Pointers for Revelation and Inspiration

1. The concept of Revelation

“Revelation" broadly refers to the process through which the contents of Scripture emerged in the
mind of prophets and apostles. Revelation is a cognitive process.
The noun “revelation” and the verb “to reveal” are used in theological as well as in secular language.
The basic meaning of the verb, which is derived from the Latin revelare, is to take away a covering, to
uncover or unveil something that is hidden; therefore, to make known what is secret or unknown. The
noun can refer to the act of revealing but also to that which has been revealed. In common language
many other words – such as “tell,” “make known,” “bring out into the open,” “bring to light” – are used to
express the same idea.
Two modes of Revelation:
(1) General Revelation
It can be defined as that revelation of God that is universal, accessible to all human beings
everywhere, by which God is known as Creator, Sustainer, and Lord of the entire
universe. As far as humanity is concerned, this general revelation is both external and
internal.
(2) Special Revelation
It is the entire process by which God has revealed Himself and His redemptive purpose for
the human race to and through Israel, the prophets, apostles, but supremely in Jesus
Christ. It is also the means by which He continues to reveal Himself through the
Scriptures under the illuminating and convicting power of the Holy Spirit, and through
the proclamation of the church to all nations on earth.
It is addressed to specific human beings and is not immediately accessible to all — here He
reveals Himself in a personal way to redeem humanity from sin and reconcile the world
to Himself.

2. The concept of Inspiration

"Inspiration," broadly speaking, refers to the process through which the contents in the mind of
prophets and apostles were communicated in oral or in written forms. Inspiration is mainly a linguistic
process.
While the concept is biblical, the word “inspiration” is not. While the word “inspiration” is not a
precise translation of any Greek word used in the Bible to describe the process by which Scripture
comes to the human mind, it may be appropriately used to represent a process in which the Holy Spirit
works on selected human beings, to move them to proclaim messages received from God.
“Inspiration” refers to the Holy Spirit’s work on these messengers or prophets, whether they spoke
or wrote. Because these people were “inspired” or “moved by the Holy Spirit” (2 Peter 1:21), their
utterances and writings may be considered inspired as well (2 Tim. 3:16).
While the word “inspiration” focuses primarily on the activity of the Holy Spirit, a careful study of
the biblical data makes it clear that both human and divine activity are involved in the process by which
the Scriptures came to be written.
The goal of inspiration is not to upgrade the human mode of thinking or of writing but to ensure
that writers do not replace God's truth with their own interpretations.

(1 of 7)
3. Verbal inspiration

As classical theologians maximized the role of divine activity in R-I, they were minimizing the role of
human agencies, seeing prophets and apostles merely as instruments God used to write the very words
of Scripture. Because God was believed to have written the words of Scripture, this notion, which led to
a high view of biblical authority, came to be known as the "verbal" theory of inspiration.
The words of the Bible are the words of God. This view builds on an extra-biblical philosophical
understanding of hermeneutics. The replacement of the biblical notion of God with the Greek idea of a
timeless God made the idea of divine sovereign providence an overpowering, all-encompassing causal
phenomenon.
The most noticeable hermeneutical effects of the verbal theory are recontextualization and
inerrancy.

4. Thought inspiration

There is little doubt that thoughts as well as words are involved in this process. Regardless of the
way the thoughts were received, the biblical writers emphasize that their words are words from God.

(1) Thought inspiration, as reflected by Adventist theologians noted above, involves positive and
negative points. On the positive side, for instance, it provides a middle way between modernistic non-
cognitive encounter revelation and absolutely inerrant classical verbal inspiration.
(2) Thought inspiration also has the positive effect of directing the interpreter's attention to the
weightier matters discussed in Scripture and away from minutiae.
(3) Finally, this view of inspiration has the obvious advantage of accounting for biblical phenomena
that do not fit within the verbal inspiration theory.
However, those reflections on thought inspiration have certain disadvantages. The thought-words
dichotomy leads to the claim that inspiration does not reach the words of Scripture. Unfortunately, this
claim and the thought-words dichotomy are not supported by Scripture, Ellen G. White, or philosophical
analysis.
Although thought inspiration accounts better for the phenomena of Scripture and Ellen G. White's
experience in writing her books than does verbal inspiration, a radical understanding of it fails to account
for the clear biblical claim that inspiration reaches the words (2 Tim 3:16).
Moreover, a detailed study of Ellen G. White's thought on inspiration seems to suggest that,
according to her, divine inspiration does reach the words and assures the "total trustworthiness of the
biblical record.”
When thought inspiration claims that divine assistance to the prophet does not reach the words it
is thereby limiting divine intervention to revelation. The practical problem with this view is that we have
no access to prophetic thought, which died with the prophets leaving only their fallible, human words.

4. Illumination

Simply put, illumination in the spiritual sense is “turning on the light” of understanding in some area.
The most basic level of enlightenment is the knowledge of sin, and without that knowledge, everything
else is pointless.

Illumination. Defined as the work of that same Holy Spirit who indicated God’s message to the
prophet by which He now enables the hearer or reader of the prophets words to comprehend the
spiritual truths and discern God’s message to himself.

(2 of 7)
5. The function of EG White’s writings

The writings of Ellen White, on the other hand, are viewed by Seventh-day Adventists as God’s
messages for a particular people—His *remnant church, at a particular time in history: the end time. Her
writings are not a new or additional standard of doctrine, but a help for the church in the time of the
end. Hence her writings have a different purpose from Scripture; they are the “lesser light to lead … to
the greater light” (CM 125).1

Mrs. White saw her writings as fulfilling eight functions, which could readily be subsumed under
three categories:
(A) To Direct Attention to the Bible:
1. To exalt the Bible
2. To attract minds to the Bible
3. To call attention to neglected truths
(B) To Aid in Understanding the Bible:
1. To further impress truths already revealed.
2. To awaken minds.
3. To simplify truths.
(C) To Help in Applying Bible Principles in Our Lives:
1. To bring out principles and help apply them.
2. To instruct in details.2

Based on what we have examined on the relationship between the Bible and Ellen White writings,
we can conclude that the following two extremes are to be avoided:
• To regard the writings of Ellen White as functioning on the canonical level identical with Scripture.
• To consider the writings of Ellen White as ordinary Christian literature
Now, there is an issue we need to discuss further. As mentioned in BRI's article, Adventists believe
that the Bible is the only standard of Christian faith and practice, that the Bible provides the sufficient
knowledge for the salvation of sinners, and that Ellen White writings are not essential for salvation. We
can conclude, therefore, that the primary function of the writings of Ellen White is not to provide the
knowledge of salvation.
EGW did not want people making her the major authority in their lives.
EGW rejected the infallible commentator approach to the use of her writings.
She pointed her readers to a study of the Bible to find out what its authors had to say, but she
regularly applied the principles of Scripture to her time and place.

6. Infallibility and inerrancy as it relates to the Bible and its authors

There are a number of differences or discrepancies in the extant Hebrew and Greek texts upon
which our Bible translations are based. … Some of these discrepancies may have perfectly good
explanations; other may be due to copyist’s mistakes or human frailties.
Do such minor discrepancies destroy our confidence in the Bible? No, unless we insist on a verbal
inspiration of Scripture, which claims that “all the words and all the verbal relationships are inspired by

1Pfandl, Gerhard. “Authority of Ellen G. White and Her Writings.” Edited by Denis Fortin, Jerry Moon, Michael W.
Campbell, and George R. Knight. The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 2013. (pp. 627-628)

2 T. H. Jemison, A Prophet Among You (PPPA, 1955).

(3 of 7)
God.” EGW stated that God “by His Holy Spirit, qualified men and enabled them to do His work. He
guided the mind in the selection of what to speak and what to write”
We cannot exclude the possibility of discrepancies or a lack of precision in minor details in the text
– details that could be left out without changing the overall reliability of the historical records or the
veracity of the theological message.

7. The meaning of “Sola Scriptura” in the Adventist perspective

Belief that Scripture is the final and only infallible authority for the Christian in all matters of faith
and practice.
The principle of the supreme authority of the Scriptures is often expressed in the Latin phrase sola
scriptura, “by Scripture alone.” In other words, only in the Scriptures has God committed to the human
race in written form the supreme and authoritative revelation of Himself and His will, by which
everything else is to be tested. No other holy books, sacred histories, ancient traditions, ecclesiastical
pronouncements, or creedal statements may be accorded authority equal to that of the Bible.3
“The Bible, and the Bible only, as the rule of faith and duty”. The Bible alone is to be the “standard
by which all teaching and experience must be tested,” (GC vii), and its authority is to take precedence
over the deductions of science, human reason, philosophy, tradition, or extrabiblical revelation. The Bible
alone is all-sufficient to provide knowledge of every truth essential for salvation.4

8. The meaning of “Tota Scriptura” in the Adventist perspective

A second general principle of biblical interpretation is the totality of Scripture (tota scriptura). It is
not enough to affirm the primacy of Scripture. … All Scripture—not just part—is inspired by God. This
certainly includes the whole OT, the canonical Scriptures of the apostolic church. … A corollary of the
tota scriptura principle is that all Scripture is an indivisible, indistinguishable union of the divine and the
human.5
Accompanying sola scriptura is the principle of tota scriptura: the whole Bible, as an inseparable union
of the divine and human, is equivalent to the Word of God. Since the whole Bible is ultimately the
product of one divine Author, there is a fundamental unity and consistency among all the various parts of
Scripture, even as there is a progressive unfolding of truth. Because of this analogy (or harmony) of
Scripture, the Bible is its own expositor (i.e., the Protestant principle of scriptura sui ipsius interpres): all
that the Bible says on a given subject is to be taken into account, one scripture being allowed to interpret
another. There is clarity in Scripture, so that it may be understood by all, both scholar and common
people alike. The language of Scripture “should be explained according to its obvious meaning, unless a
symbol or figure is employed” (GC 599).6

3Dederen, Raoul. Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology. Vol. 12. Electronic ed. Commentary Reference
Series. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2001. (p. 42)

4Davidson, Richard M. “Bible, Interpretation Of.” Edited by Denis Fortin, Jerry Moon, Michael W. Campbell, and
George R. Knight. The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association,
2013. (p. 651)

5Dederen, Raoul. Handbook of Seventh-Day Adventist Theology. Vol. 12. Electronic ed. Commentary Reference
Series. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2001. (p.62)
6Davidson, Richard M. “Bible, Interpretation Of.” Edited by Denis Fortin, Jerry Moon, Michael W. Campbell, and
George R. Knight. The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association,
2013. (p. 651)
(4 of 7)
9. Encounter revelation

Based on complex philosophical arguments. Friedrich Schleiermacher (1768-1834), the father of

modern theology, proposed a blueprint that later proponents of encounter revelation would follow.
Briefly put, revelation is a divine-human encounter devoid of the impartation of knowledge. "Thus,
the content of revelation is regarded no longer as knowledge about God, not even information from God,
but God Himself." Consequently, not a single word or thought that we find in Scripture comes from God.
Encounter revelation is the opposite of verbal inspiration. If the contents of Scripture do not come
from God, then from where? The answer is simple: from the historically conditioned response of human
beings to the personal non-cognitive encounter with God. The Bible is a human book like any other book.
The study of how the contents of Scripture originated is left to historical investigation.
According to this view, "inspiration" did not reach the personal level of prophetic thoughts or
words directly but influenced the social level of the community within which the authors of Scripture
lived and wrote. Not surprisingly, Scripture's contents remain human, not divine.
Encounter revelation suggests that the divine-human relation (encounter) takes place not at the
cognitive but at an "existential" or inner "personal" level, through the soul. Thus, revelation is a divine-
human encounter, real and objective, but involving absolutely no communication from God.

10. Adventist understanding of the Remnant of Rev 12:17

There are two possible interpretations on the "testimony of ,Jesus Christ” (Seventh-day Adventist
Bible Commentary, 7:81 2). One view sees it as the "testimony" (or "witness") Christians bear concerning
Jesus, and the other as the "testimony" (or "witness") that originates with Jesus and is revealed to His
church through the prophets. Adventists understand that the "testimony of Jesus Christ” mentioned in
Rev 12:17 is the latter, for Rev 19:10 says, "The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
A comparison with ch. 19:10 clearly favors the latter interpretation. There the “testimony of Jesus”
is defined as the “spirit of prophecy,” meaning that Jesus is witnessing to the church through the medium
of prophecy.

11. Tests of a true prophet

Prophets Share Common Characteristics:

(1) Prophets are very aware of a supernatural Person communicating with them; they have a
sense of worthlessness.
(2) Prophets often lose their strength.
(3) Prophets at times fall to the ground in a deep sleep.
(4) Prophets hear and see events in faraway places, as if they are actually present.
(5) Prophets at times are unable to speak, but when their lips are touched, they are able to
speak.
(6) Prophets often do not breathe.
(7) Prophets are oblivious to their surroundings though often their eyes are open.
(8) Prophets at times are given extra strength while in vision.
(9) Prophets receive renewed strength and breath when the vision is over.
(10)Prophets occasionally experience temporary physical trauma following the vision.
Not all of these physical characteristics accompany each vision. Thus, physical phenomena should
not be used as the sole test of whether a prophet is genuine. Moreover, they can be easily counterfeited.
The Scriptures do not present them as tests. However, the presence of such characteristics should be

(5 of 7)
considered normal for anyone who indeed claims to “speak for God.” Though physical aspects are helpful
in considering a prophet’s credentials, other criteria are much more reliable, as we shall now observe.

Tests of a Genuine Prophet

(1) Tests of Fulfilled Predictions
(2) Agreement with the Bible
(3) The Orchard Test
(4) Unequivocal Witness to the Divine-human Nature of Jesus Christ

13. Role of the Prophet

The prophet’s work was twofold: to receive the divine message and to deliver that message
faithfully. These aspects are reflected in the three Hebrew words for “prophet.” To emphasize their role in
listening to God’s will as it was revealed to them, the Hebrew writer used chozeh or ro’eh, translated as
“seer.” The Hebrew word nabi, (the most frequently used Hebrew word for prophet) describes prophets
as they convey their message through speech or in writing.
Prophets clearly recognize the presence and power of the Holy Spirit in their role as God’s
messengers.

14. EGW writings in relation to the Scriptures

A correct understanding of Ellen White’s relationship to the Bible is essential for understanding all
of her other counsel. To Ellen White the Bible was absolutely central, it was to be “the only rule of faith
and doctrine” (RH, July 17, 1888). “Our position and faith is in the Bible,” she wrote in 1894. “And never
do we want any soul to bring in the *Testimonies ahead of the Bible” (Ev 256).
Ellen White never tired of uplifting the Bible.
For her the centrality of the Bible was based upon the fact that it contained everything men and
women needed to know for salvation. She consistently held that all Christian teaching, including her own,
needed to be tested by the teachings of the Bible itself (GC vii).
Ellen White believed that her mission was to help people understand the principles of the Bible for
their lives.
The primary role of Ellen White’s writings was not to give new light, but to lead people back to the
Bible and to help them apply Bible principles to their specific context.7

15. How to interpret the writings of EG White

• Consider the Historical Context

• Study the Immediate Context
• Study the Larger Context
• Look for Principles
• Look for Growth in Her Understanding
• Acknowledge Limitations

In the interpretation of Ellen G. White we need to apply to her writings the same hermeneutical
principles that we use for Scripture. In particular, we need to take into consideration the time and the
place in which a statement was written and look at the immediate and larger context of a passage. The

7Knight, George R. “Bible, Ellen G. White’s Relationship to The.” Edited by Denis Fortin, Jerry Moon, Michael W.
Campbell, and George R. Knight. The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia. Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 2013. (pp. 647-648)
(6 of 7)
immediate context helps us to see what she really is addressing, and the larger context makes us aware
of what else she has written on a particular topic.
Because these principles of hermeneutics often are forgotten or not applied,the writings of Ellen G.
White are frequently misused. Sentences are taken out of context, and people maintain that she teaches
something that in fact, she does not. By not using proper hermeneutical principles, that which was
intended to be a blessing for the church may become a bone of contention and a source of division in the
church.

16. Explain the divine and human element in the Scriptures

The human and divine elements in Scripture, the written word of God (Heb 4:12), are inextricably
bound together just as they are in Jesus, the incarnate “Word of God” (Rev 19:13). Just as Jesus, the
incarnate Word of God, was fully God and fully man (John 1:1–3, 14) so the written word is an
inseparable union of the human and the divine.8
Because in Scripture God has incarnated His thoughts in human thought and writing, the human and
divine elements are inseparable. Consequently, we should never attempt to distinguish between divine
and human contributions in the conception and in the writing of Scripture.
When we study the Bible, a realization of its divine origin and authority as well as of its human
character is of crucial importance. If we a priori reject the possibility of supernatural revelation, the Bible
will be seen as a purely human product, and our interpretation will be biased from the outset. If, on the
other hand, we lose sight of its human shape, we are in danger of interpreting its statements in an
uncritical, dogmatic manner. In view of their divine-human character, our study of the Scriptures should
be conducted in a spirit of humility as well as honest inquiry, with earnest prayers that the Holy Spirit, the
Spirit of truth, may guide us “into all the truth” (John 16:13).

8 Davidson, Richard M. “Who Is the Author of the Bible?” Pages 1–5 in Interpreting Scripture: Bible Questions and
Answers. Edited by Gerhard Pfandl. Vol. 2. Biblical Research Institute Studies. Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research
Institute, 2010. (p. 3)
(7 of 7)