[1] Her works are officially considered to hold a secondary role to the Bible, but in practice there is wide variation among Adventists as to exactly how much authority should be attributed to her writings.
With understanding she claimed was received in visions, White made administrative decisions and gave personal messages of encouragement or rebuke to church members.
[3] Supportive views: One of the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the church is Fundamental Belief number one, "Holy Scriptures," states in part, The Adventist baptismal vows do not mention Ellen White specifically yet the set of 13 vows include: The General Conference in session made supportive statements in 2010, 2005[6] and 1995:[7] "Her writings continue to be a most positive influence in the life of the Church, providing for it comfort, guidance, instruction, correction, and theological stimulus.
"[6] An earlier, unofficial list of 22 foundational beliefs first printed in 1931 served as a de facto standard placed less emphasis on White.
The term "pen of inspiration" has been used as a colloquial phrase for White's writings, although the church's news body recommends against it for public usage.
A common criticism of Ellen White, widely popularized by Walter T. Rea, Ronald Numbers and others, is that she plagiarized material from other authors.
[22] When the plagiarism charge ignited a significant debate during the late 1970s and early 1980s, the Adventist General Conference commissioned a major study by Dr. Fred Veltman.
[25] Dr. Roger W. Coon,[26] David J. Conklin,[27] Dr. Denis Fortin,[28][29] King and Morgan,[30] among others, undertook the refutation of the accusations of plagiarism.
[21] Richard W. Schwarz from the Department of History, Andrews University, argued that any similarity with other sources may have occurred due to supernatural inspiration of those other authors, simply being another way to reveal that information.
In some cases where a historian has so grouped together events as to afford, in brief, a comprehensive view of the subject, or has summarized details in a convenient manner, his words have been quoted; but in some instances no specific credit has been given, since the quotations are not given for the purpose of citing that writer as authority, but because his statement affords a ready and forcible presentation of the subject.
In narrating the experience and views of those carrying forward the work of reform in our own time, similar use has been made of their published works.Ramik cleared her of breaking the law of the land/time (copyright infringement/piracy), not of plagiarism in the academic sense.
[21][22] In 1911, more than 70 years before charges of plagiarism, White wrote in the introduction to The Great Controversy her reason for quoting, in some cases without giving due credit, certain historians whose "statements affords a ready and forcible presentation on the subject.
[35] Robert Olson, secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate, speaking for all SDA Church, does not deny the "accumulating evidence" that she copied some of her information.
[37]As interesting as this legal opinion and discussion of the propriety of White's literary dependence may be, the real issue for Adventists is how does her now generally-recognized practice affect the perception and reality of her authority.
Supportive arguments which are used include claims of miraculous physical signs which were present, the accuracy of her health message, predictions, character of her life, and so on.
"[39] George I. Butler stated that when going into visions, "...there is no appearance of swooning or faintness," yet "...Often she loses her strength temporarily and reclines or sits; but at other time she stands up.
Many members held fundamentalist views and at conference it served to polarize Adventist theology into what some call "liberal" and "conservative" camps that continue to impact the church today.
Conservative scholar Samuel Koranteng-Pipim, and Historic Adventists Colin and Russell Standish, produced self-published works around 1991.