| . |
Arthur
L. White
In
her writings of the Holy Scriptures Ellen White made use of the various
English translations of the Holy Scriptures that were available in her
day. She does not, however, comment directly on the relative merits of
these versions, but it is clear from her practice that she recognized
the desirability of making use of the best in all versions of the Bible.
What she has written lays a broad foundation for an open-minded approach
to the many renderings of the Sacred Text.
As
a part of the great controversy vision of March 4, 1858, she was given
a view of the preservation of the Bible, which she presented in the chapter,
"Death Not Eternal Life in Misery" (Early Writings pages 218-222). This early statement is significant:
"Then
I saw that God knew that Satan would try every art to destroy man; therefore
He had caused His word to be written out, and had made His purposes in
regard to the human race so plain that the weakest need not err. After
having given His word to man, He had carefully preserved it from destruction
by Satan or his angels, or by any of his agents or representatives. While
other books might be destroyed, this was to be immortal. And near the
close of time, when the delusions of Satan should increase, it was to
be so multiplied that all who desired might have a copy, and, if they
would, might arm themselves against the deceptions and lying wonders of
Satan.
"I
saw that God had especially guarded the Bible, yet when copies of it were
few, learned men had in some instances changed the words, thinking that
they were making it more plain, when in reality they were mystifying that
which was plain, by causing it to lean to their established views, which
were governed by tradition. But I saw that the Word of God, as a whole,
is a perfect chain, one portion linking into and explaining another. True
seekers for truth need not err; for not only is the Word of God plain and
simple in declaring the way of life, but the Holy Spirit is given as a guide
in understanding the way to life therein revealed."EW 220, 221
(1SG 116, 117).
On
Mrs. White's attitude toward the English revision of the 1880's, her son,
W. C. White, reports:
"Before
the revised version was published, there leaked out from the committee,
statements regarding changes which they intended to make. Some of these
I brought to Mother's attention, and she gave me very surprising information
regarding these Scriptures. This led me to believe that the revision,
when it came to hand, would be a matter of great service to us."W.
C. White, DF 579 (1931); Ministry,
April, 1947, p. 17.
It
is significant that almost immediately after the appearance of the English
Revised Version, Mrs. White made use of it in
her books, as she did also of the American Standard Revision when it became
available in 1901. It is also significant that four major statements from
Mrs. White's pen concerning the Bible and the Bible writers were penned
during this decade of the appearance of the revised versions of the New
and Old Testaments.
The
revision of the New Testament was published in 1881, the revision of the
Old Testament in 1885. It is of interest to note that during the decade
of the revision, a number of articles appeared in the Review and Herald
in a rather casual way, keeping before Seventh-day Adventists what was
involved in the revisionthe progress of the work, its reception,
its relationship to the King James Version, and its value to us. Most
of the articles were reprints from other journals:
1.
March 11, 1880 (p.
167), "The Revised Bible."
2.
February 8, 1881(p. 87), "Different
Versions of the Bible"A historical review.
3.
June 14, 1881(p. 377), "The
Revised Greek Testament"A discussion of the Greek texts used
in the revision of the New Testament.
4.
June 28, 1881(p. 9),
"The New Version"An editorial, probably by Uriah
Smith, representing a favorable reaction to the new version.
5.
March 20, 1883(p. 186), "The
New Version vs. the Old"W. H. Littlejohn answers questions,
with favorable reaction.
6.
October 21, 1884 (p. 666), "The
Revision of the Old Testament Ready for the Press."
7.
February 8, 1887 (p.
83), "The Revised Version"A recommendation from F. D.
Starr.
8.
June 11, 1889 (p.
384), "Revising the Scriptures"A discussion by L. A. Smith
of work undertaken by the Baptists to get a satisfactory translation of
texts on baptism.
Apart
from these articles, there is little or nothing in the columns of the
Review on the revised versions of the Bible
of 1881-1885 and 1901.
Between
the years 1886 and 1889, however, Mrs. White penned the four comprehensive
and illuminating article on the nature and authority
of the Holy Scriptures referred to above. These are as follows:
1.
In 1886, "Objections to the Bible," Ms 24,1886
(1SM 19-21).
2.
In 1888, Introduction to The Great Controversy,
v-vii.
3.
In 1888, "The Guide Book," Ms 16,1888
(1SM 15-18).
4.
In 1889, "The Mysteries of the Bible a Proof
of Its Inspiration"5T 698-711.
From
these articles we cull a few excerpts which make clear her understanding
of the writing and preservation of the Biblical text. These considerations
evidently prepared the way for her to make use of various versions and
translations of the Scriptures.
1.
Statements Made in 1886Objections to the Bible
"Human
minds vary. The minds of different education and thought receive different
impressions of the same words, and it is difficult for one mind to give
to one of a different temperament, education, and habits of thought by
language exactly the same idea as that which is clear and distinct in
his own mind. Yet to honest men, right-minded
men, he can be so simple and plain as to convey
his meaning for all practical purposes. . . .
"The
writers of the Bible had to express their ideas in human language. It
was written by human men. These men were inspired of the Holy Spirit.
Because of the imperfections of human understanding of language, or the
perversity of the human mind, ingenious in evading truth, many read and
understand the Bible to please themselves. It
is not that the difficulty is in the Bible. Opposing politicians argue
points of law in the statute book, and take opposite views in their application
and in these laws. . . .
"The
Bible is not given to us in grand superhuman language. Jesus, in order
to reach man where he is, took humanity. The Bible must be given in the
language of men. Everything that is human is imperfect. Different meanings
are expressed by the same word; there is not one word for each distinct
idea. The Bible was given for practical purposes. . . .
"The
Bible is written by inspired men, but it is not God's mode of thought
and expression. It is that of humanity. God, as a writer, is not represented.
Men will often say such an expression is not like God. But God has not
put Himself in words, in logic, in rhetoric, on trial in the Bible. The
writers of the Bible were God's penmen, not His pen. Look at the different
writers."Ms 24, 1886 (1SM 19-21).
2.
Statements Made in 1888lntroduction to
The Great Controversy
"The
Bible points to God as its author; yet it was written by human hands;
and in the varied style of its different books it presents the characteristics
of several writers. The truths revealed are all given by inspiration of
God' (2 Tim. 3:16); yet thye are expressed in the words of
men. The Infinite One, by His Holy Spirit, has shed light into the minds
and hearts of His servants. He has given dreams and visions, symbols and
figures; and those to whom the truth was thus revealed have themselves
embodied the thought in human language.
"The
Ten Commandments were spoken by God Himself, and were written by His own
hand. They are of divine, and not of human composition. But the Bible,
with its God-given truths expressed in the language of men, presents a
union of the divine and the human. Such a union existed in the nature
of Christ, who was the Son of God and the Son of man. Thus it is true
of the Bible, as it was of Christ, that the Word was made flesh, and dwelt
among us' (John 1:14).
Written
in different ages, by men who differed widely in rank and occupation,
and in mental and spiritual endowments, the books of the Bible present
a wide contrast in style, as well as a diversity
in the nature of the subjects unfolded. Different forms of expression
are employed by different writers; often the same truth is more strikingly
presented by one than by another. . . .
"God
has been pleased to communicate His truth to the world by human agencies,
and He Himself, by His Holy Spirit, qualified men and enabled them to
do this work. He guided the mind in the selection of what to speak and
what to write. The treasure was entrusted to earthen vessels, yet it is,
nonetheless, from Heaven. The testimony is conveyed through the imperfect
expression of human language, yet it is the testimony of God; and the
obedient, believing child of God beholds in it the glory of a divine power,
full of grace and truth.
In
His Word, God has committed to men the knowledge necessary for salvation.
The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative, infallible
revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the revealer
of doctrines, and the test of experience. Every scripture inspired of
God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for
instruction which is in righteousness; that the man of God may be complete,
furnished completely unto every good work' (2 Tim. 3:16, 17, RV.The
Great Controversy Introduction vi-vii. (Written
at Healdsburg, California, May, 1888.)
3.
Statements Made in 1888"The Guide Book"
This
Holy Book has withstood the assaults of Satan, who has united with evil
men to make everything of divine character shrouded in clouds and darkness.
But the Lord has preserved this Holy Book by His own miraculous power
in its present shapea chart or guidebook to the human family to
show them the way to heaven. . . .
Some
look to us gravely and say, Don't you think there
might have been some mistake in the copyist or in the translators?' This
is all probable, and the mind that is so narrow that it will hesitate
and stumble over this possibility or probability would be just as ready
to stumble over the mysteries of the Inspired Word, because their feeble
minds cannot see through the purposes of God. Yes, they would just as
easily stumble over plain facts that the common mind will accept, and
discern the Divine, and to which God's utterance is plain and beautiful,
full of marrow and fatness. All the mistakes will not cause trouble to
one soul, or cause any feet to stumble, that would not manufacture difficulties
from the plainest revealed truth.
God
committed the preparation of His divinely inspired Word to finite man.
This Word arranged into books, the Old and New Testaments, is the guidebook
to the inhabitants of a fallen world, bequeathed to them that, by studying
and obeying the directions, not one soul would list its way to heaven.
. . .
I
take the Bible just as it is, as the Inspired Word. I believe its utterances
in an entire Bible. Men arise who think they find something to criticize
in God's Word. They lay it bare before others as evidence of superior
wisdom. These men are, many of them, smart men, learned men; they have
eloquence and talent; the whole lifework is to unsettle minds in regard
to the inspiration of the Scriptures. They influence many to see as they
do. And the same work is passed on from one to another, just as Satan
designed it should be, until we may see the full meaning of the words
of Christ, When the Son of man cometh shall He find faith on the earth?'
(Luke 18:8). . . .
Men
should let God take care of his own Book, His Living Oracles, as He has
done for ages. They begin to question some parts of revelation, and pick
flaws in the apparent inconsistencies of this statement and that statement.
Beginning at Genesis they give up that which
they deem questionable, and their minds lead on, for Satan will lead to
any length they may follow in their criticism, and they see something
to doubt in the whole Scriptures. Their faculties of criticism become
sharpened by exercise, and they can rest on nothing with a certainty.
You try to reason with these men, but your time is lost. They will exercise
their power of ridicule even upon the Bible. They even become mockers,
and they would be astonished if you put it to them in that light.
"Brethren,
cling to your Bible, as it reads, and stop your criticisms in regard to
its validity, and obey the Word, and not one of you will be lost. The
ingenuity of men has been exercised for ages to measure the Word of God
by their finite minds and limited comprehension. If the Lord, the Author
of the Living oracles, would throw back the curtain and reveal His wisdom
and His glory before them, they would shrink into nothingness and exclaim
as did Isaiah, I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of
a people of unclean lips' (Isa. 6:5)."Ms 16, 1888; (1 SM 15-18). (Written at Minneapolis, Minnesota, in the autumn of 1888.)
4.
Statements Made in 1889"The Mysteries of the Bible"
"All
who come to the Bible with a teachable and prayerful spirit, to study
its utterances as the word of God, will receive
divine enlightenment. There are many things apparently difficult or obscure
which God will make plain and simple to those who thus seek an understanding
of them. . . .
"Many
feel that a responsibility rests upon them to explain every seeming difficulty
in the Bible in order to meet the cavils of skeptics and infidels. But
in trying to explain that which they but imperfectly understand, they
are in danger of confusing the minds of others in reference to points
that are clear and easy to be understood. This is not our work. Nor
should be lament that these difficulties exist, but accept them as permitted
by the wisdom of God. It is our duty to receive His Word, which
is plain on every point essential to the salvation of the soul, and practice
its principles in our life, teaching them to others both by precept and
example.
"My
brethren, let the Word of God stand just as it is. Let not human wisdom
presume to lessen the force of one statement of the Scriptures."5T
704-706, 711.
Some
Later comments1889 and 1901
"God
had faithful witnesses to whom He committed the truth, and who preserved
the Word of God. The manuscripts of the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures have
been preserved through the ages by a miracle of God."Letter
32, 1899.
"The
Lord speaks to human beings in imperfect speech, in order that the degenerate
senses, the dull, earthly perception of human
beings may comprehend His words. Thus is shown God's condescension. He
meets fallen human beings where they are. The Bible, perfect as it is
in its simplicity, does not answer to the great ideas of God, for infinite
ideas cannot be perfectly embodied in finite vehicles of thought. Instead
of the expressions of the Bible being exaggerated, as many people suppose,
the strong expressions break down before the magnificence of the thought,
though the divine penman selected the most expressive language through
which to convey the truths of higher education. Sinful beings can only
bear to look upon a shadow of the brightness of heaven's glory."1
SM 22.
Mrs.
White's Use of the Revised Versions
As
noted earlier, Mrs. White occasionally used the Revised Version renderings,
also the marginal reading of texts, in nearly all of her books published
after 1885, the year of the appearance of the complete English Revised
Version.
In
The Great Controversy, published
in 1888, seven texts from the newly issued revision were employed, and
she also used the marginal rendering of eight other texts. The proportion
of Revised Version and marginal rendering of texts is very small when
we consider that there are more than 850 scriptures quoted in The Great Controversy, or an average of a little more than one scripture
text to a page, whereas there is approximately one Revised Version rendering
and one marginal rendering for each one hundred pages. In 1901 the American
Revised Version came from the press, and from that time forward we find
that Mrs. White occasionally employed both the English Revised and the
American Revised versions.
In
1911, when The Great Controversy
was reset, Mrs. White retained six of the seven texts previously quoted
from the English Revised Version. For the other text she substituted the
American Revised rendering. The eight marginal renderings were used as
in the earlier edition.
In
the publication of The Ministry
of Healing (1905) Mrs. White employed eight texts from the English
Revised Version, 55 from the American Revised Version, two from Leeser,
and four from Noyes, in addition to seven marginal renderings.
Other
volumes in which Revised Version texts frequently appear are Patriarchs and Prophets (1890); Steps to Christ ( 1892); Thoughts From the Mount of Blessing (1896);
The Desire of Ages (1898); Education (1903); and Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8 (1904).
The
E. G. White books using a few Revised Version or marginal renderings are
Christ's Object Lessons (1900); Testimonies for the Church, vol. 7 (1902);
Testimonies for the Church,
vol. 9 (1909); The Acts of the Apostles
(1911); Counsels to Parents, Teachers,
and Students (1913); Gospel
Workers (1915); and Prophets
and Kings (1917).
Patriarchs
and Prophets (1890) also contains two renderings from the Bernard translation, and at
least one from the Boothroyd Version. Education (1903) contains at least one
rendering from the Rotherham translation.
In
the five volumes of the Conflict of the Ages Series, we find the revised
versions quoted. As might be expected, those volumes that enter into an
exposition of Bible truth dealing with points of doctrine or the teachings
of Christ, contain more texts quoted from the revised versions
than do volumes of counsel to the church and those presenting largely
historical description. In the three-volume Comprehensive
Index to the Writings of Ellen G. White use of revised versions is
indicated in the Scripture Index.
As
to Mrs. White's attitude toward the revisions of 1885 and 1901, and as
to her own use of these in preaching and writing, her son, W. C. White,
who was closely associated with her in her public ministry and in the
preparation and publication of her books, wrote in 1931:
"I
do not know of anything in the E. G. White writings, nor can I remember
of anything in Sister White's conversations, that would intimate that
she felt that there was any evil in the use of the Revised Version. .
. .
"When
the first revision was published, I purchased a good copy and gave it
to Mother. She referred to it occasionally, but never used it in her preaching.
Later on, as manuscripts were prepared for her new books and for revised
editions of books already in print, Sister White's attention was called
from time to time by myself and Sister Marian
Davis, to the fact that she was using texts which were much more clearly
translated in the Revised Version. Sister White studied each one carefully,
and in some cases she instructed us to use the Revised Version. In other
cases she instructed us to adhere to the Authorized Version.
"When
Testimonies for the Church,
vol. 8, was printed and it seemed desirable to make some lengthy quotations
from the Psalms, it was pointed out to Sister White that the Revised Version
of these Psalms was preferable, and that by using the form of blank verse
the passages were more readable. Sister White gave the matter deliberate
consideration, and instructed us to use the Revised Version. When you
study these passages you will find that in a number of places where the
Revised Version is largely used, the Authorized Version is used where
translation seems to be better.
"We
cannot find in any of Sister White's writings, nor do I find in my memory,
any condemnation of the American Revised Version of the Holy Scriptures.
Sister White's reasons for not using the A.R.V. in the pulpit are as follows:
There
are many persons in the congregation who remember the words of the texts
we might use as they are presented in the Authorized Version, and to read
from the Revised Version would introduce perplexing questions in their
minds as to why the wording of the text had been changed by the revisers
and as to why it was being used by the speaker.' "She did not advise
me in a positive way not to use the A.R.V., but she intimated to me quite
clearly that it would be better not to do so, as the use of the different
wording brought perplexity to the older members of the congregation."White
Estate DF 579; Ministry, April, 1947, pp. 17, 18.
The
extracts quoted above reveal the position of Ellen White on such questions
as the transmission of the Sacred Text, the union of the divine and the
human in the written record of God's revelation to man, and also as to
her relation to the various translations of the Holy Scriptures.
December
9, 1953
Ellen
G. White Estate Washington, D. C.
Revised May, 1991
|
. |