Dr. Colin Standish's Paper Presented at the
50th Anniversary Conference on Questions on Doctrine
Click to go to our Home Page
Dear Reader, This is Dr. Colin Standish’s
presentation at the October, 2007 Conference on Questions on Doctrine. I will
make some commentary under some of Dr. Standish’s remarks. The link to the
original source is: http://qod.andrews.edu/downloads.html I added Emphasis in some
cases by way of italics emboldenment. Ron Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine: The U-turn in Doctrine and Practice Colin D.
Standish The words of Paul to the Galatian
believers could well apply to the Seventh-day Adventist believers of the
latter part of the twentieth century: I marvel that
ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto
another gospel: which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and
would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven,
preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you,
let him be accursed. (Galatians 1:6–8) Ron’s Commentary: Indeed, God’s
instruction is to accurse ANYONE who should come with another gospel, which
means have nothing to do with, but as much as I agree with the Standish
brothers on most issues involving the current new movement SDA church, they
are not following the counsel of Paul in Scripture to have nothing to do with
the New Movement and they remain in its employ. It is one thing to quote Scripture and
quote another to follow its teachings. End note. Time alone can determine the magnitude
of an historical event. Fifty years have provided sufficient time to permit
historians and Bible scholars to evaluate the enormity of the impact of the
publication of Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine (QOD)1
upon the The availability of QOD in My perplexity began with the early
pages of the book. I believed the authors were guilty of understating the God-given role of Ellen White.4 Yet
subsequently I found few who expressed
concerns in regard to the QOD authors’ treatment of the role of Ellen
White’s ministry. Ron’s Commentary: It is interesting to note that all who agree with
the heresies of Questions on Doctrine, still underrate and understate
the God-given role of Ellen White. End note. Further reading was encouraging until
I read the section addressing the atonement.5 I could hardly
believe my eyes when I read what I believed was the wholly unbiblical position expounded by the authors—that the atonement of Christ was
completed at the cross. I was greatly shaken by the fact that this
position was published in an authoritative Seventh-day Adventist publication.
This was the main concern of M.L. Andreasen,6 though he also
challenged the book’s claim that Christ took unfallen human nature. There goes the Atonement in the Omega of Apostasy—GONE! There goes the
Sanctuary in the Omega of Apostasy—Gone!—Just as Ellen White saw such: Sanctuary
Gone Atonement Gone -- "In a representation which passed before me, I
saw a certain work being done by medical missionary workers. Our ministering
brethren were looking on, watching what was being done, but they did not seem to understand. The foundation of our faith,
which was established by so much prayer, such earnest searching of the
Scriptures, was being taken down, pillar by pillar. Our faith was to have
nothing to rest upon--the sanctuary was gone, the atonement was gone."
E.G. White, The
Upward Look, 152. That is
exactly what occurred in Ellen White’s portrayal of the Omega of Apostasy
regarding a New Movement which would allow nothing to stand in its way: "The
enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great
reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this
reformation would consist in giving up
the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a
process of reorganization. Were this reformation to take place, what would
result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the
remnant church, would be discarded. Our
religion would be changed. The
fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years
would be accounted as error. A NEW ORGANIZATION would be established. Books of a new order would be written.
A system of intellectual [Calvinistic]
philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the
cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath of course, would be lightly
regarded, as also the God who created it. Nothing would be allowed to stand
in the way of the NEW MOVEMENT. The leaders would teach that virtue is better
than vice, but God being removed, they would place their dependence on human
power, which, without God, is worthless. Their foundation would be built on
the sand, and storm and tempest would sweep away the structure. WHO HAS
AUTHORITY TO BEGIN SUCH A [NEW] MOVEMENT? We have our Bibles. We have our
experience, attested to by the miraculous working of the Holy Spirit. We have
a truth that admits of no compromise. Shall we not repudiate everything that
is not in harmony with this truth?" E.G. White, Selected Messages, Vol. 1,
204-205. End note. My final concern arose when I was
confronted with Appendix B and the bold heading, “Took Sinless Human
Nature.” 7 This was Herbert Douglass’ main concern with QOD,8
though he also acknowledged the validity of Andreasen’s protest concerning QOD’s
treatment of the atonement.9 Ron’s Commentary: If Christ took our sinless human nature, He could
not have been our example. This would have proven Satan right that we cannot
keep God’s law because of our sinful, fallen nature. The Great Controversy
between Christ and Satan would thus have been over and there would be no
point in God continuing the experiment in sin to prove Satan wrong. If Christ
took man’s sinless nature before the fall, it was game over—what would He be
waiting for if not the character perfection of His bride who is making
herself ready. Rev 19:7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and
give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath
made herself ready. End note. General Conference President Reuben
Figuhr seems to have dismissed these vital differences from long-held Seventh-day Adventist
beliefs as simple semantics—a defense frequently employed later by the “new
theology” proponents of the 1970s and early 1980s.10 I searched my mind but could not
recall ever hearing or reading at home, at church, at school, or at college
the concept that Christ “took sinless human nature.” So unanimous had been
the presentations that Christ took upon Himself our fallen human nature that
I had accepted it without personal study. That was to change, but not until
1974, when I dialogued with Elder Kenneth Wood and Dr. Herbert Douglass at
the Review and Herald office. Ron’s Commentary: After Questions on Doctrines was first printed in
1957, 250,000 copies were mailed to non-SDA pastors and libraries as a
testament to what SDA’s believe. Eventually, 450,000 copies were sent out. Ministry magazine was saying flat out
that Christ took the nature of Adam before
the fall. End note. It was during this dialogue that Elder
Wood introduced a new concept to me and my then academic dean, Dr. Jack
Blanco. He had asked whether I would come to his office to dialogue
concerning the many letters the Review office was receiving from
Australians, mainly pastors, hostile to the special righteousness by faith
issue of the Review and Herald. His assertion during this dialogue was
that the basis of the opposition to the message of character perfection was
rooted in their belief that Christ took unfallen human nature. Until that
day, I had not linked the two issues together, even though I had not wavered
in my belief in the fallen human nature of Christ on the one hand and the
power of Christ to enable fallen humans to gain victory over every temptation
of Satan on the other hand. The Role of Sister Ellen White in the I was already aware that the prophetic
role of Sister White was not fully accepted among Seventh-day Adventists. I
heard that many in I wondered, “What were the authors
attempting to convey to the readers?” This was a major concern to me. It
seemed that the authors portrayed Sister White as occupying no special role
in our midst. It was hardly better when the QOD authors wrote, “This
has been well expressed by one of our
most prominent writers, Ellen G. White.” 14 Of the questions posed by the
evangelicals to the representatives of the Do Seventh-day
Adventists regard the writings of Ellen G. White as on an equal plane with
the writings of the Bible? Do you place her in the prophetic class with such
men as Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and Daniel? Are her interpretations of
Bible prophecy regarded as final authority, and is belief in these writings
made a test of fellowship in the Some of the initial answers to these
questions by the authors of QOD appeared to be evasive. Below are
their short answers: “1. That we do
not regard the writings of Ellen G. White as an addition to the sacred canon
of Scripture. “2. That we do
not think of them as of universal application, as is the Bible, but
particularly for the “3. That we do
no regard them in the same sense as the Holy Scriptures, which stand alone
and unique as the standard by which all other writings must be judged.”
16 Let us evaluate the answers of the
authors of QOD. 1.
In their 3-point summary answer, the
writers of QOD avoided the part of the first question of the
evangelicals by not addressing whether Sister White’s writings were regarded
as on an “equal plane” with the writings of the Bible. From their fuller
answers, here is a portion of their reply: We have never
considered Ellen G. White to be in the same category as the writers of the
canon of Scripture. (QOD, p. 90) While
Adventists hold the writings of Ellen G. White in highest esteem, yet these
are not the source of our expositions. . . . We as a denomination
accept them as inspired counsels from the Lord. But we have never equated
them with Scripture as some falsely charge. (Ibid., p. 93) I was amazed at the second answer
provided to the evangelicals. How could the authors of QOD assert that
Sister White’s writings are not of universal application? Certainly much of
the writings of Ellen White have universal application? 17
Certainly some of the Bible writings are not of general universal
application.18 The Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy each set forth
both individualized counsel with limited application and also transcendent
universal truths. Also, this second point in the response of the authors of QOD
clearly implied that Sister White’s books have little if any application to
those not of our faith. Yes, many books provide special counsel specifically
to Seventh-day Adventists leaders and members, yet Sister White wrote many
books especially prepared for those not of our faith.19 2.
Seventh-day Adventists certainly
believe that the canon of Scripture is closed with the New Testament and the
Bible is our foundation of all faith and practice. However, we believe that
Sister White was inspired by the same Holy Spirit which inspired the prophets
and writers of the Holy Bible, including Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and
Daniel. This question was ignored in the initial summary response. However,
here is their later response: We
have never considered Ellen G. White to be in the same category as the
writers of the canon of Scripture. However, apart from the chosen writers of
the canonical books of Scripture, God used a line of prophets or messengers
who lived contemporaneously with the writers of the two Testaments, but whose
utterances were never a part of Scripture canon. These prophets or messengers
were called of God to give encouragement, counsel, and admonition to the
Lord’s ancient people. Among these were such figures as Nathan, Gad, Heman,
Asaph, Shemaiah, Azariah, Eliezer, Ahijah, Iddo, and Obed in the Old
Testament, and Simeon, John the Baptist, Agabus, and Silas in the New. The
line also included women, such as Miriam, Deborah, and Huldah, who were
called prophetesses, in ancient times, as well as Anna in the time of Christ,
and Philip’s four daughters, “which did prophesy” (Acts 21:9). The messages
that came through these prophets, it should be recognized, came from the same
God who spoke through those prophets whose writings were included in the
Sacred Canon. . . . It
is in this latter category of messengers that we consider Ellen G. White to
be. . . . While
Seventh-day Adventists recognize that the Scripture canon closed nearly two
thousand years ago and that there have been no additions to this compilation
of sacred books, yet we believe that the Spirit of God, who inspired the
Divine Word known to us as the Bible, has pledged to reveal Himself to the
church through the different gifts of the Spirit. Adventists
believe that the closing of the Scripture canon did not terminate Heaven’s
communication with men through the gifts of the Spirit, but rather that
Christ by the ministry of His Spirit guides His people, edifying and
strengthening them, and especially so in these last challenging days of human
history. (QOD, pp. 90-95) There is no doubt that the authors of QOD
improved upon their earlier statements concerning the role of Sister White.
However, she is presented in a category inferior to the major prophets of the
Bible. Even John the Baptist’s prophetic role seems marginalized, no doubt
because he did not contribute to the canon of Scripture. I believe wisdom
dictates that we dare not seek to categorize the greatness of prophets. Let
us simply confirm that the undoubted prophetic utterances of Ellen White are
inspired by the Holy Spirit and are a great blessing to the church and to the
world. The authors of QOD
correctly pointed out that all the pillars of our faith are riveted in Holy
Scripture. Yet we believe Sister White was given inspired truths which are of
universal application for our time. For example, that germs cause cancer,20
that tobacco is a malignant poison,21 that masturbation can cause
mental illness,22 that progressive dietary reform should be made
toward veganism.23 In each of these health warnings Sister White
was far ahead by many decades of scientific medical research, and this
counsel has proven to be applicable to all humans worldwide. In other areas she presented broad
principles for Seventh-day Adventists, such as the counsel that we should not
vote for political parties 24 and that competitive sports are
not fit activities for Christians.25 It appears the authors tried
to minimize the role of Sister White. 4. The QOD authors also leave much
ambiguity in their answer to the third question of the evangelicals. Have we
ever made belief in the Spirit of Prophecy a test of fellowship? I have not
found any authoritative statement which declares that the acceptance of the
Spirit of Prophecy is a test of continued fellowship in the Do you accept
the doctrine of spiritual gifts and do you believe that the Spirit of
Prophecy is one of the identifying marks of the remnant church? There is a great difference between
the terms “the gift of prophecy” and “the Spirit of prophecy,” for we can
ignore Ellen White or have no knowledge of her inspired counsels and yet
affirm the gift of prophecy. Nowhere in Scripture is God’s remnant
identified by the term “the gift of prophecy.” We must never forget that God’s end-time remnant saints are
identified as those who “keep the commandments of God and have the testimony
of Jesus Christ” which is “the Spirit of Prophecy.” (Revelation The Completed Atonement In his introduction to Seventh-day
Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine: Annotated Edition (QODAE),
Dr. George Knight offered a surprising evaluation of the QOD authors’
conclusion concerning the completed atonement. He had correctly evaluated
that the QOD authors’ stated position concerning the humanity of Jesus
represented “a substantial shift in
understanding” from that of the preponderance of Seventh-day Adventists from
the church’s beginning,27 who believed that Christ took upon
Himself our fallen, sinful human flesh (nature). However I cannot support Knight’s
assertion that “. . . the supposed shift of position on the
atonement [by the QOD authors as claimed by M.L. Andreasen] was
incorrect.” 28 Indeed Andreasen’s assertion was fully
consistent with the evidence. Andreasen’s doctrinal position was
that which had been taught by Seventh-day Adventists from early times. This position was that the sacrificial
phase of the atonement was completed on Ron’s
Commentary: "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. Watch
this section carefully and prayerfully, because this is where the Atonement
and the Sanctuary are GONE, because if you disparage one you automatically
disparage the other. End note. I can attest that from my earliest
understanding—and without any recalled exceptions—that I was consistently
taught by teachers, pastors, and evangelists that the atonement of Christ was
not completed on the cross. Beyond this, I had found the Bible and the Spirit
of Prophecy to be rock solid on this teaching. Knight appears not to have noticed
that the authors of QOD had been careless, selective, or maybe not
wholly transparent in their response to question 30 proposed by the
evangelicals: “Seventh-day
Adventists are frequently charged with minimizing the atoning sacrifice
completed at the cross, reducing it to an incomplete or partial atonement
that must be supplemented by Christ’s priestly ministry; perhaps it might be
called a dual atonement. Is this charge true? Does not Mrs. White state that
Christ is now making atonement for us in the heavenly sanctuary? Please
explain your position, and state wherein you differ from others on the
atonement.” 31 In response, Froom et al. referred to
a statement from Early Writings: The great Sacrifice had been offered and had been accepted, and the
Holy Spirit which descended on the day of Pentecost carried the minds of the
disciples from the earthly sanctuary to the heavenly, where Jesus had entered
by His own blood, to shed upon His disciples the benefits of His
atonement. 32 When taken in isolation, this
statement appears to support, at least partially, the claim of the QOD
authors, that When,
therefore, one hears an Adventist say, or reads in Adventist literature—even
in the writings of Ellen G. White—that Christ is making atonement now, it
should be understood that we mean simply that Christ is now making
application of the benefits of the sacrificial atonement He made on the cross;
that He is making it efficacious for us individually, according to our needs
and requests. Mrs. White herself, as far back as 1857, clearly
explained what she means when she writes of Christ’s making atonement for us
in His ministry: [Then Early Writings, p. 260, was quoted as shown
above.] 33 Yet it defies credibility to believe
that the authors of QOD had overlooked the plain statements a few
pages earlier in Early Writings in which Sister White taught that the
atonement was completed not on the cross but in the holy of holies of the
heavenly sanctuary: As the priest
entered the most holy once a year to cleanse the earthly sanctuary, so Jesus
entered the most holy of the heavenly, at the end of the 2300 days of Daniel
8, in 1844, to make a FINAL ATONEMENT for all who could be benefited
by His mediation, and thus to cleanse the sanctuary. 34 The minds of
all who embrace this message are directed to the most holy place, where Jesus
stands before the ark, making HIS FINAL INTERCESSION for all those for
whom mercy still lingers and for those who have ignorantly broken the law of
God. This ATONEMENT IS MADE for the righteous dead as well as for the
righteous living. It includes all who died trusting in Christ, but who, not
having received the light upon God’s commandments, had sinned ignorantly in
transgressing its precepts.35 Knight argues that Froom’s statement
in his February 1957 Ministry article (“That is the tremendous scope
of the sacrificial act of the cross—a complete, perfect, and final atonement
for man’s sin.”) really meant “. . . the sacrifice on the cross was
a full and complete sacrifice (in terms of the sacrificial aspect of
the atonement) for sin.” 36 In the light of Ellen White’s
statements in Early Writings, pp. 253, 254, I find this explanation
overgenerous. If Froom overlooked the wrong impression many would draw from
his statement, surely a copyeditor would flag the statement. Is there
evidence that Froom made a correction in a future Ministry issue? I am
not aware of such a correction or clarification. Surely Andreasen’s words
were “prophetic”: If the book [QOD] is published, there will be repercussions to
the end of the earth that the
foundations [of Adventist theology] are being removed.” 37 Some suggested, uncharitably, that
Andreasen’s opposition was motivated by the fact that he had been ignored in
the dialogues and in the review of the QOD manuscript. Elder Figuhr
certainly ignored or rejected Andreasen’s plea to reconsider the statement
that the atonement was completed by Christ’s sacrifice. Some critics of
Andreasen make much of Andreasen’s change to a statement Froom made in the
February issue of the Ministry magazine.38 This change, I
believe, was inconsequential to Froom’s meaning. Neither does it seem possible that the
QOD authors had overlooked the clear exposition of some of the most notable
writers in the ranks of the Seventh-day Adventist Church such as James White,
Uriah Smith, and Stephen Haskell.39 The explanation that seems
most credible to me is that the authors and their main advisors, including
the then General Conference President, Elder Reuben Figuhr, were so consumed
in their desire to save the Seventh-day Adventist Church from the stigma of the label “cult” that they were ready
to reshape pillar beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church to gain favor
with these prominent evangelicals. While I do not
overlook the splendid answers to many questions including the state of the
dead, the seventh-day Sabbath, the law of the ten commandments, the second
coming, and prophetic interpretations, it
is of the utmost importance to understand that Barnhouse and Martin had
narrowed down their “tests” as to whether the Seventh-day Adventist Church
was a cult to just four areas—(1) that the atonement of Christ was not
completed upon the cross; (2) that salvation is the result of grace plus the
works of the law; (3) that the Lord Jesus was a created being, not existing
from eternity; and (4) that He partook of man’s sinful fallen nature at the
incarnation.40 We can only continue to wonder why Barnhouse and
Martin limited their test to these four questions. No doubt, long before QOD
was published, Barnhouse and Martin understood that questions two and three
did not pose any significant difference between their beliefs and those of
Seventh-day Adventists.41 The second “test” imposed by Barnhouse
and Martin was easily demonstrated to be false by valid evidence. While we
cannot deny that there have been Seventh-day Adventists who have placed merit
in law-keeping in their explanation of salvation, those who are thoroughly
Bible-based Seventh-day Adventists have stood unwaveringly upon the plain
words of Scripture 42 and the Spirit of Prophecy.43
Keeping the law or good works are neither the basis of salvation nor do they
provide merit toward salvation. However, they are the inevitable result of
God’s saving grace and power in the heart of the converted man. The
presentation of Dr. Elliot Waggoner at the 1888 General Conference session in
Further, the third “test” was just as
easily answered. Once again we have had in our ranks those who deny the
eternal deity of Christ even to this day, and certainly included were some of
our prominent pioneers including James White, J.H. Waggoner, Uriah Smith,
Joseph Bates, J.N. Loughborough, and D.M. Canright.44 However,
especially after the publishing of the Desire of Ages in 1898, we have
had overwhelming support for the eternal existence of Christ in the Spirit of
Prophecy.45 These statements fully support the Bible.46
The first and fourth “tests” posed
valid challenges to long-held Seventh-day Adventist doctrines.
Overwhelmingly, Seventh-day Adventists prior to 1957 believed that, while the
sacrifice of Christ on the cross was fully sufficient to pay the penalty for
our sins, Christ’s work of atonement is to be completed in the most holy
place of the heavenly sanctuary. It appears that the authors of QOD
wilted under the withering pressure of the evangelicals, and they failed the
test on each of these two issues. As I have presented above, the completed
atonement in the heavenly sanctuary is based upon sound Biblical evidence. If
the atonement was completed on the cross, Paul’s statement to the Corinthians
would be erroneous (1 Corinthians Ron’s Commentary: It is interesting to take pause here to determine
exactly what Christ’s work of atonement is to be COMPLETED in the Most Holy
Place. What was not completed? What did the High Priest do in the most Holy
Place on the Day of Atonement which occurred once a year? Basically, on the annual Day of Atonement, one was to afflict
him/herself over their sins and put all sin out of the camp. In the
antitypical fulfillment of the Day of Atonement, this is impossible without
the aid of the Divine Nature Holy Spirit that has been proffered to man as a
cure for sin. For a more in-depth study, see this link: https://omega77.tripod.com/dayofatonement1.htm In order for the Sanctuary to be cleansed, God’s people are going to
have to cease sinning so that no more sins will be transferred to the
Sanctuary. It was for this express purpose that God raised up His Son Jesus: From the Bible: Act 3:26 Unto you first God, having raised up his
Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his
iniquities. From Ellen White: "The Power of God in the Third
Person.--The prince of the power of evil can only be held in check by the
power of God in the third person of the Godhead, the Holy Spirit.-- Special Testimonies, Series A, No. 10,
p. 37. (1897). Lev 23:27 Also on the tenth [day] of this seventh month [there shall
be] a day of atonement: it shall be an holy convocation unto you; and ye
shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD. Lev 23:28 And ye shall do no work in that same day: for it [is] a day
of atonement, to make an atonement for you before the LORD your God. Lev 25:9 Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubile to sound on
the tenth [day] of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make
the trumpet sound throughout all your land. Chap. 364 - Bury All Bitterness My days are swifter than a
weaver's shuttle. Job 7:6. {OHC 370.1} If we have but little time,
let us improve that little earnestly. The Bible assures us that we are in the
great day of atonement. The typical Day of Atonement was a day when all
Israel afflicted their souls before God, confessed their sins, and came before
the Lord with contribution of soul, remorse for their sins, genuine
repentance, and living faith in the atoning sacrifice. {OHC 370.2} If there have been
difficulties, . . . if envy, malice, bitterness, evil surmisings, have
existed, confess these sins, not in a general way, but go to your brethren
and sisters personally. Be definite. If you have committed one wrong and they
twenty, confess that one as though you were the chief offender. Take them by
the hand, let your heart soften under the influence of the Spirit of God, and
say, "Will you forgive me? I have not felt right toward you. I want to
make right every wrong, that naught may stand registered against me in the
books of heaven. I must have a clean record." Who, think you, would
withstand such a movement as this? {OHC 370.3} There is too much coldness
and indifference--too much of the "I don't care" spirit--exercised
among the professed followers of Christ. All should feel a care for one
another, jealousy guarding each other's interests. "Love one
another." Then we should stand a strong wall against Satan's devices.
Amid opposition and persecution we would not join the vindictive ones, not
unite with the followers of the great rebel, whose special work is to accuse
the brethren, to defame and cast stain upon their characters. {OHC 370.4} Let the remnant of this
year be improved in destroying every fiber of the root of bitterness, burying
them in the grave with the old year. Begin the new year with more tender
regard, with deeper love, for every member of the Lord's family. Press
together. "United, we stand; divided, we fall." Take a higher,
nobler stand than you ever have before. {OHC 370.5} End note. To argue that Froom and others did not tamper with cardinal beliefs of
our church is impossible to defend validly. Certainly Barnhouse was not
deceived. Here are his words: The position
of the Adventists seems to some of us in certain cases to be a new position;
to them it may be merely the position of the majority group of sane
leadership which is determined to put the brakes on any members who seek to
hold views divergent from that of the responsible leadership of the
denomination. 48 Other Evangelicals also perceived
these changes.49 In the same (September 1956) issue of Eternity
magazine, those who remained steadfast in the faith established from the
Bible in our church’s earlier history were defamed by the vitriolic language
of Dr. Barnhouse. He stated that these loyal Seventh-day Adventists were
those “. . . among their numbers [who were] of their ‘lunatic
fringe.’ ” 50 Both Donald Barnhouse and Walter Martin
were men of caustic tongues. Knight referred to Barnhouse’s vitriolic
response to those who disagreed with him.51 The experience of Dr.
and Mrs. Kern Pihl, when Dr. Barnhouse was questioned during his speaking
tour of The aggressive challenge to Dr.
William Johnsson by Walter Martin on the Ankerberg programs in 1985 over the
role of Sister White as the “Adventist guru” was evidence of Martin’s
aggressiveness. Yet the loyalty by Froom et al. to these evangelicals was
amazing. In what proved to be my last conversation with Elder Roy Allan
Anderson in the Yet it was Elder Anderson who made it
plain that the real purpose of Questions
on Doctrine was a planned attempt to reshape the beliefs of our church.
This was revealed in a letter to Pastor Robert Greive, (president of the
North New Zealand Conference in the 1950s) who left the faith. He was
dismissed from his position and disfellowshipped from the church for
preaching evangelical beliefs. It was Elder Anderson, a friend of Greive, who
tried “to save him.” Here is what If you would suffer me this little word of counsel as a friend, I
would suggest that you hold those thoughts in your heart and not make an
issue of them until we, as a people, come to the place where we understand
the doctrine as clearly as we should, and as we do other points of our faith.
. . . I am confident that the time is near when the great mystery
of godliness will be understood better by us as a people. But until then it
would seem wise if we could confine ourselves to a prayerful discussion of it
between us as workers.53 The Humanity of Christ The uniquely divine-human nature of
the incarnate Christ was not in question in the issues raised in QOD.
The issue was, What human nature did Christ take upon Himself?
54 Dr. Ralph Larson’s monumental book, The Word Was Made
Flesh 55 provides the definitive research
revealing how Seventh-day Adventist authors and writers in the
English-speaking world were unified upon the belief that Christ took upon
Himself man’s fallen human nature. Dr. Ralph Larson was one of the most
perceptive scholars from the 1970s, prominent in his courageous stand against
QOD and its authors. Larson’s articulate pen was exercised with
forceful impact, even late in his life. These extracts from an article
published in 2004 reflected three decades of deep concern over the
misrepresentations of the Seventh-day Adventist faith in QOD.56 Larson presented about 1,200 quotes
from periodicals and other sources in That bold QOD heading,
“[Christ] Took Sinless Human Nature” certainly removes any credibility from
General Conference President Reuben Figuhr’s assertion that, while QOD
presented the Seventh-day Adventist beliefs in language understood by
evangelicals, “there has been no attempt to gloss over our teachings or to
compromise.” 60 This heading was a denial of the plain
truths taught in the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy—that Christ took
fallen, sinful human nature. Ron’s Commentary: The Lord has shown me that when the Bible says “confesseth
not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh,” one of the prime meanings is
sinful flesh as Romans 8:3 attests and as Ellen White stated. 1Jo 4:3 And every spirit
that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and
this is that [spirit] of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should
come; and even now already is it in the world. 2Jo 1:7 For many
deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is
come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist. Rom 8:3 For what the law
could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son
in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: I tell you before the
Lord, all who believe and teach that Christ came in sinless flesh are
antichrist. End note. One of the most significant findings
in Larson’s book is that one of the primary authors of QOD had, just a
few years before the publication of QOD, affirmed that Christ took
fallen human flesh. This is what Elder W.E. Read approvingly quoted from
Sister White at the 1950 General Conference, “Jesus was in all things made like unto His brethren. He became flesh
even as we are.” 61 When I was president of One of the most disturbing revelations
is Dr. Herbert Douglass’ declaration that “Froom took a poll of Adventist
leaders and discovered that ‘nearly all of them’ felt that Christ had our
sinful nature.” 63 Yet George Knight reports that the authors
told Martin that “ ‘the majority of the denomination had always held’
the human nature of Christ ‘to be sinless, holy, and perfect despite the fact
that certain of their writers have occasionally gotten into print with
contrary views completely repugnant to the church at large.’ ” 64
These writers “who occasionally” got into print confirming the fallen human
nature of Christ, were categorized as part of the “lunatic fringe” by the authors of QOD.65
Many happened to be General Conference presidents, church leaders, editors of
the Adventist Review and Sabbath Herald, major authors and well-known
college teachers. Larson has fully documented many scores of these writers.
My personal limited research has failed to discover any exceptions to
Larson’s research. Ron’s Commentary: George Knight has thus proven himself to be a liar
and a traitor to the cause of God. This is difficult to say because he was
best man in my wedding in San Francisco in 1964. Since Ellen White taught
that Christ had our sinful nature, that would place her in the class of the “lunatic
fringe,” by the authors of QOD. End
note. However the reason that the great
majority of Seventh-day Adventists then believed that Christ took upon
Himself fallen human nature was because they found that this was affirmed in
holy Scripture.66 The most definitive text to explain why Christ
took fallen human nature is found in Hebrews 2:9, 14: But we see
Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of
death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should
taste death for every man. . . . Forasmuch then as the children are
partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same;
that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is,
the devil. Paul’s reasoning under inspiration is
impeccable. Christ had to accept human fallen flesh and blood “that through
death” He might defeat the enemy of souls both by living a life of sinless
obedience to His heavenly Father and so that He might break the bands of the
grave. No being with an unfallen
nature has ever died. Adam and Eve had forfeited their sinless nature
because of sin; therefore, they were subject to death as is every child of
our first parents. The concept which QOD authors
borrowed from the fallen churches of Christendom is totally destructive of the atonement, for Christ could not
have died for our sins without taking fallen human nature.67
Christ could not have qualified as our High Priest.68 Nor could He
have strengthened us when we are tempted.69 Nor could He have been
tempted as we are.70 Nor could He have served as our Example.71
The entire plan of salvation, the atonement for our sins, mandated that
Christ took upon Himself our fallen human nature. Whereas the debate among Seventh-day
Adventists from the late 1950s to the early 1980s was focused upon the
straightforward issue of whether Christ took fallen or unfallen human nature,
sensing the Biblical and Spirit of Prophecy evidence overwhelmingly supported
the fallen nature of our Savior’s human nature, a movement in our
post-secondary institutions began to argue that Christ took fallen physical
and mental human nature but took unfallen spiritual human nature. The proponents of this view appear to
be confused between the perfect sinless character of Christ and His
inherited nature. However there is a dangerous flaw in this dichotomy.
The physical, mental, and spiritual aspect of the human nature are
interdependent, and in the human life of a Christian there is every goal to
bring these powers into perfect harmony. The introductory section of the book
Education focuses upon this harmony. The opening paragraph introduces
this.72 Four other times this three-fold development is addressed.73 Ron’s Commentary: Ellen White said that Christ was fully human as well
as fully divine. To be fully human, his spiritual nature humanly, would
differ from the divine or He could not be classed as fully human. Also, she
said Christ had a sinful nature. There can be no doubt that He always yielded
to the spiritual nature of His Divine nature, but that is different than
possessing divine/spiritual human nature as well as a divine spiritual nature
per His full divinity. A denial of the human spiritual nature is the same as
the denial of the sinful nature—antichrist! To demonstrate how any error confounds and contradicts full truth, look
at this notation that is found in the Adventist 27 Fundamentals: Christ took
upon Him “the same susceptibilities,
mental and physical” as His contemporaries (White, “Notes of Travel,” Advent
Review and Sabbath Herald, Feb. 10, 1885, p. 81)—a human nature that had
decreased in “physical strength, in mental power, in moral worth”—though not
morally depraved, but totally sinless (White, “ ‘In All Points Tempted
Like As We Are,’ ” Signs, Dec. 3, 1902, p. 2; White, Desire of
Ages, p. 49)154 How could one
separate and differentiate the human mental quality of Christ’s human spirituality
from his humanity if He had a decreased mental power of humanity?! One
inaccuracy breeds contradiction and results in error! End note. From Greek pagan religious philosophy much of Christianity has
accepted the concept that the soul is good and the body evil. This is the
basis for the belief in the destructible body and the immortal soul so common
in Christianity today, but it has no foundation in Biblical instruction. Ron’s Commentary: Thus being a fulfillment of Ellen White’s Selected Messages, Bk. 1, 204-5
statement that intellectual philosophy would replace our foundational
doctrines. End note. The reason that Barnhouse and Martin
and other evangelicals fiercely opposed the concept that Christ took upon
himself fallen human nature results from their acceptance of the false Augustinian-Calvinistic concept
of original sin, which leads to the conclusion that sin is a state of
being rather than “the transgression of the law.” 74 Thus the
evangelicals believe that to affirm that Christ took upon Himself fallen
human nature is tantamount to the blasphemy of saying that He was a sinner.
Yet Paul is so plain that Christ’s human nature was identical with fallen
man, yet that He was wholly free from sin.75 What Was Gained by Conceding to the
Evangelicals’ Unbiblical Errors? This can be determined by Barnhouse’s
forward to Martin’s book, The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism
(Zondervan, 1960): Let it be
understood that we made only one claim; i.e., that those Seventh-day
Adventists who follow the Lord in the same way as their leaders who have
interpreted for us the doctrinal position of their church, are to be
considered true members of the body of Christ.76 An analysis of
this limited endorsement really equates “following the Lord” with “following
church leaders.” Seventh-day Adventists have long accepted that the Bible
only is our rule of faith and practice.77 The true Seventh-day
Adventist follows the Lord by following the words of Holy Scripture. To
follow men would place God’s people in rejection of the warning of the Lord.78
Today, half a century later, many
evangelicals still regard the Some may believe that our conferees in the 1950s were a
witness to the Evangelicals; however, the evidence is all in the other
direction. There is no evidence that Barnhouse nor Martin embraced any of the
distinctive Biblical truths of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. However,
Seventh-day Adventist leaders were willing to confuse the role of the Spirit
of Prophecy in the end-time church and to
shift from the important truth of the completion of Christ’s atonement for
His saints in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary and from the
belief that Christ took upon Himself sinful, fallen human nature. While we believe
that many of God’s saints are members of the fallen churches of Christendom,
we believe it is our focused mission to call these people from these fallen
churches into the glorious light of the everlasting gospel of the three
angels’ messages. I have found no other church which understands the final
messages to the world as expounded in the three angels’ messages. We can
review the Scriptures from Genesis chapter 1 to Revelation chapter 22, and we
find no other messages to be proclaimed at the end of this sin-blighted
planet’s history to all the inhabitants of the world other than those three
messages. This biblical mandate is what sets the The Consequences of Questions on Doctrine Many believe that two or three errors
in QOD are of little consequence to the powerful overall body of truth
contained in the book. But such a conclusion is uninsightful. One error is
sufficient to despoil the whole body of truth. With great discernment Sister
White has observed: Men
think they are representing the justice of God, but they do not represent His
tenderness and the great love wherewith He has loved us. Their human
invention, originating with the specious devices of Satan, appears fair
enough to the blinded eyes of men, because it is inherent in their nature. A
lie, believed, practiced, becomes a truth to them. Thus the purpose of the
satanic agencies is accomplished, that men should reach these conclusions
through the working of their own inventive minds. But how do men
fall into such error? By starting with false premises, and then bringing
everything to bear to prove the error true. In some cases the first
principles have a measure of truth interwoven with the error, but it does not
lead to any just action, and this is why men are misled. In order to reign
and become a power, they employ Satan’s methods to justify their own
principles. They exalt themselves as men of superior judgment, and they have
stood as representatives of God.80 It takes but one small error to change
truth to falsehood. Once error is insinuated into the body of truth it
becomes a cancerous growth which continues to metastasize, destroying other
pillars of truth. This brings bitter division among God’s people, and it
engenders vilification of those who hold fast to the pillars of the faith. If
leaders accept errors, history attests that they make inappropriate efforts
to force upon members a false unity based upon “loyalty” to leaders and “the
church” rather than upon Bible truth and sanctification in loyalty to Christ.
Christ provided the perfect key to unity in His prayer for unity: Sanctify them
through thy truth: thy word is truth. . . . And for their sakes I
sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth.81 Sister White
stated, “There is no sanctification aside from truth.” 82 “We
must now, by diligent, self-sacrificing effort, endeavor to walk in the love
of Christ, in the unity of the Spirit, through sanctification of the truth.” 83
Without truth there is no sanctification, and without sanctification there is
no unity, and without unity there is no salvation. Sister White emphasized
the crucial result of accepting pure truth alone: “Unity is the sure result
of Christian perfection.” 84 Until perfect truth is established
within the ranks of Seventh-day Adventists, there can be no character
perfection of the body of Christ; therefore, God’s saints cannot be sealed by
the seal of the living God, and, therefore, they are unprepared to receive
the latter rain, and the gospel commission cannot be completed.85 Paul fully confirmed the necessity of
the unity of the faith that accompanies character perfection.86 He
then presented the tragic consequence of disunity which results in a life
alienated from the character of our perfect Pattern.87 I do not believe that the architects
of the changes in Seventh-day Adventist doctrine in QOD fully foresaw
the terrible consequences of their compromises by which they thought to
please the evangelicals and to “protect” the Ron’s Commentary: Roy Anderson’s question to Douglass fits the
description of Isaiah 56:10-12. They cannot understand the consequences of
their compromises of truth. End note. The mega public relations blitz
presented by the General Conference through the Ministry magazine—the
official organ of the Ministerial Association of the General Conference where
Elders Froom and Anderson served—assured the readers that this book (QOD)
assumed center stage as the most authentic publication concerning crucial
Seventh-day Adventist beliefs. These books were circulated free to Bible
departments of our colleges and distributed to professors and students [as
well as to 450,000 non-SDA institutions and pastors]. Overnight, the errors
in QOD were being taught to the next generation of ministers, some of
whom were destined to become the leaders of our church. The ministers
preached these errors in the pulpits, and then these errors were imbibed by
the church members en masse. This problem has continued to this day. That
there are those scattered world-wide who, by their own study or the
presentation of faithful men and women, have embraced the correct teachings
upon these doctrines is a witness to the promise that God’s Word will not
return unto Him void.89 Was Andreasen divisive when he went
public with his concerns? Decidedly not! He was following in the same pathway
as did Enoch, Noah, Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, all the
“minor” prophets, John the Baptist, Stephen, Peter, John, James, Jude, Paul,
and many others. To have been silent in the time of crisis in the 1950s would
have been sin against God. His was the only valid response when the souls of
humanity are in the balance.90 Elder Andreasen made it clear that he
understood that he would face consequences for his noble, lonely stand. Here
are his words, “I have counted the cost it will be to me to continue my
opposition, but I am trying to save my beloved denomination from committing
suicide. I must be true to my God, as I see it, and I must be true to the men
that trust me.” 91 Over all, beginning in 1957, Andreasen
published nine papers entitled “The Atonement” and six entitled “Letters to
the Churches.” 92 The book Letters to the Churches is
still available today. It is evident that Andreasen was branded as a radical
critic of leaders when he should have been embraced as a faithful watchman on
the walls of The history of God’s church through
the ages is replete with leaders who have endorsed and embraced false
teachings and who have vilified those faithful ones who stood against the
heresy and condemned it. Elder Figuhr had the prestige and power of the
General Conference Presidency against which Andreasen could not prevail.
Andreasen may have perceived the wholesale apostasy which QOD would
foment, but he did not live to see the maturity of this apostasy. The Impact of These Three Errors in QOD I acknowledge that both Barnhouse and
Martin had significant fallout from other evangelicals by declaring
Seventh-day Adventists to be sincere Christians while in the same article
maligning Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and Christian Scientists.93
However, the consequences of the U-turn away from pillar truths by the
supporters and followers of QOD have had tragic mega-consequences,
greatly impeding the completion of the planet-wide proclamation of the
everlasting gospel, and this has delayed the return of Christ. The damage to
the reputations of Barnhouse and Martin was of minor consequences in contrast
with the tragedy of the delaying of the return of our blessed Lord by the
adoption within the ranks of our Now I will address in capsule form the
impact of these three errors in QOD. They have eroded many areas of
our faith, making our church weak and very vulnerable to the evangelical
errors and the dangerous web of ecumenism whereby we do not make issues of
those things which divide but “unite” on those concepts only which we hold in
common.94 Such an accommodation, if not arrested, would destroy
the integrity of the Seventh-day Adventist church and derail its destiny.
Which faithful Seventh-day Adventist would be willing to compromise the three
angels’ messages, all doctrines of which are not part of the beliefs of the
ecumenical churches? Which faithful Seventh-day Adventist would be willing to
silence his or her voice from sharing these transcendent truths with those
not of our faith? Could we avoid culpability before God if we silenced our
settled Bible-founded beliefs on the doctrines of the seventh-day Sabbath?
the sleep-like state in death? adult believers baptism by emersion? the
pre-millennial return of Jesus to take His saints to heaven to live for 1,000
years? the power of Christ to provide victory over every temptation and
deception of Satan? that Christ is now our heavenly High Priest conducting
the judgment of the human race, blotting out the sins of the repentant and
completing His atonement for the salvation of His saints? The answers are in
the questions. Yet that is what QOD does. Ron’s Commentary: The immediacy of the post 1957 meetings with Martin
and Barnhouse, into ecumenical involvement was as if they chided SDA leaders
by saying: “Now prove that you are good Evangelicals by joining our
ecumenical associations.” Whether that was said or not, is overshadowed by
the fact that this is exactly what transpired! End note. Knight assigns the blame for the
division QOD engendered in our church to both sides in the controversy
and the strong personalities of Froom and Andreasen.95 No doubt
Froom and Andreasen were passionate concerning their positions. Yet we must
never lose sight of the fact that it is the infiltration of error into God’s
perfect truth which, without exception, has engendered division into God’s
church. Personalities may at times exacerbate the division, but no division
can be assigned to those who uphold truth. Yet the upholders of truth are
routinely labeled the “troublers of One thing which I do know is that
Andreasen became a model for many of us younger men, demonstrating the
integrity and the earnestness by which we should speak up, address, and seek
to reverse the intrusion of heresy into God’s chosen church. We cannot be
silent in a time of spiritual crisis.97 It was the results of QOD which
led to the protest of the concerned brethren in Australia.98 Froom explained to Elder Figuhr, “If
you know the backgrounds, the attitudes, the setting of it all, you would
understand why we stated these things as we have.” 99
Tragically, Froom’s explanation does not stand well in the light of history
which has revealed the chaos which these changes have brought into the
authentic belief system of the biblically-based doctrines of the Seventh-day
Adventist Church. A.
Some of the Consequences of
Diminishing and Confusing the Role
of the Spirit of Prophecy in the Church 1. It has led many to scorn what they call the
exclusiveness of the identification of the 2. Many have ignored or opposed the promised
gift of the Spirit of Prophecy as we approach the close of this earth’s
history.102 3. No longer do the official baptismal vows
contain reference to the Spirit of Prophecy as did the former vows.103
At the 1985 General Conference the term the “gift of prophecy” replaced the
term “Spirit of Prophecy.” 104 They are not the same. The
divine role of Ellen White now can be unknown to baptismal candidates. 4. It has led some to claim that after about 1884
the Spirit of Prophecy books have been tampered with and are therefore
unreliable. 5. Others claim that the Spirit of Prophecy
writings before 1890 are unreliable because only about 1890 did Sister White
first state that she may have to pass through the portals of the tomb.
Therefore, it is claimed that her early counsels do not have relevance to us
today, as before 1890 she believed she would be alive when Jesus returned. 6. It has led to many rejecting God’s blessed
reforms including sabbath reform,105 health reform,106
music reform,107 entertainment reform,108 recreational
reform,109 dress reform,110 educational reform,111
and family life reform.112 B. Some of the Consequences of Rejecting the
Final Atonement in the Heavenly Sanctuary 1. The rejection of the Old Testament types as a
shadow of the heavenly sanctuary ministry of Christ.113 2. Some reject the belief that the completion of
Christ’s atonement takes place in the second apartment of the heavenly
sanctuary.114 3. The rejection or reapplication of the
2300-day prophecy of Daniel 8:14, altering its reference to Christ’s
Second-Apartment ministry in the heavenly sanctuary.115 4. The rejection by many of the investigative
(end-time / pre-advent) judgment and/or the denial that Christ began His
Second-Apartment ministry in 1844. 116 5. The blotting out of sin at the time of the
latter rain is rejected by many. 117 6. Many now hold to a completed atonement on the
cross. 118 C. Some of the Consequences of Rejecting the
Fact that Christ Took Our Fallen Human Nature 1. Many reject Christ’s provision to give humans
victory over all sin and worldliness. 119 2. Many claim that Christ has a different nature
from us and therefore cannot be fully our Example. 120 3. Many fail to acknowledge the maturing of our
perfection of character by increasing knowledge and understanding, under the
promptings of the Holy Spirit. 121 4. Many have accepted relational theology. All
we need for salvation, they say, is to have a “relationship” with Jesus when the
Bible teaches that we must abide in Christ, have the mind of Christ, that
Christ must be in us, and we must be in Christ.122 5. Many have accepted an impotent gospel.123
One of our denomination’s most influential scholars, Englishman Edward
Heppenstall, taught many students the new theology. He expressed
anti-biblical concepts against the power of Christ to enable sinners to live
victorious lives.124 He influenced a generation of pastors at 6. Many believe that unforsaken sin will not
deprive them of their entrance into the kingdom of heaven.125 What a carnage of lost souls is in our
church today, largely as a result of these three major errors in QOD!
Many contemporary Seventh-day Adventists, no doubt, have no knowledge of QOD.
Large numbers will have imbibed the theological errors which can be traced to
QOD. Many Seventh-day Adventist scholars have no personal knowledge of
the pre-QOD era of Adventism. Some of us have. What lessons can be
learned? 1. The Bible must be re-established as the basis
of all faith and practice. 2. Do not marginalize the God-given Spirit of
Prophecy to help His people navigate through the treacherous minefield of doctrinal
error and worldly practices which Satan seeks to infiltrate into the 3. Do not minimize the consequence of even one
deviation from divine truth. Truth is only truth if it is free from all
error. 4. There are times when leaders make serious
mistakes which must be corrected. 5. Do not seek to silence the voices of warning. 6. Do not
seek to discredit the one who raises his or her voice of warning against the
intrusion of false views into the Seventh-day Adventist church. Such warnings
are just as necessary as enlightening messages and are essential in this end
time of earth’s history.126 The Influence of QOD upon Seventh-day Adventists
Believe A meeting of no small significance
took place at the General Conference on At this time I can remember seven of
the eight self-supporting leaders: Elder Joe Crews (Amazing Facts); Dr.
Herbert Douglass (Weimar Institute); Pastor John Osborne (Prophecy
Countdown); Elder Ron Spear (Hope International); Dr. Colin Standish
(Hartland Institute); Elder Laverne Tucker (The Quiet Hour); and Elder Robert
Wieland (The 1888 Message Study Committee). The twenty-three General Conference leaders
included Elder Neal Wilson (General Conference President); all but one of the
Vice-Presidents; Elder Charles Bradford (North American Division President);
Elder Robert Pierson (retired General Conference President); and Dr. Leo Van
Dolson (senior Sabbath School quarterly editor). During the meetings a dialogue ensued
concerning the upcoming book Seventh-day Adventists Believe
. . . : A Biblical Exposition of 27 Fundamental Doctrines,
which was about to be released to the Adventist Book Centers. There was great apprehension expressed
at this meeting about the contents of this book. As I recall, those who led
out in expressing concerns were Dr. Herbert Douglass, Dr. Leo Van
Dolson, and I. The expressed concerns
centered about the divisions caused by QOD. The thought was expressed
that, if Seventh-day Adventists Believe was no better than QOD,
it would be wise not to publish it. Concern was also expressed that the
original contributor to the book, Dr. Normal Gulley, was not theologically
sound concerning the human nature of Christ. We were assured that Seventh-day
Adventists Believe was much different from QOD. This was
reinforced by the emphasis that the original manuscript had been thoroughly
revised by Dr. P. G. Damsteegt, a teacher in the church history department of
When Floyd Greenleaf revised and
updated Richard W. Schwarz’s Light Bearers to the Remnant, 1979, in Light
Bearers, A History of the Greenleaf was accurate in reporting
that QOD was little referenced after the 1970s. It was during the
seventies and early eighties that many informal and planned public meetings
were held in which the teachings of QOD—especially on the human nature
of Christ and the final atonement—were exposed as error. These meetings were expanded at the
end of the 1970s to encompass a broader range of topics under what was now
termed “the new theology,” which could be equated with the other errors which
were the logical consequences of QOD. Thus errors were corrected by
the presentation of these truths: 1. The power of the gospel enables a victorious
Christian life in those who surrender their will to the will of their Savior.
(2 Cor. 7:1; Jude 24) 128 2. The gospel of salvation embraces
justification by faith and sanctification by faith in Christ’s blood. (Rom.
5:1, 9; Acts 26:18; Heb. 3. The man of Romans 7 was a convicted man but
not a converted man. Compare Romans 4. The new birth encompasses justification and
sanctification. (John 3:5) 133 5. The nature of sin is transgression of the
law. (1 John 3:4) 134 6. Humans are born with innate tendencies to
sin, not original sin. (Ps. 51:5) 135 7. Salvation is conditional. (Ezek.
18:20-24) 136 8. Sin is not accounted to the unwillfully ignorant.
(John 9. Sister White’s writings are a fulfillment of
the promise of the Spirit of prophecy’s guidance of God’s end-time people.
(Rev. 12:17; To my knowledge, the first major
challenge in book form took place when Dr. John Clifford and my brother
Russell wrote the book Conflicting Concepts of Righteousness by Faith in
the The first direct addressing of the new
theology in public meetings took place at Soon, camp meetings on every inhabited
continent were convened. These camp meetings upheld precious Seventh-day
Adventist truths which had been seriously compromised by the QOD
authors. Literally thousands of such meetings have been held since then, and
scores of books have been written against the new theology. I now address the question, “Did the
book Seventh-day Adventists Believe redress the errors presented in QOD?”
I think not. In the Adventist Review of These undisclosed authors of this
insert responded to this statement of mine with these astonishing words: “But
that is exactly the point. The united church in session has deliberately
chosen to leave some points open because general agreement on specifics does
not exist.” 140 Is it true that
“the united church in session has deliberately chosen to leave some points
open . . .”? My twin brother was a delegate representing the
South-East Asian Union when these 27 beliefs were voted at the 1980 General
Conference Session in Indeed, we had no idea until 2004 that
the Twenty-Seven Fundamental Beliefs were not those which had been
prepared by the committee which had been appointed after the 1975 General
Conference Session in The
members of the ad hoc committee, entrusted with the task of preparing
the new Statement of Fundamental Beliefs were all men known to us: Dr.
Charles Bradford, Associate Secretary of the General Conference Elder
Reginald Dower, Secretary of the General Conference Ministerial Association Pastor
Duncan Eva, General Conference Vice-President (Chairman) Elder
Elder
Willis Hackett, Vice-President of the General Conference Dr.
Richard Hammill, Vice-President of the General Conference Dr.
Gordon Hyde, General Field Secretary of the General Conference Pastor
Alf Lohne, Vice-President of the General Conference Dr.
Bernard Seton, Associate Secretary of the General Conference (Secretary) Elder Arthur
White, Secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate.141 This list included some men who were
very faithful to the Seventh-day Adventist message. In
1980, however, the work of the ad hoc drafting committee was virtually
superseded, although this was far from the intention of the General
Conference. That the General Conference permitted the work of its
sub-committee to be effectively hijacked by the theologians of This
unseemly activity must be born in mind as we evaluate the Twenty-Seven
Fundamentals. God never works through such means. . . . In
preparation for the 1980 General Conference Session, the General Conference ad
hoc committee which was delegated to redraft our fundamental beliefs, had
completed its work by August, 1979. This provided a mere eight months for
further consultations and evaluations. It was in this period that the
consequences of the selection of the faulty members to the ad hoc
committee became evident. We
have been unable to obtain a copy of the ad hoc committee’s draft
fundamental beliefs. Until this is made available we cannot know whether or
not it more strongly upheld our Bible and Spirit of Prophecy-based faith than
the final submission. We feel convicted that men such as Elders Dower, Franz,
Hackett, Hyde, Lohne and White would not have been of a mind to leave
loopholes in the fundamentals which would have opened the doors to the
serious dilution of the faith. Yet the final Twenty-seven Fundamentals were
full of such loopholes. If,
as we suspect, the ad hoc committee’s recommendations were firmer than
those of the final Twenty-seven Fundamentals adopted, then the
recommendations of Pastor Eva (chairman) and Seton (secretary) may be
evaluated by some as a none-too-subtle attempt to subvert the wishes of the
full committee. The liberal agenda not infrequently achieves its aims against
the will of the majority. . . . Pastors
Eva’s and Seton’s recommendation ensured that any hope that a straightforward
statement of the principles of our faith would be produced, irrespective of
the draft suggestions of the 1980 General Conference ad hoc committee,
would not be fulfilled. Their recommendations are documented: Pastor
Eva Further,
Pastor Seton recalled: When that
further limited revision was completed, I ventured to suggest that it would
be wise to submit the document to our professional theologians on the basis
that it would be better to have their reactions before the document went
further rather than await their strictures on the session floor. There was
some hesitation, but eventually the suggestion was accepted, and the document
went to The
recommendations of Pastors Eva and Seton were to alter Seventh-day Adventist
history. Despite the wise reservations of some of the members of this 1980 ad
hoc committee, the recommendations of Pastors Eva and Seton were adopted.
As a result Australian, Pastor Walter Scragg, then Northern European Division
President—1975-1983 (and later President of the South Pacific
Division—1983-1990) reported that: W. Duncan Eva
has described to me his surprise when he received back from [the Andrews
scholars] not a reworking of the material submitted but a completely
rewritten document. (Walter R. L. Scragg, “Doctrinal Statements and the Life
and Witness of the Church,” unpublished paper presented at a workers’ meeting
in Vasterang, Sweden and Manchester, England between August 24 and September
4, 1981). As a result
the Andrews theologians effectively routed the General Conference 1980 ad
hoc committee in a doctrinal coup, possibly unprecedented in our church
history, for the I can only wonder what would have been
the response of the delegates to these twenty-seven fundamental beliefs if it
had been known that the recommendations of the officially appointed committee
had been hijacked by an unauthorized group of A review of the
large quarto-size 467-page book, Issues: the Seventh-day Adventist Church
and Certain Private Ministries also shocked many readers by what they
could hardly believe could be in a book authorized by the North American
Division officers and the union presidents. It condemned Hope International
and Our Firm Foundation for holding “certain views on the human nature
of Christ, the nature of sin, and sanctification. These issues have never
been settled among Christians, much less among Seventh-day Adventists. They
are not issues so essential to salvation that souls will be lost unless they
are resolved. The problem that Hope International / Our Firm Foundation
has created is that this independent ministry feels driven to charge the SDA
church with being in a state of apostasy because it does not accept their
views on these moot theological issues.” 143 Surely, most Seventh-day Adventists
are shocked that such a statement would be immortalized in print form. The
human nature of Christ not essential to salvation!! (Romans 8:3, 4; Hebrews
2:16, 17; Selected Messages, book 1, p. 244) 144 The
nature of sin not important to man’s salvation!! Seventh-day Adventists do
not know what sin is?? (1 John 3:4) 145 If we do not know what sin is, we do
not know God’s perfect law of liberty. (Romans 7:7; James Have the twenty-seven (now
twenty-eight) fundamental beliefs redressed the dangerous errors of QOD?
Sadly, I must answer, “No.” Indeed, they demonstrate how far we have parted
from the blessed truths of salvation. Did the book Seventh-day Adventists
Believe redress the errors of QOD on the issue of the Spirit of
Prophecy, the completed atonement of Christ, or the human nature of Christ?
Tragically, it now reflected these errors. 1.
The
Spirit of Prophecy – the gift of prophecy is not the
Spirit of prophecy; yet there is an attempt to equate the two. When an
attempt is made to explain the Spirit of Prophecy (Ibid. p. 221), there is no
reference to the works of Ellen White. So the
expression the Spirit of prophecy can refer to (1) the Holy Spirit
inspiring the prophet with a revelation from God, (2) the operation of the
gift of prophecy, and (3) the medium of the prophecy itself.149 Sister White
is introduced by the subheading “The Spirit of Prophecy in the 2. The Final Atonement
– Consistent with the error of QOD, Seventh-day Adventists Believe
says, “The atonement, or reconciliation, was completed on the cross…” 151
2.
The
Human Nature of Christ – Seventh-day Adventists Believe
gets closest to redress the issues on the nature of Christ but it seems to
stop short of a clear and decisive statement that Christ took upon Himself
fallen, sinful human nature. Here is an example: “He clothed His divinity
with humanity, He was made in the ‘likeness of sinful flesh,’ or ‘sinful
human nature,’ or ‘fallen human nature,’ (cf. Rom. 8:3).” 152
However, just two paragraphs later, in the authors’ efforts to further
clarify our position, they stopped short of inspiration. 3.
When He took on human nature the race
had already deteriorated through 4,000 years of sin on a sin-cursed planet.
So that He could save those in the utter depths of degradation, Christ took a
human nature that, compared with Adam’s unfallen nature, had decreased in
physical and mental strength—though He did so without sinning.153 The following endnote is added to the
end of the above paragraph: Christ took
upon Him “the same susceptibilities, mental and physical” as His
contemporaries (White, “Notes of Travel,” Advent Review and Sabbath
Herald, Feb. 10, 1885, p. 81)—a human nature that had decreased in
“physical strength, in mental power, in moral worth”—though not morally
depraved, but totally sinless (White, “ ‘In All Points Tempted Like As
We Are,’ ” Signs, Dec. 3, 1902, p. 2; White, Desire of Ages, p.
49).154 This is the confusion that Seventh-day
Adventists Believe presents, for the authors do quote the italicized
portion of the following plain statement on Christ’s humanity: For four
thousand years the race had been decreasing in physical strength, in
mental power, in moral worth; and Christ took upon Him the infirmities of
degenerate humanity. Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest depths of
degradation.155 Unfortunately, in their own words,
however, the authors state in the endnote above that Christ took “a human
nature . . . totally sinless.” Note how the authors fell short of
Ellen White’s inspired revelation. Laying aside
His royal crown, He condescended to step down, step by step, to the level of
fallen humanity. 156 The King of
glory proposed to humble Himself to fallen humanity! He would place His feet
in Adam’s steps. He would take man’s fallen nature, and engage to cope with
the strong foe who triumphed over Adam. 157 Clad in the
vestments of humanity, the Son of God came down to the level of those he
wished to save. In him was no guile or sinfulness; he was ever pure and
undefiled; yet he took upon him our sinful nature. 158 There is another concern regarding the
section in Seventh-day Adventists Believe on the humanity of Christ. I
noticed the heading on page 49: “6. The sinlessness of Jesus Christ’s
human nature.” To me, the
heading and the following discussion creates an unfortunate confusion of nature
and character. It is true that the word “nature” does sometimes refer
to a person’s character, but I do not believe that “human nature,” in this
context, is referring to “character.” This confusion would make it very
difficult for someone to grasp the fact that Jesus took our sinful nature
while maintaining a sinless character. In the end, the author(s) straddled
the issue, choosing the dichotomy more consistent with the concept of the
evil body but the good soul (spirit), couching it in such language as to
confuse nature with Christ’s perfect character and sinless life. Thus “Christ’s
humanity was not the Adamic humanity, that is, the humanity of Adam before
the fall; nor fallen humanity, that is, in every respect the humanity of Adam
after the fall. It was not the Adamic, because it had the innocent infirmities
of the fallen. It was not the fallen, because it had never descended into
moral impurity. It was, therefore, most literally our humanity, but without
sin.” 159 Thus QOD’s ambivalence sadly
still reigns within our “official” presentation of fundamental beliefs. Let
us remember, confusion and error is frequently more dangerous than outright
error. The Origin of Present-Day Errors in the The test of Christian integrity is the
same today as it has always been—implicit loyalty to God and His Word. Since
the garden of Eden, Satan has insinuated his admixture of truth and error,
and with amazing success he has ultimately prevailed against every reform
movement which God has raised up in the history of the world.160 Augustine (354–430), Bishop of Hippo
(396–430) in Like almost all pagans, Augustine had
learned as a youth, probably, from his father to believe that the gods were
in complete control. Yet he believed in limited free-will. Toward the end of
his life, however, he became strong in following the Greek pagan false
concept of predestination.162 He thus accepted that by God’s
predetermined edict, some humans would be saved and others would be punished
eternally.163 He rejected the truth that one’s personal acceptance
of Christ’s free grace through faith with its offer of salvation determines
his eternal destiny.164 Augustine’s belief that some were predestined
by God to eternal burning hell, and others were predestined to eternal
salvation fearfully defames the character of our God of love. Augustine seemed unable to comprehend
or failed to accept the clearest statements of Scripture on the choice which
God gives to man. He did not give due weight to these texts.165 The concept of
predestination led many ultimately to the conclusion that once we are saved,
we are always saved, for God is constant. Once He has saved us, He cannot
change—no matter what our subsequent life history is, whether we possess holy
or unholy characters. This false teaching, termed by some as the doctrine of
the perseverance of the saints, set forth a train of false doctrines which
included that once we are saved by Christ who changes not, we are always
saved, irrespective of our conduct, whether virtuous or evil. Both the Old
and New Testaments attest to the falsity of this concept.166 Thus was laid the foundation of the
“sin-and-live” theology, whose adherents are quick to point out that we are
not saved according to our works. While this is true, the sin-and-live
theology fails to emphasize that no one will be saved without the good works
of the Spirit.167 Salvation
does not encompass forgiveness only; it also frees us from the slavery of the
practice of sin. These teachings
of Augustine opened the doors to the pagan concept of original sin, which taught that the original sin of Adam required
the punishment of all the human race. In other words, we are guilty for
Adam’s sin. This teaching proclaimed that we sin because we are sinners, not
that we are sinners because we have sinned. This teaching is a major error
and is contrary to the Bible. While we inherit from Adam sinful flesh and his
tendency to sin, the act of sin itself is a volitional act.168 Every human being is born unconverted,
with a predisposition to sin. An unconverted person will fall into sin as all
have done. Nevertheless, no sin is accounted against us unless it has
resulted from our choice or, at the least, deliberate negligence. Until God
provides us knowledge of sin He does not count us guilty.169 Augustinian theology created a great
dilemma. It had been understood that Christ took upon Himself our fallen
nature and that, in the power of His Father, He resisted Satan. However, the
logical implication of Augustine’s theory of original sin was that Christ,
too, was a sinner if He possessed the same fallen genetic nature of human
beings. Therefore, the view was proposed that Christ had a different
inherited nature from fallen human beings—that He had inherited the unfallen
nature which Adam had before the Fall. In this sense, He could not be fully
our example; yet the Bible is plain on this point.170 Here we see the development of a body
of doctrines which defies pure Scripture, but is both logical and consistent
with the false premise upon which Augustine based his theology. The New Testament is emphatic that
Christ did inherit the fallen nature of mankind. There is no excuse for us to
err on this matter.171 Christ could not have provided an
example to us who are born with fallen natures unless He possessed the same
nature as us and was tempted as we are. He could not have demonstrated that
we, filled with the power of the Holy Spirit, have no excuse for sin. Thus,
one error, the doctrine of original sin, has led to another error and many
more. For example, Christians of that era
began to ask how the curse and the penalty of original sin was taken away.
The answer eventually provided was that the curse of original sin is abrogated
by baptism. Other questions naturally followed, such as, “What happens if
someone dies unbaptized?” It was then declared that they would suffer eternal
burning torment. We can only begin to imagine the chilling terror and anguish
which filled the hearts of parents who had lost their little ones and now
were informed that their deceased babies were consigned to eternal burning
fire because their little ones had died unbaptized. Even the most heartless
priests were surely troubled by this declaration. Thus, step by step, the
wholly unbiblical concept of infant “baptism,” entered fully into the beliefs
of the Roman Catholic Church. Centuries later, indeed not until the
thirteenth century, a totally unbiblical word—“limbo”—was introduced into the
ecclesiastical language of the Church. Limbo was said to be some intermediate
place where the souls of unbaptized infants and “innocents” went at death. When men commence with one false
premise as Augustine did, and then others attempt to bring every concept incompatible
to it into unity with this false premise, wholesale destruction of the faith
inevitably ensues. This deviation was the certain result of Augustine’s
promotion of predestination. Now, two clear distinct strands of Christianity
were developed throughout Christendom. One was built upon the purity of God’s
Word, the other was established upon false premises which proved to be null
and void when examined in the light of Holy Scripture. To support the false
concepts, church tradition assumed equal status with the Bible and in many
instances superseded the authority of the Bible. Some also trace the concept of the
immaculate conception of Mary back to Augustine’s concept that Christ had an
unfallen nature. Even though this doctrine was not finally adopted by the
Roman Church until 1854, during the reign of Pius IX (Pope 1846–1878),
nevertheless it was a logical extension of Augustine’s error. Augustine was also the architect of
persecution of other Christians who stood against his beliefs. The most to
suffer were his fellow Africans, the Donatists. They opposed the church-state
union and state enforcement of the edicts of the church. Augustine threatened
dire consequences to the Donatists, and indeed they were persecuted out of
existence.172 Perhaps the annihilation of the Donatists was the
major event which permitted the Muslims to wipe out Christianity in Augustine’s beliefs, such as
predestination, were imbibed by the Augustinian monk Martin Luther, who
taught Calvin, who then taught these Augustinian concepts to Beza, Knox, and
many others.173 In turn, they have flooded into the ranks of the
Baptists and are now invading the We must look to see how some of these
false doctrines have become embedded to a significant extent into the
Seventh-day Adventist faith of today, partially through the training of our
Bible professors in the universities and seminaries of the fallen churches of
Christendom. Augustine, who died in the first half of the fifth century, is
casting his shadow across the When chairman of the Education
Department of Avondale College in the latter part of the 1960s, I was so
exercised by the intrusion of evangelical beliefs into the Bible classes
taught by Dr. Desmond Ford that I was constrained to utter this warning,
“What is taught in our college today, will be preached in our pulpits
tomorrow and will be believed by our members the day after tomorrow.” While I
am not a prophet, that statement has been tragically fulfilled with dire
consequences. Commonly presented in one form or
another is the “sin-and-live” theology. Many are increasingly proclaiming the
concept of original sin. Others are urging the doctrine that Christ came in
the nature of unfallen Adam. QOD opened the floodgate to these false
teachings. It would be logical to believe that some of the other teachings of
Augustine will eventually surface within our ranks unless we take
conscientious stands and definitive actions now. Let us be reminded that when QOD
was released in 1957, the membership of the To preserve and proclaim the
everlasting gospel to every creature (Mark 16:15) demands a mighty, diligent
effort to teach the professors in our colleges, universities, and seminaries,
to train pastors and teachers at all our schools, and by extension all our
members these sacred truths so that all can know them, believe them, live
them, and proclaim them to the world. I pray that our leaders will take up
this monumental challenge necessary for the hastening of Christ’s return. Conclusion The Beware lest
any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of
men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.178 While this gathering has not been
officially assembled for the purpose of making recommendations to the
world-wide Seventh-day Adventist body of believers, and while there has been
no official mandate from the General Conference leadership to do so,
nevertheless, I believe that we, the delegates gathered at the Fiftieth
Anniversary QOD Conference, convened at Andrews University, October
24-27, 2007, will be greatly remiss if we do not make our voices heard to
leadership, pastors, evangelists, teachers, and laity, seeking to redress the
tragic errors inserted into QOD. These errors have led to the great
theological division and confusion now in the Seventh-day Adventist ranks.
Not only have our church’s doctrines been compromised on the role of the
Spirit of Prophecy, the completed atonement in the heavenly sanctuary, and
the fallen human nature of Christ, these alterations have opened the
floodgate to allow many of the beliefs of Augustinian Catholic doctrines to
infiltrate into our church. God’s church is too special to permit this
situation to continue. Dr. Douglass’ enlightening booklet was entitled The
Notes 1
Seventh-day Adventists Answer
Questions on Doctrine (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald Publishing
Assoc., 1957), (hereafter referred to as QOD) was written to answer 40
questions provided by Evangelical Pastor Walter Martin. After many
consultations, mainly with Dr. Donald Grey Barnhouse, pastor of the Tenth
Presbyterian Church in 2
I eagerly drove to the Greater
Sydney Conference A.B.C. to purchase my copy of QOD. I was then a
24-year-old undergraduate full-time student at the “At
last,” I thought, “there is a definitive book which will provide the Bible
bases by which to substantiate the pillar truths of our faith. What a tool to
help me witness to fellow university students!” No such tool had previously
been available. With
a confidence born of naïvety, I believed this book would “fill in” all the
blanks in my Biblical knowledge. I made the most of any spare time I had,
especially during Sabbath hours. Yet,
early in my reading I was confronted with my first perplexity, and later I
discovered two others which were of critical concern to me. At that time, I
had no knowledge that any other church members was perplexed. My first
perplexity was in reference to Ellen White. Some statements did not seem
right. I had already read much of the Spirit of Prophecy from my mid-teens.
Some of the answers in QOD seemed carefully crafted to placate rather
than enlighten those Christians not of our faith. While I realized that we
need to introduce the role of Sister White with wisdom, her divinely
appointed role can clearly be explained within the spotlight of Biblical
prophecy. What I had been taught by my father and mother and instruction I
received at the Later
in my reading of QOD, I was startled by the positions proposed concerning
Christ’s atonement for the human race and the human nature of Christ. Surely
these were foreign to the learning of my childhood, youth, and early manhood.
I was greatly shaken by the discovery that the book appeared to have the
endorsement of the General Conference and a large section of leaders and
scholars in the I
was troubled. In despair, I sought to counsel with the pastor of the I
knew nothing about the Barnhouse-Martin dialog held with some of our leaders.
It was not until a few years later that the puzzle of the book become clear
to me as I witnessed the monumental changes it was effecting within God’s
chosen church. Time
has only deepened my concerns. It has led to the tragic fractionation of our
beloved church and has led multitudes to accept a gospel foreign to the
everlasting gospel of the three angels. It is surely evident that many who
have been influenced by this “other gospel” have been led astray from their
eternal salvation directly or indirectly by the influence of this book. 3
The book Questions on Doctrine
was a response largely prepared by Leroy Froom (1890-1974), an American and a
former ministerial secretary of the General Conference; Roy Allan Anderson
(1895-1988), an Australian who was then ministerial secretary of the General
Conference; and W. E. Read (1883-1976), an Englishman who served as a field
secretary of the General Conference. It provided answers in response to forty
questions presented by prominent Evangelical leaders led by Donald Grey
Barnhouse, editor of Eternity magazine, a popular radio speaker and
pastor of the Tenth Presbyterian Church in The
book caused what has proven to be the greatest and most enduring split in the
history of the 4
QOD, pp. 29, 51, 89. 5
Ibid., pp. 353–355. 6
George Knight, Seventh-day
Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine: Annotated Edition ( 7
QOD, p. 650 8
Herbert Douglass, Opportunity of
the Century ( Froom admitted
[to the Evangelicals] that some Adventists had made it into print emphasizing
these “atrocious ideas” [that Christ took fallen, sinful human nature], but
offered that such were from those in the Adventist “lunatic fringe”! Remember,
Froom and 9
Ibid., p. 17. 10
The point of special
interest is [DeHaan’s] testimony to the fact that
the book does not represent any change in Adventist doctrine. . . .
What has apparently confused some is the avoidance
of certain Adventist phraseology and the employment of “terminology currently
used in theological circles.” Adventists through the years have developed a
vocabulary of their own that to them means much but does not always rightly
convey to non-Adventists the ideas intended. The book endeavors to set forth
as clearly as possible a reason for the hope that is ours so that sincere
non-Adventist inquirers may understand. (R.R. Figuhr, G.C. President, Review
and Herald, April 24, 1958; as quoted in QODAE, p. v) 11
“One scoffer, Louis R. Conradi, did much to build up Adventism in 12
Having lived in 13
Ibid., p. 29 14
Ibid., p. 51 15
Ibid., p. 89 16
Ibid. 17
Here are two of many diverse
examples of statements by Mrs. White which have universal application: When
the Spirit of God, with its marvelous awakening power, touches the soul, it
abases human pride. Worldly pleasure and position and power are seen to be
worthless. (The Desire of Ages, p. 135) The worship of
images and relics, the invocation of saints, and the exaltation of the pope
are devices of Satan to attract the minds of the people from God and from His
Son. (The Great Controversy, p. 568) 18
Below are a few examples of commands
in the Bible which do not have universal application: Then
spake Joshua to the Lord in the day when the Lord
delivered up the Amorites before the children of Israel, and he said in the
sight of Israel, Sun, stand thou still upon Gibeon; and thou, Moon, in the
valley of Ajalon. (Joshua 10:12) And
Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning. Notwithstanding they
hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them left of it until the morning, and
it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth with them. And they gathered it
every morning, every man according to his eating: and when the sun waxed hot,
it melted. And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers
for one man: and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses. And he
said unto them, This is that which the Lord
hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the Lord:
bake that which ye will bake to day, and seethe
that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over
lay up for you to be kept until the morning. And they laid it up till the
morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm
therein. (Exodus 16:19–24) And
there went forth a wind from the Lord,
and brought quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp, as it were a
day’s journey on this side, and as it were a day’s journey on the other side,
round about the camp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the
earth. (Numbers And the Lord sent fiery serpents among the
people, and they bit the people; and much people of 19
Books written by Sister White
applicable to those not of our faith include Patriarchs and Prophets; Prophets
and Kings; The Desire of Ages; Acts of the Apostles; The
Great Controversy; Steps to Christ; Thoughts From the Mount of
Blessing; Christ’s Object Lessons; The Ministry of Healing;
and Education. 20
Those who use flesh foods
little know what they are eating. Often if they could see the animals when
living and know the quality of the meat they eat, they would turn from it
with loathing. People are continually eating flesh that is filled with tuberculous and cancerous germs. Tuberculosis, cancer,
and other fatal diseases are thus communicated. (The Ministry of Healing,
p. 313) 21
Tobacco is a poison of the
most deceitful and malignant kind. (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4, p. 128) Tobacco is a
slow, insidious, but most malignant poison. (The Ministry of Healing,
p. 127) 22
. . . both mind
and body were enfeebled through the habit of
self-abuse. (Testimonies for the Church, Volume 5, p. 91) The
effect of zinc deficiency has particularly profound effects on the male,
because extraordinary amounts of zinc are found in the testicles and the
prostate gland. . . . The amount of zinc in semen is such that one
ejaculation may get rid of all the zinc that can be absorbed from the
intestines in one day. . . . In humans, among the most consistent
effects of zinc deficiency are changes in mood an
behavior. There is depression, extreme irritability, apathy and even in some
circumstances, behavior which looks like
schizophrenia. . . . It is even possible, given the importance of
zinc for the brain, that 19th-century moralists were correct when they said
that repeated masturbation could make one mad! Similarly, the high livers
were also correct when they said that a diet rich in oysters was necessary to
compensate for excessive sexual indulgence. [Oysters supply a high level of
zinc]. (David Horrobin, M.D., Ph.D. [Oxford
University], Zinc (St. Albans, Vt.: Vitabooks,
Inc., 1981), p. 8). We hate to say
it but in a zinc-deficient adolescent, sexual excitement and excessive
masturbation might precipitate insanity. (Carl Pfeiffer, Ph.D., M.D. [Harvard
University], Zinc and other Micro-Nutrients, (New Canaan, CT: Keats
Publishing, Inc., 1978), p. 45). 23
Human beings are suffering
the results of their own course of action in departing from the commandments
of God. The beasts also suffer under the curse. Disease in cattle is making
meat-eating a dangerous matter. The Lord’s curse is upon the earth, upon man,
upon beasts, upon the fish, and as transgression becomes almost universal,
the curse will be permitted to become as broad and as deep as the
transgression. Disease is contracted by the use of meat. The diseased flesh
of these dead carcasses is sold in the market-places, and disease among men
is the sure result. The Lord would bring His people into a position where
they will not touch or taste the flesh of dead animals. There is no safety in
eating of the flesh of dead animals, and in a short time the milk of the cows
will also be excluded from the diet of God’s commandment-keeping people. In a
short time it will not be safe to use anything that comes from the animal
creation. (Pacific Union Recorder, November 7, 1901) 24
The Lord would have His
people bury political questions. On these themes silence is eloquence. Christ
calls upon His followers to come into unity on the pure gospel principles
which are plainly revealed in the word of God. We cannot with safety vote for
political parties; for we do not know whom we are voting for. We cannot with
safety take part in any political scheme. (Gospel Workers, p. 391) 25 Some
of the most popular amusements, such as football and boxing, have become
schools of brutality. They are developing the same characteristics as did the
games of ancient A view of
things was presented before me in which the students
were playing games of tennis and cricket. Then I was given instruction
regarding the character of these amusements. They were presented to me as a
species of idolatry, like the idols of the nations. (Counsels to Parents,
Teachers, and Students, p. 350) 26
The
1986 manual changed the wording from the “Spirit of Prophecy” to the “gift of
prophecy” as voted at the 1985 General Conference Session held at Do you accept
the Bible teachings of spiritual gifts and do you believe that the gift of
prophecy in the remnant church is one of the identifying marks of that
church? Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual, 1986 ed., p. 44. 27
QODAE, p. xxix 28
Ibid. 29
And there shall be no man in
the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement in
the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself,
and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel. (Leviticus
16:17) Now
of the things which we have spoken this is the sum: We have such an high priest, who is set on the right hand of the throne
of the Majesty in the heavens; A minister of the sanctuary, and of the true
tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man. For every high priest is
ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices: wherefore it is of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. . . . But
now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the
mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises.
(Hebrews 8:1–3, 6) But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a
greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not
of this building; neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own
blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal
redemption for us. For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth
to the purifying of the flesh: how much more shall the blood of Christ, who
through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your
conscience from dead works to serve the living God? And for this cause he is
the mediator of the new testament, that by means of
death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first
testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal
inheritance. . . . It was therefore necessary that the patterns of
things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things
themselves with better sacrifices than these. For Christ is not entered into
the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into
heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us: nor yet that he should
offer himself often, as the high priest entereth
into the holy place every year with blood of others; for then must he often
have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of
the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.
(Hebrews 9:11–15, 23–26) 30
Thus those who followed in
the light of the prophetic word saw that, instead of coming to the earth at
the termination of the 2300 days in 1844, Christ then entered the most holy
place of the heavenly sanctuary to perform the closing work of atonement
preparatory to His coming. (The Great Controversy, p. 422) It
is those who by faith follow Jesus in the great work of the atonement who
receive the benefits of His mediation in their behalf, while those who reject
the light which brings to view this work of ministration are not benefited
thereby. (Ibid. p, 430) 31
QOD, p. 349 32
Early Writings, p. 260;
emphasis by the QOD authors. 33
QOD, pp. 354, 355; emphasis
in the original. 34
Early Writings, p. 253
(emphasis added) 35
Ibid. p. 254 (emphasis added) 36
Knight, QODAE, op. cit., p.
xviii 37
M.L. Andreasen letter to Bro. R.R.
Figuhr; quoted in QODAE, p. xxi 38 Here
is what Froom wrote, “That is that tremendous scope of the sacrificial act of
the cross—a complete, perfect, and final atonement for man’s sin.” (Leroy
Froom, Ministry, February 1957) Unfortunately Andreasen changed the
dash after the word “cross” to the word “(is)”. The opponents of Andreasen
quickly made capital of this modification. Yet it is difficult for me to
discern that this alteration changed the intent of what Froom had written to
any significant extent. Indeed it appears to me that Froom’s original
presentation is more impactful with the dash rather than (is). Either way
there is no ambiguity in this statement. Froom asserted that the atonement
was completed and finalized at the death of Christ. By extension the
conclusion is that the high priestly ministry in the most holy place of the
heavenly sanctuary has no relevance to the atonement for the sins of
humanity. This was not the position of the early Seventh-day Adventist
leaders and far more importantly, it was not the position of Holy Scripture
nor the position found in the Spirit of Prophecy. 39
The word “atonement” means
at-one-ment; and when Christ pronounces the decree
which determines the eternal destiny of every soul, He and the subjects of
His kingdom are at-one-ment. Sin will never again
separate Christ from His people. But the
territory of His kingdom is still cursed by sin so the at-one-ment of Christ and His kingdom will not be complete in
every sense of the term until the fires of the last day there comes forth a
new earth with every mark of the curse removed. Then not only the subjects of
Christ’s kingdom, but the entire earth, will be at-one-ment
with Christ and the Father. (S.N. Haskell, The Cross and its Shadow,
Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1914, pp. 217-218) Reconciliation
the church has all along received through Christ; but we receive the
atonement only when it is made as the closing service of our Lord in the
sanctuary above. (Uriah Smith and James White, The Biblical Institute,
Pacific S.D.A. Publishing House, 1878, p. 81.) 40
QODAE, p. xiv. Why
did the evangelicals confine themselves to just four “tests” of whether
Seventh-day Adventists are genuine Christians? Unarguably all four of these
tests are crucial to salvation. Why did they not include the infallibility of
Scripture, why not the Protestant principle of sola Scriptura (the Bible
only)? Why not the ordinance of baptism? The secret rapture? I can only
speculate that the evangelicals chose the four issues and ignored the others
because the evangelicals themselves are split on these other crucial
doctrines. Then there are the very distinctive Seventh-day Adventist beliefs
such as the three angels’ messages, the full sanctuary message, the Sabbath,
the state of the dead, the millennium, the Spirit of Prophecy, and the
investigative judgment? There is no doubt that both Barnhouse and Martin had
no love for many of these Seventh-day Adventist beliefs. While a number of
these issues were superbly answered in QOD, Barnhouse and Martin did
not make these tests of Seventh-day Adventists’ Christian authenticity. Maybe
they recognized that they could not adequately argue effectively against
these Scriptural doctrines? 41
We can only speculate why Barnhouse
and Martin made no testing challenge to the Seventh-day Sabbath, death as
sleep, the sanctuary ministry of Christ (beyond the atonement), or the three
angels’ messages. Were they convinced of these truths or did they feel
inadequate to answer them? Why
did not they address our belief and practice of baptism or our understanding
of the anti-Christ, or the millennium, or the rapture? Possibly they avoided
making these beliefs a test because the evangelicals are greatly divided on
these issues. I
am mystified by Knight’s interpretation of the statement of Froom’s which is
too plain to require added explanation. Here is Knight’s interpretation:
“…the sacrifice on the cross was a full and complete sacrifice (in
terms of the sacrificial aspect of the atonement) for sin.” (Knight, QODAE,
p. xviii) Froom was too gifted as an author to write what he did while really
meaning what Knight suggests. However,
in fairness to Knight, we cannot ignore other statements of Froom concerning
the atonement in the same article which are in accord with the long-held
Seventh-day Adventist belief on the atonement. Here are Froom’s words: “The
term ‘atonement,’ which we are considering, obviously has a much broader
meaning than has been commonly conceived. Despite the belief of multitudes in
the churches about us, it is not, on the one hand, limited just to the
sacrificial death of Christ on the cross. On the other hand, neither is it
confined to the ministry of our heavenly High Priest in the sanctuary above,
on the antitypical day of atonement—or hour of God’s judgment—as some of our
forefathers first erroneously thought and wrote. Instead, as attested by the
Spirit of prophecy, it clearly embraces both—one aspect being incomplete
without the other, and each being the indispensable complement of the other.”
(Froom, ibid) I
can only wonder why Froom did not explain that “atonement” has both of these
meanings in this Ministry article and in his answer to the
evangelicals. There is no doubt that Froom understood the Biblical foundation
for the belief that both the sacrifice of Christ and the heavenly ministry of
Christ in the Froom
was certainly giving mixed signals, maybe one message for the members of the
Seventh-day Adventist Church and one more palatable for the Evangelicals.
Surely Froom could have redressed the situation when Andreasen drew the
attention of leadership to the duplicity and inaccuracy of what was being
placed in QOD. Again I can conclude only that the goal to accommodate
the evangelicals was of such a priority that the writers of QOD felt
compelled to satisfy the expectations of these evangelicals to court favor
with them. If
Elder Figuhr and the authors of QOD had harkened to the wise counsel
and plea of M. L. Andreasen, they could have quickly brought unity with
arguably the best scholar in the Seventh-day Adventist ranks rather than the
infliction of terrible retribution upon Elder Andreasen and grief to his wife
for his noble, courageous stand for the precious truth which God has
entrusted to His remnant church. While
Knight infers that Froom was to all intents and purposes supporting the same
belief on the complete atonement as was fervently cherished by Andreasen, the
actions of the General Conference do not sustain this conclusion; neither do
the comments in QOD on what Sister White meant by writing “that Christ
is making atonement now.” She meant, they said, “that Christ is now making
application of the benefits of the sacrificial atonement He made on the cross.”
(QOD, pp. 354, 355) Sister White meant nothing of the sort. She
clearly meant what she wrote. 1. Leaders expressed themselves accurately
concerning the final atonement in the Heavenly Sanctuary in Seventh-day Adventist
circles, but they denied this in QOD. For example, here are the words
of the General Conference President less than a year after QOD was
released for sale: “The sole hope of our salvation, Christ, His atoning
sacrifice on Calvary, the final phase of His atoning ministry now going on in
the heavenly Sanctuary must by word and voice be clearly proclaimed to the
world…” (Elder R. R. Figuhr address, June 1958 at the General Conference
Session, Cleveland, Ohio; published in “The Faith Once Delivered to the
Saints,” Review and Herald, June 23, 1958, p. 56; as quoted in ibid.
p, 177) QOD
stated the opposite of this. It proclaimed that the atonement was completed
at the cross. This is yet another evidence that the
message to Seventh-day Adventists was strikingly different from the message
to the evangelicals. This was clearly a case of duplicity. These differences
went far beyond a simple attempt to couch the Seventh-day Adventist message
in language understandable to the Evangelical scholars. It was a contradictory
message presented to the Evangelicals in QOD. As I have presented
earlier, the presentation to the Evangelicals was contrary to the Seventh-day
Adventist beliefs, as the Evangelicals themselves recognized—as is confirmed
later in these endnotes. QOD was to infect the minds of Seventh-day
Adventists with the false evangelical belief because of the book’s wide
distribution to professors and religion majors in our seminary, colleges, and
university. Remember, Elder Figuhr spoke the above words after the
publication of QOD and his strong endorsement of its content. Had he
changed his view? Was the spoken message for Seventh-day Adventists different
from the message prepared for the consumption by Evangelicals? Was QOD
written for the approval of the Evangelicals rather than to affirm the
precious truth to Seventh-day Adventist believers? 2. Andreasen was the Isaiah, Jeremiah, and
Ezekiel of his day. He lost his ministerial credentials (April 6, 1961)
(Ibid.) and his sustentation for standing faithful for truth and
righteousness, and he was refused the opportunity to preach in the churches.
These actions were not taken because Andreasen departed from the truth of the
everlasting gospel, nor for abandoning the 3. Elder Andreasen’s call from his death bed
for reconciliation with the denominational leaders and the restoration of his
ministerial credentials posthumously, did not redress the great chasm which
had rendered apart the Seventh-day Adventists on some pillar issues of our
faith. Fifty years later surely the time is overdue to, in sorrow and
repentance, restore the integrity of God’s faith. Let ministry and laity
unite together to bring this restoration. 42
Neither is there salvation
in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men,
whereby we must be saved. (Acts For
by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the
gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his
workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before
ordained that we should walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8–10) 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. (Galatians 2:16) For
therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is
written, The just shall live by faith. (Romans 1:17) 43
While good works will not
save even one soul, yet it is impossible for even one soul to be saved
without good works. (Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 377) Good
works can never purchase salvation, but they are an evidence of the faith
that acts by love and purifies the soul. And though the eternal reward is not
bestowed because of our merit, yet it will be in proportion to the work that
has been done through the grace of Christ. (The Desire of Ages, p. 314) There
is not a point that needs to be dwelt upon more earnestly, repeated more
frequently, or established more firmly in the minds of all than the
impossibility of fallen man meriting anything by his own best good works.
Salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ alone. (Faith and Works, p.
18. See also ibid., pp. 19-26) 44
Richard W. Schwarz, Floyd Greenleaf,
Light Bearers ( 45
In Christ is life, original,
unborrowed, underived. (The
Desire of Ages, p. 530) Christ
was God essentially, and in the highest sense. He was with God from all
eternity, God over all, blessed forevermore. The Lord Jesus Christ, the
divine Son of God, existed from eternity, a distinct person, yet one with the
Father. (Selected Messages, book 1, p. 247; see also p. 228.) 46
Before the mountains were
brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth
and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God. (Psalm
90:2) For
unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be
upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. (Isaiah 9:6) In
the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and
without him was not any thing made that was made.
In him was life; and the life was the light of men. (John 1:1–4) For
the life was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, and shew unto you that eternal life, which was with the
Father, and was manifested unto us. (1 John 1:2) 47
And if Christ be not raised,
your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen
asleep in Christ are perished. 1 Corinthians 15:17, 18 48
Donald Barnhouse, Eternity,
September 1956. 49
“The Editor once held, with
many of our beloved reader-family, that Seventh-day Adventism is heretical
and not Christian. Investigation that has lasted throughout nearly a year has
convinced us that we were mistaken, that SDAism has
been undergoing a change through the past decade, and that there are many
brethren in Christ who are within the fold of Adventism.” (E. Schuyler
English, Our Hope, November, 1956, p. 271) 50
Ibid. 51
The Adventists were dealing
with some fairly prejudiced and aggressive fundamentalist leaders. That was
certainly true of Barnhouse, who has been described as “merciless with other
views, including . . . those who did not share his pre-millennial
[dispensational] view of the second coming.” Other authors have described him
as “fiery,” “fearless and brusque,” and one who was willing to criticize
“freely.” (Knight, QODAE, p. xvi, xvii) Barnhouse
described the failure of Seventh-day Adventists to accept the doctrine of the
immortality of the soul as “folly.” (Barnhouse’s
telephone conversation with Al Hudson, May 16, 1958) 52
Confirmed in a letter from Sister
Jane Pihl, dated There
was a house meeting in After
the discourse Mr. Barnhouse opened the floor for questions! A
young pastor SDA asked a question (I think) concerning Justification and
sanctification! Barnhouse
exploded! He turned livid red and with clenched fist he hit the palm of his
other hand, and said this. “In
the name of Jesus Christ I “curse” this Seventh-day Sabbath!! I
whispered to Kern [her missionary Doctor husband] “He is going to die.” Of
course we were all horrified! He actually did die a few years later!” —“Jane
Pihl” and Kern H. Pihl MD [Reproduced
without change to punctuation, capitalization or additions or deletions from
the original letter except her opening greetings and
affirmation that she would try to answer and organize what happened. There
were final greetings to my wife.] Letter on file in the office of the
President of Hartland Institute. 53
Letter to R.R. Greive,
President of the North New Zealand Conference, dated 54
This was a very important issue
because Barnhouse and Martin were Calvinistic-oriented in their beliefs. John
Calvin had learned the Augustinian theology which was riveted upon the belief
that fallen man inherited the guilt of Adam’s original sin. Thus for
Seventh-day Adventists to proclaim that Christ took upon Himself sinful,
fallen human nature was perceived by Barnhouse and Martin to be saying that
Christ was born a sinner. Yet Seventh-day Adventists believed the plain
statements of Paul that Jesus was “in all points tempted like as we are, yet
without sin.” (Hebrews 4:15) Never have Seventh-day Adventists taught other
than that Christ was free from sin during His life on earth. It would be vile
blasphemy to entertain the thought that at any time throughout His life Jesus
had ever yielded in the slightest way to Satan’s temptations. Likewise,
Seventh-day Adventists have always taught that Christ’s character was
perfectly sinless. 55
Dr. Ralph Larson, The Word Was
Made Flesh: One Hundred Years of Seventh-day Adventist Christology, 1852–1952,
(Cherry Valley, California: The Cherrystone Press, 1986). (Hereafter
referred to as WMF.) 56
The “evidence” presented to
Martin consisted of the misrepresentations and falsifications discussed in
previous parts of this series, which were a methodological monstrosity and a
historical fraud. The
“group” at our world headquarters had a very difficult assignment. They had
to produce a double deception, for two different audiences.
They had to prove to the Calvinists that we had changed our doctrines,
and at the same time prove to the Adventists that we had not changed
our doctrines. . . . Fact
number one: There is no way, absolutely no way, that a trained scholar
with a Doctor’s degree, like Dr. Leroy Edwin Froom, could put forth such a
mass of mangled, misrepresented and misstated materials as this without
knowing what he was doing. No PHD is that dumb. This
“presentation” could not have been an accident. It had to be a deliberate and
intentional deception. Fact
number two: There is no way, absolutely no way, that a trained scholar
with a Doctor’s degree, like Dr. Walter Martin, could accept such a mass of
mangled, misrepresented, and misstated materials as this without knowing what
he was doing. No PHD is that dumb. This “acceptance” could not have been an
accident. It had to be a deliberate and intentional deception. (Our
Firm Foundation, May 2004) 57
George Knight, QODAE, p. xvi. 58
Here are a few examples of the
contribution of Seventh-day Adventist authors: [1854] To
say that God sent His own Son “in the likeness of sinful flesh,” is
equivalent to saying that the Son of God assumed our nature. (J.M.
Stephenson, RH, [1872]
And He left that throne of glory and of power and took upon Him the nature of
fallen man. In Him were blended “the brightness of the Father’s glory” and
the weakness of “the seed of Abraham.” In Himself He united the Lawgiver to
the law-breaker—the Creator to the creature. (J.H. Waggoner [Signs
editor], The Atonement (1872), p. 161. Quoted in WMF, p. 36, 37) [1874] He
took on Him the nature of the seed of Abraham for the redemption of our
fallen race. (James White [General Conference president, Review editor,
etc.], ST, [1890] It
must have been sinful man that He was made like, for it was sinful man that
He came to redeem. . . . Moreover, the fact that Christ took upon
Himself the flesh, not of a sinless being, but of sinful man, that is, that
the flesh which He assumed had all the weaknesses and sinful tendencies to
which fallen human nature is subject, is shown by the statement that He “was
made of the seed of David according to the flesh.” . . . actually taking upon
Himself sinful nature . . . having suffered all that sinful flesh
is heir to, He knows all about it. (E.J. Waggoner [Signs editor], Christ
and His Righteousness [later Christ Our Righteousness], 1890, pp.
26, 27, 28, 30. Quoted in WMF, p. 46) [1893] He
took upon Himself our sinful natures, yet without sin. (S.N. Haskell, GCB,
1893, p. 214, col. 1. Quoted in WMF, p.51) [1895] Although
Jesus Christ took sinful flesh,—flesh in which we sin, . . . God was able to
keep Him from sinning in that sinful flesh. So that although He was
manifested in sinful flesh, God by His Spirit and power dwelling in Him, kept
Him from sinning in that sinful flesh. . . . (God) made a perfect
revelation of His mind in that sinful flesh. (W.W. Prescott, GCB,
1895, p. 319, col. 2. Quoted in WMF, p.71) [1896] Do
not forget that the mystery of God is not God manifest in sinless
flesh but God manifest in sinful flesh. There could never be any mystery
about God’s manifesting Himself in sinless flesh, in one who had no
connection whatever with sin. That would be plain enough. But that He can
manifest Himself in flesh laden with sin and with all the tendencies to sin,
such as ours is,—that is a mystery. (A.T. Jones, BE, [1910] Because
we dwell in flesh that is mortal, corruptible, temptable,
having in it the accumulated tendencies of centuries of sin, “He also Himself
likewise took part of the same.” (C.M. Snow [Review and Signs
associate editor, Australian Signs editor], RH [1920] He
took the same kind of flesh that you have—sinful flesh. . . . He
came “in the likeness of sinful flesh” and lived a sinless life. (J.L.
Schuler [evangelist, ministerial secretary, conference president], The
Watchman, July 1920, p. 18, col. 2. Quoted in WMF, p. 156) [1923] As
(man) grasps the truth that there actually lived upon this earth One
possessed of the same nature as himself, who “was in all points tempted like
as we are, yet without sin,” he realizes that there is hope for him. (F.D. Nichol
[Signs assistant editor, Review editor], RH [1923] None
but a human being—“made in the likeness of sinful flesh”—could serve as a
mediator on behalf of sinful men. All the attributes of the Godhead, and
those of sinful humanity, must be made to meet in the one who should effect
the reconciliation. (Asa T. Robinson [conference
president, pioneer missionary], RH [1924]
Christ united Himself to man in his fallen condition. When He took our
nature He did not take it as it was originally created, before sin entered,
but as it was after four thousand years of the ravages of sin. He came to us
where we are. . . . If
Christ did not come in sinful flesh, to men just where they are, He did not
need to come at all, for He could bring them no help otherwise. If He came
only to where men were in their original innocence and purity, . . . then He
might just as well have remained in heaven, . . . for in this way He could not
reach men. . . . He
partook of the essential nature of fallen humanity. . . . The Bible
very clearly teaches that Christ was truly human, that He partook of human
nature as it now is. . . . Paul
makes it clear that this flesh that Christ partook of was “sinful flesh,”
[Romans 8:3 quoted]. . . . He did bear our sinful nature for
thirty-three years. . . . In the weary,
sinful, fallen, helpless nature of humanity, . . . Christ worked out the
perfect way of human salvation. (Carlyle B. Haynes [evangelist, author,
administrator], The Watchman, November 1924 p. 14, col. 2. Quoted in WMF,
p. 161–162) [1926] Christ
came and tabernacled in our sinful flesh. (R.A.
Salton, AST, [1929] [He
was made] like you—like me. . . . Having triumphed over sin in
sinful flesh. (A.G. Daniells [conference president,
union president, General Conference president], RH, [1930] Jesus
came into this world on human plane. . . . In his human nature Jesus stands
on our ground. (Allen Walker, ST, [1933] In
order for Christ to understand the weakness of sinful nature, He had to
experience it. . . . Therefore He become
bone of our bone and flesh of our flesh. W.H. Branson [evangelist, author,
conference administrator, General Conference president], AST, [1936] Jesus
Christ took upon Himself sinful flesh. (Leonard S. Barnes, AST [1938]
In fact, as one writer says, These thirteen verses (John 1:1–13) were
intended to raise the reader to the altitude of the climax, “The Word was
made flesh.” And in several other scriptures, “Flesh” denotes man’s present
frail, moral condition. . . . By
His incarnation He became married to our human nature, and is as conscious of
our infirmities, weaknesses, and frailties as He is of all that is properly
divine. . . . Jesus,
to redeem us, reached down to humanity’s lowest depths. He took our nature.
He became man. . . . Christ “came where he (man) was” by His humanity.
. . . For taking our nature, thus He is “touched with the feeling
of our infirmities.” . . . With
His divine arm He grasps the throne of the Infinite, and with His human arm
He encircles the fallen race. . . . (John 1:51)
Jesus is the ladder. This ladder is set upon earth. He is the Son of man, and
by His humanity He is linked to humanity. The ladder is within our reach.
(J.E. Fulton [missionary, administrator], AST, [1940] He
knows by experience all that man must pass through. . . . It was
necessary for Him to be made like His brethren in all things. (M.L. Andreasen
[conference president, college president, seminary professor], RH, [1942]
Jesus inherited . . . the nature of His mother. . . . A man named
Jesus, made of flesh and blood like other men, had actually lived in their
midst. (A.V. Olson [conference president, union president, division
president, general vice-president], RH, [1944] Men
seem to forget that Christ . . . divested Himself of His kingliness and
clothed Himself in sinful flesh. (S. George Hyde, AST, [1945] To
reach and redeem fallen men the Redeemer must be one with them. He must share
their weakness. . . . He must enjoy no privilege that is not within
the reach of the weakest of His fellows. . . . He came and took
upon Himself the flesh He had made, not as it was when endowed with original
strength, but after it had been weakened and corrupted by centuries of sin.
(F.G. Clifford, Signs of the Times [ [1945] Jesus
took upon Himself the nature of man. . . . As the son of David, the
descendant of David, He inherited all the frailties and weaknesses of His
ancestral line . . . (Hebrews [1947] Christ
must partake of man’s sinful nature. (A.G. Stewart [missionary,
administrator, author], RH, 59
A few Ellen White statements, one
from each decade from the 1850s: [1858]
Jesus also told them [the angels] that . . . he should take man’s fallen
nature, and his strength would not be even equal with theirs. (Spiritual
Gifts, vol. 1, p. 25) [1864] It
was in the order of God that Christ should take upon himself the form and
nature of fallen man. (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4a, p. 115) [1874]
Through his humiliation and poverty Christ would identify himself with the
weaknesses of the fallen race. . . . The great work of redemption could be
carried out only by the Redeemer taking the place of fallen Adam. . . . The
King of glory proposed to humble himself to fallen humanity! . . . He would
take man’s fallen nature. (The Review and Herald, February 24, 1874) [1889] The
divine Son of God, who had, with unprecedented self-denial and love for the
creatures formed in his image, come from heaven and assumed their fallen
nature. . . . He took upon Him our nature that He might reach man
in his fallen condition. . . . He came to bring to man moral power, to unite
the fallen race with Himself. (The Signs of the Times, September 23,
1889) [1893]
The Son of God . . . humbled Himself in taking the nature of man in
his fallen condition, but He did not take the taint of sin. (Ms. 93, 1893,
p.3; Manuscript Releases, vol. 20, p. 324) [1903]
Christ assumed our fallen nature, and was subject to every temptation to
which man is subject. (Ms. 80, 1903, p. 12; Manuscript Releases, vol.
17, p. 29) [1915] He
made Himself of no reputation, took upon Himself the form of a servant, and
was made in the likeness of sinful flesh. . . . Sinless and exalted by
nature, the Son of God consented to take the habiliments of humanity, to
become one with the fallen race. The eternal Word consented to be made flesh.
God became man. (The Signs of the Times, January 5, 1915) 60
QODAE, p. xxix 61
1950 General Conference Bulletin, p.
154. 62 He
was born as a babe in 63
Herbert Douglass, 64
George Knight, QODAE, pp. xv,
xvi. 65
See ibid. 66
For example, And
the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the
glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John
1:14) Concerning
his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed
of David according to the flesh. (Romans 1:3) For
what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending
his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in
the flesh. (Romans 8:3) But
when the fulness of the time was come, God sent
forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were
under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. (Galatians 4:4-5) Forasmuch
then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself
likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that
had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear
of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not
on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made
like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest
in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the
people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted. (Hebrews 2:14–18) For
we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our
infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
(Hebrews 4:15) 67
But we see Jesus, who was
made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with
glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every
man. (Hebrews 2:9; see also Romans 8:3; Philippians 2:5-8) Some
Seventh-day Adventist scholars have concluded that a letter written by Ellen
White to an American pastor serving in Portions
of this letter are reproduced in The Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary, vol. 5, pp. 1128–1129. The full text of the letter is found
in Manuscript Releases, vol. 13, pp. 13–29. The
first conclusion which can be drawn from Sister White’s letter is that
nowhere is the human nature Christ assumed at His incarnation addressed.
Clearly, this was not the issue to which Sister White was addressing when she
wrote, . . .
let every human being be warned from the ground of
making Christ altogether human, such an one as ourselves. In The
Word Was Made Flesh, author Ralph Larson also reprinted the majority of
the Baker letter (see pp. 311-320). In the following pages, Larson analyzed
the focus of the letter very effectively: I
find Ellen White’s own statement of the problem clear and satisfactory. She
wrote: “Let every human be warned away from the ground of making Christ altogether
human, such an one as ourselves.” (Emphasis
mine.) . . . Let
us try to fully internalize this statement, taking care that no eisegesis (putting our meaning into the text) is
mingled with our exegesis (getting the writer’s meaning from the
text). These points would appear to be beyond question: a. The message
is intended as a warning. b. The
warning, although primarily addressed to Baker, is widened to include “every
human being.” c. The subject
matter of the warning is Christology, the doctrine of Christ. d. The warning
is not limited by its wording to either the human nature of Christ or the
divine nature of Christ. The writer is speaking of Christ in His totality,
the complete Christ, the entire Christ, the divine-human Saviour who is both
God and man. This is made clear by the wording of the sentence itself, and by
the context, in which care is urged lest we “. . . lose or dim the
clear perceptions of His humanity as combined with divinity.”
(Emphasis mine.) e. The specific content of the warning is that
we be careful to not present Christ to the people as (1) altogether human,
(2) such an one as ourselves. (Ralph Larson, The
Word Was Made Flesh, op. cit., pp. 321–322.) While
we cannot be sure precisely what belief Elder Baker held to which Ellen White
was responding, Larson concluded that Baker may have been proposing the “adoptionist” concept. Here is Larson’s explanation of
this belief and of Sister White’s response: Without
identifying the Christological error by its specific technical name, Ellen
White found occasion to refute the principles of Adoptionism.
This was a view that Christ was not the Son of God at birth, nor during the first phase of His earthly life, but became
the Son of God by adoption. . . . In this
interesting letter, we find (1) a warning to Pastor Baker about spending too
much time in reading, (2) a caution against accepting the traditions of the
Fathers (a term which, when capitalized as in the letter, is understood to
refer to the church Fathers), and (3) a warning about teaching speculative
theories that would not be of benefit to the church members. She also
presents a specific, point-by-point refutation of the errors of Adoptionism. (Ibid., pp. 324–325.) The Desire of Ages, which Ellen White was writing at the time of the Baker letter,
dispels any doubts concerning her belief that Christ took upon Himself
fallen, sinful human nature: It would have been an almost infinite humiliation
for the Son of God to take man’s nature, even when Adam stood in his
innocence in Notwithstanding that the sins of a guilty world were
laid upon Christ, notwithstanding the humiliation of taking upon Himself our
fallen nature, the voice from heaven declared Him to be the Son of the
Eternal. (Page 112) For
four thousand years the race had been decreasing in physical strength, in
mental power, and in moral worth; and Christ took upon Him the infirmities
of degenerate humanity. Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest
depths of his degradation. . . . If we have in any sense a more
trying conflict than had Christ, then He would not be able to succor us. But our
Saviour took humanity, with all its liabilities. He took the nature of
man, with the possibility of yielding to temptation. We have nothing to bear
which He has not endured. (Page 117) In our own
strength it is impossible for us to deny the clamors of our fallen nature.
Through this channel Satan will bring temptation upon us. Christ knew that
the enemy would come to every human being, to take advantage of hereditary
weakness, and by his false insinuations to ensnare all whose trust is not in
God. And by passing over the ground which man must travel, our Lord
has prepared the way for us to overcome. (Pages 122–123.) Also,
in a more recently discovered letter addressed to Dr. John Harvey Kellogg,
Sister White presented her strong belief in the fallen nature of Jesus eight
years after she wrote the letter to Baker. Her interlineations, which she
added in her own handwriting (indicated by the White Estate in
<brackets> as shown below), is indicative: When the
fullness of time was come, He [Christ] stepped down from His throne of
highest command, laid aside His royal robe and kingly crown, clothed His
divinity with humanity, and came to this earth to exemplify what humanity
must do and be in order to overcome the enemy and to sit with the Father upon
His throne. Coming, as He did, as a man, <to meet and be subjected
[to]> / with all the tendencies to which man is heir, <working in every
conceivable manner to destroy His faith,> He made it possible for Himself
to be buffeted by human agencies inspired by Satan. (Letter K-303, 1903) 68
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he
might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to
make reconciliation for the sins of the people. (Hebrews 2:17) 69
For in that he himself hath
suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them
that are tempted. (Hebrews 2:18) 70
For we have not an high
priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was
in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. (Hebrew 71
For even hereunto were ye
called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that ye
should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his
mouth. (1 Peter 2:21, 22) 72
Our ideas of education take
too narrow and too low a range. There is need of a broader scope, a higher
aim. True education means more than the pursual of
a certain course of study. It means more than a preparation for the life that
now is. It has to do with the whole being, and with the whole period of
existence possible to man. It is the harmonious development of the physical,
the mental, and the spiritual powers. It prepares the student for the joy of
service in this world and for the higher joy of wider service in the world to
come. (Education, p. 13) 73
Ibid., pp. 14, 15, 16, 21 74
1 John 3:4 75
For what the law could not
do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the
likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh. (Romans
8:3) 76
Barnhouse, Donald G., Forward to
Walter R. Martin, The Truth About Seventh-day Adventists, Zondervan, 1960, p. 7 (as quoted in “Introduction to the
Annotated Edition,” QODAE, p. xxiv) 77
The Great Controversy, p. 243 78
Thus saith the Lord; Cursed be the man that trusteth in man, and maketh
flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. (Jeremiah 17:5) 79
And I heard another voice
from heaven, saying, Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of
her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues. For her sins have reached
unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities. (Revelation 18:4–5) 80
Testimonies to Ministers, pp.
363-364. 81
John 17:17, 19 82
Fundamentals of Christian Education,
p. 432 83
Testimonies for the Church,
vol. 9, p. 197. 84
The Sanctified Life, p. 85 85
Not one of us will ever
receive the seal of God while our characters have one spot or stain upon
them. It is left with us to remedy the defects in our characters, to cleanse
the soul temple of every defilement. Then the latter
rain will fall upon us as the early rain fell upon the disciples on the Day
of Pentecost. (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5, p. 214) The seal of God will never be placed upon the
forehead of an impure man or woman. It will never be placed upon the forehead
of the ambitious, world-loving man or woman. It will never be placed upon the
forehead of men or women of false tongues or deceitful hearts. All who
receive the seal must be without spot before God—candidates for heaven.
(Ibid., p. 216) 86 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 fulness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more
children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine,
by the sleight 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: from whom the whole body fitly joined
together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth,
according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself
in love. (Ephesians 4:13–16) 87
This I say therefore, and
testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in
the vanity of their mind, having the understanding darkened, being alienated
from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the
blindness of their heart: who being past feeling have given themselves over
unto lasciviousness, to work all uncleanness with greediness. (Ephesians
4:17–19) 88
Hebert E. Douglass, 89
See Isaiah 55:11 90 Son
of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of So
thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman unto the house of Cry
aloud, spare not, lift up thy voice like a trumpet, and show my people their
transgression, and the house of Jacob their sins. (Isaiah 58:1) For
91
Letter from M. L. Andreasen to R. R.
Figuhr, 92
QODAE, p. xxiii 93
“Eternity lost one-fourth of its
subscribers in protest, and the sale of Martin’s books plummeted.” (T. E.
Unruh, “The Seventh-day Adventist Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956,” Adventist
Heritage, Vol. 4, No. 2, 1977, p. 44; quoted in QODAE, p. xvii) 94
See Baptism, Eucharist and
Ministry, Faith and Order Paper Number 111 and comments from the Churches
of Christendom (Lima, Peru: The Faith and Order Commission of the World
Council of Churches, 1982). 95
Looking back, one can only
speculate on the different course of Adventist history if Andreasen
had been consulted regarding the wording of the Adventist position on the
atonement, if Froom and his colleagues hadn’t been divisive in their
handling of issues related to the human nature of Christ, if both
Froom and Andreasen would have had softer personalities. (QODAE, p.
xxvi) 96
. . . The rabbis
hoped to excite suspicion of Christ. They represented Him as trying to
overthrow the established customs, thus causing division among the people.
. . . (The Desire of Ages, p. 205) 97
If God abhors one sin above
another, of which His people are guilty, it is doing nothing in case of an
emergency. Indifference and neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of
God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst type of hostility against
God. (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 3, p. 280) 98
The Concerned Brethren (often called
the CB’s) included a retired Union President, retired conference and mission
presidents, retired department leaders from the local to the General
Conference level who protested the rampaging apostasy which developed rapidly
in 99
L.E. Froom, letter to R.R. Figuhr, 100
Revelation 12:17 101
Revelation 19:10 102
Joel 2:28 103
Do you believe the
Bible doctrine of “spiritual gifts” in the church, and do you believe in the
gift of the Spirit of prophecy which has been manifested in the remnant
church though the ministry and writings of Mrs. E. G. White?
(1932 Church Manual, Baptismal Vow #18) Do
you accept the biblical teaching of spiritual gifts and believe that the gift
of prophecy is one of the identifying marks of the remnant church? (1990
Church Manual, Baptismal Vow #8) 104
See 1986 Church Manual,
Baptismal Vows 105
Ye shall keep my
sabbaths, and reverence my sanctuary: I am the Lord. (Leviticus 19:30) If thou turn
away thy foot from the sabbath, from doing thy pleasure
on my holy day; and call the sabbath a delight, the
holy of the Lord, honourable;
and shalt honour him, not doing thine own ways, nor
finding thine own pleasure, nor speaking thine own words: Then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord; and I will cause thee to ride
upon the high places of the earth, and feed thee with the heritage of Jacob
thy father: for the mouth of the Lord
hath spoken it. (Isaiah 58:13–14) 106
Whether therefore ye
eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.
(1 Corinthians 10:31) 107
Speaking to yourselves
in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your
heart to the Lord. (Ephesians 5:19) 108
For thou art not a God
that hath pleasure in wickedness: neither shall evil dwell with thee. (Psalm
5:4) Thou
wilt shew me the path of life: in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for
evermore. (Psalm 109
And because he was of
the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they
were tentmakers. (Acts 18:3) And
he said unto them, Come ye yourselves apart into a desert place, and rest a while: for there were many coming and going, and
they had no leisure so much as to eat. (Mark 110
The woman shall not
wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither
shall a man put on a woman’s garment: for all that do so are
abomination unto the Lord
thy God. (Deuteronomy 22:5) In
like manner also, that women adorn themselves in
modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broided hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but
(which becometh women professing godliness) with
good works. (1 Timothy 2:9–10) Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of
plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; but
let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even
the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of
great price. (1 Peter 3:3–4) 111
Hear, O Israel: The Lord our God is one Lord: and thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy
might. And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be in thine heart: and thou shalt teach them diligently unto
thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest
in thine house, and when thou walkest
by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou
risest up. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon
thine hand, and they shall be as frontlets between thine eyes. And thou shalt write them upon the posts of
thy house, and on thy gates. (Deuteronomy 6:4–9) All
scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for
reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness. (2 Timothy
3:16) 112
Husbands, love your
wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he
might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he
might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle,
or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. So ought
men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth
his wife loveth himself. (Ephesians 5:25–28) Wives,
submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord. Husbands,
love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the
Lord. Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.
Servants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eyeservice, as menpleasers; but
in singleness of heart, fearing God. (Colossians 3:18–22) 113
Who serve unto the
example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he
was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all
things according to the pattern shewed to thee in
the mount. (Hebrews 8:5) 114
And there shall be no man
in the tabernacle of the congregation when he goeth in to make an atonement
in the holy place, until he come out, and have made an atonement for himself,
and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel. (Leviticus
16:17) 115
And he said unto me,
Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be
cleansed. (Daniel 8:14) 116
And as he reasoned of
righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix trembled, and
answered, Go thy way for this time; when I have a convenient season, I will
call for thee. (Acts 24:25) Saying with a
loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is
come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the
fountains of waters. (Revelation 14:7) 117
Repent ye therefore,
and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of
refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. (Acts 118
A minister of the
sanctuary, and of the true tabernacle, which the Lord pitched, and not man.
(Hebrews 8:2) For
Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the
figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of
God for us. (Hebrews 9:24) And
if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then
they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. (1 Corinthians
15:17–18) For
if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son,
much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life. (Romans 5:10) For
we are saved by hope: but hope that is seen is not hope: for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? (Romans 8:24) 119
Now unto him that is
able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the
presence of his glory with exceeding joy, (Jude Having
therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all
filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God.
(2 Corinthians 7:1) And
ye know that he was manifested to take away our
sins; and in him is no sin. Whosoever abideth in him sinneth not: whosoever
sinneth hath not seen him, neither known him. Little children, let no man
deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is
righteous. He that committeth sin is of the devil;
for the devil sinneth from the beginning. For this purpose the Son of God was
manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whosoever is born
of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth
in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God. (1 John 3:5–9) Whereby
are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye
might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that
is in the world through lust. (2 Peter 1:4) This
I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil
the lust of the flesh. (Galatians 5:16) The
remnant of Here
is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of
God, and the faith of Jesus. (Revelation 14:12) 120
For even hereunto were
ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that
ye should follow his steps: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his
mouth. (1 Peter 2:21–22) 121
That we henceforth be
no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of
doctrine, by the sleight 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. (Ephesians 4:14–15) For
the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself; first
the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear. (Mark 122
Abide in me, and I in
you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine;
no more can ye, except ye abide in me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He
that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth
forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. If a
man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered;
and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. If ye
abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it
shall be done unto you. Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much
fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. As the Father hath loved me, so have I
loved you: continue ye in my love. If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide
in my love; even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide in his
love. (John 15:4–10) If
ye love me, keep my commandments. (John 14:15) Even
the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth
him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and
shall be in you. (John 14:17) He
that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it
is that loveth me: and he that loveth
me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself
to him. (John 14:21) Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ
Jesus. (Philippians 2:5) He
that eateth my flesh, and drinketh
my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. (John 6:56) Hereby
know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his
Spirit. And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be
the Saviour of the world. Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of
God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God. And we
have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he
that dwelleth in love dwelleth
in God, and God in him. (1 John 4:13–16) 123
For I am not ashamed
of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to
the Greek. (Romans 1:16) 124
Sinless perfection is
God’s ideal for His children. . . . This will be realized with the
return of Christ, not before. (Edward Heppenstall, Perfection, p. 64) The
Bible rejects every possibility of our reaching sinless perfection in this
life. (Ibid., p. 75.) 125 Not
every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall
enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father
which is in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not
prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast
out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful
works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me,
ye that work iniquity. (Matthew 7:21–23) But
your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have
hid his face from you, that he will not hear. (Isaiah 59:2) For
whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and
this is the victory that overcometh the world, even
our faith. (1 John 5:4) Behold,
all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is
mine: the soul that sinneth, it shall die. . . . The soul that
sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father,
neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of
the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be
upon him. . . . But when the righteous turneth
away from his righteousness, and committeth
iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man
doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be
mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he
hath sinned, in them shall he die. (Ezekiel 18:4, 20, 24) 126
Son of man, I have
made thee a watchman unto the house of So thou, O son of man, I have set thee a watchman
unto the house of Work
with all your might to save your own souls and the souls of others. It is no
time now to cry, “Peace and safety.” It is not silver-tongued orators that
are needed to give this message. The truth in all its pointed severity must
be spoken. Men of action are needed --men who will labor with earnest,
ceaseless energy for the purifying of the church and the warning of the
world. (Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 187) 127
Greenleaf, Light Bearers, p.
456 128
Having therefore these
promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the
flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God. (2 Corinthians 7:1) Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling,
and to present [you] faultless before the presence of his glory with
exceeding joy. (Jude 24) 129
Therefore being
justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ…Much
more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath
through him. (Romans 5:1, 9) To
open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power
of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance
among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. (Acts 26:18) By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of
the body of Jesus Christ once for all. (Hebrews 10:10) But
we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you,
brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you
to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth. (2
Thessalonians 2:13) Elect
according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of
the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace
unto you, and peace, be multiplied. (1 Peter 1:2) 130
Now then it is no more
I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. (Romans
7:17) 131
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. (Galatians 2:20) 132
I thank God through
Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself
serve the law of God… (Romans 7:25) There is therefore now no condemnation to them which
are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. For
the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law
of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through
the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for
sin, condemned sin in the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled
in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:1-4) Who
shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall
tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril,
or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter.
Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved
us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor
principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor
height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from
the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans 8:35-39) 133
Jesus answered,
Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be
born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the 134
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth
also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4) 135
Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.
(Psalm 51:5) 136
The soul that sinneth,
it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither
shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the
righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon
him. But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed,
and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall
surely live, he shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed,
they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done
he shall live. Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his
ways, and live? But when the righteous turneth away
from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity,
and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall
he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in
his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in
them shall he die. (Ezekiel 18:20-24) 137
Jesus said unto them,
If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore
your sin remaineth. (John 9:41) If
I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have
no cloak for their sin. (John 15:22) Therefore
to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not,
to him it is sin. (James 4:17) And
the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth
all men every where to repent. (Acts 138 And
the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of
her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus
Christ. (Revelation 12:17) And
I fell at his feet to worship him. And he said unto me, See thou do it not: I
am thy fellowservant, and of thy brethren that have
the testimony of Jesus: worship God: for the testimony of Jesus is the spirit
of prophecy. (Revelation 19:10) 139
Undisclosed authors, Insert in Adventist
Review, 140
Ibid. 141
Russell and Colin Standish, The
Twenty-eight Fundamentals, Apostasy Proclaimed in Silence, Highwood
Books, Australia, 2005, pp. 25, 26 142
Ibid. pp. 26-29 143
Issues: The Seventh-day Adventist
Church and Certain Private Ministries, p. 109 144 For
what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending
his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in
the flesh: That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who
walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans 8:3, 4) For
verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed
of Abraham. Wherefore in all things it behoved him
to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful
high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins
of the people. (Hebrews 2:16, 17) The
humanity of the Son of God is everything to us. It is the golden chain that
binds our souls to Christ, and through Christ to God. (Selected Messages,
Vol. 1, p. 244) 145
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth
also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4) 146
What shall we say
then? is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not
known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said,
Thou shalt not covet. (Romans 7:7) But
whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but
a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed. (James 1:25) So
speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by
the law of liberty. (James 2:12) 147
But your iniquities
have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid his face from
you, that he will not hear. (Isaiah 59:2) 148 But
we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you,
brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you
to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth. (2
Thessalonians 2:13) Elect according to the foreknowledge of God
the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and
sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be
multiplied. (1 Peter 1:2) 149
Seventh-day Adventists Believe,
p. 221 150
Ibid. p. 224 151
Ibid. p. 315 152
Ibid. p. 46 153
Ibid. p. 47 154
Ibid., endnote 12, p. 57 155
Signs of the Times, 156
Selected Messages, book 3, p.
128 157
The Seventh-day Adventist Bible
Commentary, vol. 1, p. 1085. See also Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 147;
vol. 3, p. 566-567 158
Review and Herald, 159
Seventh-day Adventists Believe,
p. 47 160 The
Eden paradise, the patriarchal system, the Mosaic education, the schools of
the prophets, the rabbinical schools, the synagogue schools, the Celtic
schools, the schools of the Waldensians, the
Huguenots, the Albegenses, the Reformation schools,
the schools which arose under the holiness movement of Wesley—all drifted
into apostasy or were destroyed. 161
Unlike men such as Justin Martyr
(born about 100 AD), Tatian (second century AD),
Clement of Alexandria (150–215), and Origen (184–254), all of whose
background was Greek, Platonian (Plato—427–347)
and/or Aristotelian (Aristotle—384–322 BC) Paganism, Augustine’s
background was Manichaeism. Mani (215–274 AD, also called Manes or Manichaeus) attempted to “marry” the pagan Zoroastrianism
of the Persians and Buddhism of India with Christianity. Mani viewed the
world “as a fusion of spirit and matter, the original contrary principles of
good and evil respectively” (“Mani,” Encyclopedia Britannica, 2007
edition), as concepts of the conjunction of the kingdom of the light (good)
and the kingdom of darkness (evil). He believed that the soul is part of the
kingdom of light. It is trapped inside the body, and it yearns to escape the
body, but the escape can only occur at death. (World Book, 1999
edition, vol. 13, 141) Manichaeism incorporated some of the same
characteristics as Greek paganism, such as the balancing of the polar
opposites in the universe. Augustine, himself, also attempted to base
Christian theology upon facets of the philosophy of the Greek Plato, no doubt
as a result of studying the Neo-Platonist philosophies as a young man in 162
See “Augustine / The City of 163
Ibid. 164
For if by one man’s
offence death reigned by one; much more they which
receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in
life by one, Jesus Christ. (Romans 5:17) For
by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the
gift of God: not of works, lest any man should boast. (Ephesians 2:8–9) 165
And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the
gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or
the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house,
we will serve the Lord. (Joshua
24:15) And
Elijah came unto all the people, and said, How long halt ye between two
opinions? if the Lord
be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him. And the people answered him
not a word. (1 Kings But
one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that good part, which shall not be
taken away from her. (Luke 10:42) Come
unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.
(Matthew 11:28) All
that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will
in no wise cast out. (John 6:37) And
the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth
say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take
the water of life freely. (Revelation 22:17) The
Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is
longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all
should come to repentance. (2 Peter 3:9) Wherefore
he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come
unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make
intercession for them. (Hebrews 7:25) For
if by one man’s offence death reigned by one; much
more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of
righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. (Romans 5:17; emphasis
added) 166
Behold, all souls are
mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the
soul that sinneth, it shall die. . . . The soul that sinneth, it
shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall
the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous
shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him. But if
the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all
my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he
shall not die. All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not
be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith
the Lord God: and not that he
should return from his ways, and live? But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the
abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness
that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath
trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.
(Ezekiel 18:4, 20–24) For
it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the
heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and have tasted the
good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they shall fall
away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves
the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. (Hebrews 6:4–6) 167
For by grace are ye
saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: not
of works, lest any man should boast. For we are his workmanship, created in
Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should
walk in them. (Ephesians 2:8–10) For
the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law
of sin and death. For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through
the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for
sin, condemned sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be
fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. (Romans
8:2–4) 168
Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth
also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. (1 John 3:4) And
the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth
all men every where to repent. (Acts Therefore
to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not,
to him it is sin. (James 4:17) 169
Jesus said unto them,
If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore
your sin remaineth. (John 9:41) If
I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin: but now they have
no cloke for their sin. (John 15:22) And
the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth
all men every where to repent. (Acts Therefore
to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not,
to him it is sin. (James 4:17) How
shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began
to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him?
(Hebrews 2:3) Who
can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are out of the way; for
that he himself also is compassed with infirmity. (Hebrews 5:2) Coming,
as He did, as a man, to meet and be subjected to / with all the tendencies to
which man is heir, working in every conceivable manner to destroy His faith,
He made it possible for Himself to be buffeted by human agencies inspired by
Satan. (Letter K-303, 1903) Christ
declared, where stands Satan’s throne, there shall
stand My cross, the instrument of humiliation and suffering. No single
principle of human nature will I violate. Clothing My divinity with humility,
I will endure every temptation wherewith man is beset. (Manuscript
Releases, vol. 5, p. 114) He
left the glories of heaven, and clothed his divinity with humanity, and
subjected himself to sorrow, and shame, and reproach, abuse, denial, and
crucifixion. Though he had all the strength of the passion of humanity, never
did he yield to temptation to do that which was not pure and elevating and
ennobling. (Signs of the Times, November 21, 1892) 170
For even hereunto were
ye called: because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that
ye should follow his steps: who did no sin, neither was guile found in his
mouth. (1 Peter 2:21–22) 171
And the Word was made
flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only
begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. (John 1:14) Concerning
his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed
of David according to the flesh. (Romans 1:3) For
what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending
his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the
flesh. (Romans 8:3) But
when the fulness of the time was come, God sent
forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, to redeem them that were
under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. (Galatians 4:4–5) And
without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in
the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the
Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory. (1 Timothy
3:16) Forasmuch
then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself
likewise took part of the same; that through death he might destroy him that
had the power of death, that is, the devil; and deliver them who through fear
of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. For verily he took not
on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made
like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest
in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the
people. For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted. (Hebrews 2:14–18) For
we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our
infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
(Hebrews 4:15) 172
Leonard Verduin,
The Reformers and their Stepchildren ( 173
World Book Encyclopedia,
1999, vol. 1, p. 888, and vol. 15, p. 734, also Encyclopedia Britannica,
2003 ed., vol. 9, 673. 174
Ibid. 175
And I saw another
angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he
cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the
earth and the sea, saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the
trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.
(Revelation 7:2–3) 176
Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see,
and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye
shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.
(Jeremiah 6:16) 177
Beware lest any man
spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men,
after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ. (Colossians 2:8) 178
Colossians 2:8 179 Sanctified
Life, p. 85 |