Much has changed in the 100-plus years since White penned The Great Controversy. The church then had a worldwide membership equivalent to that of a large local conference. More significantly, the number of highly educated members has mushroomed, and education prompts members to ask probing questions. The most pressing question regarding any old and sacred text is the extent to which it is historically influenced. Fundamentalists say no.
Progressives say yes.
Perhaps the official church will never exclusively identify with either the fundamentalists or the progressives. From early in denominational history the seeds of both views have been present. On the one hand, Adventist pioneers took a literalist view of scripture, but Ellen White also advocated the doctrine of wholism in which the mental, physical and social dimensions were seen as important as the spiritual. Non-Adventist fundamentalists have an easier row to hoe in that their narrow focus on the spiritual easily allows them to establish Bible colleges in which nothing other than scripture gets serious attention. However, wholistic Adventism has fostered accredited colleges and universities where a plethora of disciplines are understood to yield valid knowledge.