Ellen White is often called the Messenger to the 7th-day Adventist Church. And although she has helped shape our church’s unique understanding of Bible prophecy, she also has a number of mysterious statements that find themselves in the crosshairs of many critics and former Adventists. Two of these statements refer to something Ellen White called Amalgamation.

 What did Ellen White say about Amalgamation?

“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.” 3SG 63

“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.” 3SG 75

What is Amalgamation?

According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Amalgamation is “the action or process of uniting or merging two or more things.” So, from Ellen White’s statement, the Antediluvians were merging two things, and this was a serious sin per the excerpt.

The Accusation

1. According to Ellen White’s accusers, the word amalgamation was often used in her day by racists who used the term to refer to black and white intermarriages. While this may be the case, we should understand that just because racists use a particular word doesn’t inherently make that word racist. It should also be noted that Ellen White used Amalgamation in later statements to refer to the mixture of wheat and tares, [1] and God’s people mixing with corrupt people. [2] 

Furthermore, in other statements regarding the intermarriages of whites and blacks, Ellen White always referred to this union as intermarriage.

“It is not a proper thing to do to be in defense that the white and black shall intermarry, entailing upon their offspring difficulties their children should not be obliged to carry.” PCO 89

Here, Ellen White strongly advised against interracial marriages. We don’t have to guess her reasons; according to her own words, she wanted to avoid entailing upon their offspring difficulties that were often imposed upon them by a prejudiced society. However, notice Ellen White does not call this union an Amalgamation; she calls it an intermarriage. If Ellen White was suggesting that Amalgamation referred to interracial marriages, she would’ve used that term here. Thus, any further suggestions that Ellen White used Amalgamation to refer to black-and-white unions are simply unfounded in light of this perspective.

2. Ellen White’s accusers also say that when she wrote, “The confused species which God did not create,” she was referring to black people. And when she penned, “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,” that she was once again referring to the African race.

Whether people actually believe Ellen White was a racist or not, I am intrigued with the possibility that many of her accusers would only summon the racist label when it conveniently serves their ideological agendas—but perhaps I am being too racially sensitive, so I digress.

Let’s deal with Ellen White’s statements on their own merit. In other words, let’s remove all the emotions of prejudice and bias that may come with what we believe Ellen White is saying. Let’s pause our political affiliations and how we feel modern societies address or don’t address racial issues and let’s view Ellen White’s statements in a vacuum—one that has yet to be contaminated by our own personal experiences and feelings. And if we are able to do this, I believe we will discover Ellen White’s statements are less about race and more about biology.

Examining the AMALGAMATION of man and beast statement

Examining Ellen White’s statement there are two issues that she is referring to.

1. The Amalgamation of man.
2. The Amalgamation of beast.

What is the amalgamation of beasts?

Knowing that amalgamation refers to a mixture, we should see that Ellen White was indicating that the Antediluvians were producing unsanctioned offspring by mating different species of animals that God never intended for them to procreate with one another. Reading the Biblical account, we can see that God was particular about these unsanctioned mixtures. Leviticus 19:19 says, “Ye shall keep my statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind...”

Thus, when Ellen White refers to the amalgamation of beasts, she seems to be referring to the breeding of unsanctioned animals—a breeding that we now know God commanded against.

Who are the confused species?

Ellen White has been accused of calling some of the people in Noah’s day the “confused species.” However, a closer look at Ellen White’s words, we can see that whenever she used the word “species” she was only referring to animals, not humans. If anyone doubts this, all one would need to do is read her opening statement where she says, “Every SPECIES OF ANIMAL which God had created were preserved in the ark.” And again, at the end of her statement where she differentiates beast from man by referring to animals as “varieties of SPECIES OF ANIMALS,” and humans by referring to them as “CERTAIN RACES OF MEN.”

Here, Ellen White reveals that any species of animal that was part of an unsanctioned breed would have been excluded from God’s supernatural parade into Noah’s ark. But she also reveals that many of those unsanctioned species existed in her day. Thus, it should be clear that when Ellen White used the word “species,” she was referring to animals, and when she used the phrase “races of men, she was referring to humans.

What is the amalgamation of man?

The more shocking statements come from Ellen White’s reference to the amalgamation of man.

Seventh-day Adventists are divided on the meaning of the Amalgamation of man. According to Francis D. Nichol, a former supervising editor of the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, Ellen White’s reference to Amalgamation is really about the righteous amalgamating with the wicked through marriage. [3] Although this is a possible meaning, it seems unlikely due to the fact Ellen White also referred to this type of mixture as “intermarriage.”

In Spiritual Gifts vol 3 pp 60-61 she says,

“As the sons of God mingled with the sons of men, they became corrupt, and by intermarriage with them, lost, through the influence of their wives, their peculiar, holy character, and united with the sons of Cain in their idolatry.” 

While intermarriage is technically a type of amalgamation, the premise of Ellen White’s amalgamation statements regarding the Antediluvians seems to suggest that the activity employed by the Antediluvians was an uncommon type of sin. She went as far as to call it a “base crime,” meaning that this sin was one of the lowest of the low. And although intermarriage with the wicked or being unequally yoked is a bad thing, is this considered a base crime?

According to Ellen White’s own words, the righteous Antediluvians intermarrying the wicked Antediluvians was not the base crime itself, this intermarrying is what OPENED them to a myriad of sins, which likely included the base crime of amalgamation. 

“Men and women professing godliness should tremble at the thought of entering into a marriage covenant with those who do not respect and obey the commandments of God. It was this that opened the flood-gates of sin to the antediluvians.” ST December 30, 1880. 

Although being unequally yoked is not God’s plan, I don’t know how it could be considered the sin, above all others, that would deface the image of God. This leads me to believe that Amalgamation is more than being unequally yoked. 

When we examine Ellen White’s statements, it becomes clear to me that Ellen White is not only suggesting that the Antediluvians were amalgamating animals with animals, but she seems to also suggest that they were amalgamating animals with humans! In essence, the people before the flood were engaging in activities that resulted in humanoid offspring that had common genetics with animals.

Now, before we go crazy, we should know that from times of old, men and women have had sexual relations with animals. This relation is called bestiality and God warned Israel not to engage in it. Notice what Leviticus 20:15-16 says: “And if a man lie with a beast, he shall surely be put to death: and ye shall slay the beast. And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.” From this text, we can make the educated assumption that the Antediluvian, who God said, “every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually,” [4] were engaged in this practice among many others.

It appears, that Ellen White suggested that the wicked in Noah’s day were not only engaging in sexual relations with animals but that these wicked people had, in some form or fashion, produced animal-human offspring. While this interpretation can be disputed, what cannot be disputed is the fact that Ellen White says that this corruption above all others “defaced the image of God.” Well, according to Genesis 1:27, “God created man in his own image”, and if this image was defaced, then it would seem that Ellen was referring to individuals who no longer looked physically how God originally designed for them to look.

The problem with the animal-human hybrid theory

Biologically, the differences between animals and humans prohibit us from producing offspring with each other. Today, this is an indisputable fact, however, is it possible that in times past this may have been a possibility? 

Understanding Bible history, we should see that humans and animals have drastically changed since the flood and really since creation itself.

• In the early days, humans could procreate with their siblings. Yes, early humans married their siblings and were able to produce healthy offspring. However today, procreation with close relatives increases the chance of birth defects or mutations.
• Before the flood, there were giants in the land. However, after the flood, their numbers decreased and eventually ceased.
• Before the flood, humans lived for hundreds of years, but after the flood, man’s lifespan decreased immensely.
• Before the flood, we were considered one race, but after the flood, we began to see variations within the human race.

Please know, there’s nothing in this list that proves we were able to produce offspring with animals in times past; however, we do know there have been marked changes in our bodies since the flood. Therefore, I can only speculate the possibility that there were particular species of animal that the Antediluvians biologically were able to experiment with, and those experimentations resulted in some form of amalgamation that defaced the image of God.

Other sources besides Ellen White

Whether Ellen White made these statements under inspiration or whether she was simply confirming something she read, we do see this idea suggested from other noncanonical references.

According to the apocryphal book of Jasher, it says, “And their judges and their rulers went to the daughters of men and took their wives by force from their husbands according to their choice, and 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, in order therewith to provoke YHWH; and Aluhayim saw the whole earth and it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its ways upon earth, all men and all animals.” Jasher 4:18

Regarding the Antediluvians, The Jewish Theological Seminary says "…it was crossbreeding between species that angered God and caused God to reboot with specimens that were still arranged “according to their families” (Gen. 8:19; see Midrash Tanhuma, Buber ed., Noah 11). In the Talmud (BT Sanhedrin 108a), Rabbi Yohanan teaches that animals prior to the flood were mating not only across species but also across genera, and that humans were mating with “everyone.” This interspecies orgy was the “corruption of all flesh” (Gen. 6:12) that caused the Creator to destroy life on earth. The Torah’s orderly procession of animals into the ark “two by two,” emphasizes species differentiation, which the Bible apparently believes to be a priority of the Creator." [5]

These sources may not outrightly say that man was amalgamating with animals, but it should be clear that something was going on during the time of Noah that was so devious that God not only punished man, but He punished the beasts along with them. Ellen White appears to go a step further and makes the connection that man was amalgamating with the animals.

Genetic splicing

There is also the possibility that the Antediluvians were genetically modifying humans or animals. However, due to the complex methods that are necessary for such a procedure, it is hard to fathom that this ability existed back in Noah’s day, but, let me remind you that Ellen White understood the Antediluvians to be far superior then men of her day.

“The world today takes much satisfaction in talking of the progress of the age. But in this God does not delight. It may be said of the men of this time, as of those before the flood, They have sought out many INVENTIONS. In the antediluvian world there were many wonderful works of art and SCIENCE. These descendants of Adam, fresh from the hand of God, possessed capabilities and powers that we never now look upon.” 55 Manuscript 16, 1898.

Again she wrote, “There perished in the flood greater INVENTIONS of art and human skill than the world knows of today.” 7 MR 367

Thus, it is wholly possible that their superior minds devised methods that allowed them to genetically change mankind and animals to such a degree that God decided to destroy the whole world.

Evolution?

Paleontologists and archeologists around the world are constantly discovering the fossils of humans and animals. While they often suggest these remains are millions of years old, I believe many of these fossils are the remains of animals that died in the flood or became extinct soon afterward. One of these findings is what scientists say is a hominin skeleton that they named Lucy. Lucy appears to have chimpanzee-human features, which they believe proves that she was in the midst of what they call the evolutionary process.

However, it should be understood that Lucy is not a complete skeleton. [6] In order to make the skeleton complete, the science community has had to make a number of assumptions that could make the difference between her being an animal or a human. As a result, Christians dispute these assumptions, and rightfully so.

Another find was a more complete skeleton that they named Ardi. Regarding this fossil, her discoverers once said, “She looked unlike anything ever seen before –what her discoverers described as ‘neither chimpanzee nor human.’” [7]

Although there have been other findings that many believe support the theory of evolution, there is a possibility that these fossils are in fact authentic. There is a chance that these are truly skeletons that aren’t fully human but not fully animal either, but the reason is not because of evolution, it may be the results of Amalgamation.

Amalgamation isn’t evidence for or an endorsement of evolution, it’s an explanation for discoveries that have fueled atheism for years. What many paleontologists and archeologists believe to be ancient fossils that were evolving from animal to human may just be the experiments of a superior ancient race that was attempting to play God. 

Amalgamation in a “Varieties of species of animals.”

Ellen White then caps off her Amalgamation revelation by suggesting that Amalgamation was still happening in her day and could be seen in the countless varieties of species and certain races of men.

Here, we can see that Ellen White begins by making the point that man was still breeding species of animals that God never intended to be bred and could be seen in many species of her time.

While she never specified which species she was referring to, we can guess that she likely observed animals such as the tigon (tiger and lion), the mule (donkey and horse), the zonkey (zebra and donkey), and the leopon (leopard and lioness) among many others. She was correct when she suggested that this amalgamation was still occurring in her day.

 Amalgamation in “certain races of men”?

The biggest clincher to those who accuse Ellen White of making racist comments is the final part of her statement where she refers to “certain races of men.”

This statement is sometimes called the most embarrassing statement by Ellen White and the Seventh-day Adventist Church. However, a closer look at this statement and an understanding of the society in Ellen White’s day, we can see that Ellen White was not being racist, she was simply reporting on what she saw. But the question is who or what was Ellen White seeing or referring to when she saw Amalgamation in certain races of men.

In order to reveal this to you, you must understand what was happening in her day. In the 1800’s the circus drew large crowds. However, something that was happening in these circuses got the attention of Ellen White. Here’s what one source said:

“In the circus world, freak shows, also called sideshows, were an essential part of the circus. The largest sideshow was attached to the most prestigious circus, Ringling Brothers, Barnum and Bailey, known as the "big one". It was a symbol of the peak of the practice and its acceptance in American society. In the early 1800s, single human oddities started joining traveling circuses, but these shows were not organized into anything like the sideshows we know until the midcentury. During the 1870s it was common to see freak shows at most circuses, eventually making the circus a hub for the display of human oddities.” [8]

In Ellen White’s time, circuses were huge attractions. And part of these attractions was something called freak shows. However, I want you to notice that these shows really became organized as a common attraction by the 1870s, not long after Ellen White penned the statement “Amalgamation of man and beast.”

It is important to take note of this date because this is at the crux of what Ellen White was seeing in her day. Now, let’s understand exactly what Ellen White saw that made her believe Amalgamation was still occurring in her day.

I believe we’ve seen enough images of what was popular in Ellen White’s day to understand why she believed she was seeing an Amalgamation of man and beast. The freak shows were one of the most popular attractions in America and many of these attractions featured individuals who were touted as half human and half beast. Ellen White believed that many of these individuals were a continuation of the Amalgamation she understood to have taken place in Noah’s day. She mistakenly assessed individuals, who we now know just had unusual deformities, as advertised—half man and half beast. Today, we know enough about human mutations to understand that these were not animal-human hybrids, but in the mid-1800s many likely believed that these people were an Amalgamation of man and beast, including Ellen White.

Which races of men was Ellen White referring to?

The accusation is that Ellen White was showing contempt for the black race when she said, “certain races of men.” However, notice, she didn’t say “a certain race of man,” as this could mean she was singling out a specific race. We must see that Ellen White said “races,” meaning there was more than one. Furthermore, when we look at the above images, we can clearly see these side shows consisted of different nationalities, colors, and races. So just what race was Ellen White seeing? According to the historical record, she was seeing “unknown races.” Here’s what the source says:

“The showmen and promoters exhibited all types of freaks. People who appeared non-white or who had a disability were often exhibited as UNKNOWN RACES and cultures. These "unknown" races and disabled whites were advertised as being undiscovered humans to attract viewers.” [9]

Another source states it like this: “Organizers often fabricated stories about these individuals, calling them exotic, wild or of UNKNOWN RACES or civilizations.” [10]

Now it should be clear. Ellen White was not referring to blacks, whites, or any other race specifically. We have enough evidence to see that Ellen White wasn’t sure what “race” they were because they were described to everyone as unknown races.

Did Ellen White remove Amalgamation statements from later books?

Ellen White never removed the Amalgamation statement; she simply omitted it in later books. However, considering the controversy her statement produced in earlier years, why would she include it? Ellen White wisely omitted the Amalgamation subject from later books so as to not stir any further controversy and cause the church to be preoccupied with racist accusations rather than focusing on the Advent movement.

In Conclusion

At this point, if you still believe Ellen White was making racist statements, it is because you want to see it and there’s nothing that can be said that would make you change your mind. To this day, Ellen White is still accused of saying black people were not human, or that she doesn’t believe they were created by God, but I am hopeful these few statements will help you see that this was never the case:
“The Lord Jesus came to our world to save men and women of all nationalities. He died just as much for the colored people as for the white race.” SWk 9

"The Lord's eye is upon all His creatures; He loves them all, and makes no difference between white and black, except that He has a special tender pity for those who are called to bear a greater burden than others.... Those who slight a brother because of his color, are slighting Christ.... Sin rests upon us as a church because we have not made greater effort for the salvation of souls among the colored people.... God has children among the colored people all over the land." Manuscript 6, 1891, 4a, 7, 9, 11. (“Our Duty to the Colored People,” November 4, 1889.)

“The black man's name is written in the book of life beside the white man's. All are one in Christ. Birth, station, nationality, or color cannot elevate or degrade men. The character makes the man. If a red man, a Chinaman, or an African gives his heart to God, in obedience and faith, Jesus loves him none the less for his color. He calls him his well-beloved brother. The day is coming when the Kings and the Lordly men of the earth would be glad to exchange places with the humblest African who has laid hold on the hope of the gospel.” SWk 12

“I have a most earnest interest in the work to be done among the colored people. This is a branch of work that has been strangely neglected. The reason that this large class of human beings, who have souls to save or to lose, have been so long neglected, is the prejudice that the white people have felt and manifested against mingling with them in religious worship. They have been despised, shunned, and treated with abhorrence, as though crime were upon them, when they were helpless and in need, when men should have labored most earnestly for their salvation. They have been treated without pity. The priests and the Levites have looked upon their wretchedness, and have passed by on the other side.” SWk 19

“Through faith in Christ the colored people may attain unto eternal life as verily as may the white people. Those whom the Lord sees neglected by us have been entrusted with reasoning powers, and yet they have been treated as though they had no souls. They have been wounded by a so-called Christian nation.” SWk 29

“The Lord looks upon the creatures He has made with compassion, no matter to what race they may belong.” SWk 57

"For Christ's sake, let us do something now. Let every church whose members claim to believe the truth for this time, look at this neglected, downtrodden race, that, as a result of slavery, have been deprived of the privilege of thinking and acting for themselves. They have been kept at work in the cotton fields, have been driven before the lash like brute beasts, and their children have received no enviable heritage. Many of the slaves had noble minds, but the fact that their skin was dark, was sufficient reason for the whites to treat them as though they were beasts." SWk 43

"There is to be no special heaven for the white man and another heaven for the black man. We are all to be saved through the same grace, all to enter the same heaven at last. Then why not act like rational beings, and overcome our unlikeness to Christ? The same God that blesses us as His sons and daughters blesses the colored race. Those who have the faith that works by love and purifies the soul will look with compassion and love upon the colored people. Many of those who have had every advantage, who have regarded themselves as superior to the colored people because their skin was white, will find that many of the colored race will go into heaven before them." SWk 55



[1] All tares are sown by the evil one. Every noxious herb is of his sowing, and by his ingenious methods of amalgamation he has corrupted the earth with tares. 2SM 288

[2] …the character of God's people becomes tarnished, and through amalgamation with the corrupt the fine gold becomes dim. RH Aug 23, 1892

[3] https://whiteestate.org/legacy/issues-amalg-html/

[4] Genesis 6:5 (KJV)

[5] https://www.jtsa.edu/torah/species-purity-and-the-great-flood

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_(Australopithecus)

[7] https://www.sciencefocus.com/the-human-body/lucy-and-ardi-the-two-fossils-that-changed-human-history

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freak_show

[9] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freak_show

[10] Keith, Heather, and Keith, Kenneth D.. Intellectual Disability: Ethics, Dehumanization, and a New Moral Community. Germany, Wiley, 2013.