ADVENTIST HISTORY


Manuscript 5, 1849


“The Word of God, take it ..., Thy word, thy word, thy word, a part of it is burned unadulterated, a part of [it,] the hidden book, a part of it is burned (the apocrypha).7 Those that shall despitefully tread [treat?] that remnant would think that they are doing God service. Why? because they are led captive by Satan at his will. Hidden book, it is cast out. Bind it to the heart [4 times] bind it, bind it, bind it, [laying the Bible on Oswald Stowell] let not its pages be closed, read it carefully.”


Manuscript 4, 1850


“I saw that the Apocrypha was the hidden book, and that the wise of these last days should understand it.”


T. E. Bowen Letter (1915)


“If I remember correctly, there is a statement somewhere in the spirit of prophecy that reads something like this: that there is light for the remnant in the Apocrypha.”


parallel nicely with Bowen’s remembrance that she had stated, “there is light for the remnant in the Apocrypha.” According to the transcript of her 1849 vision, Ellen White also used the word “remnant” while discussing the Apocrypha. Yet, comparing the three statements also causes one to


pause. White in 1849 used the word “remnant” in an entirely different way than Bowen’s recollection uses it. In White’s 1849 vision, the Apocrypha itself is the remnant.8 Also, neither document uses the word or the concept of “light” or even the idea of increasing knowledge or insight. Tese differences may attest to its being a previously unknown statement that no longer survives for us, as opposed to a paraphrase of surviving documents. When William White wrote in a 1911 letter that “in some of Mother’s old writings she speaks of the apocrypha and says that portions of it were inspired,” this was relatively accurate as a reflection of the content of known manuscripts (except for the idea of “portions”). William White’s statement was presented as a summary, whereas Bowen was attempting to remember and recite a quotation. He appeared convinced it was found in a written source, as opposed to being a statement he had heard. It is, of course, possible that Bowen was misremembering


and combining ideas together. He said that “there is a statement somewhere in the spirit of prophecy that reads something like this” and prefaced the quote with “If I remember correctly,” which suggests that it had been a long time since he last saw the statement he was trying to remember. He even noted aſterward, “I do not know that I could really find that statement, but I think it has been made.”


What is more curious is that William White, who four years


earlier told Guy Dail (a former secretary of the European Division) that he knew of and remembered his mother’s teachings on this subject, did not correct or contradict Bowen’s remembered statement. Instead, he merely replied that he was grateful to Bowen for pointing out the circumstances of the Maccabees and said, “I will read it again.” It’s impossible to say whether White acknowledged Bowen’s quotation as something he also remembered. Two possibilities clearly exist: either the statement remembered


by Bowen is a now-lost third document written by Ellen White that agrees theologically with the other two surviving statements, or it is a garbled later summary of those original documents. If the former, we cannot know when it was made. Was this an early statement from 1845-1850, or was it a later, post-1850 statement? In either case, it would add another piece of evidence in support of the assertion that the Apocrypha was an important early resource for Ellen White.9 If, on the other hand, it is a garbled memory of the already-


documented evidence, it demonstrates something equally important: that White’s endorsement of the Apocrypha was sufficiently known among Adventists that some could still remember, as late as 1915, these documents and what they spoke of. In fact, perhaps one of the more intriguing aspects of Bowen’s letter and White’s reply is that someone has underlined portions of the documents (specifically those aspects related to the Apocrypha) and deemed them significant.


Time to Pay Attention? In summary, scholars cannot dismiss the idea that Bowen has perhaps provided us with a link to a third statement from White’s pen, now lost to time. Regardless of the reality, Bowen’s letter demonstrates that White’s messages about the Apocrypha were


36 AD VENTIS T T OD A Y


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40