Ellen White’s Alleged Contradictions, Adventist Prophet
Accused of Contradictions

Plan of Salvation Made after the Fall? Was Adam With Eve at the Tree?
Was Adam Deceived?
Amalgamation Issue
Who shut the Door of the Ark?
Was tower of Babel Before or After Flood?
Who Fed Elijah?
Was Christ Divine?
Who choose Judas to be a Disciple
Was the Atonement Completed at the Cross
Investigative judgment , 2300 days, 1844?
Does Blood of Christ Cancel Sin?
Who Bears our Sins?
Answers to More Supposed Contradictions on Page Two

On the internet people have put together quotes and scriptures in an attempt to place Ellen White in the worst light possible. On this website I've taken several "supposed" contradictions posted elsewhere, to show these are simply attacks on the Seventh-day Adventist belief system. They are not founded on honest evaluation of facts.

"The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race." (Great Controversy, p.347).
BIBLE - NO: "Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you." (1 Pet 1:18-20).
BIBLE - NO: "According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love." (Eph 1:4).
NOTE: The Gospel of salvation through grace by faith in Jesus Christ was already in existence before the creation of this world. EGW contradicts the Bible by claiming the plan of salvation was devised after the fall of Adam and Eve.


When we take the quoted passage in context, we see that EGW is speaking of the various stages of Christ's Kingdom for fallen mankind. The disciples clung to the hope that Jesus would set up an earthly kingdom. When Christ died they suffered grief and disappointment. They had preached the message, "The time is fulfilled, the kingdom of God is at hand." (Matt. 4:17,10:7) They had not understood that the "kingdom of God" which they had declared to be at hand, was the kingdom of grace, and was established by the death of Christ.

As used in the Bible, the expression "kingdom of God" is employed to designate both the kingdom of grace and the kingdom of glory. The kingdom of grace is brought to view by Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews. After pointing to Christ, the compassionate intercessor who is "touched with the feeling of our infirmities," the apostle says: "Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace." Hebrews 4:15, 16. The throne of grace represents the kingdom of grace; So the throne of glory represents the kingdom of glory; and this kingdom is referred to in the Saviour's words: "When the Son of man shall come in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then shall He sit upon the throne of His glory: and before Him shall be gathered all nations." Matthew 25:31, 32. This kingdom is yet future. It is not to be set up until the second advent of Christ.

The kingdom of grace was instituted immediately after the fall of man, when a plan was devised for the redemption of the guilty race. It then existed in the purpose and by the promise of God; and through faith, men could become its subjects. Yet it was not actually established until the death of Christ.

Ellen White said: The "kingdom of Grace was "INSTITUTED IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE FALL--" It was then "a promise", yet it was not actually established until the death of Christ..

There was no need for a "kingdom of Grace" to be INSTITUTED or established before the fall! When mankind fell, that's when they were given the promise of a "kingdom of grace", that's when the plan was revealed which was devised for their redemption. That's when it was INSTITUTED. The same kingdom of Grace was ESTABLISHED at the cross.

This does not contradict the fact that the CONCEPT for this kingdom of Grace was planned for before the creation of the earth. But it had to be INSTITUTED immediately after the fall. And it was ESTABLISHED at the cross.

Ellen White also said in (PP p. 63)
"The plan of salvation had been laid before the creation of the earth; for Christ is the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world, (Rev. 13:8) yet it was a struggle, even with the King of the universe, to yield up His Son to die for the guilty race. But God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life

So there is no contradiction here! The plan "of salvation" that Christ would die, should man sin, was laid before the creation of the world, but the "Kingdom of Grace" was instituted, it's details and particulars, laid out, immediately after the fall.


EGW - NO: "The angels had cautioned Eve to beware of separating herself from her husband while occupied in their daily labour in the garden; with him she would be in less temptation than if she were alone. But absorbed in her pleasing task, she unconsciously wandered from his side. On perceiving that she was alone, she felt an apprehension of danger. She soon found herself gazing with mingled curiosity and admiration upon the forbidden tree." (Patriarchs and Prophets, pp.53,54).
BIBLE - YES: "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat." (Genesis 3:6).
NOTE: There is no record in the Bible of angels warning Eve of being separate from her husband.


This one is really nit picking.
Now think-- be realistic, if Adam were actually by her side while she was talking to the serpent what would have happened?

Compare this to Paul's statement in 1 Tim. 2.14
"And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. "

So if Adam was NOT DECEIVED, that means he knew the serpent was lying. If he were standing there beside Eve, listening to that serpent with her, knowing the serpent was lying, would he have just STOOD there, allowing her to be deceived?

The clause "her husband with her" more realistically means, her husband, who was with her in the garden of Eden.

Gen. 3:17 "Because you listened to the voice of your wife..." Indicates that it wasn't the serpent that beguiled Adam, it was Eve talking him into it. Remember Paul tells us Adam was NOT deceived. He ate that fruit from some other motive.--- He did it because he didn't want to be separated from his wife.
The logic is fully on EGW's side.


EGW - YES: "Satan, who is the father of lies, deceived Adam in a similar way, telling him that he need not obey God, that he would not die if he transgressed the law." (Evangelism, p.598).
BIBLE -NO: "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." (1 Timothy 2:14).
Note: Who showed EGW that Satan deceived Adam, when the Bible says Adam was not deceived?


You now see that they want it both ways. First they put Adam at the tree with Eve. (so they can attack EGW's statement) Now they show the pure logic that Adam was not at the tree being deceived by the serpent.

What is EGW speaking of here?
Eve was deceived by the serpent in thinking that God was withholding some great thing from her. She actually believed good would come from eating the fruit. Adam was not deceived. He KNEW the serpent was telling a lie.

"Adam understood that his companion had transgressed the command of God,...he could not endure the thought of separation...He resolved to share her fate; if she must die, he would die with her. After all, he reasoned, might not the words of the wise serpent be true? Eve was before him, as beautiful as before...no sign of death appeared in her, and he decided to brave the consequences." PP 57

So obviously, even though Adam was not deceived in the way Eve was -- Satan gained a foothold on Adam through his deceptive arts, or Adam would never have taken that fruit.

Only a critical individual who doesn't understand the complexity of the reasoning and motivations of a person, and the subtle workings of Satan, would see a contradiction here.


EGW - YES: "But if there was one sin above another which called for the destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion everywhere." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p.64).
EGW - YES: "Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of men." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p.75).
BIBLE - NO: "And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good." (Genesis 1:24,25).
NOTE: Five times in these two verses God states that animals can only reproduce according "to their own kinds." Horses cannot mate with birds and produce offspring. Neither can humans mate with monkeys and produce offspring. Even SDA scientists and the Ellen White Estate admits EGW was simply wrong.


This one is of course the favourite one.

It is built on several assumptions that are incorrect.

1. That amalgamation means sexual mating and producing of offspring between different species.

2. That the preflood people were a scientifically ignorant people.

We now KNOW that genetic manipulation is possible. Genetic engineering creates unnatural combinations.

I have dealt with this issue on another web page See Amalgamation


EGW - ANGEL: "An angel is seen by the scoffing multitude descending from heaven clothed with brightness like the lightning. He closes that massive outer door, and takes his course upward to heaven again." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p.68, written in 1864).
EGW - GOD: "…God had shut it, and God alone could open it." (Patriarchs and Prophets, p.98, written in 1890).
BIBLE - GOD: "In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark; And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him: and the LORD shut him in. (Genesis 7:13,16).
NOTE: The Bible says the Lord shut Noah in, EGW disagreed in 1864 saying it was an angel who shut the door. Then twenty-six years later in 1890, she changed her mind and wrote that it really was God who shut the door. First she contradicted the Bible and then she contradicted herself. SDA's try to reconcile EGW with the Bible by saying, "Oh, God used an angel to shut the door." If so, then why doesn't the Bible tell us that? Why is it that none of the Bible prophets knew God "used an angel?" Why was this information only available to Christians through EGW? And why does her information contradict every one of the Bible writers? If the OT Bible record was wrong, then why did Jesus say the Bible is "truth." (John 17:17) For EGW to be right; the Bible, Moses, Jesus and Ellen White herself have to be wrong!


Again it does amaze me --- this nit picking.
The paragraph above, can only make one shake their heads at the narrow minded determination to pick at straw as if it were truth.

First -- is it a matter of such great importance if God sent an angel to do the actual shutting of the door? It is still God that "shut them in". Sending an angel to do it would seem the consistent way of doing things.

Look at other Biblical incidents: Acts 12 tells us an angel rescued Peter from prison, but Peter goes and "declares to them how the Lord had brought him out of the prison! (vs 17)

Or look at Gen. 16.11 where Hagar is in the desert, "And the angel of the LORD said unto her." In fact it says repeatedly that the "Angel of the Lord" spoke to her. Yet she, in verse 16.13, "called the name of the LORD that spake unto her".

Or Gen. 31.11,13 "And the angel of God spake unto me in a dream, saying, Jacob: And I said, Here am I. And he said, I am the God of Bethel, where thou anointedst the pillar"

It is just so obvious that God works through His angels. The angels give all credit to God for the work done through them.

In Revelation 14, angels give messages -- we call them the three angels' messages. Now whose messages are they really? They are messages from God. Who actually gave the message? God's spirit moved upon honest hearted people to give the messages. So again -- who does it? GOD DOES IT!

A person who follows this "narrow minded approach"-- totally concrete type of thinking, can come up with a complex system of critizism against all things spiritual. Indeed this is the type of reasoning that progresses to declaring even the Bible contradicts itself. It leads to agnostic, departure from the truths of God has revealed. They criticize away truth by showing their "finite, narrow" thinking patterns, and end up having nothing.

"This system was corrupted before the flood by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God, and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel." (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p.301).
BIBLE - NO: "These are the families of the sons of Noah, after their generations, in their nations: and by these were the nations divided in the earth after the flood. And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth." (Gen 10:32;11:4).
NOTE: This was one of the first EGW contradictions that SDA's found and corrected. They claimed it was just a typographical error, forgetting that EGW claimed every word she wrote came from God! (Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 2, p.293).


The passage brought forth is from the very early writings of EGW, somehow one word was omitted. "AND"

In her next book that small word is added --- "and"

" The Lord first established the system of sacrificial offerings with Adam after his fall, which he taught to his descendants. This system was corrupted before the flood, and by those who separated themselves from the faithful followers of God and engaged in the building of the tower of Babel. They sacrificed to gods of their own [making] instead of the God of Heaven. 1SP 266 This shows she meant the sacrificial system was already corrupted prior to the flood and also after the flood when the tower was being built. The word "and" remains as part of that sentence in all her subsequent use of that paragraph. (see ST, June 17, 1880 par. 9}

I looked up Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 2 p. 293 and I can't find anywhere, where she claimed "every word she wrote came from God!" All she says there is,
"It is impossible for me to call up things which have been shown me unless the Lord brings them before me at the time that he is pleased to have me relate or write them."

In fact that page tells us about inspiration. In vision she is "shown things" -- that means she views, or sees the things God reveals. Then she sits down and trys to write what she saw. Sometimes "the matter is not so clear before me until I write, then the scene rises before me as was presented in vision, and I can write with freedom."

EGW was shown things in vision. That means God showed her scenes and events, and then she had to put them to words. God did not dictate the words to her, nor was this a matter of "holding a pen and having it write words on it's own". She wrote the messages, yes, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, but still searching for just the right words to describe what was revealed.

So there were errors, not in the message, but in ONE WORD omitted. When you think of a person with a grade three education, it is surprising that not more slight errors are found. That is the amazing part.

That is one of the reasons she had people, a staff, to go over her writings and correct grammatical and other such errors.

"There He honored Elijah by sending food to him morning and evening by an angel of heaven." (Testimonies, Vol. 3, p.288, written in 1873).
EGW - YES: "He who fed Elijah by the brook, making a raven His messenger." (Testimonies, Vol. 4, p.253, written in 1876).
BIBLE - YES: "And it shall be, that thou shalt drink of the brook; and I have commanded the ravens to feed thee there. So he went and did according unto the word of the LORD: for he went and dwelt by the brook Cherith, that is before Jordan. And the ravens brought him bread and flesh in the morning, and bread and flesh in the evening; and he drank of the brook." (1 Kings 17:4-6).
NOTE: In 1873 EGW contradicted the Bible when she said Elijah was fed by an angel. Then three years later in 1876 she changed her mind and agreed with the Bible that it really was a raven. Then, a year after her death, her editors tried to smooth things over by omitting any reference to either an angel or a raven. They changed EGW's words to say Elijah was just "miraculously provided with food." (Prophets and Kings, p.129, written in 1916).


That's pure conjecturing to say "her editors changed EGW's Words" "to smooth things over"? Prophets and Kings, page 121, says the ravens were sent to feed Elijah! Early Writings page 56 (written well before 1876) "Then (Time of Trouble) will be the time for us to trust wholly in God, and He will sustain us. I saw that our bread and water will be sure at that time, and that we shall not lack or suffer hunger; for God is able to spread a table for us in the wilderness. If necessary He would send ravens to feed us, as He did to feed Elijah, or rain manna from heaven, as He did for the Israelites."

This is another silly argument of hanging themselves on hooks. I bet angels, commissioned by God, had fun telling those ravens where to find palatable food for a human being and getting those ravens to-- (very contrary to raven behavior,) deliver that food to Elijah. In a way -- if EGW had written God fed Elijah there by the brook, she still would not be in contradiction to the Bible. For it was GOD WHO miraculously provided Elijah with food." Raven's, left to themselves don't feed people.

"The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty." (Letter 32, 1999, quoted in the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Vol. 5, p.1129).
BIBLE - YES: "For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace." (Isa 9:6).
BIBLE - YES: "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." (Rev 1:7-8).
BIBLE - YES: "Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:" (Phil 2:9). NOTE: The deity of Christ is a fundamental doctrine. Any other belief is HERESY.


Now I'm starting to wonder if these people are even honest. It seems they are intentionally lying in their efforts to destroy Ellen White.

Do they believe in the TRINITY? Or do they believe God the Father is the same as God the Son? For EGW to say that Christ is not the same person as God the Father is NOT DENYING THE DEITY OF CHRIST!

Just look at the context of that phrase!

"Although Christ's divine glory was for a time veiled and eclipsed by His assuming humanity, yet He did not cease to be God when He became man. The human did not take the place of the divine, nor the divine of the human...Though Christ humbled Himself to become man, the Godhead was still His own. His deity could not be lost.....The man Christ Jesus was not the Lord God Almighty, yet Christ and the Father are One. "

"When Judas was chosen by our Lord, his case was not hopeless." (Testimonies, Vol. 4, p.41).
EGW - DISCIPLES CHOSE JUDAS: "The disciples were anxious that Judas should become one of their number. They commended him to Jesus." (Desire of Ages, p.294).
EGW - JUDAS CHOSE HIMSELF: "While Jesus was preparing the disciples for their ordination, one who had not been summoned urged his presence among them. It was Judas Iscariot, a man who professed to be a follower of Christ. He now came forward soliciting a place in this inner circle of disciples. He hoped to experience this through connecting himself with Jesus." (Desire of Ages, pp.293, 717).
BIBLE - JESUS CHOSE JUDAS: "And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named apostles; Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon called Zealots, And Judas the brother of James, and Judas Iscariot, which also was the traitor. Jesus answered them, Have not I chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil? He spake of Judas Iscariot the son of Simon: for he it was that should betray him, being one of the twelve. Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you." (Luke 6:13-16; John 6:70-71; John 15:16).


Again we see the "narrow application" forced upon us in an attempt to make EGW contradict herself.

Luke 9.57,58 "And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head. "

People came to Jesus offering to be his disciple. Actually there were far more than twelve that followed him around off and on. Also, the disciples were great at pushing for the "inner" seat for the earthly kingdom they were sure Christ would establish. At one time they tried to force him to be king. (John 6:15) So they would naturally want "good representatives" in their group to enable them to achieve this end.

Notice that Judas pushed his way into the inner circle, before the ordination, during the period of time Christ was still preparing the men.

Then, when Jesus officially "ordained" the twelve to be his "special" group, yes, he picked Judas as one of the group.

Therefore in the sequence of events, Judas pushed himself into the group, won the trust of the other disciples and when Jesus set apart the twelve, He included him in the chosen twelve.

There is no contradiction.

"Instead of…Daniel 8:14 referring to the purifying of the earth, it was now plain that it pointed to the closing work of our High Priest in heaven, the finishing of the atonement, and the preparing of the people to abide the day of His coming." (Testimonies, Vol. 1, p.58).
EGW - NO: "Jesus entered the most holy of the heavenly sanctuary, at the end of the 2300 days of Daniel 8, in 1844, to make a final atonement for all who could be benefited by His mediation." (Early Writings, p.253).
BIBLE - YES: "When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost." (John 19:30).
BIBLE - YES: "But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets; Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God; Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;" (Rom 3:21-25).
BIBLE - YES: "Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him. For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement." (Rom 5:9-11).


This of course is attacking the central position of Christ's work as our High Priest in the heavenly sanctuary. It deals with a broad field of study.

The supposed contradictions rest on a number of suppositions.

1. What was finished on the cross? Was everything finished? If so, why didn't Christ set up His kingdom 2000 years ago? What in the world is Christ doing in the book of Revelation receiving scrolls, opening seals, carrying censors, and confessing names before the Father, and tending or removing candlesticks?

2. How does the fact that Christ's death provides the sure means for righteousness and being justified freely, prove that the atonement is finished and the day of atonement is a myth?

3. Is the word "atonement" synonymous with sacrifice?

4. Does the text "NOW WE RECEIVED the atonement" mean the atonement was finished at the cross?

I've often wondered why people didn't just sit down and read from scripture itself what the word "atonement" means. Why do they all insist that the atonement is the sacrifice, when scripture makes it so plain that the sacrifice provides the blood of the atonement which the PRIEST then takes and he, the PRIEST, makes an atonement for the person.

I mean that's the way the word is used consistently in the scriptures-- not just once, not just twice but dozens of times. Over and over and over again. How come nobody reads scriptures and then they condemn us and EGW, because we do read scripture, but they keep insisting the atonement was completed at the cross. (Lev. 4:20,26,31,35, Lev. 5:6,10,13,16,18, Lev. 6:7, 12:8, 14:2,31) and many more. It's always the priest that makes the atonement.

The sacrifice was completed at the cross, the blood of the atonement was all sufficient, once for all, but our Priest, Jesus makes atonement for us in the heavenly sanctuary. Christ, with HIS OWN BLOOD, the blood of the atonement, the blood of the covenant, has entered the heavenly sanctuary as our High Priest to make atonement for us. At-one-ment. We must individually receive the atonement. Being AT-ONE-MENT with Christ.

1844, 2300 days, Investigative Judgment?
The Bible totally rejects EGW's idea of the 2300 days and an investigative judgment in the heavenly sanctuary beginning in 1844. Notice how the Bible texts quoted above were all written less than thirty years after Jesus' resurrection, and all clearly state that Christians living then were already fully justified, redeemed, sanctified and reconciled to God through Christ's death on the cross. There is not a verse in the Bible to support the SDA sanctuary doctrine.


This of course is NOT TRUE! Scripture plainly teaches that there will be a judgment BEFORE the coming of Christ. Scriptures give us the sanctuary doctrine-- Christ working out the plan of salvation in the heavenly sanctuary. See my studies on Daniel, Revelation and other pages on this subject.

Hebrews 8.12
Now of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.

The book of Daniel has a graphic picture of the judgment. Daniel 7:9-10. The THRONES of judgment are set up in heaven. God, Himself takes His seat in blazing splendor. Ten thousands times ten thousand of heavenly beings are in attendance. The judgment is set and the books are opened.

Daniel says this judgment will sit, or take place, after the 1260 day/years, after the "little horn" power, has had it's time to think he could change God's times and laws. Dan. 7:25,26.

The book of Revelation is totally built on sanctuary imagery, and it also clearly announces that judgment began after the 1260 day/years and before the second coming. It also shows the decline of the Christian church and it's turning into an apostate power that actually fights against the true people of God. Making the investigative judgment an essential element for showing the universe who the true Christians are.

We find the announcements of Christ moving into the Most Holy Place in the seven churches, when the Philadelphia church has an "open and shut door".

For more on the door in the Philadelphia Period click here.

We find the announcement in the seven seals. After the four horses of Christianity have already galloped forth, and shown the moral decline of Christianity, the fifth seal is opened. Here we see the blood of the martyrs cry "How long will you NOT judge"? These are the children of God, which the apostate Christian church declared worthy of death. Will God's children be condemned by those who claim to be Christ's representatives on earth. "How long, O Lord, holy and true, do YOU NOT judge and avenge our blood, on them that dwell on the earth?"

Then white robes were given to them, but they must sleep in death a little longer for the time of the resurrection is not yet. Notice-- before the fifth seal JUDGMENT had not yet taken place. They are THEN given white robes-- they are vindicated! BUT this is not the second coming for they must sleep in death a little longer.

We find the announcement in the seven trumpets, in chapter 11, when (again after the 1260 day/years Rev. 11:2,3) the announcement is made by the 24 elders that the time has come to judge the dead and reward the saints, and the temple of God was opened in heaven, and the ark was seen. (Rev. 11:18-19)

The "little horn" had tried to "change" God's law. Now it is seen they are in opposition TO God's law.

Again and again we see that God commences judgment AFTER the 1260 day/years period. This 1260 years is the time period allotted to the "little horn" (the papacy) to have legal power.

More on the 1260 day/years, click here.

The 2300 day/year prophecy takes us to 1844, when the sanctuary will be cleansed (Dan. 8:14)

Hebrews 9.23,24
It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

More on the Investigative Judgment, click here.

The texts quoted by the antagonist ( supposedly in opposition to this doctrine) do not do away with the judgment. Of course, most Christians now believe in universalism, or some variation of it. Universalism (everyone is now saved) and it's more limited variations declaring the, "Once saved always saved" message, which maintains that once a person acknowledges that Christ died for his sins, he is forever saved, no matter what his life is like--- these modern concepts can only be maintained by using very selective texts in the Bible, and throwing out the many pasages that say the opposite.

EGW does not uphold universalism, nor the "once saved always saved" mentality, so anyone who has embraced that unscriptural doctrine will see all other evidence, both biblical and from EGW as being "contradictory" to their "pleasing fable".

Truth must include ALL scripture!

Those texts, if rightly understood, mean that we will not come into condemnation in the judgement, if we are truly "born again" in Christ. But the precious promises of Justification and forgiveness; the great and precious plan of redemption FROM sin, to all who with contrite heart surrender their lives to Christ, do not now give us license TO sin. We cannot continue to cherish willful sin and still expect to gain the promises of saved. Reconciliation is not just a "legal title", it is a relationship that entails DOING the things Christ would have us do. The judgment verifies how we respond to Christ's provisions for our salvation.

The Judgment in John

11. DOES THE BLOOD OF CHRIST CANCEL SIN? EGW - NO: "The blood of Christ, while it was to release the repentant sinner from the condemnation of the law, was not to cancel sin…it will stand in the sanctuary until the final atonement." (Patriarchs and Prophets, p.357).
BIBLE - YES: "In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;" (Eph. 1:7).
"But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin." (1 John 1:7).
BIBLE - YES: "Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin." (Rom 4:7-8).
NOTE: To forgive means to pardon, give up all rights to punish, to forever cancel a debt. Jesus did all that for us when He shed His blood for us. The Bible says that forgiven sins are never counted against an individual. However Ellen White contradicts the Bible by claiming God stores up our sins and later punishes us for them if we do not measure up to His standard before the final atonement. This idea causes millions of SDA's agony as they question whether or not they will be saved.

: ________

First of all, EGW tells us plainly that it is ONLY through the blood of Christ that sins will be cancelled. Let's read the quote in context:

: PP.357
"The blood of Christ, while it was to release the repentant sinner from the condemnation of the law, was not to cancel the sin; it would stand on record in the sanctuary until the final atonement; so in the type the blood of the sin offering removed the sin from the penitent, but it rested in the sanctuary until the Day of Atonement.
In the great day of final award, the dead are to be "judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works." Revelation 20:12. Then by virtue of the atoning blood of Christ, the sins of all the truly penitent will be blotted from the books of heaven. "

: Just see how "differently" she sets forth the principles from the twisted rendition given by the antagonist.:

"God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son," that the lost might be reclaimed. The sacrifice and mediation of Christ has brought the repentant soul into sacred relations with the Eternal Father. He who has tasted and found that the Lord is good, cannot bear the thought of following in the path of transgression. It is pain to him to violate the law of that God who has so loved him. He avails himself of the help which God has promised, ceases his disobedience, flees to Christ, and, through faith in his blood receives remission of sin. The divine hand is reached to the aid of every repentant soul. Divine wisdom will order the steps of those who put their trust in the Lord. Divine love will encircle them, and they will realize the presence of the Comforter, the Holy Spirit.":

Modern Christianity believes in "once saved always saved". Yet we read plainly in scripture that the person who continues in wilful sin, while claiming forgiveness is deceiving himself.

1 Cor. 6.9
"Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived:"

Notice-- not one of the texts (which are brought forth as evidence to say EGW contradicts the Bible) says our sins are immediately cancelled from the books of heaven.

Again they do not even address the question-- The question isn’t whether Christ’s blood cancels our sin, for there is no doubt that it is Christ’s blood, alone, that can cancel our sins. The question is -- when is sin fully cancelled?

When we come to Christ in repentance and seek forgiveness, we can know that our sins are covered by Christ's blood. "If we confess our sins He is faithful and just to forgive and cleanse us from all unrighteousness." 1 John 1:9 Yes, forgiven sins are covered by Christ's blood, and they won't rise up against us in judgment.

We no longer carry forgiven sins upon ourselves, but it doesn't say they are already blotted out of the books of heaven. During the judgment they will be blotted out.

Romans 4.7-8
"Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin."

Rev. 3.5
He that overcomes, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

Acts 3.19,20
Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord; And he shall send Jesus Christ

Acts 17.31
Because he has appointed a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that man whom he has ordained.

But what about sins that we confess, but refuse to give up? Read Ezekiel 18. Study also the parable of the ungrateful servant in Matt. 18. The servant was "forgiven" of his great debt. But something happened and he yet received punishment!

And Hebrews 10.26-30
For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:
Of how much sorer punishment, suppose you, shall he be thought worthy, who has trodden under foot the Son of God, and has counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and has done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know him that has said, Vengeance belongs unto me, I will recompense, says the Lord. And again, The Lord shall judge his people.


EGW - SATAN: "It was seen, also, that while the sin offering pointed to Christ as a sacrifice, and the high priest represented Christ as a mediator, the scapegoat typified Satan, the author of sin, upon whom the sins of the truly penitent will finally be placed. Christ will place all these sins upon Satan, … so Satan, …will at last suffer the full penalty of sin." (Great Controversy, p.422,485,486).
BIBLE - JESUS: "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed." (1 Pet 2:24).


This of course is a real twisting of facts.

First of all-- notice again that the question does NOT fit the quotation. Who bears our sins? This is not the same question as “Who will suffer the full penalty for the sins he has caused?”

This is nothing more than a malicious attack-- a total misrepresentation.
There is a volume of writing which EGW has done depicting Christ's sacrifice for our sins.

What a price has been paid for us! Behold the cross, and the Victim uplifted upon it. Look at those hands, pierced with the cruel nails. Look at His feet, fastened with spikes to the tree. Christ bore our sins in His own body. That suffering, that agony, is the price of your redemption. 6T 479

The Bible tells how Christ bore our sins, and carried our sorrows. Here is revealed how mercy and truth have met together at the cross of Calvary, how righteousness and peace have kissed each other, how the righteousness of Christ may be imparted to fallen man. There infinite wisdom, infinite justice, infinite mercy, and infinite love were displayed. Depths, heights, lengths, and breadths of love and wisdom, all passing knowledge, are made known in the plan of salvation. RH.1889-06-04.013

There is no doubt at all that Christ is our Saviour, the ONLY ONE, Who, by His death made it possible for us to be forgiven and restored to favor with God.

To then turn and take from her writings the understanding that Satan will be punished for all the sins he has caused God's children to commit, and to insinuate that she teaches this is what brings us salvation, is pure malicious attacking. Yes, in the end, Satan is destroyed with all the sin that he has caused. The ridding of the earth forever of sin, includes this final placement of guilt upon the perpetrator of sin. But his punishment is not what saved people from their sin.

Page Two, Contradictions explored.

Return to E.G.White Page

639 Placed April 6, 2003