No dictionary has ever used “amalgamation” to describe the cohabitation of man with beast. The primary use of the word describes the fusion of metals, the union of different elements such as in making tooth cements. Nineteenth-century usage included the mixing of diverse races.MOL 491.7

Granted, her statement could appear ambiguous: Does she mean “amalgamation of man with beast” or “amalgamation of man and of beast”? Often, repetition of the preposition is omitted in similar construction. ^{40“We might speak of the scattering of man and beast over the earth, but we do not therefore mean that previously man and beast were fused in one mass at one geographical spot. We simply mean the scattering of man over the earth and the scattering of beasts over the earth, though the original location of the two groups might have been on opposite sides of the earth. In other words, the scattering of man and of beast.” Ellen G. White and Her Critics, 308.}MOL 491.8

On two other occasions, Mrs. White used the word “amalgamation.” She used it metaphorically, comparing faithful believers and worldlings. ^{41“Those who profess to be followers of Christ, should be living agencies, cooperating with heavenly intelligences; but by union with the world, the character of God’s people becomes tarnished, and through amalgamation with the corrupt, the fine gold becomes dim.” The Review and Herald, August 23, 1892.} And she used it to describe the origin of poisonous plants and other irregularities in the biological world: “Christ never planted the seeds of death in the system. Satan planted these seeds when he tempted Adam to eat of the tree of knowledge which meant disobedience to God. Not one noxious plant was placed in the Lord’s great garden, but after Adam and Eve sinned, poisonous herbs sprang up.... All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares.” ^{42Selected Messages 2:288.}MOL 491.9

Recognizing that Satan has been an active agent in the corrupting of God’s plan for man, beast, plants, etc., we can better understand what Ellen White may have meant when she described the results of amalgamation. That which “defaced the image of God” in man and that which “confused the species [of animals]” has been the handiwork of Satan with the cooperation of humans. Such “amalgamation of man and [of] beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men,” becomes understandable.MOL 492.1

Mrs. White never hinted of subhuman beings or any kind of hybrid animal-human relationship. She did speak of “species of animals” and “races of men” but not any kind of amalgam of animals with human beings. ^{43We have no evidence that Ellen White read Alexander Kinmount’s Twelve Lectures on the Natural History of Man (1839), pp. 152, 153, which gives us another example of how the word “amalgamation” was used in her lifetime: “Another specimen of the evil resulting from mixing science with religion, to the injury of both, may be seen in the argument for the amalgamation of the African and European races, on the ground of their being one family, both descended from Adam and Eve.... It belongs to science, and to the common instincts and feelings of mankind to say, whether there are not races of men so unlike in their temperaments as to prohibit, as nefarious and contrary to nature, the amalgamation of them.”}MOL 492.2

We recognize, however, that serious students of Ellen White’s writings differ on what she meant by “amalgamation.” ^{44For a contemporary review of the two interpretations, see Gordon Shigley, “Amalgamation of Man and Beast: What Did Ellen White Mean?” Spectrum, June 1982, pp. 10-19.} “The burden of proof rests on those who affirm that Mrs. White gave a new and alien meaning to the term.” ^{45Nichol, Critics, p. 308.}MOL 492.3

Concern Over Ellen White’s Scientific Statements

Volcanology