In 2014, Ellen G. White's "Remarks in Vision" (Ms 5, 1849) was published for the very first time. In it, we have a very positive endorsement of the Apocrypha:
(Taking the large Bible containing
the apocrypha:) Pure and undefiled, a part of it is consumed, holy, holy, walk
carefully, tempted. The Word of God, take it (Marion Stowell), bind it long
upon thine heart, pure and unadulterated. How lovely, how lovely, how lovely.
My blood, My blood, My blood. O the children of disobedience, reproved,
reproved. Thy word, thy word, thy word, a part of it is burned unadulterated, a
part of the hidden book, a part of it is burned (the apocrypha).
In "A
Copy of E. G. White’s Vision, Which She Had at Oswego, N. Y., January 26, 1850"
(Ms 4), She wrote how, in a vision
I then saw the Word of God pure
and unadulterated, and that we must answer for the way we received the truth
proclaimed from that Word. I saw that it had been a hammer to break the flinty
heart in pieces, and a fire to consume the dross and tin, that the heart might
be pure and holy. I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the
wise of these last days should understand it. I saw that the Bible was the
standard book, that will judge us at the last day. I saw that heaven would be
cheap enough, and that nothing was too dear to sacrifice for Jesus, and that we
must give all to enter the kingdom. I heard an angel say, think ye God will
place His seal where there is an idol? No, no.
In 1888, we find many affirmations of the purity of the textual
transmission of the biblical texts. For example:
In the Autumn 1888 "The Guide Book"
(Ms 16) we read that
And He [God] has not, while
presenting the perils clustering about the last days, qualified any finite man
to unravel hidden mysteries or inspired one man or any class of men to
pronounce judgment as to that which is inspired or is not. When men, in their
finite judgement, find it necessary to go into an examination of Scriptures to
define that which is inspired and that which is not, they have stepped before
Jesus to show Him a better way than He has led us.
In
a sermon from December 1, 1888 (Ms 13), White instructed her fellow
Adventists to
take your Bible, but do not put a
sacrilegious hand upon it and say, “That is not inspired,” simply because
somebody else has said so. Not a jot or tittle is ever to be taken from that
Word. Hands off, brethren! Do not touch the ark. Do not lay your hand upon it,
but let God move. It is with His own power, and He will work in such a manner
that He will compass our salvation. We want God to have some room to work. We
do not want man’s ideas to bind Him about.
In her December 18, 1888 “David’s Prayer” (Review
and Herald 65 [1888]) White taught that
A correct understanding of “what
saith the Scriptures” in regard to the state of the dead is essential for this
time. God's word declares that the dead know not anything, their hatred and
love have alike perished. We must come to the sure word of prophecy for our
authority. Unless we are intelligent in the Scriptures, may we not, when this
mighty miracle-working power of Satan is manifested in our world, be deceived
and call it the workings of God; for the word of God declares that, if it were
possible, the very elect should be deceived. Unless we are rooted and grounded
in the truth, we shall be swept away by Satan's delusive snares. We must cling
to our Bibles. If Satan can make you believe that there are things in the word
of God that are not inspired, he will then be prepared to ensnare your soul. We
shall have no assurance, no certainty, at the very time we need to know what is
truth. Our feet should be shod with the preparation of the gospel, and the
truth of God should be our shield and buckler. We must know for ourselves that
we have the truth of God. Therefore let no one entertain the question whether
this or that portion of the word of God is inspired. Go to work; gird on the
armor of Christ's righteousness.
Commenting on these 1888 sources, especially in light of her 1849
and 1850 comments, wrote that
Her words in later life appear to
echo her concern from her youth when in 1849, speaking about the Apocrypha, she
declared that Adventists should “Bind it to the heart . . . le[s]t everything
be cast off” (White 1849).
One plausible interpretation of her youthful vision was that she was warning
that any removal of part of the Bible (the Apocrypha), would risk the same
removal happening to any other parts of the Bible. If true, this would mean
that she saw the denigration of the Apocrypha as being “un-inspired,” as a
denigration of scripture and inspiration itself. This also reveals that for
White, the canon of scripture was whatever had been retained within her Bible
up until that point. This can find evidence in her declaration that “The Lord
has preserved this Holy Book by His own miraculous power in its present
shape” (White
1888a). (Matthew Korpman, “Endorsing
the Septuagint: Ellen White and Her Later Views of the Apocrypha,” Academia
Letters [2002]: 3)
One should read the rest of Korpman’s article, including White’s
acceptance of the Septuagint and its implications for her understanding of the
inspiration and authority of the Apocrypha.
Such also serves as a good comparison and contrast to another 19th-century
religious leader, Joseph Smith and his views on the Apocrypha one finds in D&C
91 from March 9, 1831. For more, see:
Gerrit Dirkmaat, “Lost Scripture and ‘the Interpolations of Men’:
Joseph Smith’s Revelation on the Apocrypha,” in Producing Ancient Scripture:
Joseph Smith’s Translation Projects in the Development of Mormon Christianity,
ed. Michael Hubbard MacKay, Mark Ashurst-McGee and Brian Hauglid (Salt Lake
City: The University of Utah Press, 2020), pp. 285-303
and
Jared W. Ludlow, Exploring the Apocrypha from a Latter-day
Saint Perspective (Springville, Utah: CFI, 2018).
