Letter Written by Ellen White from the Grave:
Throughout my life and ministry, I’ve often been asked about the nature and purpose of my testimonies—the writings given to guide, instruct, and correct the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Let me clearly express that these writings are not merely my own opinions or ideas, but rather direct revelations inspired by God through visions and guidance from the Holy Spirit. As I wrote in Testimonies for the Church,
“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.” [1]
My testimonies have never been intended to replace or overshadow Scripture. Instead, their purpose has always been to highlight and draw attention back to God’s Word. As I explained,
“The Testimonies are not to belittle the word of God, but to exalt it and attract minds to it, that the beautiful simplicity of truth may impress all.” [2]
Furthermore, I’ve always viewed my writings as a lesser light but one that must to spread to everyone because they are truth. Do you not remember when I wrote you these words,
“The Lord has sent His people much instruction, line upon line, precept upon precept, here a little, and there a little. Little heed is given to the Bible, and the Lord has given a lesser light to lead men and women to the greater light. Oh, how much good would be accomplished if the books containing this light were read with a determination to carry out the principles they contain! There would be a thousandfold greater vigilance, a thousandfold more self-denial and resolute effort. And many more would now be rejoicing in the light of present truth. My brethren and sisters, work earnestly to circulate these books.” [3]
These inspired God-derived messages are meant to correct errors, clarify truths already revealed, and encourage faithful adherence to God’s principles. They don’t introduce new doctrines but emphasize and vividly impress upon hearts the essential truths found in Scripture. This is why my testimonies are always true! I summarized this clearly:
“The written testimonies are not to give new light, but to impress vividly upon the heart the truths of inspiration already revealed. Man’s duty to God and to his fellow man has been distinctly specified in God’s Word; yet but few of you are obedient to the light given. Additional truth is not brought out; but God has through the Testimonies simplified the great truths already given and in His own chosen way brought them before the people to awaken and impress the mind with them, that all may be left without excuse. If we (you) disregard them [the warnings in the Testimonies], what excuse can we (you) offer?” [4]
Ultimately, my testimonies are a manifestation of God’s care and guidance for His church, given through a humble instrument like myself, solely to strengthen believers’ connection to Christ and His Word. But they CANNOT be disregarded because they are from GOD!
While this clearly isn’t a letter written by Ellen G. White, I took the creative liberty to illustrate how Ellen White felt about her own testimonies as a backdrop to the following research and findings.
Let’s dive into the ‘testimony’ of Ellen White surrounding the controversial Chicago Building Vision and see if her own statements validate her as a prophet of God or confirm what many critics claim. She was a false teacher and false prophetess.
When Ellen White, revered by many as a prophetic voice within the Seventh-day Adventist Church, had a vision regarding Dr. John Harvey Kellogg’s misuse of funds and the construction of extravagant buildings in Chicago, she unknowingly ignited one of the most controversial episodes in Adventist history. This incident, famously known as the “Chicago Buildings Vision fiasco,” became a critical turning point that exposed deep-seated ethical dilemmas and tested the church’s understanding of prophetic authority.
A Prophetic Accusation
In 1899, Ellen White delivered a scathing prophetic “testimony”—a message she claimed was divinely inspired—accusing Dr. Kellogg of misappropriating substantial funds from the Battle Creek Sanitarium to construct elaborate buildings for his medical missionary work in Chicago. Her allegations were explicit, stern, and authoritative, creating an immediate controversy that severely damaged Kellogg’s reputation and cast suspicion over his entire ministry.
Unveiling the Truth
As Adventist leaders and members began to investigate White’s claims, a troubling contradiction quickly surfaced. Extensive historical research, notably by scholars like Kerry B. Wynne, revealed that White’s accusations were fundamentally incorrect. In fact, no new buildings had been constructed; Dr. Kellogg had merely rented properties to carry out his humanitarian work. Further, the funding came from private donors and Kellogg’s personal business income, not from the Battle Creek Sanitarium.
Ethical Concerns and Conflicts of Interest
Adding to the controversy, Ellen White herself was a stockholder in the Battle Creek Sanitarium. Her financial stake raised serious conflict-of-interest concerns, prompting many to question the sincerity and motivation behind her prophetic denunciation of Dr. Kellogg. Was her vision genuinely from God, or was it influenced by her own financial interests?
Additionally, Ellen White demanded that Dr. Kellogg redirect funds to support her mission projects in Australia. This request not only raised eyebrows but also violated the legal stipulations of the Michigan state charter, which mandated that Sanitarium funds must be used exclusively within the state. This bold move sparked further criticism, suggesting White considered herself above the law, which significantly undermined her ethical standing.
Internal Contradictions and Growing Doubts
The situation became even more complicated when Willie White, Ellen’s son and influential church leader, publicly supported plans at the 1901 General Conference for constructing a medical college building in Chicago—a project remarkably similar to the one Ellen White had previously condemned. This clear contradiction threw the church into deeper confusion, amplifying skepticism surrounding her prophetic authenticity.
Rising Doubts among Church Leaders
Unlike ministers who relied on the church for their livelihoods, the educated professionals associated with Dr. Kellogg at the Battle Creek Sanitarium began openly expressing their skepticism about Ellen White’s visions. Leading figures, such as Dr. Charles Stewart, documented numerous inconsistencies and inaccuracies within White’s testimonies. Stewart’s detailed critique fueled growing doubts about White’s reliability, adding to the church’s internal crisis.
Attempts at Damage Control
In response, Ellen White and her supporters offered explanations that many found evasive or insufficient, such as claiming the vision was simply an “object lesson” intended to prevent future financial mistakes. These rationalizations only compounded doubts and damaged her credibility further. Historian Alonzo L. Baker’s meticulous analysis supported Dr. Kellogg’s claims of innocence, validating the growing perception that Ellen White had erred significantly.
The Long Shadow of the 1919 Bible Conference
The implications of this controversy were so profound that they dominated discussions at the secretive 1919 Bible Conference, where church leaders debated whether to publicly acknowledge Ellen White’s prophetic mistakes or maintain a cover-up. The decision to conceal her errors from the wider church perpetuated a culture of skepticism and secrecy within Adventism that continues to have implications to this day.
A Legacy of Controversy
The “Chicago Buildings Vision fiasco” serves as a potent example of the tensions that arise when prophetic claims intersect with institutional politics, human error, and personal ambitions. Kerry B. Wynne highlights how this incident not only challenged Ellen White’s prophetic legitimacy but also revealed vulnerabilities in religious leadership and institutional governance. It underscores the necessity of accountability and transparency, especially when leaders claim divine authority.
This historical episode remains a powerful reminder of the potential pitfalls when human imperfections collide with spiritual authority, prompting critical reflection on the nature of prophecy, truth, and trust within religious communities.
My Personal Stand
I choose to believe the Word of God and have rejected ANY and ALL writings from this False Prophetess Ellen G. White! What is your choice? Ellen White never guessed her writings would have to deal with the information age of the internet. If her writings were to ‘stand the test of time,’ I guess God should have told her to be truthful and honest and refrain from false prophecies. The data is out there, but will you choose to read, study, and test the work of Ellen G. White?
Here is the direct link to Kerry Wynne’s research on this Chicago Vision Fiasco.
In Christian Love,
[1] Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5 (Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1855), 67.
[2] Testimonies for the Church, vol. 2 (Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1855), 606.
[3] Ellen Gould White, Colporteur Ministry (Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1953), 125–126.
[4] Ellen Gould White, The Faith I Live By (Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1958), 295.
0 Comments