Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, Andrews University The Role of Ellen White in the Development of Adventist Doctrines Jerry Moon, 2006 Introduction. Many Adventists assume that Adventist beliefs had their origins in the visions of Ellen White. Typical of non-Adventist opinion in years past is that of G. H. Shriver, author of the article on “Seventh-day Adventism” in the Abingdon Dictionary of Living Religions (1981): “The source of authority for belief is the Bible, but the writings of Ellen White are held in such high esteem that for all practical purposes it is the Bible as interpreted by Ellen White” (p. 672). Not all hold this view, however. Dr. Roger Nicole, eminent evangelical scholar and founder of the Evangelical Theological Society, remarked to an Andrews faculty member and student at the annual conventions in Atlanta, November 2003, “I appreciate Seventh-day Adventists so much. They have one of the highest views of Scripture of anybody I know. . . . Ellen White believes very strongly in Scripture.” According to one church growth study, Adventists who considered themselves “regular readers of the writings of Ellen White” were almost twice as likely to also have daily personal Bible study as compared to non-readers of the Spirit of prophecy (Ministry, October 1982, p. 11). One of the clearest evidences of the priority of Scripture in the experience and teaching of Ellen White, is a series of seven conferences held by our spiritual ancestors 155 years ago, in 1848. I believe it is absolutely essential that we remember the history and especially the spiritual lessons of those conferences, because those conferences laid the foundations for a church built on Scripture, the whole Scripture, and nothing contrary to Scripture. Of course, this ideal was not new; it is a classic formula of Reformation Protestantism. It is however, an ideal seldom realized for more than a brief period of time, because the mere passage of time tends to create traditions and customs that are easily assumed to represent Scripture, but which in fact can take the place of Scripture as a basis for making decisions in our daily lives. One corrective to the tendency to replace Scripture with tradition is to pause from time to time—as we are doing this weekend—to re-examine the foundations of our faith and to re-examine our own lives, in order to make sure that we are indeed building our lives on Scripture, the whole Scripture, and nothing contrary to Scripture. One of the strongest defenders of the Scriptural foundation of the church was a young woman, present at all seven of the 1848 conferences, who was then just 21 years old. Note what she later wrote about the sola Scriptura principle: “God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms. The opinions of learned men, the deductions of science, the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, . . . the voice of the majority---not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain “Thus saith the Lord” in its support” (Ellen G. White, Great Controversy, 595; all emphasis added unless otherwise noted). She consistently maintained that the Bible alone is the ultimate standard by which all other standards are to be tested. Speaking of the relationship between Bible and the gift of prophecy , she wrote, “The Spirit was not given--nor can it ever be bestowed--to supersede the Bible; for the Scriptures explicitly state that the word of God is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested [1 John 4:1, Isa 8:20 quoted]” (GC, viii). This remains the foundational teaching of the Seventh-day Adventist Church today, enshrined in the very first of our Fundamental Beliefs. But that insight did not just “happen.” Nor will it remain the experience of the church today, just because it is written in the Fundamental Beliefs. The test of any belief is whether it is practiced, and how consistently it is practiced, and the Sabbatarian Conferences (1848-1850) became a benchmark example of the practice of this belief among Seventh-day Adventists. So we turn to our history. To see the significance of 1848, we have to go back 4 years further, to 1844 and the Great Disappointment. The Disappointment, of course, was the day in October 1844 when the Millerite Adventists expected the Second Coming of Jesus. The Disappointment was a devastating example of the results of accepting non-Scriptural assumptions as truth. The Millerite Adventists had believed that the sanctuary in Daniel 8:14 was the earth; so the “cleansing of the sanctuary” was thought to be the cleansing of the earth by fire at Christ’s second coming. You see how a single non-biblical idea—that the sanctuary was the earth—laid the foundation for the Disappointment. Following the Disappointment, the Millerite movement splintered into many parts. Those who advocated the keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath were considered fanatics, and were ostracized by their former Millerite brethren, referred to as “first-day Adventists” by those who were beginning to be known as “seventh-day Adventists.” The name “Seventh-day Adventist” would not become official until 1860, and the General Conference was not organized until 1863, but by 1848 the doctrinal shape of the church that would be born, was beginning to appear.I. The Relationship between Visions and Bible Study in Pre-1850 Doctrinal Development A. Sabbath and Sanctuary Conferences, 1848-1850: The term “Sabbath Conferences” or “Sabbath and Sanctuary Conferences” refers to a series of at least 23 meetings between April 1848 and December 1850, in the northeastern USA, that started a process of consensus formation among ex-Millerite Adventists that led in two years to an agreed doctrinal core, and culminated 15 years later in the organization of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. The conferences included seven in 1848, six in 1849, and ten in 1850 (C. Mervyn Maxwell, “The 1848 Sabbath and Sanctuary Conferences: What Actually Took Place?” in Source Book for CHIS674 Development of SDA Theology, ed. Gerard P. Damsteegt, Andrews University, 1994, pp. 325-327). B. Historical Overview of the 1848 Conferences 1. Rocky Hill,