what they called the “good fruits” argument. By its very nature, this argument was more pragmatic then theological and was based primarily on personal experiences of believers with Ellen White. We must note also that while a majority of Sabbathkeeping Adventists accepted Ellen White’s gift, there were some who were doubtful. But through personal examination and by seeing the “good fruits” of the visions (individually and communally) they gradually accepted Ellen White’s prophetic claims as authentic.GOP 254.1
Maybe the most famous example is that of Joseph Bates, one of the founders of the movement. Bates commented about his experience with Ellen White: “It is now about two years since I first saw the author, and heard her relate the substance of her visions as she has since published them in Portland (April 6, 1846). Although I could see nothing in them that militated against the word, yet I felt alarmed and tried exceedingly, and for a long time unwilling to believe that it was anything more than what was produced by a protracted debilitated state of her body.” GOP 254.2
Bates’s declaration is rather surprising since he came from the Christian Connexionist tradition, which was open to the perpetuity of spiritual gifts. But it is also because of his tradition that he left open the possibility that Ellen White might be manifesting the true prophetic gift. As he put it: “ ‘I am a doubting Thomas. I do not believe in visions. But if I could believe that the testimony the sister has related to-night was indeed the voice of God to us, I should be the happiest man alive.’ ” GOP 254.3
Perplexed, Bates tried to investigate the matter for himself and “sought opportunities in presence of others . . . to question, and cross question her, and her friends which accompanied her, . . . to get if possible at the truth.” Bates’s personal conviction of the legitimacy of Ellen White’s prophetic gift came in November 1846 in Topsham, Maine, “when Ellen White had a vision that included astronomical data” describing other planets. Being an ex-sea captain and having a particular interest on the topic, Bates was well familiar with the astronomical data of that time. Since he knew that Ellen White could not have had any previous knowledge of astronomy, he became at once convinced that this vision came “outside of her knowledge and control.” Following that personal experience Bates became a believer in her prophetic gift.GOP 254.4
Similarly, Heman S. Gurney also noted that after some personal investigation, and seeing and benefiting from some of the “fruits” of her prophetic work, he accepted her gift as being genuine. Interestingly, Gurney paid half of the cost for printing a broadside containing her first vision in 1846. GOP 255.1
Another “good fruit” of the modern manifestation of the gift of prophecy was its ability to bring believers into “the unity of the faith” and strengthen them spiritually. Otis Nichols, for example, used this argument in his letter to William Miller in 1846. He pointed out that when Ellen White’s visions were “received as from the Lord” they “broke down and melted their hearts like little children, fed, comforted, strengthened the weak, and encouraged them to hold on to the faith, and the 7th month movement.” Contrarily, he noted that those who had rejected her messages “very soon fell into the world and a nominal faith.” GOP 255.2
The unifying power of Ellen White’s gift was also seen at some of the early Sabbath conference meetings that took place in the late 1840s. For instance, at the second Sabbatarian conference at Volney, New York, in August 1848, there was a vast difference of understanding of biblical doctrines. At one point Ellen White received a vision in which she saw “some of the errors of those present, and also the truth in contrast with their errors.” As a result of her vision, unity was achieved and “truth gained the victory.” This is not to assume, of course, that Ellen White had a leading role in the formation of the Seventh-day Adventist beliefs. As George Knight has pointed out: “We can best view Mrs. White’s role in doctrinal development as confirmation rather than initiation.” After all, Ellen White had always considered her gift as being “a lesser light” leading people to “the greater light”—the Bible. But seeing the unifying force and the “good fruits” of her gift was another reason for early Sabbathkeepers to accept her prophetic claims as authentic and sincere.GOP 255.3
A fourth argument that Sabbathkeeping Adventists were initially inclined to accept Ellen White’s gift was related to the existence of counterfeit prophets. Like the Millerite Adventists, they did not deny the reality of “false prophets,” but this, they claimed, did not negate the manifestation of the true gift of prophecy. On the contrary, false prophets only confirmed their belief that there were “true ones.” The question for Sabbathkeeping Adventists, therefore, was not the reality of “modern” displays of the gift of prophecy, but how to distinguish between true and false prophetic manifestations. The identifying mark, they believed, was the nature of prophetic messages in comparison with the Bible and their fulfillments.GOP 255.4
Otis Nichols clearly had this in mind when he wrote to Miller that Christians had a duty not to reject “prophesyings” but to “prove all things” and to “hold fast that which is good. 1 Thessalonians 5:20, 21.” Trying to convince Miller of Ellen White’s genuine prophetic gift Nichols noted that her first vision was an accurate fulfillment of what the Millerites went through during the Great Disappointment in 1844 (as far as he and the Sabbathkeeping Adventists were concerned). It was also in accordance with the biblical record. GOP 256.1
Bates wrote in the same manner concerning the Sabbathkeepers’ understanding on the issue of true and false prophets. He, like Nichols, argued against those who believed that all visions were to be considered as false manifestations. “We are commanded to try the spirits,” Bates wrote in 1849, “that we may understand which is right. So also to try visions by proving all things and holding fast that which is good.” Then Bates became more specific and pointed out how Ellen White’s visions were “clearly” in “accord with God’s Word and Second Advent history.” Based on their truthfulness, he implied that Ellen White was a true and genuine prophet of God.GOP 256.2
James White, likewise, argued for the validity of their belief in the gift of prophecy based on the existence of the counterfeits. He logically noted that those who rejected “such special revelations because the counterfeit exists, may with equal propriety go a little farther and deny that God ever revealed himself to man in a dream or a vision, for the counterfeit always existed.” GOP 256.3
Thus by 1850, Sabbathkeeping Adventists had accepted the prophetic ministry of Ellen White by pointing out to: (a) its biblical confirmation; (b) being a manifestation of the Holy Spirit in the “last days”; (c) bringing “positive fruits” among believers; and (d) differentiating it from counterfeit prophetic manifestations at that time. Ellen White’s gift during this early period, however, was seen more as a “sign” rather than a doctrine in itself. During the next two decades, as Sabbathkeeping Adventists continued to build upon their initial arguments and defend further their acceptance of Ellen White, the gift of prophecy would become one of their distinguished doctrinal teachings.GOP 256.4