The Visions of E.G. White Not of God

Chapter 2

By Snook and Brinkerhoff, 1866


They Teach Doctrines Contrary To The Bible, Absurd, Inconsistent And Contradictory

These visions teach that the Negro race is not human. This charge they deny, but we will let the reader decide for himself. Here is what she says; "Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species, and in certain races of men."—Sp. Gifts. Vol. 3, p. 75. But what are we to understand by certain races of men? She has not informed us in her writings, but left us to fix the stigma of amalgamation where we may see fit. But the interpretation has come to light. She told it to her husband, and he made it known to Eld. Ingraham, and he divulged the secret to the writer, that Sister White had seen that God never made the Darkey. Paul says,
"And hath made of one bleed all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth. Acts 17:26.
Which shall we believe, Paul or E. G. White? I beg leave to believe the Apostle. I must believe that the colored man is a creature of God. If he is not, why preach to him and try to save him. Oh shame on such visions! Is not the poor Negro debased low enough with chains and shackles, without depriving him of the honor of being a creature of God, a human being?

She Teaches Contrary To The Bible On The Subject Of Immortality That Even The Endless Life In The Eternal State May Cease Or Waste Away. She says,
"In order for man to possess an endless life, he must continue to eat of the fruit of the tree of life. Deprived of that tree, his life would gradually wear out. "—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 64.

Questions.—

  1. How can an endless life cease? Is not such an idea destructive of Paul's doctrine of immortality.—1Cor. 15:31-54.
  2. If the endless life can be perpetuated only by eating of the fruit of the tree of life, upon what principle has the Devil lived for the last six thousand years? Has he had access to that tree?
  3. If the endless life may fail and wear out, was not our Lord a false teacher when he said, "Neither can they die any more, for they are equal unto the angels, and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.—Luke, 20:36.

Her Visions On Slavery In the United States Have Been Proven False By Recent Facts.

"Then commenced the jubilee when the land should rest. I saw the pious slave rise in triumph and victory and shake off the chains that bound him, while his wicked master was in confusion and knew not what to do, for the wicked could not understand the voice of God. Soon appeared the great white cloud." —Ex. View, p. 18.

Again she says, "It looked to me like an impossibility now for slavery to be done away."—Test. No. 7. p. 19, 1862. But slavery is now abolished by the United States, and there is not a slave holder in our government according to the Constitution. These visions therefore have failed and these prophesying are false, such as we are admonished to beware of.

She Teaches That The Sabbath Was Not A Test Prior to 1844, which is contrary to the Bible. She says,

"The time for the commandments of God to shine out with all their importance, and for God's people (not sinners, Snook) to be tried on the Sabbath truth, was when the door was opened in the most Holy Place of the heavenly sanctuary. This door was not opened until the mediation of Jesus was finished in the Holy Place of the sanctuary in 1844. I saw that the present test on the Sabbath could not come until the mediation of Jesus in the Holy Place was finished."

Christians who fell asleep before the door was opened in the Most Holy—and had not kept the Sabbath, now rest in the hope, for they had not the light and the test on the Sabbath, which we now have, since that door was opened.— Ex. Views. p. 24-25.

Questions.—

  1. Have not God's commands ever been a test?
  2. Was not the Sabbath a test to all who saw the light prior to 1844, and is it a test to any others since then?
  3. Did not those who lived prior to 1844 have the light of the Bible on the Sabbath? Have we any better light since that date?

Her Visions Are Contradictory And, Opposed to The Bible On The Subject Of Meats For Food. That we may make their changes and inconsistencies here appear in their true character, we will, 1st. show the position of Eld. White, who leads out on all these matters. He says,

"Some of our good brethren have added swine's flesh to the catalogue of things forbidden by the Holy Ghost, when the Apostles and Elders assembled at Jerusalem. But we feel called upon to protest against such a course, as being contrary to the plain teaching of the holy scriptures. Shall we lay a greater burden on the disciples than seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ? God forbid. Their decision being right, settled the question with them, and was a cause of rejoicing among the churches, and it should forever settle the question with us."—Review, Vol. 5, No. 18.
Mrs. White, during the same time, believed and taught to the same effect, "Some have gone too far in the eating question. They have taken a rigid course and lived so very plain, that their health has suffered. I was referred back to Rochester. I saw that when we lived there we did not eat nourishing food as we should, and disease nearly carried us to the grave. * * All this is outside of the word of God. ... If God requires his people to abstain from swine's flesh he will convict them of the matter. If this is a duty of the church to abstain from swine's flesh, God will discover it to more than two or three. He will teach his church their duty."—Test No. 5, p. 27-29, now suppressed. 1859.

What does she mean by nourishing food, above? Answer. She says,

"We could not eat meat or butter and were obliged to abstain from all greasy food. Take these from a poor man's table and it leaves a very spare diet. Our labors were so great that we needed nourishing food."—Vol. 2, p. 144.
Again, when writing to a sister who was fanatical on the pork question, she said,
"Dear sister I felt sorry for you, as I read your letter. The Lord has shown me two or three years since, that the use of swine's flesh was no test, that it was not sinning against God to use it. Now dear sister if it is your husband's wish to use Swine's flesh, you should be perfectly clear to use it." We will hear her again in 1864 she says, "God gave man no permission to eat animal food until after the flood. Everything had been destroyed upon which man could subsist, and therefore the Lord in their necessity, gave Noah permission to eat of the clean animals which he had taken with him into the Ark. But Animal food was not the most healthy article of food for man. After the flood the people ate largely of animal food. And he permitted that long-lived race to eat animal food to shorten their sinful lives. But God never designed the swine to be eaten under any circumstances."—Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 4 p. 121.

Notes:

  1. If God gave Noah permission to eat of animal food, merely, because he was out of vegetables, would he not have limited the permit by the time he could raise a supply of potatoes, beans, and such things as would be better for food?
  2. If animal food is not the best for man, why did not God instruct Noah to take into the Ark, a sufficiency of vegetables to last him through? Could he not have lived upon the vegetables that were required for many of them to live upon?
  3. If God permitted the wicked to eat meat to shorten their lives, why did he permit Noah to do the same thing? Why did righteous Abraham kill the calf, good and tender and feed the angels upon it if meat is such bad food?
  4. Do not the foregoing visions indicate that we are living in the time when some should give heed to seducing Spirits, and forbid to use meats, which God has created to be received with thanksgiving by them who know the truth (see 1 Tim. 4:1-4)
  5. Seeing that the same Prophetess has taught that swine's flesh was nourishing food, and that she also denounced as fanatics those who opposed its use, and that now she teaches that God never designed its use under any circumstances, and that she goes even farther, and discourages the use of all animal food, we must say that God is not the author of her visions.

Her Visions Are Contradictory In Regard To The 144,000. She first taught that they were composed of the Saints that will live till Jesus comes.

"Soon we heard the voice of God like many waters, which gave us the day and hour of Jesus coming. ... The living Saints, 144,000 in number, knew and understood the voice. Then Jesus silver trumpet sounded as he descended. He gazed on the grave of the sleeping Saints and cried, awake, awake, awake. The graves opened and the dead came up clothed with immortality. The 144-000 shouted halleluia as they recognized their friends who had been torn from them by death, and in the same moment we were changed and caught up together with them."—Ex. Views. p. 11-13.
She now teaches that those who die under what they call the third angel's message will be resurrected before Christ comes, and will take their places among the 144,000.
"When the voice of God came, the graves were shaken open, and those who died in faith under the third angel's message, came forth from their dusty beds glorified to hear the covenant of peace." Following this is the general resurrection. She says, "The earth mightily shook as the voice of the Son of God called forth the sleeping saints. They responded to the call and came forth clothed with glorious immortality crying victory, victory, over death and the grave."—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 205-8.
There are too many resurrections here to accord with the Bible, and besides, the vision is opposed to itself.

Contradictions And Inconsistencies.

  1. 1. She says:
    "In the time of trouble we all fled from the cities and villages, but were pursued by the wicked, who entered the houses of the saints with the sword. They raised the sword to kill us, but it broke and fell as powerless as a straw."—Ex. Views, p. 17.

    "I saw the saints leaving the cities and villages, and associating in companies together, and living in the most solitary places."—Vol. 1. p. 201.

    This is understood to be the condition of the saints at the coming of Christ. Jesus teaches a different doctrine, He says,
    "I tell you that in the night there shall be two men in one bed, the one shall be taken and the other left: two women shall be grinding at the mill, the one shall be taken and the other left."— Luke 17, 31-35.
  2. Speaking of the Magicians of Egypt, she says, "The magician's rods did become serpents, but Aaron's rod swallowed up theirs."—Test No. 7, p. 57. Contradiction, "They did not really cause their rods to become serpents."—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 3. p. 205. In the last clause she contradicts Exodus 7, 11-12. For they cast down every man his rod and they became serpents, but Aaron's rod swallowed up their rods."

  3. She taught contradictory in regard to prayer for the sick. "If any among us are sick, let us not dishonor God by applying to earthly physicians, but apply to the God of Israel. If we follow his directions the sick will be healed." Visions Published By James White, Topsham, Me., Jan. 31, 1847.

  4. In 1869, she saw that many, as their last resort follow the directions in the word of God and requested the prayers of the elders of the church for their restoration to health. God does not see fit to answer the prayers of such. —Vol. 4. p. 44.

  5. "For seven days these animals were coming into the ark. ... He (the angel) closes that massive outer door, and then takes his course upward to heaven again. Seven days were the family of Noah in the ark before the rain began to descend upon the earth."—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 68. Contradicts Gen. 7, 11-16. —"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month—the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights: in the self same day entered Noah and Shem and Japheth, the sons of Noah and Noah's wife and the three wives of his sons with them into the ark. The cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort. And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh wherein is the breath of life. And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh as God had commanded him, and the Lord shut him in."

  6. "Every species of animals which God had created was preserved in the ark."—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 75. "There were a class of very large animals which perished at the flood."—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 4, p. 121. Either God did not create these large animals or here is a contradiction.

  7. "At the close of the 1,000 years, Jesus and the angels and all the saints with him leave the holy city, and while he is descending to the earth with them, the wicked dead are raised."—Exp. Views, p. 34. Contradiction: "At the end of the 1,000 years Jesus left the city and a train of the angelic hosts followed him. Jesus descended upon a great and mighty mountain which as soon as his feet touched it, parted asunder and became a mighty plain. Then we looked up and saw the great and beautiful city. ... And it came down in all its splendor, and dazzling glory, and settled in the plain. ... Then Jesus and all the holy retinue of angels, and all the redeemed saints, left the city. ... Then Jesus in terrible fearful majesty, called forth the wicked dead.—S. Gifts, Vol. 1, p. 213. Question.— When did Jesus raise them? While he was descending as first stated or after the city came down as last stated?"

  8. "Those who lived before the flood came forth with their giant like stature, more than twice as tall as men now living. The generations after the flood, were less in stature. There was a continual decrease through successive generations down to the last that lived upon the earth."—S. Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 84. Contradicts facts.—See American Tract Societies, Bib. Dict., Art. Giant. "If we judge from the mummies of Egypt and from arms and implements of the earliest antiquity found in ancient tombs, in bogs, and in buried cities, we should conclude that mankind never exceeded in the average, their present stature."

  9. "I saw an angel swiftly flying to me. He carried me from the earth to the Holy City. In the city I saw a temple which I entered."—Ex. Views, p. 16. Contradicts, Rev. 21:22. "And I saw no temple therein for the Lord God and the Lamb are the temple of it."

  10. "The Father’s person I could not behold, for a cloud of glorious light covered him. I asked Jesus if his Father had a form like himself. He said he had but I could not behold it, for said he if you should once behold the glory of his person you would cease to exist." Contradiction.—"And I saw the Father rise from the throne and in a flaming chariot go into the Holy of Holies and did sit."—Ex. Views, p. 43.

  11. Her vision of the battle of Manassas, like most of her other visions, seen after the event transpires is contradictory. Note 4.—
    "The Northern army was moving on with triumph, not doubting but that they would be victorious. They rushed into battle and fought bravely, desperately. The Southern men felt the battle, and in a little would have been driven back still further." Contradiction.—"And in this battle had the Northern army pushed the battle still further in their fainting exhausted condition, a far greater struggle and destruction awaited them which would have caused great triumph in the South." Who can reconcile such a positive contradiction? I am very certain that it cannot be done. This may be the reason why Elder James White left this vision out when he republished Test. No. 7, in Sp. Gifts, vol. 4."
  12. Her view of the tree of life is much more fanciful than true. "On one side of the river was a trunk of a tree and a trunk on the other side of the river both of pure transparent gold. At first I thought I saw two trees. I looked again and saw they were united at the top, in one tree. So it was the tree of life on either side of the river of life."—Ex. Views, p. 12-13. Is not the idea of the species of this tree on either side of the river much more natural than the supposition that there is but one tree, and it astride the river? Is the idea of a gold tree, altogether reasonable? Where is the proof?"

  13. Her vision on the name and number of the beast is not believed now even by the leaders in this cause. "I saw that the number (666) of the image beast was made up, and that it was the beast that changed the Sabbath, and the image beast had followed on after and kept the Pope’s and not Gods Sabbath."—Word to The Little Flock, p. 19.

    Editor's Note: According to Rev. 13:18 the number 666 is associated with the Beast, not the Image to the Beast. The following point was added by W.H. Brinkerhoff in the June 12, 1866, issue of the Hope of Israel:
    Here she "saw that the number (666) of the Image Beast was made up." Now it so happens that the Image Beast has no number, and, per consequence, the view here given could not have come from the Lord.

  14. Many things in her older visions are now suppressed, and no doubt it was done on account of their appearance of fanaticism and wild imagination. "And I saw two long golden rods, on which hung silver wires, and on the wires most glorious grapes, one cluster was more than a man here could carry. And I saw Jesus step up and take of the manna, almonds, grapes and pomegranates, and bear them down to the city, and place them on the supper table. I stepped up to see how much was taken away and there was just as much left, and we shouted Hallelujah. ... And with Jesus at our head we all descended from the city down to this earth. ... Here I saw most glorious houses that had the appearance of silver. ... which were to be inhabited by the saints. In them was a golden shelf. I saw many of the saints go into the houses, take off their glittering crowns and lay them on the shelf, then go out into the field by the houses, to do something with the earth, not as we have to do with the earth here, no, no. We passed through the woods, for we were on our way to Mount Zion. I thought this mount was in the city of God." (But she left the city to go to it.) ... "Then we began to look at the glorious things outside of the city." Word to the little Flock, p. 16-17.

  15. She has taught in a suppressed vision that to speak against her visions is to sin against the Holy Ghost. "I saw the state of some who stood on the present truth, but disregarded the visions, the way God had chosen to teach in some cases those who erred from Bible truth. I saw that in striking against the visions they did not strike against the worm the feeble instrument that God spake through, but against the Holy Ghost. I saw that it was a small thing to speak against the instrument, but it was dangerous to fight the words of God. I saw that if they were in error and God chose to show them their errors through visions, they would be left to take their own way and run in the way of error, and think they were right until they would find it out too late. ... Then in the time of trouble I heard them cry to God in agony. Why didst thou not show us our wrong that we might have got right and been ready for this time. Then an angel pointed to them and said: My Father taught but you would not be taught. He spoke through visions but you disregarded his voice and he gave you up to your own ways, to be filled with your own doings."—Visions published at Topsham, by James White Jan. 31, 1849. Why was this awful penalty for rejecting these visions not published with the rest of the vision in Experience and Views? Is it because it is not as great a sin to reject them now as then? Why was it suppressed if it was the word of God?

  16. She ignores the right of private judgment as much as the Catholics do. She teaches that those who exercise their own judgment in regard to matters of duty, instead of following her visions, cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. Hear her in the following, "I was shown that the following scripture was applicable to such, who go along under such a deception: "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name and in thy name cast out devils, and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me ye that work iniquity. ... God has provided means to correct the erring, yet if those who err, choose to do as they think best, and follow their own judgment and despise the means God has ordained to correct the erring and unite them upon the truth, they will be brought into the position described by the words of our Lord quoted above."—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 4, p. 157. Notes:
    1. To err from Bible truth according to her version of the matter is to reject some of the opinions or visionary tenets believed by herself and her brethren. To bring such back to unity on these matters with them, a vision is generally forthcoming and then the question is settled, not by an appeal to the Bible, but to the vision. The Bible must be bent to conform to the new light that comes down direct from God. The individual must receive it as such. If he cannot see it: if the vision contradicts the Bible, and his judgment would lead him to follow it: and reject the vision, he is told that he must give up his own judgment in the matter and rely upon the judgment of his brethren. Just so the Priests teach their subjects and keep them bound down with a fear and superstition no worse than that of the believer in this delusion.

    2. What are the means God has ordained to correct the erring? She tells us, her visions, but Paul tells us that the holy scriptures are all sufficient for correction, and every other necessary thing that God requires of us in that we may be perfect before him.—2 Tim. 3, 14-17.

    3. What is it that is to unite us on the truth? Her visions! Have God's people not been united before her visions were given, and if so, what united them? Ans.—The Bible. Is it not sufficient for the unity of God's people now? If so, these visions are unnecessary.

    4. But how do they unite this people? Why, she explains the Bible in vision and they accept it through the visions. This is the same kind of union that we find among all other churches. They are united upon their creeds, and believe the Bible just as the creeds teach. Just so it is with S. D. Adventists. The visions are their creed, and they are the most dangerous of all others because they claim to be given by divine inspiration, and therefore are infallible.

    5. The penalty for us who choose to exercise our own judgment of right and wrong and reject her revelations is terrible indeed! They cannot enter into the kingdom of God! So say the Mormons and almost all others who have had new revelations, of those whose good judgment leads them to reject their deceptive delusions. Such things are gotten up merely to terrify and hold the ignorant in chains. Our Lord delivers us from all fears. He says, "For whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in heaven the same is my brother, and sister and mother."—Matt. 12:50. Again, "Blessed are they that do his commandments."—Rev. 22:14. He ought to have said blessed are those who receive the revelations of E. G. White, in order to carry out the above doctrine.

Her teaching in regard to her husband is the same as that of fanatics, enthusiasts and false prophets. She claims great honors and favors from God for herself and husband. Dr. Alexander says:

"The sober christian can appeal to the word of God as containing all the ideas by which his mind is affected in its highest elevations of joy and love, but the enthusiast departs from the written word and trusts to impulses, impressions on the imagination, immediate suggestions, dreams or supposed visions. ... And accordingly most fanatics believe themselves inspired.—Evidences p. 223-4.
Mahomet says,
"We have sent thee an Apostle, unto man and God is a sufficient witness thereof. Whosoever obeyeth the Apostle obeyeth God."—Koran, p. 110.
Sweedenborg said,
"The Lord has called me to a holy office, who most graciously manifested himself to me in person, his servant, when he opened my sight to the view of the spiritual world and granted me the privilege of conversing with spirits and angels.—Sweedenborg, Doctrine, p. 20.
Mrs. White, in the same egotistic channel, says
"I saw that God had made my husband a burden bearer since 1844, that he might obtain an experience to fill the place in the work he designed him to occupy. ... I saw that some do not realize that selfishness is at the bottom of their murmuring. God's humble instrument moves too fast for their faith, and his venturing out as he has done, has reproved their slow and unbelieving pace. And there has been satisfaction taken in watching and finding fault. Hints have been thrown out, doubts expressed which have had their influence."—Sp. Gifts, Vol. 2, p. 231.

Again "God has committed his work at Battle Creek to chosen servants. He has laid the burden of the work upon them. Angels of God are commissioned to have the oversight of the work, and if it does not move right, those who are at the head of the work will be corrected and things will move in God's order without the interference of this individual or that."—Test. No. 5, p.26.

Notes. 1. To say nothing of the correctness of the above, it would at least have looked better for some one else to have had that vision. 2.The heads of this work at Battle Creek (not the New Jerusalem) are so high in authority that man must not interfere with their wrongs, they must be left in the hands of God for correction. They are above all revealed law, they must have special revelations for their case. God has given his Bible to us as our rule of life, and it is the duty of the leaders in this work to submit to it and if they do not, they must suffer the consequences. But as it has been with all fanatics, so it is with them, thy must not be corrected by man. No, no, they are too holy for that. They must be let alone and their cases referred to God.

19. S. D. Adventists claim to be those who will be translated at the second coming of Christ. If this claim is true, her visions are false, and if the visions are true, this claim is false. Our Lord, speaking of the class they profess to be says,

"These are they which follow the Lamb withersoever he goeth. ... And in their mouth was found no guile, for they are without fault before the throne of God." Rev. 14, 4-5.
Do they answer this description? If not they cannot be the people in question. We will hear a description of them given by their prophetess, and let the reader be his own judge. She says,
"I was shown that the spirit of the Lord has been dying away from the church.—Vol. 3, p. 1.

"Then I was pointed back to the years 1843-4. There was a spirit of consecration then that there is not now. ... What has come over the professed peculiar people of God."—id. p. 15.

"As I saw the dreadful fact that the people of God were conformed to the world, with no distinction only in name between many of the professed disciples of the meek and lowly Jesus and unbelievers my soul felt deep anguish."—id. p. 19.

"O the pride that was shown me of God's professed people. It has increased every year until it is now impossible to designate professed Advent Sabbath-keepers from all the world around them. Much I saw was expended for ribbons, and laces for the bonnets, collars, and other needless articles." (The note I omit because when this was first published there was no such explanation given) ... "They advance every month in (holiness, virtue, benevolences and righteousness? No.— writer) pride, covetousness, selfishness and love of the world. When truth affects the heart it will cause a death to the world, and the ribbons, laces and collars will be laid aside, and if dead, the laugh, the jeer and scorn of unbelievers will not move them."—id. p. 22.

These testimonies were republished in 1864, and purport to give a true statement in regard to these things. She says of them. "It has been thought best to reprint them ... omitting local and personal matters and giving these portions only which are of practical and general interest and importance."—Preface in Vol. 4. The vision of John and the above cannot apply to the same people. A people growing every month in such great sins as she say the S. D. Adventists are, cannot be God's people. And if they are not God's people her visions are a deception for she teaches that they are God's people and will be translated. Hence the visions are false, let the question turn either way.

20. Her visions are inconsistent and not in accordance with truth on the state and object of the late rebellion.

"I was shown if the object of this war was to exterminate slavery:—then England would have helped the North if desired. But England fully understands the existing feelings in the government and that the war is not to do away with slavery but merely to preserve the Union. It is not for her interest to have it preserved."—Test. No. 7. p. 9-10.
The above purports to be the view that God gave of the condition of the rebellion.

1st. What are the facts in the case. Has the war done away slavery. Read the Constitution as amended and the statute books of the rebellious states.

2nd. Why would England not aid us? Vision says, "because the war was not to do away slavery." According to this England hates slavery so very much she cannot help us. But what about her character on this point? She did aid the south in various ways, as piratical crafts evince that were built ( if not by her orders, yet under her acquiescence) to prey upon our commerce. Let the bonded and burning vessels tell England's love of slavery. What was the corner stone of the Confederacy: Slavery. Thus England was willing to aid where slavery was not intended to be done away.

Her vision says, "it is not for the interest of England to have the Union preserved, and as the object of the war was only to preserve the Union she would not help us." Therefore according to this inspiration: to do away slavery would destroy the Union. Slavery is Constitutionally abolished and instead of the Union being destroyed the Southern States are very anxious to get a representation in the Halls of Congress again.

Reader, where did the above vision come from, and by what inspiration. The above vision literally destroys itself.

21. Visions relative to the conduct of some during the war.

"In Iowa they carried things to quite a length and ran into fanaticism. They mistook zeal and fanaticism for conscientiousness. ... Instead of making their petitions to, and relying solely upon the power of the God of heaven, they petitioned to the legislature and were refused. They showed their weakness and exposed their lack of faith."—Test. No. 9, p. 2.

1st. What was done in Iowa? A petition was sent to the legislature for an exemption in the case any Sabbath keepers were drafted. This was fanaticism and exposed their lack of faith. Now mark what was done at the place where the author of these visions resides.

1st. Petitions were sent to the Governor asking to be permitted to come under the exemption clause, in the law regulating drafting, and state conferences were directed to do the same, and a little pamphlet containing sixteen pages nearly half of which was the virgin paper, unsoiled by type, was published, and twenty-five cents drafted out of the pockets of those who obtained said work. But this was not fanaticism and did not expose their lack of faith. Again not satisfied with this they went to Washington City and consulted the authorities there relative to the same thing, came home and issued two small books, charging three dollars and fifty cents if sent in any part of Michigan, and four dollars if sent out of the State.

(Note.—Since nobody is in danger of being drafted, these books can be had for one dollar. Somebody's necessities must have been taken advantage of.) They have done much more than in Iowa and if one was fanaticism, the other must be fanaticism intensified.

22. Our duty during the war.—Many believed that God would direct his people, through vision, relative to their duty during the late war, and not being satisfied with what was in the Bible on that subject, manifested much anxiety to know what to do. Did any thing definite and clear emanate from this source of light? No. Why not? Simply because she did not understand the matter herself and could only reflect what she had received. But we had visions during this period of anxiety and doubt that were plain and concise, and how important, we leave the reader to judge.

She says in vision relative to dress,

"The dress should reach somewhat below the top of the boot: but should be short enough to clear the filth of the sidewalk and street without being raised by the hand. A still shorter dress than this would be proper, convenient and healthful for females, &c."—How to Live, No. 6, p. 63.

Sisters, this dress matter was so important that you had specific directions about your apparel in this time of war, while we were compelled to guess at our duty unless we were willing to take the Bible as our guide on this question. And yet we are taught 'tis death, eternal ruin, not to recognize the hand of God in these visions. Can our judgment, aided and directed by the word of God, charge such things as these to the all wise Creator.


Previous Chapter HOME Table of Contents Next Chapter