Is the True, Original SDA Gospel Protestant or Catholic?
Click to go to our Home Page
Dear Reader, Many who believe what the Bible
and Ellen White say about overcoming sin, are accused of teaching a Catholic
gospel. Pastor Dennis Priebe does an excellent job of disproving this false
accusation often made against true historicist Seventh-day Adventists. The following sermon by Pastor
Dennis Priebe will clearly demonstrate the reality of two different gospels
being taught in the professing Seventh-day Adventist church. There are many
proponents of the New Theology gospel among SDA leaders. Pastor Priebe names
a few of them in his sermon, but one merely has to read the many books of a
new order by SDA leaders to discern the prevalence of the false gospel being
taught by the professing Seventh-day Adventist New Movement church. Proponents of the true gospel,
other than Pastor Priebe, include Dr. Ralph Larson, relieved of his ministerial
credentials, Dr. John Grosboll, relieved of his ministerial credentials,
Colin and Russell Standish, Ron Spear, and there are others. The growth trend in the SDA
church is toward the New Theology false gospel. The logical conclusion of
that false gospel is that it is foolish to try to keep the Sabbath
commandment if one cannot overcome sin this side of glorification. The
proponents of the New Theology will one day instruct the members of the SDA
church to keep Sunday. Ellen White predicted that. The only reason they
remain in the church is to convert others to their Satanic belief system. Notice: "The Lord has a controversy with his professed people in these last days. In this controversy
men in responsible positions will
take a course directly opposite to that pursued by Nehemiah. They will not
only ignore and despise the Sabbath themselves, but they will try to keep it
from others by burying it beneath the rubbish of custom and tradition. In
churches and in large gatherings in the open air, ministers, will urge upon
the people the necessity of keeping the first day of the week." E.G.
White, Review and Herald, Vol. 1,
p. 405, col. 3. Ellen White was speaking to professing Seventh-day Adventists.
Babylonians have always instructed their people to keep Sunday, but “…in
these last days,” SDA leaders will do the same, and that is only acting on
the logical conclusion of the New Theology, that we cannot keep all the
commandments this side of glorification, and by the belief that we are saved by
forensic justification, without sanctification as a condition and/or the
teaching that sanctification, even when empowered by the Holy Spirit, is not
meritorious toward our salvation. The basis of the two different
gospels clusters around the human nature of Christ and what was accomplished
by His atonement on the cross and what is being accomplished for the true
believer now in the heavenly sanctuary. While you are reading Pastor Priebe’s
article, keep the following E.G. White statement clear in mind: "The intercession of Christ in man's behalf in the sanctuary
above is as essential to the plan of salvation as was His death upon the
cross. By His death He began that work which after His resurrection He
ascended to complete in heaven. We must by faith enter within the veil,
'whither the forerunner is for us entered.' Hebrews 6:20:" E.G. White, The Great Controversy, 1911 edition,
p. 489. ***** Dennis Priebe confronts continuing claims that regular Adventism
partakes of flawed Roman Catholic theology A Quiz A little while back I came across an
article in the Adventist Review, September 23, 1999. In it was a
little quiz, and I'm going to ask you to take this quiz as you hear the
statements I'm going to make. I'm not going to ask you to raise your hand, I
just want you to think about what you would answer to these various
questions, and then I am going to put them on the board as well so we can
make very clear what we're talking about. Here's the quiz, and it's always
going to be odd number and even number, odd and even, one and two. Alright, one, is this what you believe?
"Our right standing with God is based solely on what Christ has done for
us." Alright? So number one, and listen carefully, "Our right
standing with God," in other words, salvation, "is based solely on
what Christ has done for us." For us. Number two, now these are going to be
either/or, number two, "Our right standing with God is based on what
Christ has done for us and in us." And so the second one is "for
and in." Alright, I'll read those two again. Think about what you
believe. "Our right standing with God is based solely, solely on what
Christ has done for us," or, "Our right standing with God is based
on what Christ has done for us and in us." For, and in. Alright, you think about that, you decide
what you believe. Now here's the next set of two statements. One, "We are justified through the
merits of Jesus Christ alone." So we are justified through the merits of
Jesus alone. Two, "We are justified through the merits of Christ and
through the work of the Holy Spirit in our life." So we are justified by
Christ and the Holy Spirit. So let me read those again, one, "We are
justified through the merits of Jesus Christ alone." Two, "We are
justified through the merits of Christ and through the work of the Holy
Spirit in our life." Alright, think about those and what you
think is the right answer there. Again, next set, number one, "God gives
us right standing with Him by accounting us righteous in His sight."
Accounting, so we are accounted righteous, credited, counted, stated to be
righteous. Number two, "God gives us right standing with Him by actually
making us righteous in His sight." Making us, actually making us
righteous. So the two =statements again, number one, "God gives us right
standing with Him by accounting us righteous in His sight." Two,
"God gives us right standing with Him by actually making us righteous in
His sight." Think about what you would answer to
that. And the last one, number one, "After accepting Christ's
righteousness, a believer experiences the new birth, which results in a
transformed life and character." So, after being justified, let's put
the first statement here. That leads to, that will produce the new birth.
After accepting Christ's righteousness, which is justification, a believer
experiences the new birth, which results in a transformed life and character.
Two, "After having a new birth experience, in which a person's life and
character is transformed, that person is then justified before God." So
it just reverses it. After the new birth, that leads to a justified state or
standing in God's sight. Now let me read those two again. The
first, after accepting Christ's righteousness, or after justification, a
believer experiences the new birth, which results in a transformed life, so
after you have been saved, after you have been accepted by God, then you
experience the new birth. Or two, after a new birth experience in which a
person's life and character are transformed, that persons is then justified
before God. Alright. There you have the four questions that I would like you
to think carefully about as to how you would answer those various questions. Now I'm going to read what was in the
article by Clifford Goldstein as the conclusion of this little quiz. "If
you have placed true after any or all of the even numbered ones, column two,
the even numbered ones, to some degree at least you are inclined toward the
teaching that Roman Catholicism has embraced since the Council of Trent in
the 16th century." So all of these statements here, are
Catholic. Reading onward, "All of the odd-numbered statements reflected
the biblical teaching that our right standing before God is based not even on
what God can do in us, but solely on what Christ had done in our stead
through His life and death." And so the odd-numbered statements are the
biblical statements. He continues, "The even-numbered
statements, the number-two statements, reflect the idea that our right
standing before God is based not just on Christ's merits imputed or credited
to us, but also on what God does in our lives. This latter position has been
attractive to Roman Catholics and some Adventists. The holiness that makes
anyone right before God, is never the personal holiness that is manifested in
good works and obedience to the law. That holiness is never good enough for
salvation. The only holiness that saves us is the holiness that existed in
Christ Jesus in the flesh." Well there's our quiz, and the
conclusions of the quiz in this review article, as to what is Catholic and
what is Protestant. And that is the basis for my subject this afternoon,
"Protestant or Catholic?" Now it wasn't just this article alone.
Also in the Adventist Review
of June 22, 2000, is an article entitled "By Grace Alone" by the
same author, Clifford Goldstein, in which he deals with this subject a little
more in depth and explains a little more than in just this brief little quiz
that he gave, and I want to share just a little but of what he said in this
article. He said, "Since the Reformation,
Lutherans along with almost all Protestants have insisted that justification
by faith is an act by which God declares us or accounts us righteous. The
Reformers taught that justification is something that god does for us, not in
us. Nothing that happens in us gives us merit that can in any way justify us
in God's sight. We are justified only by what Christ did for us, apart from
us, outside of us." Now he continues a little more on this line. He
said, "Protestants understand the grace of justification as purely a
legal declaration. For Rome, justification is a process of inner renewal,
something that happens in us." So Protestants say its just legal, an
accounting, a declaring for us; for Rome it is an inward renewal. Any time
we're talking about inward change, heart-change, we're into Catholic doctrine
on this subject, and we need to recognize that, he is saying. It is not just this author that is doing
that, but also in another Review,
article, May 25, 2000, by Woodrow Whidden, a teacher at Andrews University,
he also makes some of the same statements in which he deals with this idea of
justification and how it happens. "Papal Rome believes that
justification makes a sinner righteous through an inner sanctifying or
transforming grace. Through this transforming grace, the sinner is declared
to be justified." So transforming grace is Papal. "Rome teaches that
the sinner is justified because of what grace does in him, or her."
However, "The Reformers," he says, "believed that transforming
grace was the inevitable result of receiving Christ by faith, a fruit of the
justifying root of Christ's imputed righteousness." And then the
question, "If I am saved because of what Christ does in me, how can I
ever be sure that my obedience and good works will be enough to satisfy the
infinite justice of God?" Well there it is. There's the
presentation as made by at least two major individuals within the Seventh-day
Adventist church on this subject. And the challenge is thrown out, are you
Protestant, or are you Catholic? I think that's a legitimate challenge. We
need to know. Brothers and sisters, we need to know, and we need to know why
we believe it. A recent campmeeting speaker has been heard to say that the
teaching of Christ in you is pantheism. Christ in you is pantheism. As I read these two articles and others
like them, I thought back to when I was teaching at pacific Union College,
and two individuals came through and were expressing their views about
justification and righteousness by faith. Robert Brinsmead and Jeffrey Paxton
came together, and Jeffrey Paxton later wrote a book titled The Shaking of Adventism. Now Jeffrey
Paxton is not an Adventist, but he was very interested in the teachings of
Adventism. And listen carefully to what Jeffrey Paxton wrote in his book The Shaking of Adventism, page
39: "Whereas Rome taught that
justification means to make the believer just through inner renewal in
his heart, the Reformers taught that justification is the declaration
by God that the believer is just on the grounds of the righteousness of
Christ alone which is outside the believer." He said, "To focus on
the indwelling Christ is to abandon the reformation doctrine of
justification" (pp. 42). He said on page 40, "The grace of God
always refers to God and never to what is in the believer's heart." And so as I read these statements in
recent Review articles, my
mind was called back to the same statements being made by Jeffrey
Paxton regarding Catholicism and Protestantism. The challenge was thrown out
to us in the late seventies, "Are you Protestant or are you
Catholic?" And the very same kinds of questions were asked then, as are
being asked now in the pages of our church's flagship paper. And it is
clearly stated that to believe in an inward work of grace as necessary and
preceding salvation, that is Catholic. And to believe that Christ declares us
righteous and it is a legal work, that is Protestant. And so there is the
same statement made by Jeffrey Paxton back in those years as is made now
today by Clifford Goldstein and Woodrow Whidden. So. What we need to do is examine the
evidence to see what the Bible really teaches. So I'm going to invite you to
take your Bibles right now, and we're going to study a little bit about
justification from the Bible. A Bible Study Turn to Romans chapter five, verse one.
"Therefore, being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our
Lord Jesus Christ." So the context here is obviously justification. Paul
is talking about justification, especially in Romans three through five; that
is a given. Now look back here just a little bit in
chapter four. Look back to verses seven and eight. "Blessed are they
whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man
to whom the Lord will not impute sin," that means credit, declare if you
will, account. "Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not credit sin."
That's justification. See, Paul is amplifying here his subject of
justification. And notice, "blessed are they who's iniquities are
forgiven." That's justification. So, very clearly, justification is
forgiveness of sin, covering of sins, imputing no sin to the believer. That's
justification by faith as Paul described it. Now listen to what Ellen White says in Mount of Blessing, p. 114:
"God's forgiveness," forgiveness remember, we just read here,
'blessed are they who's iniquities are forgiven, "God's
forgiveness is not merely a judicial act by which He sets us free from
condemnation." The phrase "not merely" is important. It is
a judicial act, but it's not merely that. "It," God's
forgiveness, "is the outflow of redeeming love that transforms the
heart. David had the true conception of forgiveness," forgiveness,
"when he prayed, 'Create in me a clean heart O God, and renew a right
spirit within me.' (Psalm 51:10)." What is forgiveness? It is
transformation, it is the new creature, the creation of a new heart and a
right spirit. And that -- according to Romans five and Romans four --
forgiveness, is justification. And her addition tot hat, "It is not
merely a judicial act," it's more than a judicial act. And then, Review and Herald, August 19, 1890, "To be
pardoned," that's another word for forgiveness, "To be pardoned in
the way that Christ pardons, is not only to be forgiven, but to be renewed in
the Spirit of our mind." To be pardoned is more than being forgiven. It
is renewal in our inner spirit. "The Lord says, 'a new heart will I give
unto thee.'" So pardon is a new heart; they're the same thing. There is
no difference. Now let's go to the Bible once again. Go to Titus, chapter three, where we have
I think the clearest statement of how justification really works. Titus,
chapter three, verses five to seven. "Not by works of righteousness which
we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us," Notice how, now,
He saves us, "by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy
Ghost, which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour, that being
justified," not sanctified, justified, "by His grace, we should
be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." What precedes justification in Paul's
theology? "Washing of regeneration." That's not baptism washing,
that's inner washing; inner washing of the heart of which baptism is only a
symbol. The washing of regeneration, recreation, a new heart, and renewing
of, now notice here, renewing of the Holy Spirit. Renewing and regeneration
precede justification, not follow. In this understanding [pointing to the
chart and Goldstein's even-numbered column] of the biblical gospel as he
calls it, justification comes first and the new birth comes after. But right
here, the new birth is preceding justification; the new birth is the source
of justification. It says washing and regeneration precede justification by
His grace. Turn to Romans once again, Romans chapter
eight, verse one. Now notice some parallels, we're looking for parallels here
in several verses. Romans eight, verse one: "There is
therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not
after the flesh, but after the Spirit." Look now at verse nine:
"But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the
Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he
is none of His." Now verse ten, "And if Christ be in you, the body
is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness." OK, now look carefully. Verse one,
"Them which are in Christ Jesus," is equal to verse nine, "the
Spirit of God is dwelling in you," is equal to verse ten, "if
Christ be in you." "In Christ," "Christ in you,"
"the Spirit in you," are all synonyms. They're all saying the same
thing using different words, all of them saying and meaning the same thing.
"No condemnation," you're free, you're justified, you're forgiven,
you're not condemned any longer -- if you are in Christ Jesus, if the Spirit
of God dwells in you, if Christ be in you -- all of those mean the same
thing. They are not separate parts, justification here and sanctification
over there. They're all equivalent to each other. Again, listen to the Spirit of Prophecy,
in Christ's Object Lessons, page
163: "As the sinner, drawn by the power of Christ approaches the
uplifted cross, and prostrates himself before it, there is a new creation. A
new heart is given him. He becomes a new creature in Christ Jesus. God
Himself is the Justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. What is
justification? Prostrating before the cross, new creation, new heart, new
creature. Well that's what I would think
"making" is all about, through the power of the Holy Spirit in us,
the new birth preceding justification by faith. Again from the Spirit of
Prophecy, SDA Bible Commentary,
vol. 6, p. 1098. "By receiving His imputed righteousness," now
watch this carefully. Imputed is usually the same as accounting; that's how
its usually used. "By receiving His imputed righteousness,"
-- how do we receive His imputed righteousness? -- "through the
transforming power of the Holy Spirit." We receive this imputed
righteousness through the making, transforming power of the Holy Spirit.
That's the new birth preceding justification once again. "Imputed"
comes through "transforming by the Holy Spirit." And one more, Selected Messages, vol. 1, page 394, the clearest of them
all: "Having made us righteous, through the imputed righteousness
of Christ, God pronounces us just." First God makes us
righteous, new birth, then He pronounces us righteous, justified, righteous
before Him. That's crucial; let me reread that statement. "Having made
us righteous, through the imputed righteousness of Christ, God pronounces us
just." Making precedes pronouncing. Turn to the book of John with me. John
chapter three, and we're going to look for some more parallels here. John
three, verse 14: "And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness,
even so must the Son of man be lifted up: that whosoever believeth in Him
should not perish, but have eternal life." Now how do we get that
eternal life? Go back to verse three. These are familiar statements.
"Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Verse
six: "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born
of the Spirit is spirit." Alright. Parallels: "eternal life,"
equal to "born again," equal to "Born of the Spirit." All
of those say the same thing as best I can tell. How do we have eternal life?
By being born again, and that is being born of the Spirit, of the Holy
Spirit. And so again we have parallels showing it is an inward
transformation, a new birth transformation. Turn to Ephesians with me. Ephesians,
chapter four, beginning with verse 22: "That ye put off concerning the
former conversation the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful
lusts; and be renewed in the spirit of your mind; and that ye put on the new
man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness." So
what is the new man? The new man is "renewed in our mind." That is
being a new man, renewal, renewal, always renewal, in the spirit of our mind,
that we put off the old man and put on the new man. The new man is created
and that is our renewal. Turn to Galatians chapter two, verse 16,
and we're looking at the word "justified": "Knowing that a man
is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ,
even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the
faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law
shall no flesh be justified." Now go down to verse 20: "I am
crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in
me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son
of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me." Parallels again:
"justification by faith in Jesus Christ," is the same as
"crucified with Christ," crucified, dead with Christ, the old man
dead with Christ, and "Christ liveth in me."
"Justification," "crucifixion," "Christ living in
me," all synonymous terms, all meaning essentially the same thing,
stating it in different ways. And one more text, Galatians chapter
three, verse 11: "That no man is justified by the law in the sight of
God, it is evident: for, The just shall live by faith." Now how do we
receive that state? Look back at verse three: "Are ye so foolish? having
begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?" Where's the
beginning point? In the Spirit; we begin in the Spirit. We don't begin with
Jesus alone; we begin with Christ through His Holy Spirit and in the Spirit.
And if we begin in the Spirit, we are justified by faith. In my judgment this is pretty solid
evidence for an inward transformation in the work of justification. Now, as
we have read just in the last few minutes here from these other authors, it
is said that the first view, the biblical view, is what the Protestant
Reformation taught, while the second view is what the Catholic church taught
and is not correct. Therefore, I think we need to take one more step. We need
to go back and check what was actually taught in the Reformation. What Then Was Actually Taught in the
Reformation? So we're going to take just a moment to
do that. To support this particular view as expressed by Goldstein and
Whidden, Hans LaRondelle, in Ministry
magazine of November 2000 said this: "Luther's mature concept of
justification is this: it is the forensic or legal imputation of Christ's
righteousness to the repentant believer." That's what the mature Luther
taught. It is the forensic or legal imputation or accounting or crediting of
Christ's righteousness to the repentant believer. In the same article, in the same Ministry magazine, Hans Heint
said, "Forgiveness and making-right contradict one another."
Forgiveness is accounting and it can't be making. That's what he's saying.
Forgiveness and making-right contradict one another. So that again is in
support of this diagram that we have been given. Now what we really want to know is, did
Luther really teach this? Now listen to Luther; all of these statements are
from Luther's works, and most of them from 1535 and 1536, and reflecting his
mature views: "This movement of justification is
the work of God in us." Wow! The work of God in us. "He therefore draws us into Himself
and transforms us. It is thus in Romans five we are justified by faith."
Transforming is justifying by faith. "Therefore, the Christ who is
grasped by faith and who lives in the heart, is the true Christian
righteousness on account of which God counts us righteousness and grants us
eternal life." Are you catching the thought there? The Christ who lives
in the heart is the true Christian righteousness; on account of that God
counts us righteous, not on account of the Christ out there, but the Christ
in here, in the heart. "But so far as justification is
concerned," so we're talking about justification here, none of these
statements are sanctification, "But as far as justification is
concerned, Christ and I must be so closely attached, that He lives in me and
I in Him. Faith must be taught correctly, namely that by it you are so
cemented to Christ that He and you are as one person which cannot be
separated. This faith couples Christ and me more intimately than a husband is
coupled to his wife." I don’t know how martin Luther could be any
clearer on the subject. "As far as justification is concerned," he
says, " He lives in me and I in Him," and it is closer than,
"a husband is coupled to his wife," in union with each other. Another statement: "Then what does
justify? The Holy Spirit who justifies." "This faith justifies you; it will
cause Christ to dwell, live, and reign in you." What justifies? Christ
dwelling, living, and reigning in you. All of these are Luther. At the beginning of his sermons on John
three when he wrote about the new birth experience on John three, he said,
"this chapter stresses above all else that sublime topic faith in Christ
which alone justifies us before God." What is John three all about?
Justification. What is John three talking about? New birth. Justification and
new birth are one and the same. "This chapter stresses above all else
that sublime topic faith in Christ which alone justifies us before God." Correcting the Claims When the claim is made that the mature
Luther concept of justification is the forensic or legal imputation of
Christ's righteousness to the repentant believer, that's just not so. And how
tragic that it comes from some of our best scholars to say that. It's just
not so. So we have to change something up here
[on this chart], brothers and sisters. This is not quite right. What is
thought to be the Catholic position, and according to which we are said to be
"Catholic," is not Catholic at all. It turns out that this is
biblical. And it turns out that what we had been told was biblical is not
biblical at all, but instead it is more correctly titled "Evangelical." This side, the first side, is the
evangelical gospel, with its "for us" emphasis: Jesus alone,
accounting righteous, justified first then followed by the new birth. That
is, what I said last night was the evangelical gospel, well stated and
clearly stated. On the other hand, the biblical gospel,
its work of justification both for and in us, done by Christ and the Holy
Spirit, a making righteous, and the new birth then followed by the statement
or declaration of justification by faith -- Justification by faith is an
inward work of righteousness from beginning to end, and it is no other way,
as best I can tell. In fact, I found something interesting in
the same Ministry magazine I
quoted from earlier, November of 2000, this by Raul Dederen. Listen
carefully, this is important: "In time Lutherans began to draw an
increasingly sharp distinction between the event of being declared righteous,
justification, and the process of being made righteous, sanctification or
regeneration." Who began to draw that? Lutherans, not Luther.
Lutherans, followers of Luther, began to make this sharp distinction, and say
that justification is only declaration, while anything else is sanctification. In a book by a well known Luther scholar,
Aliester McGrath, "Luther's concept of justification, his concept of the
presence of Christ within the believer, all were rejected or radically
modified by those who followed him." That's where the trouble spot is,
those who followed Luther. Melanchthon was the first one to follow
Luther; he took over where Luther left off. He promoted a legal-only
justification. He was the one who began to formulate declaring only. Martin
Chemnitz also was a defender of Luther, helping to form the Formula of
Concord, which is the basic foundation of Lutheran belief today, and he
defended Luther against Catholic arguments, according to McGrath he followed
Melanchthon, he said there is no Scriptural evidence for internalized
righteousness, Christ in you is figurative, we are counted as righteous even
though we are not really righteous. That all comes from Chemnitz, not Luther,
in trying to defend Luther against the Catholics. Do you see where the problem is coming?
Those who came later changed what the original Reformer had said. Christ in
you is figurative; we are counted righteous even though we are not really
righteous. They were always hunting for the middle ground. "Orthodox Lutherans," this
again is from McGrath, "Orthodox Lutheranism followed Chemnitz and
rejected Luther's position. In other words, what we are dealing with here is
the legal-only justification, all the number-one statements in our quiz. The
legal-only justification is post-Reformation scholastic Lutheranism, and that
has become the orthodox position of the Christian church today. And now we're
having some of our best leaders say to us that that is the biblical position. It wasn't the biblical position. It
wasn't Luther's position. It wasn't Calvin's position. It was the position of
those who followed Luther and Calvin and has become transmuted into the
evangelical brand of Christianity today that we now find in the conservative
Protestant churches of America. And we are being told and urged that it is
biblical. Now why is this so serious. Because brothers and sisters, if the
biblical position is the inward experience, the Spirit of God making
righteous, the new birth, and all of this is part of what the Bible teaches,
we are being warned to stay away from it because it is Catholic. And anything
catholic, obviously we don't want to be a part of. We are being warned against the biblical
gospel, under the guise that it is Catholic. And we're being told that we
should go over to another gospel, which is really the evangelical gospel,
under the guise that it is biblical. We are at high-level, subtle deception
here, my brothers and sisters. Subtle, subtle deception, because it sounds
almost right the first reading. You go through the quiz and you scratch your
head, which should I say yes to and which should I disagree with, and you
half-wonder which is the right one, and it all comes clear when you get the
whole picture together, that what we are being told to do, is to move away from
the Bible to evangelicalism. That's a serious, serious problem. What then is the Catholic View? Now, if what I have just shared with you
is correct, then what really is the Catholic position? If I have just
crossed-out Catholic and said that wasn't the Catholic position, then really
what is the Catholic position? And I'm going to do something interesting. I'm
going to go right back to these articles that I started with, the first one
by Clifford Goldstein, and right in these very articles they are very clear
as to what the real Catholic position is. Listen carefully. I'm quoting again from Adventist Review, June 22,
2000, and here is their description of the Catholic position: "According to the Catechism of the
Catholic church," and he's quoting here that "Christ's perfect
righteousness is infused into the life of the believer through the sacraments
administered by the Roman Catholic Church. Rome teaches that this saving
doesn't remain outside of us but actually becomes something that happens
inside a person, a change which gives that person merit before God." So
let's try to break that down just a little bit. The real Catholic position is, first, infused
righteousness. Now what does that mean? That's a little bit like filling your
gas tank. You infuse gas into the tank. And when you infuse it and its
full-up, you have a full gas tank, and then you can run on that gas tank
until the gas runs out. You have a reservoir in your soul which can get filled-up
with righteousness, and God will pour-in His righteousness into you, and you
get filled-up with righteousness, infused. That's not imputed, and
that's not imparted, its infused. Aren't we getting technical now? Infusing is filling-up into a reservoir.
How do you get filled-up? Through the sacraments. This is crucial, this is
the bottom-line. Through the sacraments administered by the Catholic Church.
You don't get righteousness by getting on your knees and praying. You don't
get righteousness by studying the Word of God. You don't get righteousness by
walking with Christ day by day. You get righteousness only through the
sacraments as the priest administers them. There is no other way of
righteousness available for the human being. Then, you see, this merit which comes
inside us, actually gives that person merit before God. So then our works
merit eternal life. Because here at this point, you see, we've been infused
with righteousness, and now we've got all this good righteousness inside of
us, so that means the good works we do come out of this infused
righteousness, and that's why it has merit for eternal life. Here again is the way the Catholic Church
states this: "The merit of good works belongs not just to Christ, but
also to the faithful, who's good works do then grant them merit before
God." Since we have this righteousness, our works give us merit.
"We can merit for ourselves," the Catechism says, "and for all
others, the graces needed to obtain eternal life." So once we have this
righteousness within us, we then merit what we get because our works are
being done by this good righteousness that has been placed within us, and we
can have this experience in our life. Here's another way of stating it. Again,
these are all quoted by Clifford Goldstein from the Catholic Catechism.
"The Church affirms that for believers, the sacraments of the New
Covenant are necessary for salvation." You don't get salvation without
the sacraments. Have to have the sacraments: baptism, confirmation,
eucharist, penance, anointing of the sick, holy orders, matrimony. That's the
only way you receive any righteousness at all is by receiving those
sacraments. "The Roman Catholic system is based on the crucial notion
that all that Christ has done or does for a person comes mediated through the
Church itself. Salvation is dispensed to the faithful only through the Church
and its sacraments and its priesthood. Rome sees itself as the sole dispenser
of grace." So the real Catholic position is infused
righteousness through the sacraments; that's what Catholicism teaches. It is
not about Christ in us. It is not about making righteous. It is not about the
new birth preceding justification. It is about grace received only through
the sacraments; that's the real Catholic position as expressed in the very
same article, so clearly. So you have in the same article the real
Catholic position and the false Catholic position, all crammed-together to
make you think that they are all one and the same. That's where this becomes
extremely hard to sort out. In fact, Woodrow Whidden in his article
in the Adventist Review, May
25, 2000, does the very same thing. He says this: "The Catholic way of
salvation is a vast sacramental system that sees grace as being mediated
through the sacraments administered by ordained priests. The sacraments and
the human priests are the channels of saving grace. In partaking of these,
Catholics partake of Jesus and His saving grace. It is the sanctifying grace
of God infused into the believer through the sacraments of the Church; this
inner, infused righteousness forms the meritorious basis of the penitent
believer's justification." So infused righteousness comes through the
sacraments. Rome teaches that the sinner is justified because of what grace
does in him or her. And listen to this, this is a nice
summary. Again, this is from the same article: "The necessity of other
mediators than Christ in the Roman system becomes especially apparent when we
look at the sacrament of penance. When a person goes to confession, the penitent
receives absolution, the forgiveness of sins from the priest confessor. The
guilt of sin and its eternal penalties are absolved or remitted by the
priest, the but the temporal, earthly time-based penalties are not. These
latter penalties must be satisfied or worked-off through indulgences. These
indulgences draw upon the so-called treasury of merit, a vast reservoir of
excess merit that Jesus and the saints have gained through their righteous
lives. Access to this treasury is the prerogative of the Church, and it
obtained by the faithful through various actions, observances, or financial
purchases." Now listen carefully, we can add one more
item here. The way righteousness is received is through the confessional, and
no other way. And it is received through the system of indulgences. There you
have the real Catholic way of salvation; that is what Catholicism is all
about. So, right in the same article in which we
are informed that to believe that Christ is in us, that the Holy Spirit is
the agent of justification, that making righteous and the new birth are
Catholic beliefs, are put these beliefs of infusion, sacraments, works,
merit, confessional, and indulgences, to make us run, scared to death of any
inward work of justification, to put it all together and say that all of
this, is Catholic. That's what we are being told. All of the second two
columns are Catholic, and therefore we must avoid anything tainted with this.
This is high-level deception, brothers and sisters. We are being told to run
with fear from the biblical gospel of righteousness by faith. In fact, not far away from here, in
Riverside Press enterprise quoted, "salvation is like a spiritual bank
account," said Ford, who teaches at the Catholic University of America
in Washington D.C. "The Key difference between Catholics and Lutherans
is who can make withdrawals." The Catholic Church emphasizes receiving
salvation through the mediation of the church, kind of a middle-man.
Lutherans believe in a direct connection between the believer and God. That's
the difference between the Catholic and the Protestant system. The
middle-man, or direct; that's the real difference. In the Catechism of the Catholic Church,
in 1994, "Justification is conferred in baptism the sacrament of
faith." That's the only way you'll be justified by the sacrament of
baptism. You don't get it by surrendering to the Lord, you don't get it by
praying, you get it by the sacrament of Baptism. All things mediated through
the priest from birth to death through the sacraments. So what does Roman Catholicism teach?
Justification by faith plus the works that are done in the sacramental
process especially in the works of penance. Going back to the Council of Trent, a
couple of statements. Here's what the Catholic Church said a long time ago,
in the counsel of Trent following the Lutheran Reformation. "If anyone
says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else
is required to cooperate in order to obtain the grace of justification, let
him be anathema." If you believe we are justified by faith alone, you
are anathema. "If anyone says that the good works of the one justified
are not also the good merits of him justified, or that the one justified does
not truly merit an increase of grace, let him be anathema." So if you
don't believe that our works merit eternal life, you are anathema. "We
can merit for ourselves, and others, all the graces needed to obtain eternal
life." Brothers and sisters, we need to be
discerning rightly these days. The winds are blowing. How can the very elect
be deceived? We're beginning to see, brothers and sisters. I wondered all my
life how the very elect could be deceived on the truths of the Bible. The
ones who are searching the Bible. But now some who we might've thought of as
the very elect are telling us falsehoods. They are telling us things that are
absolutely wrong. They are telling us to move away from the biblical gospel
into an evangelical, for us, accounting, legal, forensic, outside of us
gospel; the same gospel, exactly, that was taught in the late seventies by
Brinsmead, Paxton, and Desmond Ford. And now we're being told that this is
the gospel we need to follow. We are at high level issues right here brothers
and sisters. And I'm going to conclude our little
discussion and then open it up for questions, but I'm going to conclude by
showing you how this confusion really works in practical terms. Confusion I have high regard for the work of the
1888 Message study committee. As I read a couple of their newsletters, I saw
some interesting things. And here is where the confusion comes to be seen
very strongly. In referring to some who believe not quite the way they think
is right, here is what they said. "Sanctification is understood by
them as our obedience to the law." Well my friends, that's not
sanctification. Sanctification is never our obedience, it is always God's
grace working in us, through us, at all times. Our obedience is legalism, and
that was what Paul was fighting against, works of the law. But Christ's works
in us are never legalism. Christ in us. That's an unfortunate misrepresentation.
"Sanctification is understood by them as our obedience to the law." Another statement that was made on this
point, "To say that Christ does not save completely, but that we add to
His saving work, by our own sanctified good works, is the essence of the
Council of Trent teaching of Romanism." My brothers and sisters, again,
that misrepresents what I and many others teach about sanctification.
Sanctification is never our own good works; there is no such animal as our
own sanctified good works. If it is sanctified good works it is God's good
works, and we can never add to God's grace. We can only agree to God's grace,
receive God's grace, and cooperate with God's grace, but we can never add to
it. What a tragic misrepresentation. Another statement, "Never does our
obedience add to Christ as the complete Savior or become a means of
salvation." No, of course not. Our obedience is never a means of
salvation. It is a condition of our salvation, but it is never a means of our
salvation, a cause of our salvation. And so right here, well meaning people,
having heard so much about the fact that it is for us, credited to us,
justified apart from us, seeing sanctification as some Catholic idea, are misrepresenting
the truth of God. Sincere, good people, the confusion is real. And it's
interesting that the title of this particular article I'm reading from is
called, "I'm Confused." And I will scratch my head on that one. Now, in this very same (and as I said I
respect the work of the 1888 Message Study committee), and they said some
powerfully strong things that I am going to conclude with right here.
Concerning the evangelical view of justification, they said, "Such justification
only legally clears them of past sins and is not itself a change of heart.
The change of heart they say comes in sanctification, which they believe is
never complete in this life. Therefore, justification by faith covers
continued sinning." That's right. That's what the evangelical gospel
does. Since it only legally clears us, since it is only an accounting,
therefore [that view of] justification by faith covers continued sinning. "In fact, due to not understanding
the full message of Christ's righteousness, they the evangelicals, see it as
impossible to not continue sinning so long as we are in mortal flesh with a
sinful nature." Then the conclusion of this article, "Justification
by faith therefore has to be far more than a legal declaration. It actually
reconciles the believer’s heart to God, and he cannot be reconciled to god
and not at the same time be reconciled to His holy law. Therefore genuine
justification by faith in this antitypical day of atonement makes the
believer obedient to all the commandments of God and prepares him for
translation. We are saved by Christ, by grace, through faith, and not of
works." Beautiful statement from again, the 1888 Message newsletter.
Yes, good material, straight and true. And as I say, this is why it's so perplexing
to see both correct and incorrect statements from the same authors. The last thing now from the 1888
Committee. "Such faith, genuine faith works, and motivates to full
obedience to all the commandments of God. Faith and works are like to sides of
a single pane of window glass. If there is faith as a response to Calvary,
the other side of the pane of glass is a natural outpouring of obedience in a
life totally changed by grace." Amen. "Consistently her idea [Ellen
White] is that justification is by a faith which works. In every incident
where she speaks of obedience, her basic idea is that faith alone produces
it, it proves that the faith is genuine, and in that sense she says that
salvation is by obedience." Again, well said. I'm going to finish now with one last
article, this one by Colin Standish, and I think he said something very
important for us to hear: "What we are dealing with here, is
that there are only two distinct streams. There is the authentic stream of
the everlasting gospel, and there is the stream which is to be found
enshrined today in the evangelical gospel. The two are absolutely watertight,
logical, and coherent concepts. But as sister White says, men start with a
wrong premise, and bring everything to bear upon it, which is exactly what
evangelical Protestantism has done." "These concepts have no plunged into
the Baptist church, the church of Christ, and even into other, more
conservative groups. Incredibly, they are now making great inroads into the
Seventh-day Adventist Church. Today we are in no man's land in Seventh-day
Adventism if we try to integrate some of these evangelical reformed concepts
into Seventh-day Adventism. There is no consistency in having part of one and
part of the other." "Our brethren at Glacier View, were
wholly wrong in condemning Desmond Ford's eschatology, his end-time
interpretation, while upholding his soteriology, his salvational concepts.
Either he was right on both or wrong on both. Somehow who were leading out in
Glacier View did not have sufficient understanding of the situation to
discern that Ford's eschatology and soteriology were wholly inseparable.
There is no way we can safely accept part of the everlasting gospel and part
of the evangelical gospel, because error will eventually always win out. For
centuries in some places both Sabbath and Sunday were kept as holidays or
holy days. Eventually the error of Sunday won that battle. When truth and
error are incorporated together, ultimately error is the victor." "Many Seventh-day Adventist preachers
today are presenting a hybrid system of theology, and have a mixture of the
everlasting gospel and evangelical Protestantism. For example, take preachers
who support the understanding that Christ took upon Himself our fallen
nature, adult believer's baptism, and the possibility of victorious Christian
living. These beliefs are all inconsistent with evangelical Protestant
concepts. Yet many of the same preachers will deliver sermons entirely
consistent with the evangelicals. A justification alone salvation. Sins do
not separate us from God. The belief that the man of Romans seven is the
converted man." "As these preachers attempt to blend
their evangelical teachings with portions of the everlasting gospel, they
present an inconsistent gospel. However, most of us are just not sufficiently
versed to distinguish such inconsistencies. And so members of widely
different understandings receive from the sermons that which they already
believe, and so declare it all to be such a beautiful gospel. Such responses
are likely to be satisfying to the preacher, for they may lead him to
conclude that he has found an approach to the gospel that brings both sides
of the schism into a unified understanding." You know what I found? As I have
presented my two trees of the gospel, and this is just another way of talking
about the two gospel trees, I am asked over and over, "but isn’t there a
third tree? Isn't there a mixture of the two trees that will really bring the
two trees into harmony?" I've hear that so many times, and I've always
asked, "Show me that third tree which is consistent from beginning to
end." It is always a mixing of inconsistent teachings. Conclusion Colin concludes, "The more we as
Seventh-day Adventists neglect the study of God's Word, the greater will be
our inability to perceive the lack of consistency in the presentations either
in sermons or books." He's right. It's hard to tell the difference when
we first hear it. It's hard to pick out the error, but you know what? The
more confusion there is in Adventism on salvation, the more confusion there
will be in Adventist practice and lifestyle. That may be where you'll be able
to tell the difference. If you can't figure out the theology
behind it, look at the fruits of the gospel. Look at the confusion right now
about methods of worship in the house of God. Look at that. That didn't just
appear out of nowhere. Look at the confusion concerning methods of church
growth; how we plant and build churches; how we produce and win souls to
Jesus Christ ion new churches. Look at the confusion on what is
appropriate music, that didn't appear out of nowhere. That came out of
theological concepts right in the area of justification by faith. Look at the
confusion on entertainment, proper and improper in the Seventh-day Adventist
church. Look at the confusion on church standards. There you may be able to
tell what really is wrong with these basic teachings on justification and sanctification. Would you turn to one more text with me,
Ephesians chapter four, verses 13-15. "Till' we all come in the unity of
the faith." We're not there now, brothers and sisters; we're not in
unity in the Adventist Church. "Till' we all come in the unity of the
faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God unto a perfect man, unto the
measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ, that we henceforth be no
more children tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine
by the slight of men and cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to
deceive, but speaking the truth in love, may grow up into Him in all things
which is the head, even Christ." That is my prayer for us today. That we
grow up into maturity in Jesus Christ; to discern between truth and error.
May God help us. The times are very difficult. |
http://www.greatcontroversy.org/columns/c-lk031226.php3
|
|
|
Dennis Priebe has served in many capacities, including
pastor, Theology professor at Pacific Union College, and Revivalist for Amazing Facts.
He is the author of Face to Face with the Real Gospel, as well as
other articles, tracts, and booklets. He has given hundreds of seminars,
especially on the topic of righteousness by faith. Each year he is joined by
his wife Kay and son Matthew as they travel across the United states and
elsewhere filling requests for speaking engagements. |