What do you think?
Rate this book
Reclaiming the Prophet: An Honest Defense of Ellen White's Gift
There are many books on the market about Ellen White and her ministry, with some authors rejecting her work, while others insist she could do no wrong. A few of her followers have tried to make her infallible. This book aims at inspiring thoughtful conversation rather than vehement shouting. It has been almost two hundred years since Ellen Gould Harmon White was born. Today we know more about her than ever before. Her voluminous private correspondence is now open for study, and researchers have discovered much about the historical background of her widely read books. Eleven senior scholars think it is time for a new consensus. They have looked at a rich range of fresh evidence, from Ellen White’s understanding of women’s leadership to her teaching on “holy living,” her use of history, and her power as an end-time preacher. These scholars, including five former college or university presidents, are not interested in rehashing old arguments. The authors of Reclaiming the Prophet do not find the extremes to be believable, and they are determined to give a candid defense of a remarkable woman.
176 pages, Paperback
Published July 1, 2025
About the author
Eric Anderson
180 books11 followersLibrarian Note: There is more than one author by this name in the Goodreads database.
Eric Anderson is Professor of Sport, Masculinities and Sexualities at the University of Winchester, UK. He holds four degrees, has published 17 books, over 60 peer-reviewed articles, and is regularly featured in international television, print, and digital media. Professor Anderson is recognized for research excellence by the British Academy of Social Sciences and is a fellow of the International Academy of Sex Research. His work shows a decline in cultural homohysteria and promotes inclusive attitudes toward openly gay, lesbian and bisexual athletes as well as a softening of heterosexual masculinities.
Eric Anderson is Professor of Sport, Masculinities and Sexualities at the University of Winchester, UK. He holds four degrees, has published 17 books, over 60 peer-reviewed articles, and is regularly featured in international television, print, and digital media. Professor Anderson is recognized for research excellence by the British Academy of Social Sciences and is a fellow of the International Academy of Sex Research. His work shows a decline in cultural homohysteria and promotes inclusive attitudes toward openly gay, lesbian and bisexual athletes as well as a softening of heterosexual masculinities.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review
October 12, 2026
Interesting to see these SDA scholars struggle to balance Ellen White's key contributions and prophetic legacy with her errors, shortcomings, and unoriginality. But Seventh-day Adventism, as some of them indeed admit, has always been fundamentalist and conservative, so their wish to see Fundamental Belief 18 revised to nix the mentions of "prophetic authority" and "the remnant church" are pretty much pipe dreams. (In 50 or 100 years, who knows?) I'm more puzzled by their apparent fear that she'll be assigned to the dustbin of history and forgotten. Where are they getting this? To me, Sister White still seems extremely popular among Adventists and in no danger of disappearing.
Paul E. McGraw and Denis Fortin insist that Ellen White was a homilist, a preacher, not an exegete, and that we should view her writings as (primarily? exclusively?) devotional. Fortin writes, "I think it is safe to consider her writings on the biblical stories as largely devotional. This conclusion avoids having to ask or to answer legitimate questions about what Ellen White really saw in her visions. It, then, does not matter as much to know what she saw or what she copied from other authors or how much her assistants did in the preparation of her books. What matters more, in my opinion, are the long-lasting benefits of her writings to the spiritual experience of those who read them." Well, at least he acknowledges he's dodging the question! The problem is, as Jonathan Butler in this book even points out (in his comments on White's fervent rebuttals to Charles E. Stewart's 1907 criticizing "Blue Book"), "The Testimonies were the purest expression of Ellen White's authority in print form. To fault them was to disparage her credentials as a prophet." There IS a prophetic claim, then and today. Would we be doing this dance with anyone else, say, Joseph Smith and his Book of Mormon? "Oh, it doesn't matter as long as his writings are spiritually helpful to people." It does matter, whether or not they really saw what they said they saw. It's only because we're Adventist and we're already attached to Ellen White that we are trying our best to skirt around issues and "have it both ways," where she can occupy a central place of honor but troubling errors and shortcomings can all be explained away and excused.
Eric Anderson, George Knight, and Don McAdams highlight a few instances (poorly publicized, unfortunately) when the still-living prophet pushed back against a ultra-high view of her writings. We know of times when she objected to the use of her writings as a determiner of doctrine, like in the 1888 argument over the meaning of "the law" being nailed to the cross in Galatians 3 that arose between E.J. Waggoner and A. T. Jones (who said it meant the moral law) and G.I. Butler (who said it meant just the ceremonial law), and the 1910 argument over the meaning of "the daily [sacrifice]" in Daniel 8:13. We know of times when she contradicted things she had written in the past, due to altered circumstances (e.g., later advocating for schooling young children since the schools were in this case SDA). And she approved many changes and corrections to the Great Controversy and other books of hers, even some softening of the anti-Catholic language for Spanish editions. George Knight seems to believe she fought back hard and clear, while Don McAdams is more critical, basically saying she should've said and done more to prevent distorted views. I agree with McAdams; it probably would've upped the chances of the church choosing to "turn" instead of freeze at the turning points of the 1919 Bible Conference, in the 1970s, and today.
The thing I keep coming back to, however, is that Ellen White's visions and her interpretation of the Bible was literally the foundation of Seventh-day Adventist doctrine. The unique eschatology, the prophetic chronologies, the investigative judgment, the enduring Sabbath—those are from the prophetess, sorry, "messenger" (and her cohorts). You can talk until you're blue in the face about how the Bible should be our only creed, but the fact is (as the thousands of denominations show), people interpret Scripture any number of ways, and the Adventist way came through Ellen White's visions and her interpretations. So her writings determined doctrine, and she approved of much of that. Informed Adventists, then, must determine where her legitimate prophetic authority ends and where her fallible human preaching begins. Desmond Ford didn't actually agree with Ellen White about the sanctuary, and he was defrocked for that, but apparently several other Adventist scholars agreed with him, even if all of them didn't voice it. I would be interested to know exactly where these highly educated Adventists think Ellen White was wrong or misguided in her PROPHETIC ministry. The Testimonies and such. Also, what kinds of credence do they give other prophets in history who claimed to see visions from God? There have been many!
Paul E. McGraw and Denis Fortin insist that Ellen White was a homilist, a preacher, not an exegete, and that we should view her writings as (primarily? exclusively?) devotional. Fortin writes, "I think it is safe to consider her writings on the biblical stories as largely devotional. This conclusion avoids having to ask or to answer legitimate questions about what Ellen White really saw in her visions. It, then, does not matter as much to know what she saw or what she copied from other authors or how much her assistants did in the preparation of her books. What matters more, in my opinion, are the long-lasting benefits of her writings to the spiritual experience of those who read them." Well, at least he acknowledges he's dodging the question! The problem is, as Jonathan Butler in this book even points out (in his comments on White's fervent rebuttals to Charles E. Stewart's 1907 criticizing "Blue Book"), "The Testimonies were the purest expression of Ellen White's authority in print form. To fault them was to disparage her credentials as a prophet." There IS a prophetic claim, then and today. Would we be doing this dance with anyone else, say, Joseph Smith and his Book of Mormon? "Oh, it doesn't matter as long as his writings are spiritually helpful to people." It does matter, whether or not they really saw what they said they saw. It's only because we're Adventist and we're already attached to Ellen White that we are trying our best to skirt around issues and "have it both ways," where she can occupy a central place of honor but troubling errors and shortcomings can all be explained away and excused.
Eric Anderson, George Knight, and Don McAdams highlight a few instances (poorly publicized, unfortunately) when the still-living prophet pushed back against a ultra-high view of her writings. We know of times when she objected to the use of her writings as a determiner of doctrine, like in the 1888 argument over the meaning of "the law" being nailed to the cross in Galatians 3 that arose between E.J. Waggoner and A. T. Jones (who said it meant the moral law) and G.I. Butler (who said it meant just the ceremonial law), and the 1910 argument over the meaning of "the daily [sacrifice]" in Daniel 8:13. We know of times when she contradicted things she had written in the past, due to altered circumstances (e.g., later advocating for schooling young children since the schools were in this case SDA). And she approved many changes and corrections to the Great Controversy and other books of hers, even some softening of the anti-Catholic language for Spanish editions. George Knight seems to believe she fought back hard and clear, while Don McAdams is more critical, basically saying she should've said and done more to prevent distorted views. I agree with McAdams; it probably would've upped the chances of the church choosing to "turn" instead of freeze at the turning points of the 1919 Bible Conference, in the 1970s, and today.
The thing I keep coming back to, however, is that Ellen White's visions and her interpretation of the Bible was literally the foundation of Seventh-day Adventist doctrine. The unique eschatology, the prophetic chronologies, the investigative judgment, the enduring Sabbath—those are from the prophetess, sorry, "messenger" (and her cohorts). You can talk until you're blue in the face about how the Bible should be our only creed, but the fact is (as the thousands of denominations show), people interpret Scripture any number of ways, and the Adventist way came through Ellen White's visions and her interpretations. So her writings determined doctrine, and she approved of much of that. Informed Adventists, then, must determine where her legitimate prophetic authority ends and where her fallible human preaching begins. Desmond Ford didn't actually agree with Ellen White about the sanctuary, and he was defrocked for that, but apparently several other Adventist scholars agreed with him, even if all of them didn't voice it. I would be interested to know exactly where these highly educated Adventists think Ellen White was wrong or misguided in her PROPHETIC ministry. The Testimonies and such. Also, what kinds of credence do they give other prophets in history who claimed to see visions from God? There have been many!
Displaying 1 - 1 of 1 review