Tall, do you recall the time when we got into a heated debate because you were showing me verses from the Bible that are supposedly contradictory? You took the position that in several places the Bible is not consistent with itself, and even went as far as to argue that the writers weren't always consistent.
So now you try to use these arguments to refute the prophetic gift of Ellen White while readily excusing contradictions that inspired writers made in the Bible?
I find your double-standard to be quite interesting!
Yes, I do recall it. I am actually holding both to the same standard. We were discussing the texts by Thompson and Pippim looking at issues in the Scripture and Ellen White.
I don't hold to verbal inspiration of the Bible. Nor do I hold Ellen White to verbal inspiration either, as she does not even claim that she, or the Bible were verbally inspired. Therefore in the Bible when we have an instance where the signs on the cross say slightly different things, I am not stressed over it. Or if one list of items says slightly different things from the temple, I am not stressed over it, as we discussed that day.
In the same way, I am not overly stressed over such things as Ellen white putting Enoch instead of Adam at one point when the context makes it clear she meant Adam.
However, when she makes up things, such as the destruction of a city that the Bible says was spared, and that is seen later as existing, that is not the same thing as a transposed name or a different number on a list.
Or when she says that God used Miller's false, time-setting message to test people, that is not a little scribal blunder , but a whole frame of mind which disregards the words of Jesus on that point and attributes the mistakes of Miller to God.
So yes, I still look at the issues surrounding verbal and thought inspiration, and some of the errors that are attributed to EGW actually fall into that category. But there are others where that does not sufficiently explain the issue.
Now another factor which comes up is the difference between contradictions and additions.
Ellen White added many things to accounts of the Bible. And some I am a bit doubtful that they are accurate. But unless they outright contradict the text I don't think we can use that as evidence against her.
And we do see instances of inspired authors giving more details in the Scriptures. For instance, the author of Hebrews mentions that blood was brought into the whole temple during the dedication service, though the OT account only mentions oil being brought in and blood on the bronze altar. Now that is additional material. But that doesn't make it wrong.
Ellen White for instance says that Adam was more than twice as tall as men currently. Now does the Bible say that? No. Can I prove it was false, and use that against Ellen White? No because the Bible doesn't say one way or the other.
So additions of themselves I think do not disqualify. Outright contradictions that are not attributable to simply the process of inspiration are a different story.
In the same way using other people's work as a source when making an inspired work does not per se rule out someone's inspiration. Ellen using sources in the Great Controversy, as she admits, is not something that would rule her out as a prophet. Luke also used sources for his history. On the other hand if she claimed that information was from a vision and actually was just from contemporary work that might be different. So for instance, when her health reforms are held up as proof, but some of them seem to be more based on the health reformers of her day, that becomes an issue.
