Ellen White often made claims she attributed to ‘Divine’ revelation, but what happens when we critically examine these statements? Should such claims be accepted as truth simply because of their source? Many, including well-educated Seventh-day Adventists (SDAs), seem to think so, often accepting her words without question. But what happens when we compare her assertions to biblical evidence or the observable natural world?
Take, for example, White’s description of the first visible effects of sin in nature. She wrote:
As they witnessed in drooping flower and falling leaf the first signs of decay, Adam and his companion mourned more deeply than men now mourn over their dead. The death of the frail, delicate flowers was indeed a cause of sorrow; but when the goodly trees cast off their leaves, the scene brought vividly to mind the stern fact that death is the portion of every living thing.[1]
This passage raises questions: Was the natural process of flowers wilting or leaves changing in autumn truly absent before sin? Or could this be a built-in feature of nature’s cycles, established by God from the beginning?
White implies that any sign of decay in Eden would have been entirely unprecedented. However, this interpretation conflicts with both logic and Scripture. For instance, Genesis 1:11 highlights God’s command for plants to yield seed and reproduce “after its own kind.” This strongly suggests a natural cycle of growth, reproduction, and renewal, not stasis.
Jesus Himself affirmed this natural cycle:
“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless a grain of wheat falls into the earth and dies, it remains alone; but if it dies, it bears much fruit.” (John 12:24, ESV)
If Adam and Eve plucked flowers or fruits, wouldn’t they have naturally withered or decomposed, returning nutrients to the soil to sustain new life? Or did White envision a world where plucked plants lay eternally unchanged, like “plastic” replicas? This idea feels at odds with the dynamic, self-sustaining system God created, where all living things work together in a harmonious cycle.
White’s vision of Heaven reflects a similar belief. As this vision is coming from her Testimonies for the Church, let’s not forget that she claimed this was barricaded with a ‘Thus says the Lord’:
“In these letters which I write, in the testimonies I bear, I am presenting to you that which the Lord has presented to me. I do not write one article in the paper expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision—the precious rays of light shining from the throne.” [2]
With this in mind, Ellen White wrote:
And I saw another field full of all kinds of flowers, and as I plucked them, I cried out: “They will never fade.” Next I saw a field of tall grass, most glorious to behold; it was living green, and had a reflection of silver and gold, as it waved proudly to the glory of King Jesus.[3]
From this, White seems to suggest that in a perfect, sinless environment—whether Eden or Heaven—decay is entirely absent. But does this make sense? How could nature’s intricate cycles of growth and renewal function without some elements falling away to make room for the new?
For example, when Adam ate a peach, what happened to the pit? Did it remain intact forever? Or did it follow the natural process God designed for seeds—to decompose, take root, and produce new trees? The very act of creation described in Genesis implies a world designed to sustain itself through cycles of life and renewal, not one where decay is synonymous with sin.
Even the vibrant colors of autumn—yellows, oranges, and reds—are often viewed as a beautiful testament to nature’s rhythm. Should they really be seen as evidence of sin’s curse?
To better understand this topic, with solid rational, biblical, and scientific perspectives, I’d like to present an article written by Michael Todhunter: Do Plants and Leaves Die? This article will help to reveal the ludicrousness of Ellen White’s so-called divine insight into the results of sin in the natural world. As we will see, science does not help Ellen’s case. Her lack of understanding around scientific reality exposes her as the false prophet she is. (Emphasis is mine)
Do Plants and Leaves Die?
Fall in America and throughout much of the Northern Hemisphere is a beautiful time of year. Bright reds, oranges, and yellows rustle in the trees and then blanket the ground as warm weather gives way to winter cold. Many are awed at God’s handiwork as the leaves float to the ground like heaven’s confetti. But fall may also make us wonder, “Did Adam and Eve ever see such brilliant colors in the Garden of Eden?” Realizing that these plants wither at the end of the growing season may also raise the question, “Did plants die before the Fall of mankind?”
Before we can answer this question, we must consider the definition of die. We commonly use the word die to describe when plants, animals, or humans no longer function biologically. However, this is not the definition of the word die or death in the Old Testament. The Hebrew word for die (or death), mût (or mavet or muwth), is used only in relation to the death of man or animals with the breath of life, not regarding plants.[4]/[5] This usage indicates that plants are viewed differently from animals and humans.
Plants, Animals, and Man — All Different
What is the difference between plants and animals or man? For the answer we need to look at the phrase nephesh chayyah.[6] Nephesh chayyah is used in the Bible to describe sea creatures (Genesis 1:20–21), land animals (Genesis 1:24), birds (Genesis 1:30), and man (Genesis 2:7).[7] Nephesh is never used to refer to plants. Man specifically is denoted as nephesh chayyah, a living soul, after God breathed into him the breath of life. This contrasts with God telling the earth on day 3 to bring forth plants (Genesis 1:11). The science of taxonomy, the study of scientific classification, makes the same distinction between plants and animals.
Since God gave only plants (including their fruits and seeds) as food for man and animals, then Adam, Eve, and all animals and birds were originally vegetarian (Genesis 1:29–30). Plants were to be a resource of the earth that God provided for the benefit of nephesh chayyah creatures — both animals and man. Plants did not “die,” as in mût; they were clearly consumed as food. Scripture describes plants as withering (Hebrew yabesh), which means “to dry up.” This term is more descriptive of a plant or plant part ceasing to function biologically.
A “Very Good” Biological Cycle
When plants wither or shed leaves, various organisms, including bacteria and fungi, play an active part in recycling plant matter and thus in providing food for man and animals.
When plants wither or shed leaves, various organisms, including bacteria and fungi, play an active part in recycling plant matter and thus in providing food for man and animals. These decay agents do not appear to be nephesh chayyah and would also have a life cycle as nutrients are reclaimed through this “very good” biological cycle. As the plant withers, it may produce vibrant colors because, as a leaf ceases to function, the chlorophyll degrades, revealing the colors of previously hidden pigments.
Since decay involves the breakdown of complex sugars and carbohydrates into simpler nutrients, we see evidence for the second law of thermodynamics before the Fall of mankind. But in the pre-Fall world, this process would have been a perfect system, which God described as “very good.”
What Determines a Leaf’s Color?
When trees bud in the spring, their green leaves renew forests and delight our senses. The green color comes from the pigment chlorophyll, which resides in the leaf’s cells and captures sunlight for photosynthesis. Other pigments called carotenoids are always present in the cells of leaves as well, but in the summer their yellow or orange colors are generally masked by the abundance of chlorophyll.
In the fall, a kaleidoscope of colors breaks through. With shorter days and colder weather, chlorophyll breaks down, and the yellowish colors become visible. Various pigments produce the purple of sumacs, the golden bronze of beeches, and the browns of oaks. Other chemical changes produce the fiery red of the sugar maple. When fall days are warm and sunny, much sugar is produced in the leaves. Cool nights trap it there, and the sugars form a red pigment called anthocyanin.
Leaf colors are most vivid after a warm, dry summer followed by early autumn rains, which prevent leaves from falling early. Prolonged rain in the fall prohibits sugar synthesis in the leaves and thus produces a drabness due to a lack of anthocyanin production.
Still other changes take place. A special layer of cells slowly severs the leaf’s tissues that are attached to the twig. The leaf falls, and a tiny scar is all that remains. Soon the leaf decomposes on the forest floor, releasing important nutrients back into the soil to be recycled, perhaps by other trees that will once again delight our eyes with rich and vibrant colors.[8]
Revelation 21:4 promises a future without death or pain, but it does not refer to the natural cycles of life.
“He will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning, nor crying, nor pain anymore, for the former things have passed away.” (Revelation 21:4, ESV)
On the New Earth, when the redeemed eat the fruit of the tree of life or other plants, those trees will continue their cycles—sprouting, budding, and producing new fruit. This isn’t a result of sin but part of God’s plan for a self-replenishing world.
In contrast, White’s claim that Adam and Eve mourned over the first signs of decay—falling leaves and drooping flowers—raises more questions than it answers. If such decay was unprecedented, why would God create plants that yield seeds? Without this natural cycle, the earth would eventually be overwhelmed by eternal, unfading debris—a scenario that seems neither logical nor scripturally supported.
Ultimately, Ellen White’s interpretation appears to mischaracterize the natural world’s processes and conflates them with sin. By critically examining her statements, we find that they often lack biblical and scientific coherence, leaving both her and the SDA Church vulnerable to scrutiny.
Instead of viewing the natural world’s cycles as evidence of death and sin, perhaps we should appreciate their beauty and purpose as part of God’s perfect design. This system sustains and renews life, reflecting His wisdom and care. And, on a final note, instead of allowing Ellen White’s twisted and contrived views to taint our understanding of the Bible and who God is, we should rely solely on Scripture, allowing Scripture to interpret itself.
In Christian Love,
[1] Ellen Gould White, The Story of Patriarchs and Prophets as Illustrated in the Lives of Holy Men of Old, vol. 1, Conflict of the Ages Series (Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1890), 62.
[2] Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5 (Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1855), 67.
[3] Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1 (Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1855), 68.
[4] “Death Before Sin?,” accessed December 4, 2024, https://www.icr.org/article/295/.
[5] “Was There Death Before Adam Sinned?,” Answers in Genesis, accessed December 4, 2024, https://answersingenesis.org/death-before-sin/was-there-death-before-adam-sinned/.
[6] “‘Life’ According to the Bible, and the Scientific Evidence,” Answers in Genesis, accessed December 4, 2024, https://answersingenesis.org/origin-of-life/what-is-life/life-according-to-the-bible-and-the-scientific-evidence/.
[7] “‘Life’ According to the Bible, and the Scientific Evidence,” Answers in Genesis, accessed December 4, 2024, https://answersingenesis.org/origin-of-life/what-is-life/life-according-to-the-bible-and-the-scientific-evidence/.
[8] “Do Plants and Leaves Die?,” Answers in Genesis, accessed December 4, 2024, https://answersingenesis.org/biology/plants/do-leaves-die/.
I find EGW’s account not compelling. I also find the article to not be that compelling either. The fact of the matter is no one knows. Lately I have gotten to the point of the Bible doesn’t speak to something I try not to use conjecture. I have learned to be suspicious of derived doctrines. If a Bible writer doesn’t deal with it specifically in the narrative of their writings I tend to discount it.
I appreciate your thoughts. Yes, I agree. We try to discuss and dialogue about things that Scripture doesn’t touch on. The points in the article attempt to address an issue that EGW brings up, which isn’t really discussed. It would be considered extra-biblical.
The fact that plants were made with seed-yielding functions already informs us that plants and trees were created to have a natural cycle. We see this as the leaves dying, but in reality, this is just nature. And is a part of God’s ordained cycle and function.