The Ellen White Research Project

"Many false prophets are gone out into the world." 1 John
4:1

Home
Shut
Door
Visions
1844
Top
7
Plagiarism
Health
Site
Map
Letters
FAQ
Search
Order

Amalgamation

A Denominational
Embarrassment

By D. Anderson

Esta pagina in
Español

Many Adventists agree that these statements are the most shocking ever penned by
Ellen White:

"But if there was one sin above another which called for the
destruction of the race by the flood, it was the base
crime of amalgamation of man and beast which defaced the image of God, and caused confusion
everywhere."1

"Every species of animal which God had created were preserved in the
ark. The confused species which God did not create, which were the result of
amalgamation, were destroyed by the flood. Since the flood
there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as may be seen in the almost
endless varieties of species of animals, and in certain races of
men."2

A Summary of Mrs. White's main points about
Amalgamation

It was "a sin" serious enough to require "the destruction" of the human
race.

It was a vile, "base crime".

This vile sin "defaced the image of God."

It occurred both before and after "the flood."

Its effects can be seen "in certain races of men."

Analysis
There is no doubt that Ellen White understood
her statements to be describing the sexual union between man and beast. At the
time Mrs. White penned this "inspired" section, it was believed by some...

"...that crosses between men and animals had created a
no-man's-land between man and beast, populated by gorillas, chimpanzees, wild
bushmen of Africa, Patagonians, and Hottentots."3
Of
course, we now know that to be false. Science has long ago proven that it is
impossible for humans and animals to produce offspring.

This leads to the question: If she did not receive the amalgamation ideas
from God, then where did she get them? One likely source is the Book of
Jasher. Many of Mrs. White's statements about the pre-flood era appear
astonishingly similar to statements in the Book of Jasher, a
fictional account of earth's early history published in 1840. In that book we
find that the pre-flood humans experimenting with amalgamation...

"... the sons of men in those days took from the cattle of the
earth, the beasts of the field and the fowls of the air, and taught the
mixture of animals of one species with the other."4

Which race is a product of
amalgamation?
Mrs. White said the results of amalgamation could be
seen "in certain races of men." The question that has haunted the SDA Church for
more than 140 years is, which races are the result of amalgamation of man and
beast?

Ellen White's statement provoked instant controversy and
stinging criticism of her in the 1860s forced church leaders to attempt to
defend their prophet. In 1868, four years after the amalgamation statements
first appeared in print, Adventist leader Uriah Smith5 published his
defense of Ellen White. In that book he conjectured that the union of man with
beast had created "such cases as the wild Bushmen of Africa,
some tribes of the Hottentots, and perhaps the Digger Indians of our own
country".6

James White "carefully" reviewed Smith's book prior to its
publication, and then recommended it in glowing terms to the readers of the
church's official magazine, the Review and Herald:

"The Association has just published a pamphlet entitled, 'The
Visions of Mrs. E.G. White, A Manifestation of Spiritual Gifts According to
the Scriptures.' It is written by the editor of the Review. While
carefully reading the manuscript, I felt grateful to God that our people could
have this able defense of those views they so much love and prize, which
others despise and oppose."7
As noted, the prophet's
husband carefully read Smith's book. It is inconceivable that the
statements about the Bushmen of Africa passed by James White without notice. His
endorsement of the book indicates his implicit approval of the explanation. In
fact, because it supposedly established Mrs. White's claims, James and Ellen
took 2,000 copies of Smith's book with them to peddle at camp meetings that
year!8 By promoting and selling Smith's book the Whites placed
their stamp of approval on his explanation of the amalgamation statement.

Without Smith's explanation, anyone reading Ellen White's statement might
easily be confused as to exactly which race she was talking about. While Smith
may have limited the amalgamation to the Bushmen, a few Adventists have gone
further and applied the statements to the negro race.9

SDA Scholars Perform Mental
Gymnastics

While the "Bushmen of Africa" explanation was good enough for the Whites
and Smith, it eventually fell out of favor with SDA leaders. It became
increasingly difficult to explain these statements to an increasingly educated
and racially tolerant denomination.

Despite the controversy, both the critics and supporters of Ellen White
agreed that Mrs. White was talking about the union of man with beast. However,
by 1947 an Adventist biologist named Dr. Frank Marsh convinced an SDA panel to
interpret Mrs. White's statement to mean the interbreeding among species,
not interbreeding between man and beast. Dr. Marsh argued convincingly that the
union of man and beast is impossible. Despite the fact that James White, Uriah
Smith, W.C. White (her son), and D.D. Robinson (her secretary) all indicate Mrs.
White believed her statement to refer to the interbreeding of man with beasts,
the mounting scientific evidence made it impossible for Adventists to continue
to defend her statement based upon its intended meaning.10 Thus, they
developed a new meaning for the statement, a meaning which was unknown to
Ellen White, and a meaning which is extremely difficult to extract from the text
of the amalgamation quotes themselves.

One recent Adventist scholar, Francis D. Nichol, in his book Ellen G. White
and Her Critics, informs us that the word "amalgamation" was used commonly
in the 19th century to refer to intermarriage between the black and white races.
He also notes that Ellen White used the word "amalgamation" to refer to the
intermarriage between those of different faiths. Nichol argues that Mrs. White's
statement was referring to amalgamation between "man and "man", namely, the
interbreeding between humans of different races or different religions.

Intermarriage between the races?

This explanation raises more questions than answers:

How could intermarriage between races deface the image of God in man? How
could one human (made in the image of God) married to another human (made in
the image of God) deface the image of God?

If intermarriage between races is a "sin" and a "base crime", then why is
it never described as such in the Bible?

Many Biblical scholars believe Moses' wife Zipporah was a different race.
Were the children of Moses an amalgamated species? If so, why did God offer to
make the children of Moses into a great nation? Why didn't God destroy them
for committing a base crime?

Intermarriage between godly and
ungodly?

Another theory proposed by those wrestling to come up with a way to explain
away this statement is that Ellen White meant the intermarriage between the
righteous sons of Seth and the wicked. However, this interpretation seems to
contradict the context of the statement. Gordon Shigley explains:

"It was difficult to read the statements within their context
without seeing a series of sins, of which the last sin--the 'one sin above
another'--was obviously the climax. It was not likely that Ellen White was
talking about intermarriage since she already had described that sin in an
earlier paragraph. ...it is impossible to make the amalgamation of beast with
beast or man with man the one sin greater than idolatry, adultery, polygamy,
theft, or murder."11
Again, this interpretation raises
far more questions than it answers:

Is intermarriage between the godly and ungodly a "sin" or a "base crime?"
Interestingly, Mrs. White describes the intermarriage between the sons of Cain
and Seth just four pages earlier on page 60 of Spiritual Gifts.
She says the intermarriage "displeased God", but she does not call it a
base crime. Neither does the Bible. Samson married a Philistine woman
over the objections of his parents and the Bible simply says:

"But his father and his mother knew not that it was of the
Lord..." (Judges 14:4)
If marrying an ungodly woman was a "base
crime" worthy of the destruction of the human race, why would the Bible say
that Samson's marriage to a Philistine was "of the Lord?"

How could the results of intermarriage between people of different faiths
now "be seen" in "certain races of men?" Which races show visible evidence of
intermarriage between believers and unbelievers?

White Estate Plays Word Games: What does
Amalgamation mean?

While the current defenders of Mrs. White at the White Estate cannot seem to provide a
definitive explanation as to what Mrs. White was talking about, they assure us
on their web site that whatever it was that Mrs. White was talking about, it was
not the union between man and beast:

"No dictionary has ever used 'amalgamation' to describe the
cohabitation of man with beast. ... Mrs. White never hinted of subhuman beings
or any kind of hybrid animal-human relationship. ... The burden of proof rests
on those who affirm that Mrs. White gave a new and alien meaning to the
term."12

The word "amalgmation" comes from "amalgam"
which has two primary meanings:

1 : an alloy of mercury with another metal that is solid or
liquid at room temperature according to the proportion of mercury
present and is used especially in making tooth cements
2 : a
mixture of different elements14

How was the word used in the 1800s? Webster's 1828 dictionary:

Amalgamation - The mixing or blending of different
things.15
Webster's 1913 dictionary:

A*mal`ga*ma"tion (#), n. [Cf. F. amalgamation.]

The mixing or blending of different elements, races, societies,
etc.; also, the result of such combination or blending; a homogeneous
union.16

While dictionaries
do not explicitly describe amalgamation as the union of man and beast, they
certainly allow for that definition. The word "amalgamation" is widely
used in the English language to describe a mixture of any two or more
different elements. For example, the word is used today to describe the
following combination of the human with the non-human:13

The mythical creature called a Werewolf--a being that is part human and
part wolf--has been described as an "amalgamation".

The Sphinx is described as an amalgamation of a lion and a human.

Science Fiction buffs use it to describe the offspring of the union
between human and alien beings!

Thus we can see by these few
examples that it is a perfectly valid usage of the word to describe the
combination of an animal with a human.

A "new and alien meaning"?
The
White Estate claims that we are under a "burden" to prove that Mrs. White was
talking about the union of man and beast because that specific definition never
appears in a dictionary. They write:

"The burden of proof rests on those who affirm that Mrs. White
gave a new and alien meaning to the term."17
Is that
true? Are we under the burden to prove the word can be used in that
manner? Or is this simply a "smoke-screen" used to hide the truth?

Let us examine some of Mrs. White's other uses of the word to determine
whether or not they appear in the dictionary:

"Every noxious herb is of his [Satan's] sowing, and by his
ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with
tares."18

"...by union with the world, the character of God's people becomes
tarnished, and through amalgamation with the corrupt, the fine gold
becomes dim."19

No dictionary specifically describes Satan mixing evil properties into herbs
to produce tares as amalgamation. Neither does any dictionary specifically
describe the union of Christians with the world as a process of amalgamation.
Therefore, is Mrs. White giving a "new and alien meaning to the word" by such
uses? Of course not! All of Mrs. White's usages of the word amalgamation clearly
fit within the dictionary's definition of the word. The word is used in
thousands of ways to describe the hybrid union of any two things that are
different. How could a dictionary possibly list every potential use of the word
amalgamation? It would take thousands of pages for just a single word! Just
because a particular usage of a word does not appear in the dictionary does not
prove that the usage is incorrect!

For Mrs. White to use the word to describe the union of man and beast is not
"new and alien," nor is it without precedent. As noted above, the word is used
in reference to the Sphinx, the Werewolf, half-human, half-alien beings, and a
host of similar unions.

"Base Crime" proves White Estate and Nichol
wrong
Mrs. White describes amalgamation as a base crime. Why?
What is a base crime? What does the dictionary say? First, let us look at
Webster's 1828 dictionary:

Base - Mean; vile; worthless; that is, low in value or
estimation; used of things.20
Webster's 1913 dictionary:

Base - Morally low. Hence: Low-minded; unworthy; without
dignity of sentiment; ignoble; mean; illiberal; menial; as, a base fellow;
base motives; base occupations. A cruel act of a base and a cowardish
mind.21
Here are the synonyms to the word "base" from
Webster's 1999 dictionary:

Synonyms: BASE, LOW, VILE mean deserving of contempt
because of the absence of higher values.

BASE stresses the ignoble and may suggest cruelty, treachery, greed, or
grossness [base motives].

LOW may connote crafty cunning, vulgarity, or immorality and regularly
implies an outraging of one's sense of decency or propriety [refused to
listen to such low talk].

VILE, the strongest of these words, tends to suggest disgusting
depravity or filth [a vile remark].22

If the
amalgamation was "human with human, and beast with beast," then how could these
relationships be described as base crimes? How could sexual relations
between married human partners be described as base crimes? Doesn't God
honor marriage, whether or not both partners are of the same race or religion?
How could union between different species of animals be a base crime? Animals
have no such moral capacity to commit a base crime!

If the union of human with human is not a base crime, and if the union of
animal with animal is not a base crime, then what is a base crime?

A base crime is an act of vile immorality. Mrs. White uses the phrase
base crime only one other time in her writings. She used the
phrase to describe Potiphar's wife's vile and adulterous sexual advances upon
the youthful Joseph.23

The Bible is very clear that sexual relations between humans and animals is a
vile, base crime. It is condemned in the Bible as an abomination worthy
of the death penalty.24 Notice carefully that the crimes of adultery
and bestality are in close context with one another in the Levitical law:

Lev. 18:20 - "Moreover thou shalt not lie carnally with thy
neighbour's wife, to defile thyself with her."

Lev. 18:23 - "Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself
therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto:
it [is] confusion."

To reiterate, Mrs. White uses the
term "base crime" only two times in her entire writings. One, the sexaul assault
upon Joseph, refers to a violation of Lev. 18:20. The second, the amalgamation
statement, refers to a violation of Lev. 18:23. Furthermore, Mrs. White says the
amalgamation "caused confusion everywhere", clearly linking it to Lev. 18:23
which states that bestality "is confusion". Mrs. White's choice of the words
"base crime" and her allusion to the resulting "confusion" is irrefutable
evidence she was describing bestiality, not intermarriage between humans with
racial or religious differences.

Genetic amalgamation?
A recent and
even more outlandish defense of Mrs. White's statement has arisen with the
advent of genetic engineering. Some have suggested the ancients performed
genetic manipulations in the laboratory. This sounds plausible to those who do
not understand the difficulties of genetic engineering. Genetic engineering is
an extremely complex process that science is only now beginning to grasp. It
requires the use of super-computers and highly advanced technology. While there
is no evidence that the people before the flood possessed this type of enabling
technology, Mrs. White says this amalgamation also happened after the
flood! There is absolutely no evidence that the advanced technology needed
to accomplish genetic engineering ever existed in any society after the flood.
It is pure conjecture--mental gymnastics at its best.

Is Amalgamation the greatest reason for the
flood?
If Ellen White is correct, that the "one sin above another
which called for the destruction of the race" was amalgamation, why was that sin
never mentioned in Genesis? Moses mentions the sins of corruption and violence
in Genesis 6:11-13, but never amalgamation. One would think that if amalgamation
was the "one sin above another" that caused the flood, Moses would have at least
mentioned it! How could such a grievous sin pass by Moses without mention?

Why were these "inspired" statements
removed?
If the amalgamation statements were true, then why not
include them in the book Patriarchs and Prophets? Why remove them from
this edition? If this sin caused the flood, shouldn't people should be warned
about it so that they don't repeat it? If the "bushmen of Africa" are the
result of union between man and animals, doesn't the world have a right to know
about it? The White Estate is always bragging about how Ellen White was "years
ahead of science". Well then, why not let the world know about this amazing
scientific finding of Ellen White? Shouldn't the world's leading scientists be
made aware of this so that they can begin studying the bushmen? Wouldn't it be a
wonderful proof of Ellen White's divine inspiration if scientists were to
examine the bushmens' DNA and prove they are indeed half-animal? Why should
prophetic utterances need to be deleted from later editions of a prophet's
writings?

We are not the first to ask these questions. People have been asking those
questions for over 100 years. The removal the amalgamation statements created
such a controversy that the White Estate decided it was important for them to
provide an explanation for the omissions. Her son W.C. White writes:

"Regarding the two paragraphs which are to be found in
Spiritual Gifts and also in The Spirit of Prophecy regarding
amalgamation and the reason why they were left out of the later books, and the
question as to who took the responsibility of leaving them out, I can speak
with perfect clearness and assurance. They were left out by Ellen G. White. No
one connected with her work had any authority over such a question, and I
never heard of anyone offering to her counsel regarding this matter.

"In all questions of this kind, you may set it down as a certainty that
sister White was responsible for leaving out or adding to matters of this sort
in the later editions of our books.

"Sister White not only had good judgment based upon a clear and
comprehensive understanding of conditions and of the natural consequences of
publishing what she wrote, but she had many times direct instruction from
the angel of the Lord regarding what should be omitted and what should be
added in new editions."25

Now you know the reason,
straight from the pen of the prophet's son.

Did Mrs. White remove the statements because they created a controversy?
No!

Did she remove them because they were wrong? No!

Did she remove them because the brethren faced a predicament trying to
explain them to new converts? No!

Did she remove them because they made her appear biased and uneducated?
No!

Supposedly she removed them because an angel instructed her to do
so. That leads us to our final question:

Why didn't the angel instruct her to
omit the lines before they were published?

NOTES

1. Ellen White, Spiritual Gifts, Vol. 3, p. 64.

2. Ibid., p. 75.

3. Gordon Shigley, "Amalgamation of Man and Beast: What Did Ellen White
Mean?", Spectrum, vol. 12, no. 4, p. 13. Gordon Shigley wrote this
article while a graduate student at the University of Wisconsin.

4. Jasher 4:18.

5. In 1868 Uriah Smith still professed belief in Ellen White as a prophet. By
1883 he did not hold the same degree of conviction: "It seems to me that the
testimonies, practically, have come into that shape, that it is not of any use
to try to defend the erroneous claims that are now put forth for them." (Smith
to Canright, March 22, 1883).

6. Uriah Smith, The Visions of Mrs. E. G. White, A Manifestation of
Spiritual gifts According to the Scripture, p. 103, (Steam Press, Battle
Creek Michigan, 1868). NOTE: This book is not available in any SDA bookstores
today. Here is the full quotation from pages 103-104:

"Since the flood there has been amalgamation of man and beast, as
may be seen in the almost endless varieties of species of animals, and in
certain races of men." This view was given for the purpose of illustrating the
deep corruption and crime into which the race fell, even within a few years
after the flood that signal manifestation of God's wrath against human
wickedness. There was amalgamation; and the effect is still visible in certain
races of men." Mark, those excepting the animals upon whom the effects of this
work are visible, are called by the vision, "men." Now we have ever supposed
that anybody that was called a man, was considered a human being. The vision
speaks of all these classes as races of men; yet in the face of this plain
declaration, they foolishly assert that the visions teach that some men are
not human beings! But does any one deny the general statement contained in the
extract given above? They do not. If they did, they could easily be silenced
by a reference to such cases as the wild Bushmen of Africa, some tribes of the
Hottentots, and perhaps the Digger Indians of our own country, &c.
Moreover, naturalists affirm that the line of demarkation between the human
and animal races is lost in confusion. It is impossible, as they affirm, to
tell just where the human ends and the animal begins. Can we suppose that this
was so ordained of God in the beginning? Rather has not sin marred the
boundaries of these two kingdoms?

7. James White, Review, Aug. 15, 1868.

8. Shigley, p. 18, footnote #11: "This information appears as a handwritten
note at the bottom of a copy of Uriah Smith's 'Objection 39: The Negro Race Not
Human,' provided by [Professor] Frank Marsh."

9. The author is saddened to say, that as an SDA for 33 years, I know for a
fact that behind closed doors in private conversations a few white American
SDA's still believe this "inspired" statement applies to the entire black race.
One person claimed to have seen an unpublished manuscript in the White Estate
vault indicating such, but proof is lacking. In a statement received from a
former SDA via e-mail, October 2004: "I found the testimony from the guy that
was in the vault and Dr. B showed him where EGW wrote about women being with
apes. Well, I wanted to tell you back in the early 1980s my husband had a good
friend that went to Andrews. He told my husband about seeing this writing while
doing research in the vault. We wondered all these years about it. I was pleased
to confirm it with that part of your site. We suspect he was kicked out of
school, as bearing that statement he began preaching to kids on campus about
what he had found, referring to black people as monkeys."

10. See Shigley, pp. 11-18.

11. Shigley, p. 11.

12. See www.whiteestate.org web site, "Comments Regarding Unusual Statements
Found In Ellen G. White's Writings".

13. For example, in a review of the book Blood of the Wolf, the
reviewer makes this statement: "This has nothing to do with Tribes or Auspices,
just the physical and psychological aspects of being spirit, flesh, human and
wolf all rolled up into a single disturbing amalgamation." (reference found on
http://www.nocturnis.net/reviews/268 on the date Nov. 26, 2006). A second
example is the Sphinx: "Some scholars believe that the famous Sphinx, with its
lion's body and human head, was an amalgamation of Leo and the nearby
constellation of Virgo, the Maiden." ("Leo the Lion may have inspired the Great
Sphinx", Feb. 19, 2006,
http://archive.recordonline.com/archive/2006/02/19/features_buzzandsundayextra-19bzcosmic-02-19.html).
For an example of the word "amalgamation" used to describe human-alien union,
see Christ Links forum posting #25114, March 14, 2006: "There are people in
hiding, underground citys and such, who are amalgamating man and beast. ... The
grays appear to be a human/animal amalgamation of some kind."
(http://www.christianlinks.com/forums/showthread.php?p=25114#post25114)

14. Merriam-Webster
Dictionary © 1999 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated.

15. Webster's 1828
Dictionary.

16. Webster's
1913 Dictionary.

17. See www.whiteestate.org web site, "Comments Regarding Unusual Statements
Found In Ellen G. White's Writings". White Estate quoting F.D. Nichol, Ellen
G. White and Her Critics, p. 308.

18. Ellen White, Selected Messages, Vol. 2, p. 288.

19. Ellen White, Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, August 23, 1892.

20. Webster's
1828 Dictionary.

21. Webster's 1913
Dictionary.

22. Merriam-Webster
Dictionary © 1999 by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated.

23. See article written by Ellen White, Signs of the Times, Jan. 8,
1880.

24. Leviticus 18:23, 20:16.

25. W.C. White, Selected Messages, Vol. 3, p. 452.

Home | Support Us | Contact Us | About  | FAQ

Copyright © 1996-2007 by Ellen White Research Project

And many false prophets shall rise, and
deceive many. Matt.
24:11