Response to Devon Grey's "Some Ellen White Mistakes"

Click to go to our Home Page

First of all, I would want to express my sincere thankfulness for Devon Grey's articles. They were full of important truth. However, I believe that we all must be very, very careful before labeling anything Ellen White said as being a mistake. There are sub-surface deeper complexities of the Bible and the writings of Ellen White that may "appear" to be contradictions and "mistakes" to the uninformed. The Lord has shown me the following responses to Ellen White's supposed "mistakes."

Because some do not understand a sufficient degree of revelation, it is the ultimate "mistake" for anyone to say that something the voice of the Holy Spirit to the Church said is a mistake. I will demonstrate this fact in responding to Devon Grey's interpretations of certain portions of Ellen White's writings as being mistakes. Here are Devon's examples of her "mistakes," with my response after each item he mentions:


That Ellen White made mistakes is indisputable. There were times when she directly contradicted herself. The following are a few examples.

1) In the 1886 edition of The Great Controversy, page 335, Ellen stated that the fall of the Ottoman Empire or Turkey was the "exactly fulfilled prediction" sounded by the sixth trumpet of Revelation. Yet in 3 SM 426, she says: "Trumpet after trumpet is to be sounded; vial after vial poured out one after another upon the inhabitants of the earth." Which statement is right? Is Ellen a liar?

Ron Beaulieu responds: Ellen White said that there were things in her writings and in Scripture that "appear" to contradict. The answer to the above riddle is that Matthew 25 describes a time when the bride awakens the ten-virgin bridesmaids declaring that the bridegroom, Christ, cometh. After that declaration, Christ did not come, but rather a "tarrying time" ensued. Was the bride declaring a false prophecy? See Christ's Object Lessons, 405-6. Further, in order for this declared "coming" of Christ, it was accompanied with pre-signs of that coming in order to motivate and awaken the ten-virgins. Ellen White says that Christ held his hand over this coming and certain events surrounding the circumstances of this "coming." Did Christ enlist the bride to announce a false prophecy concerning His coming? No! The coming announced, and the tarrying time to ensue after that awakening, was predicted in Matthew 25. The fall of the Ottoman Empire or Turkey, was an exactly fulfilled prediction and sounding of the sixth trumpet of Revelation--in the same manner as the declaration of the voice of God and the bride that the bridegroom was coming, go ye out to meet Him. Then, in 3 SM, 426, as Devon says, Ellen White said that "Trumpet after trumpet is to be sounded; vial after vial poured out one after another upon the inhabitants of the earth. Which statement is right? Is Ellen a liar? To which I respond: Both statements are correct! Ellen White is not a liar! Ellen White used prophetic license in mentioning the Ottoman Empire or Turkey as fulfilling a trumpet of Revelation. All the signs elucidated as pointing to the second coming in circa 1844, were true and valid and were necessary to a "coming" that was predicted by Scripture, but was to be preceded by a "tarrying time." There will be no tarrying time at the final loud cry to come out of Babylon. But there was a type of Biblically described signs of Christ's coming as mentioned in Matthew 25. These were signs of His coming--that it was nearer, but not the final cry--the Loud cry, at which He will not tarry.

So did Christ come to the Marriage in 1844? Read The Great Controversy, p. 426-7, and come to your conclusions very carefully.

Devon Grey continues:

In relation to the signs connected with the 6th seal of Revelation 6:13-14, Ellen says in GC 304: "These signs were witnessed before the opening of the nineteenth century." This would put events of the fifth seal (the souls under the altar) sometime before that time." These signs [the Lisbon earthquake, the darkening of the sun and moon]) were witnessed before the opening of the nineteenth century.

Ron Beaulieu responds: The same answer given for "mistake" number one is applicable here also. Secondary "signs of Christ's coming" were necessary before the opening of the nineteenth century, to accommodate the Matthew 25 "coming of the bridegroom," after which there was to be a tarrying time. But the signs will be fulfilled again in a primary and final fulfillment at the next Loud Cry call out of Babylon.

2) In 7BC 968 she says: "When the fifth seal was opened, John the Revelator in vision saw beneath the altar the company that were slain for the Word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. After this came the scenes described in the eighteenth of Revelation, when those who are faithful and true are called out from Babylon." Again in 7BC 984, Ellen said, "The prophecies in the eighteenth of Revelation will soon be fulfilled." Which of her statements will you take as true? Was Ellen mistaken?

Ron Beaulieu responds: No, Ellen White was not mistaken. Ellen White clearly said that the call out of Babylon would be repeated. Matthew 25 says that call will be repeated, because there was to be a tarrying time after the first call. Some of the seals were opened in a secondary fulfillment of the signs of Christ's coming, but the primary fulfillment of the seal is yet to come. Ellen White fully understood that.

The Midnight Cry Repeated

"My mind was carried to the FUTURE, when the signal WILL BE GIVEN, 'Behold, the Bridegroom cometh; God ye out to meet Him.'" E.G. White, Review and Herald, Vol. 3, p. 331, Feb. 11, 1896.

Notice the date, February 11, 1896.

"The parable of the wise and foolish virgins comes as a solemn warning to EVERY CHURCH. In the parable, all the ten virgins went out to meet their Lord. All had lamps, and vessels for oil. For a time there was seen no difference between them. So with the church that lives just before Christ's second coming. All have a knowledge of the Scriptures. All have heard the message of Christ's soon approach, and confidently expect His appearing. But as in the parable, so it is NOW. A time of waiting intervenes [the tarrying time], faith is tried; and WHEN THE CRY IS HEARD, [FUTURE] 'BEHOLD, THE BRIDEGROOM COMETH; GO YE OUT TO MEET HIM,' MANY ARE UNREADY. They have no oil in their vessels with their lamps. They are destitute of the Holy Spirit. Working, waiting, watching, and praying,==this constitutes genuine Christianity." E.G. White, Review and Herald, Vol. 4, pp. 373-4, January 21, 1902.

Notice the date, January 21, 1902. This was long after the cry of 1844--and the tarrying time still continues to the next Midnight Cry of Revelation 18.

Devon continues:

3) In GC 267 we find the statement "The two witnesses represent the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament." On pages 269, 270 Ellen says: "According to the words of the prophet, then, a little before the year 1798 some power of satanic origin and character would rise to make war upon the Bible. And in the land where the testimony of God's two witnesses should thus be silenced, there would be manifest the atheism of the Pharaoh and the licentiousness of Sodom."

This prophecy has received a most exact and striking fulfillment in the history of France." Up farther on page 269, she uses the term "Great City" in reference to France, calling her "Egypt." We know that reference to "the great city" in Revelation is to Babylon. If France is Babylon, which she would have to be to fulfill what Ellen White said, then she is the beast from the pit in Revelation 18. That beast is in control of the seven heads, which means France would have to be the head - the 8th king, but only one beast ascends out of the bottomless pit.

Ron Beaulieu responds: Read the reference (The Great Controversy, 267, 269, 270) Devon uses in context. Ellen White mentions that the time the two witnesses (Old and New Testament) testified was "clothed in sackcloth." This "clothing in sackcloth" period was the time that Rome suppressed the scriptures and ended in 1798. Then a "..beast that ascendeth out of the bottomless pit" was to make war on the Scriptures, p. 268. Prior to 1793, as stated, in many of the nations of Europe the powers that ruled in church and state had for centuries been controlled [clothed in sackcloth] by Satan through the medium of the papacy. But now is brought to view a new manifestation of satanic power--Atheism, symbolized by France, Egypt and Sodom--not Babylon, a professing church--the Scarlet Whore Rome, and her daughters.
France instituted a naked women in its parliament and worshipped her as the goddess of reason. That country worshipped the reasoning power of man over and above God Almighty. So all Ellen White was doing was contrasting the false prophet (Rome), a professing Christian part of the Satanic synagogue, with that of atheism of Egypt, Sodom and France. This same atheism was adopted by Russia. Ellen White was merely pointing out a "new manifestation" of Satan's arsenal. She correctly and astutely did not confuse Babylon with atheism, even though atheism was part of Satan's arsenal. Devon Grey's interpretation of this passage would confuse the two.

Devon continues: 4) The lamb-like beast in GC 441 is identified as the United States circa 1798. Three years later in 3SM 393, Ellen says it was Satan who would bring fire down from heaven to deceive those that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast. She continues quoting Revelation 13, telling how Satan will cause all to worship the first beast and receive a mark. What is she saying? How can she contradict herself so blatantly?

Ron Beaulieu responds: Ellen White does not contradict herself in the least in the above references. The lamb-like beast is the USA and Satan uses the USA to bring fire power down from heaven. The USA will cooperate with Satan in somehow bringing fire down from heaven in the sight of the beast, the U.S.A. Both are beast powers--Satan being the dragon and the USA being the lamb-like beast. They will operate in concerted effort to deceive with miracles. Satan will cause all to worship the first beast, Rome, who will reach across the gulf to clasp hands with "lamb-like" protestant USA. Satan will persuade the U.S.A. lamb-like beast to enforce Sunday-sacredness in honor of the first beast and receive his mark--his counterfeit day. Because Devon Grey cannot understand the prophecy Ellen White is depicting, it is the height of personal ego for him to say it is she, rather than he, who is mistaken. He should give her the benefit of the doubt until his lesser spiritual discernment is capable of discerning the truth of the matter. We should all follow this same course when we are not able to understand and discern truth spoken by the Holy Spirit gift to the church.

Devon continues: 5) GC 54 shows the 42 month prophecy of Revelation 13:5 beginning in the sixth century. In 7BC 975, all the comments of Ellen on Revelation 13 point to the end of time, not the sixth century. In 1898 Ellen said that Daniel 7:25, a companion text to Revelation 13, was an event that was yet future. 6) GC 480 talks about 1844 being the time when "the judgment was set and the books opened." On page 666, less than 200 pages later, Ellen describes the same scene, but shows it taking place at the end of the millennium.

Ron Beaulieu responds: Ellen White clearly stated that certain prophesies of Daniel and Revelation will have a dual fulfillment. Revelation 13:3-5, involves a period of 1260 literal days (forty and two months--30 days to the month) AFTER THE WOUND IS HEALED, and of course the wound is not even yet fully healed and will not be until the papacy returns to its former wielding of power in getting Sunday-keeping enforced at penalty of death for violation of that false day of worship.
Ellen White's application of the 42 month prophecy as beginning in the sixth century, is a secondary dual, historic, day for a year, historic application of the prophecy. Of course Daniel 7:25, a companion text to Revelation 13:3-5, is applicable to Rome's ancient past record, as well as her future role after her wound is fully healed. This is a dual prophecy. Both are valid, but Devon Grey is apparently ignorant of this historic fact. So what does he do? What a lot of folk do who are ignorant of sufficient knowledge. They give themselves the benefit of the doubt, rather than the gift of prophecy to the church and the world.

Day for A Year Prophecy Versus Literal Days

Ellen White clearly stated that there would be no more prophetic time (day for a year) time after 1844. This is the only way to interpret her statement on this issue so that she does not contradict Revelation 13:3-5, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY LITERAL TIME.

As regards GC 480 wherein Ellen White speaks of the judgment being set and the books opened (the pre-Advent judgment), and on p. 666, describing the same scene but showing the judgment occurring at the end of the millennium, both are correct because Christ first judges and seals those who are sighing and crying for the abominations and afflicting themselves because of sin (Ezekiel 9), and then, at the end of the millennium when judgment will be administered by sentence of the guilty. Both are correct. It is the faulty understanding of the critic that is mistaken, not Ellen White.

Devon continues: As can be seen Ellen White did not always agree with what she said in other places. One reason for this is that she would have to change her ideas to advance in new light that was brought to her. Then too, she depended upon proofreaders and others to help her with the insertions in the books. If God was satisfied, why should any human try to find fault with any of the books? The purpose of any of these books is to lead people to Christ, and that they do admirably. Her book "Desire of Ages" about the life of Christ has been designated by the Library of Congress as the most profound book on this subject that they have. English teachers concluded that the language in that book is as perfect as it can be, and this from a 3rd grade education.

From the above quotes extracted from her various writings, the reader can see that Ellen White's work as a prophet was not always a pleasant experience. If she were not a true prophet, would not the enemy bless her endeavors to gain followers? This concludes our study in defense of Ellen White. The reader is asked to consider and weigh all the evidence we have presented that supports her messages as being of divine origin. Not once will you ever find her talking against the Word of God. The theme of her messages and instructions were only and always to establish a relationship with our Lord. Never did she try to draw people to herself or to look at her as someone special. These two last points speak the truth about her better than any thing else could.

May God bless you as you continue to seek and find the truth. If you have further questions please feel free to contact us.

Ron Beaulieu concludes: If you do not understand something that Ellen White has written--if it appears to contradict, lay it on the shelf and pray for discernment to correctly understand and relate what she has said. I have oft prayed for months for specific answers, and then received such exciting and obviously true answers that it was positively thrilling. I invite you to do the same instead of indicting the Spirit of Prophecy gift to the church as errant and mistaken.

God bless your discernment,

Ron Beaulieu