Why Do SDAs Recommend a Vegetarian Diet?

Current Issues in Adventist Nutrition
Loma Linda University
February 22, 2013

Why Do SDAs Recommend a Vegetarian Diet?

Presented by Fred Hardinge, DrPH, RD
Associate Director, General Conference Health Ministries Department


Three basic reasons:

1. Health
2. Spiritual
3. Ecological

First, let us examine what is the official position of the church on diet:

Baptismal Vow, number 22, Christian Beliefs, says:

“…Along with adequate exercise and rest, we are to adopt the most healthful diet
possible and abstain from the unclean foods identified in Scriptures…”

Seventh-day Adventists Believe:

“The diet God ordained in the Garden of Eden–the vegetarian diet–is the ideal, but
sometimes we cannot have the ideal. In those circumstances, in any given
situation or locale, those who wish to stay in optimum health will eat the best food
that they can obtain.”

SDA Working Policy, Health Ministries, p. 303

“The Church advocates that positive steps be taken to develop a healthful lifestyle,
and encourages a balanced vegetarian diet. It requires of its members the nonuse
of alcoholic beverages and tobacco. It also requires the nonuse of other drugs,
except in a recognized evidence-based therapeutic context. The Church
encourages the avoidance of flesh foods… Physical well-being and clarity of mind
are usually interdependent; clarity of mind is essential for discernment between
right and wrong, between truth and error.”


SDAs believe we are each stewards of the gifts God has given us. We each are
managers of the talents, abilities, and resources that have been entrusted to us. Simply
living longer, living better is the dividend of making good choices, not the primary


The formative years of the Seventh-day Adventist Church took place in an era of rapid
social and scientific change. There were reform efforts in temperance, women’s rights,
labor-management relations, abolition, dress, sex education and other areas. Most of
the movements were active no more than ten years before going dormant, although
abolition was a notable exception. Of all the “reforms” popular at the time, only health
survived as an important concern in the SDA church.

During the first half of the 19th century there was a general unfamiliarity with the
principles of healthful living and the treatment of disease. However, in both Europe and
the United States there was increasing interest in temperance, therapeutic reform, and
diet reform. Health and diet reform were especially promoted by individuals such as
Trall, Jackson, W. Alcott, Graham, Coles, and Horace Mann long before the church was
organized. The issues these men and others vigorously supported included opposition
to the use of tea, coffee, tobacco, and alcohol, natural remedies and various dietary

While not pioneers in many of the principles of health reform, Adventists do claim the
uniqueness of integrating some of these reforms into their theology. This integration
into the third angel’s message made health a vital part of SDA theology and accounts
for the strong emphasis the church places on the intimate relationship of the human
body and mind to the religious experience of the individual.1

This evening we want to examine the Adventist philosophy of health, particularly as it
relates to the vegetarian diet2. Initially only a few Adventists prior to 1863 adopted
some of the “health reforms.” However, principally through the strong influence of Ellen
G. White’s visions,3 there was growing adoption and integration of these reforms after
the first vision on June 5, 1863.4 In tracing the development of health reform in
Adventist thought and philosophy during the early years, Damsteegt,5 divides these into
two periods as follows:

A. The growth of thinking on religion and health (1848-63).

One of the first appeals used to stress healthful living in the early years was its
relationship to improved spirituality. In 1848 Ellen White called attention to the “injurious
effects of tobacco, tea, and coffee,”6 and later she equated the use of these substances
to “idols”.7 Others joined in this plea, and articles were published in church papers
pointing out that “religion, for its full development, demands all our mental powers.”8
This suggested that anything which impaired mental powers would diminish a persons
ability in spiritual matters.

Great importance was also placed on the body as the temple of God and the
habitation of the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 6:19; 3:16-17). Thus it was the individual’s
responsibility to preserve the human body in the best possible condition. Another text
often cited to support the religious responsibility for the care of the body was Paul’s
statement in Romans: “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that
you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your
reasonable service” (Rom. 12:1).

Healthful living also came to be seen as an essential part of the preparation for the
Second Advent of Christ.9 Emphasis was placed on the necessity of cleansing the body
and the spirit, and perfecting holiness (2 Cor. 7:1; Is. 52:11) because continuation of
defiling practices would prevent entrance into the new earth. A healthy body was viewed
as an indispensable part of the preparation for the latter rain.

A third appeal made for healthful living was as a means of saving money to finance
missions. As the early church attempted to expand, there was a great demand for
financial support. Appeals were made calling for the denial of unhealthful practices so
that money saved in this way could be “put into the treasury of the Lord.”10

B. Health Reform and the third angel’s message (1863-74).
A great deal more emphasis was placed on the necessity of healthful living habits
from 1863 onward. A major reason for this growing emphasis was the visions Ellen
White received on this subject in 1863 and 1865.11 Health reform came to be seen as
an intelligent understanding of the laws of life and nature, and thus as divine laws,
resulting in a series of reformations so individuals could enjoy the greatest measure of
physical, mental, and spiritual health. In 1867 Ellen White stated that “Health Reform is
a part of the third angel’s message, and is just as closely connected with this message,
as the arm and hand with the human body.”12 At the same time counsel regarding the
necessity of balance was given.

“The Health Reform is closely connected with the third angel’s message, yet it
is not the message. Our preachers should teach the Health Reform, yet they
should not make this the leading theme in the place of the message.”13

A basic tenant of health reform suggested that transgression of the natural laws of
the human organism was a moral issue, and thus sinful. Transgression of these laws
were considered as transgression of the Ten Commandments.

The integration of health reform into the third angel’s message took place because
the central theme of that message called people to the observance of God’s
commandments, “Here are those who keep the commandments of God and the faith of
Jesus” (Rev. 14:12). Health reform, by calling people to obedience to the laws of nature
supported obedience to God’s commandments, a purpose very similar to the mission of
the thrid angel’s message.

Damsteegt14 cites three approaches that were made to explain the violation of the
laws of the human body as a sin. These included:

1. Linking a disregard of health with the sixth commandment, “Thou shalt not kill.” It
was concluded that it is morally wrong to do anything tending to shorten the lives
of ourselves or others.15

2. A second approach saw disobedience to the laws of the human organism in the
context of God’s creatorship, thus making transgression of them a sinful act.16
Thus a clear call to the message of the first angel, ” and worship Him who made
heaven and earth, the sea and springs of water” (Rev. 14:7) was made.

3. Another approach recognized that violation of the laws of health affected the
physical, mental, and spiritual constitution of man.17 For example, the effect of
the use of alcoholic beverages on the body was that it impaired the mind, which
in turn negatively affected spirituality.18 In 1866 Ellen White summarized this
approach by saying

Every violation of principle in eating and drinking, blunts the perceptive
faculties, making it impossible for them to appreciate or place the right
value upon eternal things. In order to render to God perfect service, you
want clear conceptions of his requirements. You should indulge in the
use of the most simple food, prepared in the most simple manner, that
the fine nerves of the brain be not weakened, benumbed nor paralyzed,
making it impossible for you to discern sacred things, and to value the
atonement, and the cleansing blood of Christ as of priceless worth.19

These arguments were used by the early pioneers of the Adventist church to
establish an appeal for total acceptance of health reform as an important part of the
third angel’s message.


We have briefly traced the development of the concepts of healthful living and their
integration into the message of the third angel. It is important to note that several
doctrines of the SDA church have greatly influenced thinking in regard to healthful living
and diet.

For instance, a major building block in the church’s philosophy of health has been the
holistic view of man. Adventist’s reject the Greek separation of body and soul, and its
corollary, the immortality of the soul. Instead, they accept the unitary view of Hebrew
thought. Body and spirit are united in a person, often referred to as “mortal man”. Life
is seen as a continuing, moment by moment gift of God, not a state conferred at some
point in the past. Accordingly, life exists only as long this gift continues to flow from
God, the only source of life.

The Adventist concept of salvation is strongly influenced by this view of man. If man is
a whole, God must save him as a whole. Jesus’ mission was not only the justification of
sinners but also their sanctification through a growing conformity with God’s will by the
indwelling of the Holy Spirit. S. N. Haskell, an early Adventist theologian said,

“Every true Christian should, therefore, take a broader view of Christ’s mission
than merely to say, ‘God forgives sins.’ In forgiving of sin, it should be
remembered that there is also a removing of the effects of sin, and sickness is
one of these effects. Repentance toward God includes, therefore, a ceasing to
transgress physical laws; and faith in Christ Jesus embraces God as the
author of these laws, as well as what is termed the moral law, which lies back
of all transgression, both physical and moral.”20

Thus Adventists place the law of nature alongside the moral law and believe that man
must obey both.

The doctrine of the body as the temple of God (Romans 12:1-2; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17;
6:19-20; 10:31) is also fundamental to the Adventist philosophy of health. This blends
the principles of true stewardship–that as humans we are only managers of what God
has entrusted to us–with the doctrine of the indwelling of the Spirit. J. N. Andrews,
another early theologian, wrote,

“Our bodies are the temple of the Holy Spirit. That we may truly glorify Him in
our bodies, as in our spirits, how requisite that we possess in full vigor all the
powers of our physical being. Thank God that this subject is now being
especially set before our people.”21


With this background information, let us quickly review the Biblical support for a
vegetarian diet.

In Scripture the diet covering the history of man can be divided into three distinct
periods: (1) The original Eden diet (Gen. 1:29); (2) The diet modified with the addition of
“the herb of the field (Gen. 3:18); and (3) The second modification permitting the use of
flesh foods (Gen. 9:3).

The Prefall Diet. To man in his innocence were given “every herb bearing seed,
which is upon the face of the earth, and every tree, in which is the fruit of a tree yielding
seed, to you it shall be for meat” (Gen. 1:29). The next verse makes it clear that God
made a distinction in the diet of man and animal, for to the animals He gave the green
plants for food. Ellen White wrote in 1864,

God gave our first parents the food He designed that the race should eat.
It was contrary to His plan to have the life of any creature taken. There was to
be no death in Eden. The fruit of the trees in the garden, was the food man’s
wants required.22

The Post Fall Diet. After man exercised his free-choice, sin entered this earth and
man was driven from the original Eden home, two dietary changes took place. First,
man lost access to the tree of life, and second, he was told to eat “the herb of the
field” (Gen. 3:18). Ellen White comments, “Grains, fruits, nuts, and vegetables
constitute the diet chosen for us by our Creator.”23

The Post-Flood Diet. About 1650 years later, as Noah’s family exited from the ark
onto a desolate earth after the flood, another modification was made. “Every moving
thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all
things” (Gen. 9:3). Ellen White adds this explanation,

Before this time God had given man no permission to eat animal food;
He intended that the race should subsist wholly upon the productions of the
earth; but now that every green thing had been destroyed, he allowed them to
eat the flesh of the clean beasts that had been preserved in the ark.24

The phrase “every moving thing” might be understood as license to eat any
creature. However, this was evidently not the intention, for prior to the flood, God
ordered Noah to preserve only one pair of each of the unclean animals in contrast to
seven of the clean. This limited the killing of animals for the emergency food supply to
the clean animals, of which some could be spared for slaughter.

Why did God makes this modification of the original diet plan? Two reasons
present themselves. First, “Every green thing had been destroyed,” and not enough
time had elapsed for new plants to develop. This was an emergency provision.25
Second, Ellen White was shown in a vision that
After the flood the people ate largely of animal food. God saw that the ways of
man were corrupt, and that he was disposed to exalt himself proudly against
his Creator and to follow the inclinations of his own heart. And he permitted
that long-lived race to eat animal food to shorten their sinful lives. Soon after
the flood the race begin to rapidly decrease in size, and in length of years.26

Genealogical records indicate that during the next 500 years the lifespan of man was
cut from Noah’s 950 years to Abraham’s 175 years. Not many generations following
Abraham, 80 years was considered a good life.27


When God led His people out of Egypt He again provided a diet of His choosing in the
form of the manna. Ellen White said, “He provided them with the food best adapted for
this purpose, not flesh, but manna, ‘the bread of heaven.'”28 This was a unique food
containing all the essential nutrients for man’s sustenance.

Leviticus 11 and Deuteronomy 14 contain the classifications of clean and unclean
animals. While it might appear that these distinctions were new, the experience of Cain
and Abel (Gen. 4) suggests that Adam was aware of the sacrificial system and its
regulations, which included an understanding of the clean and unclean animals. As
there is no record that Noah had any questions about which animals to save in pairs of
seven and which to restrict to one pair, it is plausible to assume that Noah did not need
any instructions as he already knew. He knew the clean from the unclean because of
his knowledge of the sacrificial system, for no unclean animal was ever accepted as an
offering to represent the Savior. Thus the Levitical codes delineating the clean and
unclean animals was simply a repetition of a classification known to those who lived
before the Levitical period. It was now repeated to Israel at Sinai, the same as the
sacrificial (ceremonial) law, and the moral law.

What is the difference between these two laws? The sacrificial laws were made up of
symbols pointing to Christ’s mission, sacrifice and priesthood. These rituals were to be
performed by the Hebrews until Christ’s death when they were to cease. However, the
moral was never to cease for it is eternal.29

This moral law can be divided into three parts: (1) The moral code of law which was ten
brief precepts given to all covering the duty of man to God and his fellow humans, each
based on the universal principle of love.30 (2) The national code of law based on the
last six of the commandments.31 (3) The last division of the moral law is the natural law.
All the laws of nature are the laws of God. They are constant and dependable, and
continually reveal the love of God. In every detail they express God’s purpose and love
for His creatures. It is clear that the moral code, national code, and the natural laws
never end, and they are in no way ceremonial or symbolic.

Now what about the eating of flesh as food? Not only was permission to eat it granted
under emergency situations, and its use restricted to emergency situations; but this
practice was further guarded by other regulations including a proscription on the eating
of the blood (Gen. 9:5; Lev. 7:26-27; 17:10-14) and the fat (Lev. 3:17; 7:23, 26; 1 Sam.
2:16). The Talmud records how the Hebrews were to prepare their meat. It was to be
chopped into small pieces, pounded, soaked, and washed. Then it was put into a
muslin cloth and beaten with a wooden mallet to express what fluid yet remained.
Treated in this way it became tasteless and it was customary to add leeks, onions and
garlic to give it flavor. Apparently, God never intended for meat to be eater as it is today.


The book of Acts records that an Apostolic Council was called over the question of
whether or not the observance of the ceremonial law should be required of Gentile
converts. James, the chairman of this council, rendered the decision that the
requirements to be emphasized to the Gentiles was “to abstain from things polluted by
idols, from sexual immorality, from things strangled, and from blood” (Acts 15:20).

Many stop here because they feel that not only has the ceremonial law been ended, but
that the natural laws of the Levitical code have also. To them the health laws given by
God to Israel, the laws of sanitation and hygiene for individuals, the home and the
nation, the instructions regarding food and its preparation, and especially the use of
meat–were all wiped out. Yet James continues, “For Moses has had throughout many
generations those who preach him in every city, being read in the synagogues every
Sabbath” (Acts 15:21).

This verse completes James summary of the Councils decision. While some scholars
entertain different views as to the meaning of this verse, the best interpretation suggests
that the instruction in the natural laws of Moses were still being read faithfully each
Sabbath, and that the Apostles felt it necessary to emphasize to the Gentile converts
these special points that related so definitely to their physical and moral safety. A letter
from Ellen G. White says,

The instructions given to Moses for ancient Israel with their sharp, rigid outlines
are to be studied and obeyed by the people of God today.”32

God, instead of leaving His people with only the ten commandments amplified them

He commanded Moses to write, as He should bid him, judgments and laws,
giving minute instructions in regard to what he required them to perform, and
thereby guarded the ten precepts which He had engraved upon tables of
stone. These specific directions and requirements were given to draw erring
man to the obedience of the moral law, which he is so prone to transgress.”33

Thus the purpose of God’s love in the many laws given through Moses which were
neither ceremonial nor temporary was to safeguard the moral law. The Levitical codes
regarding the food, sanitation and hygiene were included in these.


What about the diet for the remnant church? Paul, after recounting the wanderings
of Israel in the wilderness, admonishes those who are living at the “end of the age” not
to “lust after evil things” (I Cor. 10:6,11).

It is interesting to note, as Shea34 and Davidson35 has pointed out, that the Levitical
codes were given in the first section of the book as a preparation for the day of
Atonement. On this day, all secular interests and work were stopped. It was a day of
complete fasting. All were required to be clean physically and to put away all sins (Lev.

Seventh-day Adventists, believe that since 1844 they have been living in the antitypical
day of atonement, and that the Heavenly High Priest is in the most holy place of the
heavenly sanctuary about to complete the investigative judgment. This is a time for the
cleansing of the body, a searching of the soul, and fasting.

What is the fasting for those living in the antitypical day of atonement? Ellen White
wrote in 1896,

The true fasting which should be recommended to all is abstinence from every
stimulating kind of food, and the proper use of wholesome, simple food, which
God has provided in abundance.”36

It would appear that flesh foods have no place in the diet God has chosen for His
people at this time in earth’s history. The use of such foods are repeatedly spoken of
us “stimulating.” God’s diet calls for avoidance of every type of stimulation and an
intelligent use of simple foods; choosing to live in such a way as to always have clarity
of thought and mind.

Scripture records that that when God has a special work to be done, He entrusts a
special individual–or a special people–with the task, and then counsels them regarding
diet and healthful living. For example Samson, Daniel, John the Baptist, and the Advent

John the Baptist who represents those today who are called to prepare a people for
Christ’s second return lived and ate simply.

“The angel Gabriel, direct from heaven gave a discourse upon health reform to
the father and mother of John. . . His diet, purely vegetable, of locusts and wild
honey, was a rebuke to the indulgence and gluttony that everywhere

Of Daniel and his three companions who were tempted on the very issue we are
discussing today we read,

They did not move capriciously, but intelligently. They decided that as flesh
meat had not composed their diet in the past, it should not come into their diet in
the future.”38

It is interesting that even in that time of captivity there were some in Israel who
maintained the type of diet committed to God’s remnant people.
In the seventh chapter of Isaiah is the well known prophecy of Christ’s virgin birth.

Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign: Behold, a virgin shall conceive,
and bear a son, and shall call his name, Immanuel.39

Yet less well known is the next verse which is an integral part of this same prophecy.

Butter and honey shall he eat, that he might know the refuse the evil, and
choose the good.40

The phrase “butter and honey” or “milk and honey” occurs 22 times in Scripture.
Without exception, it describes completeness. Any land, for example, whose rivers
flowed with “milk and honey” had every thing. Thus this Hebrew phrase regarding a diet
of “milk and honey” indicates one that lacks nothing and is completely adequate.

The prophet goes on record that Christ would eat a completely adequate diet that
“He may know to refuse the evil, and choose the good.” Thus Christ set us an example
of living in harmony with physical law that His moral discernment might not be impaired.
When dying on the cross Christ refused the drink offered to Him lest His clarity of mind
be diminished, even for a moment.41

Anything that lessens physical strength enfeebles the mind and makes it less
capable of discriminating between right and wrong. We become less capable of
choosing the good and have less strength of will to do that which we know to be

In the new earth, as in Eden of old at the beginning, Scripture records that there will
be no destruction of life. “They shall not hurt nor destroy in all My holy mountain, says
the Lord” (Isa. 65:25). Those who have the privilege of living there will once more
subsist on the products of the earth. Ezekiel writes, “Along the bank of the river, and this
side and that, will grow all kinds of trees used for food;…Their fruit will be for food, and
their leaves for medicine” (Eze. 47:12). John the Revelator saw the same vision (Rev.
21-22) of the heavenly home where sin would be banished, death abolished, Eden
restored, and God’s law of love exemplified in every detail, moral, universal and natural.

Just as there was no sin and no death in the beginning in Eden, so it will be in Eden
restored–the new earth. Seventh-day Adventist’s believe that life on this earth today is
a preparation for eternal life in the earth made new. Thus it would seem logical that the
people of God today would choose in every possible respect to live a lifestyle here that
emulates the lifestyle which will be experienced in the new earth, including a vegetarian


Psalm 104:
1. God created the earth and all things in it, and he continues to sustain the earth
and all things in it by the loving exercise of his sovereign power.
2. The earth and all things in it belong to God by virtue of his creative work, and all
things find their reason for being fundamentally in relation to him.
3. The earth and all things in it were created perfectly– each creature in itself and
the entire creation in its interrelatedness.
4. Even after the entrance of sin into the created order this perfection still shines
through so as to be perceivable by man. Thus, creation continually bears witness
to the perfections of God and promotes in man praise toward God.

Christians recognize that God is Creator and owner of all. We are not the owners but
rather stewards (managers). Our authority is that of a trustee. Because all creatures
depend on the earth for life, health and fulfillment, stewardship is the responsible use
and care of what God has created. The Bible clearly testifies of this. Therefore our
relationship with God dictates how we treat the whole of creation. Fear is not the
primary motive that drives our care for the earth and its creatures, but it is because we
love God and all He has created.

There is little question to day that the most ecological way of eating is to be a


From time to time we hear negative health outcomes for vegetarians. We may be able
to explain these by flawed research, but maybe not. There have always been those who
questioned the value of God’s simple way of living and eating. I had to chuckle a few
weeks ago when I read about Apple Corporation’s “disappointing” financial results. Yet it
was the most profitable quarter in the history of the company–more than Microsoft and
IBM combined!

The weight of evidence is strongly in favor of a balanced, well-chosen vegetarian diet
today. Yet following God’s way has always required faith. We will probably never see the
time when all questions are settled. Our way of living, of eating has always stretched
our faith–and always will in some way until the Lord returns. I am not discouraged or

Throughout the history of this world there have been those who choose, even at great
risk, to eat a diet in harmony with that provided by God to Adam and Eve in the very
beginning, and that which will be in Eden restored. There is strong support for this
vegetarian diet from Scripture as well as in the writings of Ellen G. White. In preparing
for this paper, I was surprised by the lack of clear discussion on this topic by Adventist
theologians, particularly as the dietary and health laws of the Old Testament relate to
the call to holiness and preparation with the inherent promise of power to accomplish
what is necessary.

We are living in the final days of the world’s history. Christ looked prophetically down
the stretches of time and saw the world awash with moral pollution of every kind. To
protect us from these delusions by keeping our minds clear and sharp, God in His
infinite wisdom and love, gave His remnant people the wonderful, scientifically
vindicated, message of Health Reform. This message, given in language all can
understand, describes a lifestyle that preserves, above and beyond its many health
benefits, moral integrity.

The apostle John expressed his great longing when he wrote

Beloved, I pray that you may prosper in all things and be in health, just as your
soul prospers..43

1. P. Gerard Damsteegt, Foundations of the Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission (Grand
Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1977), p. 222.
2. A vegetarian diet was not original with Adventist pioneers. Sylvester Graham published a book in
1839 advocating many aspects of vegetarian diets. In 1850 the American Vegetarian Society was
founded, and a number of prominent persons subscribed to this dietary.
3. While the Bible served as the source of moral direction and some specific information on healthful
living, a lot of the reforms came from the visions of E. G. White or the discoveries of science.
4. For an understanding of health reform practices among Adventists before and after 1863 see, Arthur
W. Spaulding, Origin and History of Seventh-day Adventists, vol. I (Washington, DC: Review and
Herald Publishing Association, 1961), pp. 335-352.
5. Damsteegt, pp. 222-241.
6. James White, “Western Tour,” Review and Herald, Nov. 8, 1870, p. 165.
7. E. G. White, Letter 5, 1851.
8. “Tobacco”, Review and Herald, Dec. 13, 1853, p. 178.
9. Ellen G. White, Manuscript 1, 1954.
10. Ibid.
11. Robinson, The Story of Our Health Message, pp. 75-171.
12. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to the Church Vol.1 ( ), p. 469.
13. Ibid., p. 470.
14. Damsteegt, pp. 229-31.
15. Ibid. p. 229.
16. Ibid. p. 230.
17. Ibid. p. 230-31.
18. The experience of Nadab and Abihu (Lev. 10:1-2) was used to support this reasoning. God did not
excuse them because their brains were confused by alcohol. See Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts, vol.
4, p. 125.
19. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 2, p.46.
20. Stephen N. Haskell, “Christ the Healer From the Beginning,” The Medical Missionary 1 (May 1891),
p. 84.
21. John N. Andrews, Review and Herald, October 25, 1864, p. 176.
22. Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4 (Battle Creek, MI: Steam Press of the SDA Publishing
Association, 1864), p. 120.
23. Ellen G. White, Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1942
ed.), p. 296.
24. Ellen G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association,
1958 ed.), p. 107.
25. Roger Coon, in an unpublished monograph, “Ellen G. White, Vegetarianism, and the ‘Integrity’
Issue” discusses the dietary teaching and practice of Ellen G. White as it relates to vegetarianism.
He puts forth evidence suggesting that prior to 1894, she condoned the use of flesh foods in
emergency situations.
26. Ellen G. White, Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4, p. 121.
27. Although no permission to eat flesh had been given before the flood, Ellen White was shown that
“the inhabitants of the antediluvian world were intemperate in eating and drinking. They would
have flesh meat, although God had at that time given man no permission to eat animal food.”
Christian Temperance and Bible Hygiene (Battle Creek, MI: Good Health Publishing Company,
1890), p. 43.
28. Ellen G. White, Ministry of Healing, p. 311.
29. Ibid., p. 365.
30. Ibid., p. 305.
31. The application of this can be illustrated by the sixth commandment which is the injunction, “Thou
shalt not kill” (Ex. 20: ). The rules of driving: stop signs, railroad crossings, etc., interpret this
command into every day principles.
32. Ellen G. White, Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary (Washington, DC: Review and Herald
Publishing Association, 1953), p. 1103.
33. Ellen G. White, Spirit of Prophecy, vol I (Battle Creek, MI: SDA Publishing Association, 1884), p.
34. William H. Shea, “Clean and Unclean Meats” (Unpublished paper from BRICOM, General Conference
of SDA, Washington, DC: March 1987).
35. Richard M. Davidson, “The Good News of Yom Kippur,” Journal of the Adventist Theological Society,
2/2 (1991):4-27.
36. Ellen G. White, Counsels and Diet and Foods (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing
Association, 1938), p. 90.
37. Ellen G. White, Counsels on Health (Mountain View. CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1951),
p. 72.
38. Ellen G. White, SDA Bible Commentary, pp. 1166-7.
39. Isaiah 7:14
40. Isaiah 7:15
41. Ellen G. White, Testimonies to the Church, Vol. 3, pp. 50-51
42. Ellen G. White, Christ’s Object Lessons (Washington, DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association,
1941 ed.), p. 346.
43. 3 John 2


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *