Waggoner on the Human Nature

of Christ




Fred T. Wright

Click to go to our Home Page










In my document at the following link

https://omega77.tripod.com/newmovementcult.htm I quoted some paragraphs from Fred T. Wright’s book Destiny of a Movement, and forgot to give him credit for the quoted part. Also, I did not begin the quote at the proper point, which gave a wrong impression as to what Waggoner taught on the human nature of Christ. This issue is so very important that I am here including the last few chapters of Wright’s book to insure that no confusion accrues. Every professing Seventh-day Adventist should read the entire book. I provide it on-line at the bottom of the main menu on my Website.—rwb





Chapter 18—Waggoner Misrepresented


The principal argument presented in Movement of Destiny is that in

1888  at  Minneapolis,  Minnesota,  there  came  at  last  the  inevitable

confrontation between those who believed that Christ was eternally and

truly God, and those who believed He was the first of all created beings. In

setting up this case, L. E. Froom projects E. J. Waggoner as champion for

the former position with Uriah Smith and others as the opponents.

If 1888 was nothing more than a divine effort to correct this error, the

principal burden of Jones' and Waggoner's message would be presenting

the deity or divinity of Christ—proving that He was forever and eternally

God. It would not bring any great new advances in truth such as the fourth

angel would, but it would emphasize truths already held that had been

neglected and little preached. This is what Froom argues as he takes the

messages given by Waggoner at the Conference and sets forth his view of

what was presented to the Adventist Church. The argument long presented

by Adventist opposers of the present revival of the 1888 message is that the

messages brought in 1888 shifted emphasis away from law and prophecy

to the presentation of Christ and His righteousness which had not been

brought forward as God had intended. In this way God's great work in

1888 is minimized and reduced.

On the other hand, if 1888 is understood to be the beginning of the

loud cry of the third angel of Revelation 18, then the message of Waggoner

and Jones was something far more than a mere effort on God's part to

correct the errors in the church at that time. It is not denied that there were

errors which needed to be corrected if the church was to finish the work.

There were errors in the churches when the first angel began to sound in

1833; in the Advent groups when the second angel began his work; and

when the third angel came. From this, it is clear that the Lord does not wait

till every error is corrected before He sends the next angel with the

corrections of the previous faults, and advanced light.





In      1888 the church had serious errors needing correction. The next

mighty angel came with a message which would not only correct the errors

of the church but would have opened up the wonderful vistas of the third

angel's message such as had neither been seen nor preached before by


Waggoner's message had to be more than correcting the errors in the

church and more than revealing Christ to be eternally God. It had to

present light that would fill the whole earth with the glory of God.

"This message was to bring more prominently before the world the

uplifted Saviour, the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. It presented

justification through faith in the Surety; it invited the people to receive the

righteousness of Christ, which is made manifest in obedience to all the

commandments of God. Many had lost sight of Jesus. They needed to

have  their  eyes  directed  to  His  divine  person,  His  merits,  and  His

changeless love for the human family." Testimonies to Ministers, 91, 92.

These messengers of the Lord brought the doctrine that Christ came in

the selfsame flesh and blood as the children whom He came to save. It is

the teaching that the ladder reached up to the very throne of God and

down to the sinful flesh of man. In The Desire of Ages, 311, 312, it is

declared that if that ladder had come short in the slightest degree, we would have been lost.

If men had come presenting only the divinity of Christ, they would have come preaching only God, instead of the saving truth, "God with us," which is Christ in the flesh —the doctrine of Christ. They would have presented the top half of the ladder without the bottom half. This is not preaching salvation. It is no better than the teachers of antichrist in the Roman Catholic and Protestant churches.

But they did not do this.  They came preaching the fullness of the

Godhead dwelling in the fullness of humanity as it was upon the earth when

He came to it. One has only to read their writings to see the truth of this,

and as this reading progresses, it will be seen, as the wonderful beauty of

the truth they presented unfolds to the eager, spiritual mind, that they did

bring a message the like of which had never before been preached within

the Adventist Church. It was not merely a shifting of the emphasis; it was

not merely the correction of long-standing errors; it was not merely the

reviving of truths long held in the church. It was a declaration of a message

beyond that which had been preached by Adventists before, just as each of

the former angels presented light not taught by their predecessors.

This is not the picture presented in Movement of Destiny nor the

argument it seeks to develop. It aims to prove that the presentation was

only for the correction of certain errors, re-emphasis of what had been

formerly held and taught, and shifting the emphasis away from the law to

the gospel.






Therefore we can expect Movement of Destiny to emphasize the side of

Waggoner's message setting forth the deity and eternal pre-existence of

Christ, while ignoring or actually misrepresenting the side setting forth the

fullness of Christ's coming in fallen, sinful flesh. In this expectation we are

not disappointed for this is just what the book does do as an examination of

it will show.

On page 188 of Movement of Destiny is the chapter heading, £. J.

Waggoner's Actual Message at Minneapolis—No. 1. Part 2 follows on page

202 and extends to page 217. The submissions made in the first three

pages explode the old argument that we do not have any record of what

was preached at the first Minneapolis Conference. Here it is stated that

Waggoner's book, Christ and His Righteousness, is a true portrayal of the

message preached by him at that conference. It is good to know this, so it

can be accepted that this book by Waggoner does contain what he actually

taught at that Conference.

On page 191, Froom begins his explanation of what he believed the

messenger sent by God presented at that Conference.

          The presentation of Christ must begin with setting Him forth as the

eternally pre-existent God. Waggoner, being a true messenger of the Lord,

began at this point and spent time developing this great truth. This was

preliminary and basic to presenting Christ as a human being as well, but

Froom takes Waggoner's presentations on the deity of Christ and makes

that the whole message given.

Froom passes through paragraph after paragraph with such headings as

All-Encompassing Transcendence of Christ, Majesty and Pre-eminence as God, Possesses All Attributes and Prerogatives of God, Comprises 'All the Fulness of the Godhead,' Supremely God in Highest Sense,  Christ as Creator—Equal with Father,  Christ Emphatically Not 'Created Being,' Jehovah the 'Self-Existent' One. He dwells upon these thoughts and gives a reasonably accurate picture of what Waggoner taught thus far. He had no difficulty in accepting what has been presented under these headings. Neither would anyone in the Roman Catholic or Protestant churches, for they all teach this part of Christ's incarnation.

Now comes the problem. Waggoner passes on to show that the Christ

who was and is the fullness of God, came and accepted fallen, sinful,

mortal humanity. In this area, Waggoner is just as forthright, specific, and

clear as he was on the deity of Christ, devoting seven pages to the section,

and many more to the implications of this truth. In this section is the clear

declaration that Jesus Himself took the flesh and blood of a sinful, and not

of a sinless man. Here is the thought expressed by Waggoner:

"A little thought will be sufficient to show anybody that if Christ took

upon Himself the likeness of man, in order that He might redeem man, it

must have been sinful man that He was made like, for it is sinful man that

He came to redeem. Death could have no power over a sinless man, as






Adam was in Eden; and it could not have had any power over Christ, if the

Lord had not laid on Him the iniquity of us all. 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.'

David had all the passions of human nature. He says of himself, 'Behold, I

was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.' Psalm

51:5." Christ and His Righteousness, 26, 27. Emphasis original.

These words leave no doubt that Waggoner taught and believed that in the flesh of Christ were "all the weaknesses and sinful tendencies to which fallen, human nature is subject ..." This is certainly not holy flesh, but sinful, mortal, fallen flesh.

Now, if Waggoner was teaching in this that which was contrary to the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy, Sister White would never have stood beside him and supported him in his teachings. The plain command of the Bible in 2 John 7-11 absolutely forbids that. Therefore, to declare that Waggoner was wrong in this presentation of the humanity of Christ, is to charge Sister White with being disobedient to the instruction in God's Word which, in turn, is to class her as a false prophet.

In  any case,  the  heading of the chapter under consideration in

Movement of Destiny shows that the author is claiming to set forth the

actual message of Waggoner at Minneapolis. This would lead us to expect,

now we know what Waggoner taught on Christ's humanity, that Froom

would inform us of Christ's humanity as Waggoner teaches it. We would

expect  in  the  light  of  the  previous  extract  from  Christ  and  His

Righteousness, that Froom would reveal Waggoner's teaching that Christ

came with "all the weaknesses and sinful tendencies to which fallen human

nature is subject ..." We would recognize that should he fail to do so, he

would fail to give the actual message Waggoner brought in 1888.

Not only does he fail to give Waggoner's true message in respect to Christ's humanity, but he inserts a key word into the text of Waggoner's writings which gives it a different meaning altogether. On page 197, he devotes one paragraph to the section on the humanity of Christ under the heading, "Became Flesh to Bear Our Sins and Redeem."

The key paragraph in this section by Froom reads as follows:

"As to His humanity, Christ came in the 'likeness of sinful flesh'

(Romans 8:3, 4). God 'laid on Him the iniquity of us all.' He 'took' all the

'weaknesses' of man, and 'suffered all the infirmities' of man. (Pages 26,

27.) More than that, He was actually 'made'—vicariously—to 'be sin for us,'  that  we  'might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in  Him' (2 Corinthians 5:21). On this Waggoner comments:

" 'Here is the same mystery as that the Son of God should die. The

spotless Lamb of God, who knew no sin, was made to be sin. Sinless, yet







not only counted as a sinner, but actually taking upon Himself sinful nature.

He  [sic]  was made to be sin in order that we      [sic]  might be made

righteousness!' Christ and His Righteousness,     27,     28."

It is true that L. E. Froom quotes a paragraph from E. J. Waggoner

stating that Christ "actually" took "upon Himself sinful nature." But this is

neatly covered and perverted by inserting a key word which does not

appear in the section as written by Waggoner and which changes the truth

in the statement. It is the word "vicariously". This word has a definition

quite opposite from "actually", which means that He took it literally and in

reality. "Vicariously" teaches that He did not take it literally but in some

mysterious kind of sympathetic sense. Here Froom has produced one of

those impossibly contradictory statements which purports to make the

matter clear, but which obscures it further. Something cannot be actual and

at the same time vicarious.

Observe too that while  Froom  does refer to Waggoner's statement

saying that Christ took all the weaknesses of man, he is careful to omit the

next words in the same sentence which say that the flesh which Christ

assumed "had ..." "all the sinful tendencies to which fallen human nature

is subject ..."

This sentence which Froom has so carefully omitted, is one of the most

important in the whole paragraph. Throughout, Froom is doing his best to

make  it  appear  that  today  the  church  teaches the  same  message  as

Waggoner, but this is the very sentiment in the doctrine of Christ's nature to

which he is most opposed—the teaching that Christ came in the same

nature as we have, a human nature having "all the sinful tendencies to

which human nature is heir."

As Movement of Destiny proceeds, Froom emphatically rejects the idea

that Christ came in the same flesh and blood as the children. Yet he knows

that the Spirit of Prophecy endorsed Waggoner and Jones' teaching that

Christ, who was the eternal God, came down and accepted a flesh and

blood human nature derived exactly the same as any of the children of

men, and therefore had as its very nature, all that humanity has.

Froom's task as commissioned by the church, is to prove that he and the church are in perfect agreement with,  and zealously preaching a message with which they are really in complete disagreement. That is quite a task and places before him quite a dilemma.

How is such a problem solved?

It is solved without difficulty if the tactics followed by the church are

adopted. This involves, with carefully calculated timing, the setting forth of

the problem under the halo of declared agreement, rather than with the

chilling atmosphere of direct rejection. Expressions of awe for the message

Waggoner brought complete the image of pretended approval. Then, by

carefully omitting vital key statements made by the Lord's messenger and

inserting the word "vicariously", an interpretation of Waggoner is projected







which makes his message acceptable to the church. Thus Waggoner is made to be the supporter of deadly error instead of the champion of truth which he really was.

The timing of this presentation of what Waggoner is alleged to have

preached, is a critical factor in the guarantee of its success. A great deal is

made of the fact that when Elder A. G. Daniells first spoke to Froom about

writing the book, he pointed out that while the work was to be commenced,

it was not yet time to present it to the world. Years went by until the time

was finally ripe for the completion and release of the volume.  See

Movement of Destiny, 17.

It was important that those who really knew what the men of 1888

taught, be no longer there, having been removed by death or the powers of

the church. If E. J. Waggoner had still been alive and was to read what this

book credits him with teaching, he would have shortly put the record

straight. No one would dare attribute a living Waggoner with the teachings

ascribed to him in this volume. Waggoner was guiltless of teaching the

papal doctrine of Christ having sinless, perfect human nature.

The living prophet has passed away, and so far the Lord has not raised

another to guide and caution the church. Were the living prophet alive

today, we would have a voice of unquestionable authority to declare the

nature of the deception being practised upon the church and world.

It was necessary to wait until the voices of those within the church who were not afraid to stand up and be counted, and who understood by living experience what the men of 1888 taught, had been silenced. This was effectively done during the struggles of the fifties and sixties. It was accomplished by throwing the full weight of church authority against their witness and testimony until they were expelled from church fellowship and were heard no more among the church members.

With these voices stilled, the church comforted its members with the

assurance that all was well. They assured all that those who declared there

had been a rejection in 1888 were mistaken and deluded; the church

believed just what Waggoner and Jones taught; the necessary adjustments had been made; and the stage was now set for the great and final triumph of truth. This is believed by the majority in the church for they trust the leadership just as the average man trusts his doctor.

All those who mistakenly believe that Waggoner and Jones taught that

Christ came in the sinless, perfect humanity of Adam before he fell, will also

believe that the 1888 message was never rejected and is being taught in the

church today. They will accept the conclusions drawn by L. E. Froom as a

valuable and true evaluation of developments in Adventist Church history.

But they are terribly mistaken. We will summarize the evidences investigated so far.

It is incorrect to evaluate the Minneapolis Conferences as merely a

confrontation because of growing pressure between two schools of thought






over the deity of Christ. This is tragic understatement, reducing and

minimizing the coming of the Revelation 18 angel whose glory was to fill the

whole earth,  and who brought light Adventists had never known or

preached before.

Such a seriously incorrect evaluation must lead to equally erroneous

conclusions of what the message and its developments actually were.

          The message of Waggoner and Jones was not simply the presentation

of Christ as the fullness of the Godhead. That was only part of the story, for

a Saviour who remained God, or even as God in sinless flesh, could not

save us. Both Waggoner and Jones taught emphatically that Christ took

the same flesh and blood as the children. It is serious misrepresentation to

say otherwise.

It is incorrect to say that a great victory was gained in 1888; that God achieved what He designed should be achieved; that the movement was delivered from fatal errors and the stage set for final and glorious victory. This is not what happened. The loud cry began but was stifled to death and in that rejection of truths to which they merely assented, the church was swung into the direction of the great antichrist. This has become more pronounced as the intervening years have passed.

The picture of Waggoner and Jones' message in the Minneapolis Conferences beginning in 1888, as given in Movement of Destiny, is not a true and accurate picture of what really happened.

The discussion in Movement of Destiny of consequent developments

from those Conferences, must also be an inaccurate and unreal evaluation

of what has really taken place. These developments will further certify that

1888 was not a victory but a defeat for the forces of truth. We will move on

beyond        1888  to  study  the  developments  which  took  place  and  the

evaluation of them given in Movement of Destiny.




Waggoner Was Not In Error








Movement of Destiny sets forth an evaluation of the Minneapolis

messages which minimizes the significance and importance of that event.

This is serious enough on its own, but the book does not stop there. It even

presents Waggoner's message on the eternal pre-existence of Christ as

being faulty and speculative in certain respects. From these errors L. E.

Froom asserts the church  has been delivered and subtly conveys the

impression that our understanding is superior to Waggoner's at that time.

But is it? Was Waggoner wrong and the modern church correct in this particular area? Have we come far beyond the truth given by this messenger from the Lord?

If the believers back there  had accepted the message  as modern

Adventist leadership so confidently claims, the church's understanding

today would be far in advance of Waggoner and Jones. If they did not

accept the message then, they are not as far advanced as those men, for

the Lord sends no further light until what has already been sent is truly


If the church fails to accept that light, it not only proceeds no further, but falls aside into some error. The church will not realize this. It will be more confident than ever that it has the whole truth.

If we can show that Waggoner was wrong in one area, and Froom

correct in his criticism of Waggoner in this field, we will have proof that L.

E. Froom is ahead of Waggoner. This will be a witness in favour of the claim that the church did not reject the message back there.

On the other hand, if it can be shown that Waggoner was not confused

or speculative in his position, we have proof that Froom is incorrect in his

evaluation of the same subject and is far behind Waggoner's understanding.

This will constitute a witness to the belief that the church did reject the

message given. While the position as set forth by Froom will tend to reduce

confidence in the messengers God sent in 1888, and lead the members to

lose any real desire to study their writings, the position that Waggoner is





correct will have the opposite effect. It will lead those convicted by the truth to distrust the modern writer's evaluation of the message, thus encouraging them to go back and study those men's works for themselves.

It is to be understood that this writer is not making any claim that Waggoner and Jones had all the truth. But what they did teach was the truth, as far as the Lord had revealed it at that time.

The chapter in Movement of Destiny devoted to finding fault with

Waggoner's message begins on page 281,  and is entitled Retrospective

Look  at  Waggoner's  Minneapolis  Message—No.      2.  The  opening  two

paragraphs read as follows:

"Confused  by  Phrase  'Proceeded Forth.'—In  a couple  of instances

Waggoner ventured out onto the thin ice of speculation, and broke through

into waters of conjecture that were over his depth—over anyone's depth, in

fact.  These  instances concerned the  same  point.  So  it  was really a

breakthrough at the same spot—over the same issue. That this could be is

not surprising, for it was a question that had intrigued and puzzled Christian

scholars throughout long periods in the Christian Era. It had been agitated

in the era of discussion concerning Christ and the Godhead by inquisitive

churchmen of the early centuries. It again came under discussion both in

Reformation and post-Reformation times.

"Its reverberations could still be heard in certain Protestant bodies in the

early nineteenth century. It even penetrated our own ranks in our earlier

decades, when our men thought anxiously concerning the Godhead and its

relationships—especially as to Christ. It centered on the intent of those

Biblical  expressions—'only  begotten'  and  'Son  of God,'  and  'proceeded

forth' from the Father (John 8:42). Just what did these expressions mean

to Waggoner? And how far back do they take us into the illimitable past?

Were there two proceedings forth—one in the unfathomable beginning,

and one at the Incarnation? That was the question."

Here  is the  assertion  that  on  this point Waggoner ventured  into

speculation because there was no Bible support for his position. It is inferred

that he ought to have known better, for this was an area which had

engaged the thought and study of churchmen for centuries without any

total agreement being reached among them. Therefore, he ought to have

left the subject alone. This point was over the expressions, "only begotten," "Son of God" and "proceeded forth from the Father."

Froom questions what these expressions meant to Waggoner, and how far they take us back into the illimitable past. "Were there two proceedings forth—one in the unfathomable beginning, and one at the Incarnation? That was the question."

The next eight pages of Movement of Destiny are devoted to discussing the various beliefs of scholars down the corridors of time, after which a more direct discussion of Waggoner's position is begun.







On page 291, Froom lists the offending statements from Christ and His

Righteousness, under the general heading of" 'Goings Forth' Equated with

'Proceedeth Forth . . . From God.' " He then says, "Here are Waggoner's

two questionable statements on Christ's origin in their context:

" 'The Word was 'in the beginning.' The mind of man cannot grasp the

ages that are spanned in this phrase. It is not given to men to know when or

how the Son of God was begotten; but we know that He was the Divine

Word, not simply before He came to this earth to die, but even before the

world was created. Just before His crucifixion He prayed, 'And now, O

Father, glorify Thou Me with Thine own self with the glory which I had with

Thee before the world was.' John      17:5. And more than seven hundred

years before His first advent, His coming was thus foretold by the word of

inspiration: 'But thou, Bethlehem Ephratah, though thou be little among

the thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto Me that is

to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from the

days of eternity,' Micah 5:2, margin. We know that Christ 'proceeded forth

and came from God' (John 8:42), but it was so far back in the ages of

eternity as to be far beyond the grasp of the mind of man.' (Christ and His

Righteousness,     9.)

" The Scriptures declare that Christ is 'the only-begotten Son of God.'

He is begotten, not created. As to when He was begotten, it is not for us to

inquire, nor could our minds grasp it if we were told. . . [Micah 5:2

quoted.] There was a time when Christ proceeded forth and came from

God, from the bosom of the Father (John 8:42; 1:18), but that time was so

far back in the days of eternity that to finite comprehension it is practically

without beginning.

" 'But the point is that Christ is a begotten Son, and not a created

subject. He has by inheritance [sic] a more excellent Name than the angels;

He is 'a Son over His own house.' Hebrews 1:4, 3:6.' (ibid., pages 21,


Froom quotes a third paragraph but before doing so he says: "In his anxiety to emphasize 'begotten Son'—for he was arguing against the contention of some in his audience who had claimed that Christ was a created being—Waggoner also made the following statement:

" 'It is true that there are many sons of God; but Christ is the 'only-

begotten Son of God,' and therefore the Son of God in a sense in which no

other being ever was, or ever can be. The angels are sons of God, as was

Adam (Job 38:7; Luke 3:38), by creation; Christians are the sons of God

by adoption (Romans 8:14, 15); but Christ is the Son of God by birth.'

(ibid., page 12.)"

Froom comments on these statements as follows:

"Based on Faulty Equations.—Waggoner clearly equates—in these

statements—the 'goings forth' of Micah 5:2 with the 'proceeded forth and

came from God' of John 8:42, to which he adds the expression 'in the






bosom of the Father' from John        1:18. He concludes that since Christ is

declared to be 'the only-begotten Son of God'—and that He 'proceeded forth and came from God' and His 'goings forth have been from of old, from the days of eternity'—therefore 'there was a time when  Christ proceeded forth and came from God, from the bosom of the Father . . . , but that time was so far back in the days of eternity that to finite comprehension it is practically without beginning.'

"From the strict Trinitarian view, the eternal pre-existence of Christ is

absolutely  essential  to  His  Godhood.  Self-existence  can  brook  no

intimation of beginning or derivation. If there was any point in eternity

when Christ came forth from the Father, then He had a beginning, and is

less than complete Deity—no matter how 'far back in the days of eternity'

this may have happened." Movement of Destiny, 291, 292.

Waggoner did not limit the going forth of Christ from the Father, to the

incarnation in Bethlehem. He saw a similar proceeding forth from God

having taken place formerly in the limitless reaches of eternity so far back

that it was beyond the beginning of all things. If this idea of Christ having a

former point when He proceeded forth from God is taken to say that He

had a beginning, this denies that Christ is truly God in the eternal sense. To

be God, He must be as eternal in the past as He is in the present and future.

There must never be any point of time when He cannot say "I AM".

That Jesus was already the only begotten Son of God before He

became incarnate man in Bethlehem, is made clear in Patriarchs and

Prophets, 36. This statement describes a meeting called by God before this

world was even created. Then God presented Christ, not as one to become

the begotten Son of God, but as one who was already that. This was not

merely a title possessed by Christ. God presented Him as His only begotten

Son because that is what He was at that time. Thus this statement fully

supports Waggoner's position and denies that of Froom.  Here is the


"The King of the universe summoned the heavenly hosts before Him,

that in their presence He might set forth the true position of His Son, and

show the relation He sustained to all created beings. The Son of God

shared the Father's throne, and the glory of the eternal, self-existent One

encircled both.  About the throne  gathered the  holy  angels,  a  vast,

unnumbered throng—'ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of

thousands,' the most exalted angels, as ministers and subjects, rejoicing in

the light that fell upon them from the presence of the Deity. Before the

assembled inhabitants of heaven, the King declared that none but Christ,

the only begotten of God, could fully enter into His purposes, and to Him it

was committed to execute the mighty counsels of His will. The Son of God

had wrought the Father's will in the creation of all the hosts of heaven; and

to Him, as well as to God, their homage and allegiance were due. Christ

was still to exercise divine power, in the creation of the earth and its






inhabitants. But in all this He would not seek power or exaltation for Himself contrary to God's plan, but would exalt the Father's glory, and execute His purposes of beneficence and love."

It is evident that Froom does interpret Waggoner's words to mean that at the point of time when in the illimitable past, Christ came forth from the Father, He had a beginning. Froom equates being born of God as having a beginning and shows that he believes this is what Waggoner had in mind and conveyed by this teaching.

It is here that weakness is found in Froom's understandings and

strength is found in Waggoner's teachings. Waggoner did not elaborate

further  on  the  point  to  show  whether  he  understood  that if Christ

proceeded forth from the Father it meant that He had a beginning at that

point of time. We do not know what Waggoner believed in this final

connection nor can we prove he believed either way. Froom assumes that

Waggoner thought Christ did have a beginning, but we stress that this

assumption cannot be proved.

We are left to decide whether or not it is error to declare that Christ did

proceed forth from the Father as the only begotten Son of God. If this is

correct, then even though Waggoner may not have understood all of the

truth, what he said in itself would not be the error which Froom declares it

is. All we can do is decide from what Waggoner actually said whether he

was in error or not. We cannot go into any assumptions as to how he might

have interpreted what he said in the unspoken concepts of his mind.

By searching into the original words of the Greek text, Froom tries to

argue that these expressions do not mean any literal physical birth on the

part of Christ in the distant past, but are used to convey the idea of

uniqueness and difference between Christ and the rest of the beings in

existence. There is no point in going further into his argument here. It can

be read in his book by those who care to do so. We are concerned only with

seeing if Waggoner's statement was the truth, or a limiting of Christ's


The eternal pre-existence of Christ, the fact that God has no beginning

and all that pertains to this, is a great mystery which can only be understood

so far as the Lord has seen fit to reveal it to the human mind. Revelations

have been given so that the understanding of that mystery is much greater

now than it was in the very beginning. We can see this on the basis of Paul's

testimony in Ephesians.

"For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

          "If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given

me to you-ward:

"How that by revelation He made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

"Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)





"Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto His holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;

          "That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body and

partakers of His promise in Christ by the gospel:

"Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of

God given unto me by the effectual working of His power.

          "Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given,

that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ;

          "And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which

from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all

things by Jesus Christ:

"To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God,

          "According to the eternal purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus

our Lord." Ephesians 3:1-11.

In these verses Paul speaks about the mystery of Christ, which is all

involved in God's eternal purpose in Jesus Christ. This is the wisdom of

God. It had not been truly understood previously by men upon this earth,

nor even by principalities and powers in the kingdom of heaven amongst

the  unfallen  creatures  in  God's  great  universe.  But,  because  of the

revelation of Jesus Christ through the ministration of God's church upon

this earth, that mystery was becoming clearer even to the principalities and

powers in heavenly places.

What is the mystery of God? In Colossians, chapter one, Paul takes up the same theme and uses almost the same words. "Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

"Even  the  mystery  which  hath  been  hid  from  ages  and  from

generations, but now is made manifest to His saints:

          "To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of

this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory."

Colossians 1:25-27.

The mystery of God then, is Christ, the sinless, eternal One, dwelling in

us,  the sinful and finite ones.  It is divinity dwelling in humanity—the

incarnation. The incarnation was by no means complete when Christ came

and dwelt in sinful flesh, for that is not sufficient to effect our salvation. It is

complete only when Jesus comes and dwells in our own sinful, fallen, human nature. That this can be done is the mystery of God revealed now as never before, even in the beginning of God's creation before sin marred the perfection of God's universe.

This revelation of the mystery of God to an extent not seen even by the

principalities and powers in heavenly places is "according to the eternal

purpose which He purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord." There is an intimate

connection between the mystery of God and His eternal purpose in respect

to Jesus Christ. These two must be studied with reference to each other.







What is the extent of an eternal purpose? Eternity encompasses not only the unending future, but stretches as far back into the past as it does into the future—eternally. Therefore, this purpose involving the mystery of God, which is Christ in the body of a creature, is not of a temporary nature, but is as eternal as God Himself. The text does not merely say it is an eternal purpose, but that it is the eternal purpose.

The eternal purpose of God in which is involved the mystery of God, was in existence long before man was created or sin entered the universe. It was not there as something which God purposed for Christ at a future time, for then it could not be God's eternal purpose, but something eternally purposed instead. When Christ came to this earth, He was fulfilling the eternal purpose of God to a new extent, in a wider dimension and fuller degree than ever before. Christ was not doing something new. He was carrying to a greater height, width, and depth that which He had always done in the eternal purpose of God for Him.

In the New Testament we see Christ fulfilling the eternal purpose of

God by coming as both God and man that thereby man can approach

unto God. Perhaps there is no better understood nor widely accepted truth

than that there is no way man can approach unto God except through

Jesus Christ. "Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other

name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." Acts


It is God's purpose that man should have communication and access to

Him, for He is the fountain of all life, joy, and happiness. Without Him,

there can be no life and no continued existence. It is impossible for there to

be direct communication between God and man. God is totally infinite

while man is so finite and small a part of the total creation and so far

removed from God through sin, that he could never provide a way to reach

God. God must provide a way for man. The man Christ Jesus fulfils that


So it is written "That in the dispensation of the fulness of times He might

gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and

which are on earth; even in Him." Ephesians 1:10. The purpose of God is

to draw all things together in Christ, not only upon this earth but in heaven.

To us and the principalities and powers in heavenly places, the greatest revelation of this purpose and mystery is found in the incarnation of the Son of God working to draw sinful man back into oneness with God. The salient truth necessary for this work's success is that Christ must first be God, so that He can lift us all the way up to God and He must be truly man in sinful flesh and blood to reach men where they are.

"Christ is the ladder that Jacob saw, the base resting on the earth, and

the topmost round reaching to the gate of heaven, to the very threshold of

glory. If that ladder had failed by a single step of reaching the earth, we

should have been lost. But Christ reaches us where we are. He took our






nature and overcame, that we through taking His nature might overcome.

Made 'in the likeness of sinful flesh' (Romans 8:3), He lived a sinless life.

Now by His divinity He lays hold upon the throne of heaven, while by His humanity He reaches us. He bids us by faith in Him attain to the glory of the character of God. Therefore are we to be perfect, even as our 'Father which is in heaven is perfect.' " The Desire of Ages, 311, 312.

While it is generally recognized that man cannot approach unto God except through Christ, it has not been so readily seen that the angels cannot approach Him directly either. They need an Advocate who is one with them and one with the Father. "Heaven is a ceaseless approaching to God through Christ." The Desire of Ages, 331.

The need for this is apparent when the nature of God versus that of the

angels is considered. Between the infinite Creator of everything which

exists, and the angels, each of whom is so small a part of that vast creation,

there is a great gulf so deep and wide that direct communication is

impossible. God's purpose was to draw all things in heaven into one, just as

on this earth. He had to provide the means to establish communication.

That means is fulfilled in the ministry of Jesus Christ.

For Christ to provide the channel of communication between man and

God, He had to be both man and God. To provide the same between

angels and God, He would have to be both angel and God. Again that

ladder must reach from God to the angels, not coming short by a single


In the New Testament where we see the outworking of God's eternal

purpose in the realm of man, Christ stands revealed as both God and man.

In the Old Testament where we see Him as He was before He entered

physically into man's realm, He was the Mediator for the angels, being both

God and angel.

A study of heavenly messengers appearing to men in the Old Testament, shows that often it was Christ Himself who appeared. Christ was the Angel who wrestled with Jacob till daybreak. It was Christ, the Angel of the Covenant, who went before the people of Israel in the wilderness and who appeared to Joshua,  Gideon, Manoah and his wife.  It is Christ, the Archangel, who bears the name of Michael our prince.

For Christ who was eternally God, to become a man, He had to be

begotten by God into the form of a man, and for Christ to become an angel,

He had to be begotten into the form of an angel. How and when this was

done we do not know, for it has never been revealed to us. As soon as God

created the angels, there was the need for communication to be established

between them and Christ was willing to. fulfil God's eternal purpose in Him

to draw all things into one in heaven as later it was to be on earth.

Therefore, just as there was Christ's first work of drawing the angels into

oneness with God, there had to be a further extension of the identical work

in drawing men into oneness with God. So there had to be two occasions






when Christ was begotten of God, the first being into the form of an angel and the second into the form of man.

But, the fact that Christ was begotten into a new form, did not mean

that He had a beginning at that point of time. No one who believes the Bible

truth of Christ's eternal pre-existence has difficulty in seeing that when

Christ was begotten into the form of man, He only had a beginning as a

man. He had descended from where He had been and taken up a flesh and

blood body as the tabernacle for His eternal Spirit and Life.

The fact that He was begotten into the form of an angel as far back as Waggoner says He was, does not need to be understood that begetting Him meant  the  beginning  of  Him,  for  it  did  not.  Before  that,  He  was God—eternally so, infinite and beginningless.

Waggoner saw more, much more than is generally realized. He was not

wrong in saying that Christ was the begotten Son of God long before His

appearance in Bethlehem. He did not venture "out onto the thin ice of

speculation," nor did he break "through into waters of conjecture that were

over his depth." Instead, he presented a sound Biblical truth on the position

of Christ who is the One through whom the Father has ever been, is, and

ever will be, fulfilling His eternal purpose of drawing all things together into


When God sent E. J. Waggoner and A. T. Jones with the mighty

message of the fourth angel, it was a great and wonderful light that they

brought. The messages sent are still available in their published works for all

to study. The lesson learned from the presentation of what another man

thought they taught, and from the pages of history generally, is that there is

safety only in studying for yourself to see what was taught back then. If the

Lord sent "a most precious message" to His people then—the message of

the loud cry to finish the work—we need that message today and should

spare nothing in our quest for it. There is great and wonderful light revealed

there and it will be our fault if that light is not seen, understood, and

experienced as it should be.




One Giant Step Too Far







We  now  return  to  trace  the  development  of  the  arguments  in

Movement of Destiny. The title conveys the author's conviction that the

Seventh-day Adventist Church is the movement of destiny. For that body

to fulfil its appointed destiny, Froom correctly argues, it must first be purged

from serious errors and equipped with the real and living truth for this time,

particularly in the field of the Person and work of Christ.

Seen by the author as a serious obstacle to fulfilling this destiny was the

presence in the Adventist Church after 1844, of teachings which denied the

full deity of Christ. The first objective to be achieved was the correction of

these errors. Froom sees this as the great purpose of the messages given in

1888. Movement of Destiny gives no revelation of the more glorious work

the Lord intended to accomplish in   1888.

Deep-seated errors are not corrected in a day or one short year. There

had to be a period of time subsequent to    1888 for these errors to be set

straight in the church. Froom traces his view of this in the chapters, Decade

of Varied Advances Follows   1888,  beginning on page        313 through to

Headquarters  Group Studies Mark  1930's,  ending on page 442,  with

several  other  chapter  headings  between,  such  as  Resurgence  Gains Momentum by 1920, Daniells' Contribution to the Resurgence, and 1931 Opens New Epoch of Unity and Advance.

Just as the first era of the Adventist Church is designated by this book as

lasting from 1844 till 1888, so the second era is said to extend to 1931. This

year is chosen by Froom as being of special significance because unity was

finally achieved on the question of Christ's deity. The event to mark this

point of time was the appearance in the Yearbook of The Statement of

Adventist Beliefs. This formed the basis for the Baptismal Certificate which

appeared ten years later.

In the light of these two events, Froom states, "While 1931 was the

crucial year, it was more accurately the decade—embracing the years 1931

to 1941—that marked the pivotal turn of events for unity of belief in our





post-1888 history. As seen, this ten-year period was introduced by the

appearance of an acceptable Statement of Faith, now received by all.

          "The decade logically closed with the adoption, in 1941, of the uniform

'Baptismal Covenant' and 'Vow,' in Certificate form. This was definitely

based upon, but elaborated and accentuated, the now generally accepted

'Fundamental Beliefs' declaration of 1931." Movement of Destiny, 415.

The important point Froom seeks to make is that the work begun by the

turning of the tide in 1888 by the declaration of Christ's complete deity now

came to completion so far as unity within the church is concerned. "We

now come [in 1931] to another in the series of vital turning points in

Adventist history. Or perhaps it might more accurately be called a point of

concurrence—one that marked the beginning of a new epoch, a drawing

together in a united front. After 87 years of conflicting viewpoints over the

Deity of Christ, the Trinity, and the Personality of the Holy Spirit, a unified

position that honored Bible truth—and was in accord with the Spirit of

Prophecy—came to be accepted by both sides." ibid., 409.

This is what Froom declares had been achieved at this point of time. He

saw in this the completion of the work which the Lord planned to achieve in

sending the message in 1888. According to his thinking, the point to which

the church had come was of preparation to go forth as a unified movement

preaching the everlasting gospel to the world and to finish the work.

"We were now ready, so far as an acceptable Statement of Faith and

Baptismal Certificate were concerned,  to go to all the world with the

Everlasting Gospel message in a clearer and more compelling way. We

were  no  longer  subject  to  a  legitimate  charge  that  on  the  Eternal

Fundamentals—the  basic  principles,  provisions,  and  Personalities  of

redemption—we were divided, or in conflict with the testimony of the

soundest Christian faith of the centuries. And in addition, that we ourselves

were out of harmony with the repeated and cumulative declarations of the

Spirit of Prophecy.

"So it was that we passed the last major theological roadblock in the

series of obstacles that we have been compelled to survey in tracing our

history. The culminating events of the decade 1931 to 1941 consequently

marked the end of an old epoch, and the beginning of a new day in

unification and auspicious witness for us as a Movement. It was definitely

another major turning point in denominational history." ibid., 421-422.

So the church entered upon the final section of her history according to

the divisions set forth in the book, namely, the period beginning with the

decade 1931 to 1941. This becomes the most significant section, for it

shows the full maturing of what the church did in 1888.  Here, in the

leadership's words, is revealed the point and position to which the course

adopted by the church in 1888 had taken them, just as when a seedling first

appears above the ground, it is often difficult to discern what kind of plant it

is, but when it comes to full maturity, its real nature is clearly seen by all.





Movement of Destiny has claimed that the church was rescued in 1888 from serious errors, and that the experience was a great and wonderful victory for the church. This is how the church views itself, but we will see as the  full development comes into view, that it was breaking down the differences between the Adventist Church and Babylon, leading to a closer unity and fellowship between them.

Step  follows  step  and  no  sooner  had  the  church  published  her statement of beliefs and the "Baptismal Certificate" and "Vow", than she moved on in the chain of events to the revision of certain statements in books of the past. Of this Movement of Destiny says:

"The next logical and inevitable step in the implementing of our unified 'Fundamental Beliefs' involved revision of certain standard works so as to eliminate statements that taught, and thus perpetuated, erroneous views on the Godhead. Such sentiments were now sharply at variance with the accepted 'Fundamental Beliefs' set forth in the Church Manual, and with the uniform 'Baptismal Covenant' and 'Vow' based thereon, which, in certificate form, was now used for all candidates seeking admission to membership in the church." Page 422.

There were such statements in Adventist books which did need revision

and deletion. Seventh-day Adventists certainly could not continue printing

the sentiments in Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah Smith which said that

Christ was a created being. As the true church of God advances into the

greater light of everlasting day, she will be obliged to discard errors once

vigorously taught, and revise her teachings accordingly. The church of the

Middle Ages taught and believed that the first day of the week was the true

day of worship but the time came when the advancing church saw its error

and no longer printed and distributed literature that gave Sunday any


We take no issue with the need for revision, but we do with how far that

revision is taken. If, in deleting error, truth is taken also, more damage than

good has been done. If the church comes to a crisis point in her history,

when the Lord offers truth, and she fails to accept it as time goes by, she

may reject some points of error but she will reject truth as well. This is

another indication of whether there was rejection or acceptance of the truth

at Minneapolis. If error only was deleted in the period we are now studying

subsequent to 1941, we can be sure that Froom is correct in his evaluation

of what took place in 1888. However, if the deletions and corrections took

away sound fundamental truth, we know that there was a rejection in 1888

and thereafter.

Already one can see that Froom has presented an imbalanced view of

Waggoner's message. He has projected Waggoner as teaching that Christ

was eternal God, but also that He came down to dwell in sinless, holy flesh,

merely accepting our nature and experiencing our trials and temptations

vicariously. This is not what Jones and Waggoner said. They taught that







Christ took our human nature actually and literally and in the selfsame way that we acquire ours. They teach that the ladder did not fail by a single step of reaching us where we are.

Tenaciously hold to and remember that the doctrine of Christ is the

teaching that God came down into human nature—not merely that Christ is

God or man but is God and man. If it is taught that Christ was not truly,

wholly, and eternally God, this denies the doctrine of Christ. If there is the

slightest denial that Christ took the very same sinful, fallen, degenerate

flesh and blood as the children, this also is the doctrine of antichrist. The

message of God and of 1888 was that Christ, as all the fullness of the

Godhead, came to dwell in all the fullness of fallen humanity.

The devil fears no teaching which presents the fullness of one or the

other, provided that the two are not linked together. It is the nature of

antichrist to deny one or the other, but not both. In Christ's day the issue

was over His divinity. They could see that He was truly a man, with the

same flesh and blood as they had, but they could not see that He was the

divine Son of God. The issue has swung to the other end of the ladder

today. To the body of fundamental Christians and even the Roman

Catholic Church, it is plain that Christ is truly and eternally God. What they

cannot see is that pure and spotless divinity can actually humble itself to

dwell in fallen humanity. Here is the Roman Catholic sentiment to this


"Disbelief in the immaculate conception of the blessed virgin Mary would imply belief in the following revolting consequences; namely, that He who is holiness itself, and has an infinite horror of sin, took human nature from a corrupt human source." Catholic Belief, 217.

This statement says that the Saviour had the same holy, sinless, and

immaculate humanity of His mother Mary, according to Catholic belief. If

you present to a Roman Catholic well versed in the theology of his church,

the idea that Christ did receive a corrupted human nature, to his way of

thinking this denies the divinity of Christ and makes Him a sinner. The

mystery of the incarnation is a mystery indeed, standing unrevealed to his


We shall see that the daughters of Babylon share the same view. In their minds, to give Christ a sinful human nature is to make Him altogether like ourselves, to take away His divinity and eternal pre-existence. It is to disparage and destroy His Person and work.

Not only is this the viewpoint and belief of Babylon but it is the

identifying mark of that vast, antichristian system. Wherever that view is

found we find that Babylon exists. Babylon, wherever she is to be found,

cannot see and accept that Jesus, the eternal Son of God, actually came

and took as His very own, the same weak, fallen, sinful human nature as

the children of men. They reject such a concept with horror, believing that it

degrades the Son of God.






The true child of God does not see this as a degradation but as the glorification of the Son of God.

"Some  may  have  thought,  while  reading  thus far,  that  we  were

depreciating the character of Jesus, by bringing Him down to the level of

sinful man. On the contrary, we are simply exalting the 'Divine power' of

our blessed Saviour, who Himself voluntarily descended to the level of

sinful man, in order that He might exalt man to His own spotless purity,

which He retained under the most adverse circumstances. His humanity

only veiled His Divine nature, by which He was inseparably connected with

the invisible God, and which was more than able successfully to resist the

weaknesses of the flesh." Christ and His Righteousness, 28.

This is Waggoner's understanding, the man sent of God with a message

in 1888. It is not difficult to see that it is the opposite of Babylon's thinking.

In the eyes of Babylon, Waggoner and Jones would belittle and disparage

the Person and work of Christ. However, this would not cause these men

of God any distress. They would be very anxious if Babylon could approve

of what they taught. They would seriously wonder whether their message

was the truth or not. In fact, they would know that if Babylon could and did

approve of their message on the nature of Christ, they had to be teaching

the doctrine of antichrist with Babylon.

Babylon is antichrist—the deadly enemy of Christ and His church. There can be no fellowship or agreement between them, only unrelenting warfare. The more the church of God is true to God's truth and her sacred trusts, the more hostile and deadly will the warfare be.

If LeRoy Froom and the Adventist leadership backing the production of

Movement of Destiny, truly believe in the message brought by Waggoner

and Jones, as they earnestly claim, they will hold Waggoner and Jones'

viewpoint on the nature of Christ in the incarnation. They would not hold

what are the teachings of today's Babylonian churches,  and would be

regarded by those churches as a people who would disparage and belittle

the Person and work of Christ.

We  have already seen that Movement of Destiny failed to present Waggoner's message as he taught it.  Froom's book makes it appear that Waggoner did teach the doctrine of Babylon, for where Waggoner taught that Christ came in sinful flesh, Froom presents him as teaching that Christ did this merely in a vicarious way.

Therefore, when the deletions were going forward, the church would not stop with deleting Uriah Smith's statements denying the fullness of Christ's deity, but would further delete those which spoke of His taking the sinful human nature of man. This is precisely what they did.

The most significant of these statements appeared in the 1915 edition

of Bible Readings for the Home Circle, pages 173, 174, under the heading

of "A Sinless Life". Here is a facsimile reproduction of the "offending" part of this chapter. Immediately following are the same pages as they appear in the revised edition of 1958.






These notes are worthy of careful study. Those who understand the message of Waggoner and Jones and the true doctrine of Christ will see that here in a few words, is an accurate and truly wonderful statement on the incarnation of Christ. These sentiments are in exact harmony with the message brought by the fourth angel in 1888.

Note how it distinctly states that "In His humanity Christ partook of our

sinful, fallen nature." If this was not so, the writer argues, the Scriptures

which teach that He was "made like unto His brethren," was "in all points

tempted like as we are," arid overcame as we have to overcome, are totally


It immediately takes issue with that papal teaching which states that

Christ "inherited no tendencies to sin, and for this reason did not sin,"

declaring that this removes Him from the very place where He could effect

our salvation.

Of special interest is the distinction made between the divine nature of

Christ and the human nature. "On His human side—Christ inherited just

what every child of Adam inherits—a sinful nature." So much for that side

of the story, but there is the other divine side of Christ. This is distinguished

from the sinful human nature as being perfect and sinless. "On the divine

side, from His very conception He was begotten and born of the Spirit."

This plainly teaches that the eternal God dwelt in the same flesh and blood

as the children. The note concludes with the implications of this, which are

simply that Christ proved by demonstration that by laying hold upon His

divine nature we may gain complete victory over sin in our own sinful flesh.

This is a wonderful statement on the incarnation of Christ and it is

evident that Professor Colcord to whom Froom attributes this statement,

understood and believed the messengers sent by the Lord in 1888. This

statement should be treasured and held to by every Seventh-day Adventist in the world.

But this is not the teaching of antichrist. In the light of the discussion earlier in this chapter, it should not be difficult to realize with what hostility and ridicule the churches of Babylon would regard these words. As you listen again to the words of the papacy, compare these sentiments with those of Bible Readings.

"Disbelief in the immaculate conception of the blessed virgin Mary would imply belief in the following revolting consequences; namely, that He who was holiness itself, and has an infinite horror of sin, took human nature from a corrupt human source." Catholic Belief, 217.

The essential point in this statement is that Christ took a corrupt human

nature. In order to exempt Christ from this, He is born from a mother who

has been born of an immaculate conception. This is how Babylon, the

mother,  denies  Christ's  doctrine  and  bears the  identifying  mark  of

antichrist. It is well known that the daughters of Babylon, the Protestant

churches, do not arrive at the same conclusion that Christ had sinless flesh







by teaching that the mother of Jesus had an immaculate conception. They give Christ the immaculate conception, which gives Him exactly the same flesh and blood as the Roman Catholic Church gives Him.

Some  may  conclude  that  because  the  Protestant  churches  do  not

believe in the immaculate conception of Mary, their teachings on the nature

of Christ are different. This is not so. Their teachings are identical so far as

the end result is concerned. The Roman Catholic Church gives Christ an

immaculate  conception  by  giving  His  mother  one  first,  whereas the

Protestant churches give the immaculate conception to Christ directly. See

how plainly the Protestants claim this as shown in the following statement

from Dr. E. Schuyler English, who was in 1955 the editor of Our Hope

Magazine and chairman of the committee for revision of the Scofield

Reference Bible. This identifies him as an evangelical Protestant of some


" 'He [Christ] was perfect in His humanity, but He was none the less God, and His conception in His incarnation was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit so that He did not partake of the fallen sinful nature of other men.' " Movement of Destiny, 469. Dr. English could not have stated the teaching that Jesus Christ was born of an immaculate conception more plainly. This is Roman Catholic theology and the mark of antichrist.

That he  should  express such  sentiments is not surprising for the Protestant churches are Baby/on — the daughters of the great mother. If Babylon, they are antichrist, and if that, they certainly must and do deny that Christ came  in  the flesh.  They could  not be Babylon  and teach otherwise, nor could they teach this and not be Babylon.

These teachings are the direct opposite from those taught by E.  J.

Waggoner and A. T. Jones, and further repeated in the Bible Readings,

1915 edition. But what else can be expected? Waggoner, Jones, and the

Bible Readings set forth the doctrine of Christ, whereas Babylon sets forth

the  doctrine  of antichrist.  How could  such  opposite  teachings  be  in


It cannot be argued, as some are attempting to do, that Waggoner and

Jones brought the truth of righteousness and justification by faith, but were

astray on their teachings of the incarnation of Christ. It is impossible to

argue this successfully, for the message of justification by faith and the

incarnation of Christ are inseparable. Our concept of one will determine our

teaching on the other. If one's belief on the incarnation is in error, one's

belief of justification and righteousness by faith is also in error.

Waggoner and Jones were not in error so far as justification by faith and the righteousness of Christ were concerned, for this is the message God gave them to bring to the Adventist people.  Therefore,  they were not wrong in their teachings on the nature of Christ.

Babylon could not see what they taught, as the truth. They saw it as

deadly error. It kindled anger and hostility and more than ever led them to






think of Adventists as being a people who disparage and belittle the Person and work of Christ.

The actual writings of Waggoner and Jones were not given the wide

circulation and promotion by the church which they ought to have had. As

time passed, the books disappeared from circulation altogether, but Bible

Readings was widely circulated and did not disappear.  It was rightly

regarded as being a highly representative Adventist publication. So it was

this book, not the writings of Waggoner and Jones, that the Protestants

looked upon as confirmation of the "unchristian" teachings of the Adventist

Church, as they read that "offending" statement saying that Christ "partook

of our sinful, fallen nature."

That such a beautiful statement of living truth should cause offence among the Protestants should not cause a true Adventist the least distress. He should boldly unfurl this flag of truth to the world and with conviction confess what he believes.

For the true people of God, faithful to His word, it is possible that the

power-filled witness of Godly lives may reluctantly wring from Babylon the

admission that we are at least Christians in our behaviour, but they will

never confess that in our teachings we are Christians. Nor should we expect

them to. If we find that the Babylonian churches commend as Christian our

teachings on vital issues, we will know that they have ceased to be Christian

and have become decidedly antichristian. There could be nothing more

serious for the Church of God.

It was the preaching of the first, second, and third angels' messages

which separated the people of God from the fallen churches.  "By the

mighty cleaver of truth, the messages of the first, second, and third angels,

He has separated them from the churches and from the world to bring them

into a sacred nearness to Himself." Testimonies for the Church 5:455.

If this was the effect of the first three angels, what must the effect be of

the mighty angel who fills the whole earth with his glory? What must be the

effect of this angel who declares in clarion tones the fall of Babylon? Will it

close the gulf between Adventism and Babylon? Never! It can only widen it


In 1888, that other angel came to do his work. Wherever that angel's

message appeared in Adventist books as in the Bible Readings, it would be

the worst kind of offence to the Protestant world, the daughters of Babylon.

So that statement became "the oft-cited note in the old edition of Bible

Readings," (Movement of Destiny, 469)  which was used repeatedly by

those who wished to show that Adventists were not Christians according to their evaluation of the case.

This attitude toward the statement can be expected from Babylon but

hardly  from  Seventh-day  Adventists  and  especially  the  responsible

leadership among Adventists. It would not be expected unless seen how

Froom  in  Movement  of Destiny  has  sought  to  make  it  appear  that








































A TEACH ."R OF RIGHTEOUSNESS " Ile was in all points tempted like as we

          are , } et without sin." IIeb. 4 : 1


1. WHnT testimony is borne concernin; Christ's life on

earth ?

" Who did no sin, neither was guile found in His mouth." 1 Fete& 2 : 22.

2. What is true of all other members of the human family ?

          " For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God."

Prom. 3 : 23.

3. With what question did Christ challenge His enemies? " Which of you convinceth Me of sin? " John 8. 46.

4. To what extent was Christ tempted ?

"[He] -pas in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Heb.4:15.

5. In His humanity, of what nature did Christ partake?

" 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." Heb. 2: 14.

6. How fully did Christ share our common humanity?

" Wherefore in all things it behooved 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." Verse 17.

NOTE.-In His humanity Christ partook of our sinful, fallen nature.

If not, then He was not "made like unto His brethren," was not "in all

points tempted like as we are," did not overcome as we have to overcome,

and is not, therefore, the complete and perfect Saviour man needs and

must have to be saved. The idea that Christ was born of Rn immaculate

or sinless mother, inherited no tendencies to sin, and for this reason did

not sin, removes Him from the realm of a fallen world, and from the very

place where help is needed. On His human side, Christ inherited just

what every child of Adam inherits,-a sinful nature. On the divine side,

from His very conception He was begotten and born of the Spirit. And

all this was done to place mankind on vantage-ground, and to demonstrate

that in the same way every one who is " born of the Spirit" may gain like

victories over sin in his own sinful flesh. Thus each one is to overcome

as Christ overcame. Rev. 3 : 21. Without this birt'i there can be no

victory over temptation, and no salvation from sin. John 3: 3-7.

7. Where did God, in Christ, condemn sin, and gain the victory for us over temptation and sin ?

"' For what the law could not do, in that it was weak througn

the flesh, God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful

f l esh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." Rom. 8: 3.

NOTE.-God, in Christ, condemned sin, not by pronouncing against it merely as a judge sitting on the judgment-seat, but by coming and living in the flesh, in sinful flesh, and yet without sinning. In Christ, He demonstrated that it is possible, by His grace and power, to resist temptation, overcome sin, and live a sinless life in sinful flesh.

8. By whose power did Christ live the perfect life ?

" I can of Mine own self do nothing." John 5: 30. " The

words that I speak unto you I speak not of Myself : but the

Father that dwelleth in Me, He doth the works." John 14: 10.

NoTE.-In His humanity Christ was as dependent upon divine power

to do the works of God as is any man to do the same thing. He employed

no means to live a holy life that are not available to every human being,

Through Him, every one may have God dwelling in him and working in

him " to will and to do of His good pleasure." 1 John 4: 15; Phil. 2: 13.

9. What unselfish purpose did Jesus ever have before Him ?

" For I came down from heaven, not to do Mine own will, 6vf the will of Him that sent Me." John 6: 38.


HAVE I need of aught, 0 Saviour!

Aught on earth but Thee?

Have I any in the heavens,

Any one but Thee?

Though I have of friends so many,

Love, and gold, and health,

If I have not Thee, my Saviour,

Hold I any wealth?-Coma F. DAVIS.

Bible Readings for the Home Circle, 1915 Edition.







Bible Readings for the Home Circle, 1958 Edition.


a Sinless e>Cife







WHAT testimony is borne concerning Christ's life on earth?

"Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth."

1        Peter 2:22.

What is true of all other members of the human family?

"For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Romans 3:23.

With what question did Christ challenge His enemies?

"Which of you convinceth me of sin?" John 8:46.




To what extent was Christ tempted?

"(He] was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Hebrews 4:15.

In His humanity, of what nature did Christ partake?

"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." Hebrews 2:14.

How fully did Christ share our common humanity?

"Wherefore in all things it behoved him to he 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." Verse 17.

NOTE.-Jesus Christ is both Son of God and Son of man. As a

member of the human family "it behoved him to be made like unto

his brethren"-"in the likeness of sinful flesh." Just how far that

"likeness" goes is a mystery of the incarnation which men have never

been able to solve. The Bible clearly teaches that Christ was tempted

just as other men are tempted-"in all points . . like as we are."

Such temptation must necessarily include the possibility of sinning;










but Christ was without sin. There is no Bible support for the teach-

ing that the mother of Christ, by an immaculate conception, was cut

off from the sinful inheritance of the race, and therefore her divine

Son was incapable of sinning. Concerning this false doctrine Dean

F. W. Farrar has well said:

"Some, in a zeal at once intemperate and ignorant, have claimed

for Him not only an actual sinlessness but a nature to which sin was

divinely and miraculously impossible. What then? If His great con-

flict were a mere deceptive phantasmagoria, how can the narrative of

it profit us? If we have to fight the battle clad in that armour of human

free-will, . what comfort is it to us if our great Captain fought

not only victoriously, but without real danger; not only uninjured,

but without even the possibility of a wound? . Let us beware of

contradicting the express teaching of the Scriptures, .. . by a suppo-

sition that He was not liable to real temptation."-The Life of Christ (1883 ed.), vol. 1, p. 57.



Where did God, in Christ, condemn sin, and gain the victory for us over temptation and sin?

"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

f l esh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh." Romans 8:3.

NOTE.-GOd, in Christ, condemned sin, not by pronouncing

against it merely as a judge sitting on the judgment seat, but by com-

ing and living in the flesh, and yet without sinning. In Christ, He

demonstrated that it is possible, by His grace and power, to resist

temptation, overcome sin, and live a sinless life in the flesh.

By whose power did Christ live the perfect life?

"The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but

the Father that dwelleth in inc, he doeth the works." John 14:10.

NOTE.-In His humanity Christ was as dependent upon divine

power to do the works of God as is any man to do the same thing. He employed no means to live a holy life that are not available to every human being. Through Him, every one may have God dwelling in him and working in him "to will and to do of his good pleasure." (I John 4:15; Philippians 2:13.)

What unselfish purpose did Jesus ever have before Him?

"For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me." John 6:38.







Waggoner actually taught that Christ came in sinless, holy flesh upon which

He took our nature  only  vicariously.  After seeing this distortion  of

Waggoner and Jones' teaching, it is not surprising to find that the attitude of

the present Adventist leadership toward the truth set forth in Bible Readings

is the same as that of Babylon, terrible as the implications may be.

As the pages of Movement of Destiny are turned, it is found that the attitude of the modern Adventist leadership towards the incarnation as actually taught by Waggoner and Jones—not as Froom represents them as teaching—and the truth as set forth in Bible Readings, is precisely the same as that of the Babylonian churches.

On page 427, this statement from Bible Readings is described as being an "erroneous note," an "erroneous position," and a "definite error." Here is the full text of the paragraph containing these words under the subheading "Elimination of Erroneous Note in Bible Readings."

"Erroneous Position Injected by Colcord.—Cognizance must also be

taken of the correction, in 1949, of a definite error appearing in a note on

the nature of Christ during the Incarnation. For years it had appeared,

unchallenged, in the standard Bible Readings for the Home Circle. It was in

the section on 'A Sinless Life.' Apparently it was first written in by W. A.

Colcord, in 1914, It likewise involved one of those questions upon which

there had been variance of view through the years. Colcord had declared

that during His incarnate earthly life Christ 'partook of our sinful, fallen

nature' (page 174)." Movement of Destiny, 427, 428.

Again on page 428 this wonderful note from Bible Readings is referred

to as an "erroneous note," an "unfortunate note," an "inaccurate note,"

and "another error," so that it was necessary to delete it from Adventist


The story of this deletion is told by Froom on page 428 as follows:

"Erroneous Note Deleted.—In 1949,  Professor D.  E.  Rebok, then

president of our Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, when it was

still in Washington D.C., was requested by the Review and Herald to revise

Bible Readings for the Home Circle. Coming upon this unfortunate note on

page 174, in the study on the 'Sinless Life,' he recognized that this was not

true. But in eliminating the note he found that some still held with Colcord

in his position.

"However, a growing number of explicit statements by Ellen White had

appeared confirming the true position that there was no 'bent' to sin, or

'taint' of sin, or 'evil propensity' in Christ. He was like Adam before his fall,

who  was  similarly  without  any  inherent  sinful  'propensities.' (See

compilation  of  E.G.W.  Statements,  Questions  on  Doctrine,       650-660.)

"So the inaccurate note was deleted,  and has remained out in all

subsequent printings. Thus  another error was removed through these

revisions of the 1940's, as concerned some of our standard and otherwise

helpful books."






It is interesting to note how Froom claims that because of the Spirit of

Prophecy witness on the incarnation of Christ, they were able to make the

change even though there were still those who held the old view. In like

manner, the Protestant churches claim they have the Bible's backing for

their view on eternally burning hell, on Sunday observance, and on the

doctrine of the nature of Christ.  All the statements appearing in the

compilation referred to above, are sound, solid truth, but they are read by

the  modern  Adventist  through  the  coloured  glass  of  that  word

"vicariously". What is stated in the words of inspiration as being actual fact,

is seen by them as only make-believe. Professor Rebok did not have the

backing of the Spirit of Prophecy to delete that note from Bible Readings.

On page 465 there are further references to this note where it is

described as "the lingering 'sinful-nature-of-Christ' misconception," and

"the regrettable note," fit only to be expunged from Adventist literature.

"And the lingering 'sinful-nature-of-Christ' misconception was remedied by

expunging the regrettable note in the revised Bible Readings of 1949."

On 469, it is referred to in similar terms where it reads, "And further, that the old Colcord minority-view note in Bible Readings—contending for an  inherent sinful,  fallen  nature for Christ—had years before been expunged because of its error . . ."

Thus the failure to do no more than give assent to the message of 1888

when it came to the church, has matured to the point where the Adventist

Church shares with Babylon the same attitude in regard to the incarnation

of Jesus Christ. Today, the Adventist Church has the very attitudes and

sentiments that the Babylonian world holds and expresses. Most serious of

all is that the area in which such unanimity now exists is the infallible,

divinely-given test of who antichrist is. It is unbelievable, and thousands

upon thousands of Adventists will not believe it has happened. But facts are

facts. The words of Movement of Destiny leave no doubt of the stand of the

Adventist Church today on the doctrine of the incarnation. Anyone not

prepared to face this fact; anyone who allows preconceived ideas and

opinions to be his guide and stay; anyone who believes the leadership can

do no wrong;  anyone who believes that the church will go through

regardless; in short, anyone who is not prepared to face up to things as they

really are, will lose his eternal life unless quickly delivered from such


Today,  the leadership and ministry of the Seventh-day Adventist

Church claim that the message of righteousness by faith was accepted by

the church when delivered by the mighty angel of Revelation 18, in 1888.

This message was based upon the great truth that Christ, the eternal God,

came and dwelt in the same flesh and blood as the men and women He

came to save. But where does this claim stand when the truth as taught by

the messengers of that day,  is declared by the modern church to be

erroneous,  evident error,  unfortunate,  regrettable,  and fit only  to be






expunged from Adventist publications? They did not stop with saying it should be expunged. They did expunge it. Today it is not to be found in those publications.

They have repeated  what the  Roman  Catholic Church  did  many

centuries ahead of the Adventist Church. The apostles as the messengers of

God, brought the great truth of Christ's incarnation to the church of their

day.  But  when  those  pioneers  had  vanished,  the  developing papacy

deleted those truths from the gospel. The monstrous mystery of iniquity

grew into full maturity. Step by step, the church of that time formed her

fearful destiny.

Today, history is being repeated. The pioneers are gone; Waggoner

and Jones have passed to their rest; the prophet sleeps her peaceful sleep;

those who voiced the revival of the 1888 message in the fifties and know

just what the message really is, have been expelled from the church where

their voices can no longer be heard; and the leaders have expunged from

their books the great truths of the incarnation of Christ just as the papacy

did centuries ago.

The ultimate outcome must be the same. The mystery of iniquity is developing inexorably and irretrievably in the Adventist Church.  Her destiny is being formed—fearful and terrible though it be.




Adventism Identified With Antichrist







By 1949 then, the changes had been made in the representative

Adventist publications which brought the doctrine of the nature of Christ

fully into line with the belief and teachings of the Protestant, and also the

Roman Catholic, churches. Between the Adventist Church and the others,

no practical distinctions remained. The heart had been taken out of the

three angels' messages.

The third angel's message is a separating message. "By the mighty cleaver of truth, the messages of the first, second, and third angels, He has separated them from the churches and from the world to bring them into a sacred nearness to Himself." Testimonies 5:455.

Those messages are first and foremost, the everlasting gospel. The very

heart of the gospel is the doctrine of Christ, the teaching that the sinless,

eternal God came and dwelt in the sinful, fallen flesh of man. While that

teaching had not been explicitly developed in the early days of the advent message, it was there implicitly. The power of that message was present, and it was this which caused that deep and bitter enmity of the fallen Protestant churches against the Adventists.

We can now ask this question: When the doctrine which is the heart and life of that gospel which caused the violent separation from, and hatred of, Adventists is removed, what can we expect to see?

This is a very simple question which requires only a simple answer. If the cause of the enmity is removed, then the enmity will also be removed. Once the Protestant churches are convinced that the change has been made, we would expect them to rewrite their evaluations of the Adventist Church; to regard the Adventists as being worthy of fellowship; to see a new era of co-operation; to see friendly relations being developed; and to see mutual sharing of activity in common causes.

On the other hand, if the Adventist Church has indeed, as Froom

claims, corrected the errors of the past, so that she now holds and teaches

only the pure doctrine of righteousness by faith, then what would we expect

to see develop? There could be only one outcome. The enmity would

intensify, the gulf would widen, they would regard Adventists as being






unworthy of fellowship, and there would be no mutual sharing of activity between them.

This is the only way it could be.  The perfect life of Christ is the

convincing proof of this. He lived a perfect life. There were no errors in His

teaching whatsoever. Yet He was hated with an implacable hatred by those

who, in His day, were teachers of error and darkness. Nothing can change

or weaken the fact that "... all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer

persecution."        2  Timothy  3:12.

This leads to a further question. If we make fundamental changes to

our doctrines and then find that those whom the Word of God plainly

declares to be Babylon, thereafter can endorse our teaching, and accept us

into the body of Christ as they define that body to be, then what should this

say to us?

There can be only one true answer. Such a development should be an

alarm signal of the greatest danger. It should tell us that there has been the

most grievous departure from the great principles to which God called us. It

should drive us to our knees to beg the Lord to guide us back to safe paths

once again. Then, when those safe paths have been rediscovered, there

must be the most open confession to the world that it was a grave mistake

to change the doctrines, but that the error has been corrected.

They will, of course, deride and hate us for it. But that is the path the true child of God and therefore the church of God, must follow. Look and see when, at any time in the past, the church held the truth in its purity and power and was, at the same time, loved and respected by Babylon. No such time will ever be found. Rather, it will be seen that the world hated the church whenever it preached the truth as it is in Jesus.

It is, of course, very comfortable and pleasant to have the approval of

the powerful churches of the world. It is much nicer to be within the warmth

of the inner circle, than to be out in the cold. It is easier to work when the

other churches approve rather than oppose. There is nothing that fleshly,

human  nature  could  desire  more.  But there  could  be  nothing  more

dangerous either.

Having  raised  these  questions  and  considered  some  of  their

implications, we return to the history of the Adventist Church. We have

seen from the book by Elder Froom, that by 1949, the changes in Adventist

literature had been made. The teaching on the nature of Christ in His

incarnation  had been  brought  fully into  line with the teaching of the

Protestant churches.

What would we now expect to see happen in the thinking of those

churches? We would expect them to rewrite their evaluations of Adventists

after having made a careful study to see if the changes had really been


This is precisely what happened.

The historical record of it is set forth in Movement of Destiny 465-468, in the chapter entitled "Changing the Impaired Image of Adventism." In the opening paragraphs,  Froom  refers  again  to the  changes  made  in the teachings and literature of the church.






Then he says, "It is significant that once these were cared for—and

even beginning back in the late 1930's—searching questions began to be

asked with remarkable frequency, and vital contacts through inquiry made

by scholars as to the fundamental faith of Seventh-day Adventists in

relation  to  the  Eternal  Verities.  It  seemed  to  be  spontaneous  and

simultaneous, and became a pronounced phenomenon. It was clearly the

beginning of a new outreach for understanding by non-Adventist scholars.

"2. SUCCESSION OF INVITATIONS ROLLS IN.—A succession of inquiries, with invitations to speak, began to come from various quarters in the religious world. Along with others, I had personal opportunity to respond to requests from  many study groups to tell  'why I  am  a Seventh-day Adventist'—with  essentially  the  same  topic  always  assigned.  These invitations came from  non-Adventist churches,  colleges,  universities, seminaries—and even secular organizations.

"The church groups included Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Methodist,

Baptist,  Reformed,  Congregationalist,  United  Brethren,  and  even

Pentecostal and Unitarian faiths—as well as an organization of converted

Roman Catholic priests. So I write from personal knowledge, for I spoke to

each of these groups.

"Universities such as Marburg (Germany), Rutgers (N.J.), and Pittsburg

(Pa.)  extended  unusual  invitations,  with gratifying results from the

presentation opportunities, with question periods. And following these

came various dialogues with Roman Catholic student priests—both groups

and individuals—which were highly fruitful and refreshingly frank. In one

instance the contact was with thirty-eight student priests-in-training from the

Catholic University of America,  in Washington,  D.C.—an  hour for

presentation, and an hour for questions. Out of this, smaller follow-up

groups of five to eight. Later, I was privileged to address a class of graduate

students at the same 'Catholic U.,' on the same theme." Movement of

Destiny,      465,   466.

Following these observations are paragraphs under these headings,

Unforgettable Contacts With Noted Scholars, Opportunities Came Because

Prepared,  Wave of Sincere Inquiries Continues,  Corrections in Encyclo-

pedias and Reference Works,  Contacts Come When We Are Ready.

Elder Froom is arguing through all this that these results are the effects which followed the cause. The cause was the changing of the Adventist doctrines. The effect was an entirely new attitude on the part of the Babylonian churches.

Without doubt he is correct in this evaluation. They are the effects

which followed those causes. It was making the changes in the teaching of

the Adventist Church which removed the enmity of the churches against

the Adventists.

Such effects as these should have instantly alerted the Adventist leadership and, in turn, the laity, to the fearful peril into which the Adventist Church had moved. " . . . know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God." James 4:4.







"Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him." 1 John 2:15.

          "Be  ye  not unequally yoked together with unbelievers:  for what

fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

"And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that

believeth with an infidel?

"And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people.

"Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

          "And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be My sons and daughters,

saith the Lord Almighty." 2 Corinthians 6:14-18.

There is a tendency to think of the world as being those who make no

profession of religion whatsoever. Those who think this way do not think of

the fallen churches as being the world. This is a dangerous mistake. The

world is composed of the atheist who openly denies any responsibility to

God, and the religious who profess to love and serve God, but whose lives

are wholly bent on the pursuit of the things of this world.

Friendship with either of these sections of the world is enmity against

God. There can be no harmony between the pleasure-loving world, as

such,  and the true child of God.  Neither can there be any harmony

between the religious world and the true child of God. So impossible is it for

the true child of God and the true church of God to have friendship with

either, that the development of any friendship is evidence that the person

or the church so involved, has ceased to be a true child of God. This may

seem a very strong statement but it is only what the Scriptures say. To have

formed a friendship with the world is to have become an enemy of God.

How can a church or a person who is an enemy of God, be, at the same

time, a true child of God? This can never be.

Therefore, when such friendly overtures were forthcoming from the

churches of the world, a great alarm should have sounded through the

ranks of Adventist leadership first of all, and through the ranks of Adventists

immediately thereafter. It should have been recognized that this response

from the fallen churches was the clearest indication that erroneous steps

had been taken. It should have been seen that the cause had produced the

wrong kind of results.

But instead, the whole reaction from the outside churches to these changes was hailed as the most wonderful breakthrough. It was and is looked upon as the strongest evidence that the right steps had been taken. Things could not have been more up-side down. No greater blindness could have rested on the minds of those responsible, nor on the minds of those who so willingly followed them.

Yet, once these results began to be obtained, the church entered upon

a course from which there seems to be no turning back. LeRoy Froom







recalls next the "Precedent-breaking contacts with Dr. E. Schuyler English,

the editor of Our Hope magazine." Of this he writes as follows:


understand the latter portion of this and the next chapter, dealing with the

conferences with Evangelicals Martin and Barnhouse—and the resultant

book, Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine (1957)—it is

necessary to go back to 1955, and certain preliminary exchanges with Dr.

English, of Our Hope. In an editorial note in his January, 1955, issue,

English stated,  erroneously,  that Seventh-day Adventists 'deny Christ's Deity' (p. 409). And he added that we are a group that 'disparages the Person and work of Christ' (p. 410).

"As to the latter expression, Dr. English based this misconception upon

his understanding that we hold that Christ, during His incarnation, 'partook

of our sinful, fallen nature.' In this expression he was clearly alluding to the

then oft-cited note in the old edition of Bible Readings. (E. Schuyler English

letter to L.E.F., Mar. 11, 1955, p. 1.)" Movement of Destiny, 469.

It is clear that Dr. English was familiar with the statement in Bible

Readings as reproduced on page 189 of this book. This is a very wonderful

and accurate statement on the nature of Christ, but not in the eyes of Dr.

English. Nor should we expect it to be. His is a very different theology from

that of the third angel's message.  His is a Sunday-keeping,  natural

immortality of the soul, and one apartment ministry in the sanctuary, creed.

The very mark of that theology is the denial of the truth written in the Bible

Readings  statement.

Therefore, we must expect that he would find himself in disagreement with that statement. More than this, it should be to us, an evidence that our position is correct when it is opposed by Babylon.

In order to really appreciate the situation, it must be recognized that Dr.

English was evaluating Adventism on the basis of what it was back in 1915.

He was, at this time, unaware of the changes which had been made in

Adventist theological writings as a reflection of their changed beliefs. The

doctrine of the nature of Christ as held by the Adventists in 1915, separated

them from the world and the churches of the world. This was rightly so.

LeRoy Froom recognized that Dr. English had not been acquainted with  the  changes  made  and  so  he  wrote  at  once  to  correct  this misconception. Here is his account of this correspondence.


wrote to Dr. English expressing concern over his mistaken understanding of

our teachings on these and other points. Ample authoritative documentary

evidence was furnished to show that, instead of depreciating the Deity of

Christ—as many Modernists in varipus denominations constantly do—we,

as a Church, ring as true as steel to the Biblical truth of the full and complete

Deity of Jesus Christ. And further, that the old Colcord minority-view note

in Bible Readings — contending for an inherent sinful, fallen nature for

Christ—had years before been expunged because of its error, and again

furnishing incontrovertible evidence to sustain these statements. This led to

a highly gratifying and profitable exchange of letters.







"At the close of the interchange, extending over several months, Dr.

English in a most manly and truly Christian spirit stated that he was

convinced that he had 'certainly been mistaken in the charges,' and said

that he would assuredly 'acknowledge those mistakes through the columns

of Our Hope.' " ibid.

Consider very carefully the nature of the argument used by LeRoy

Froom. He did not deny that, in 1915, the position was set forth in Bible

Readings which gave Christ a sinful, fallen, human nature like our own.

Instead, he appealed to Dr. English not to judge Adventists by what was

taught back in 1915, but by what they believed in 1955. There had been a

change. Proof of this was given among other things in the expunging

"because of its error," of "the old Colcord minority-view note in Bible

Readings —contending for an inherent sinful, fallen nature for Christ."

Froom contended that if Dr. English would take Adventism as it was in 1955, he would find that he could and would be able to identify Adventism with his own church on the subject of the nature of Christ and the gospel truths. He would find harmony and unity between the two.

This Dr. English did in the most thorough manner. In his position as

editor of Our Hope with a very large circulation throughout evangelical

Protestantism, he could not afford to do otherwise. So, for a full year, he

studied the question very carefully. He examined all the evidences given

him. Then, at the end of that period, he came right out in the same

magazine, Our Hope, and gave a fresh evaluation of Adventism. It was an

evaluation opposite from that which he had presented the year before. In

this, he confirmed Froom's contention that he would find that modern

Adventism and Babylon did believe the same thing on the question of the

nature of Christ.

Here is Froom's narration of the event.

"Dr.  English honorably  and  graciously  fulfilled his promise  in the

February, 1956, issue of Our Hope. The editorial statement was candidly

titled, 'To Rectify a Wrong.' In this he referred to making a 'grievous

mistake'  in  the  January, 1955,  note,  in  affirming that Seventh-day

Adventists  'deny  Christ's  Deity  and  disparage  His  Person  and  work'

(p. 457). In this editorial he told of 'several months' correspondence' with

this writer, and set forth the considered conclusion he had reached:

" 'Seventh-day Adventists believe implicitly in the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ' (ibid.). In support he cited the various documentary items that had been furnished him." ibid., 470.

In Our Hope, January 1955, Dr. English had made his statement of

belief in the incarnation of Christ. This is quoted on page 469 of Movement

of Destiny.

"He [Christ] was perfect in His humanity, but He was none the less

God, and His conception in His incarnation was overshadowed by the Holy

Spirit so that He did not partake of the fallen sinful nature of other men."

When Dr. Froom read those words, he wrote to Dr. English confirming that his belief was the same. Here are Dr. Froom's words. "That, we in turn assured him, is precisely what we likewise believe." ibid., 470.







Thus, in the clearest possible way, Dr. Froom identifies Adventism with

Babylon on that most important of all Bible questions, the nature of Christ

in the incarnation. It is the most important for it is so integral a part of the

gospel that it is provided as the infallible test of Christ and antichrist.

Therefore, Froom is saying in fact, that Adventism is to be identified with

the body of antichrist.

No other conclusion than this can be truthfully drawn. The facts which

support this conclusion cannot be changed. They are as follows.

          The message of the second angel has told us that the churches which

reject the special truths for this time are Babylon, and therefore antichrist.

          It is the mark of antichrist to deny that Christ took the same fallen, sinful

flesh and blood as we have.

Therefore, the fallen churches teach that Christ came in sinless flesh and blood.

Therefore, to assure such churches that Adventists today likewise teach that Christ came in sinless flesh and blood, is to declare that Adventists have also become part of the body of antichrist.

It must be emphasized here that we are studying what Dr. Froom has to

say and the implications of that. We are not studying the position of the

author of this book. The point is not a matter of whether I am or am not

saying that the Seventh-day Adventist Church organization is antichrist.

This is a study of Dr. Froom's statements and a declaration that the

implication of his assertions is that he has declared that the Seventh-day

Adventist Church today is part of the body of antichrist.

This is a very significant declaration to make. What is even more

significant is that the whole of modern Adventism has no quarrel with him

for saying it. The then General Conference President, Elder Pierson,

endorsed the statement to the point where he declared that the book "is a

must for every worker, every theological student, and every church

officer—in fact, for every church member who loves this message and longs

to see it triumph in the near, very near, future." ibid., 13. He evidently saw

nothing dangerous at all in its arguments, or he would have warned the

Adventist world of the peril in which they were being placed.

Publishing house managers and their scrutinizing committees, division,

union,  and  conference  leaders  saw  no  problems  with  it.  Teachers,

ministers, colporteurs, and church members have raised no outcry against


Ten years have now passed since Movement of Destiny appeared.

Thousands of copies have been scattered throughout the world.  These

have been read and studied by Adventists at every level. Ample time has

elapsed for them to come through with vigorous denials of, and protests

against, the position which this book assigns to Adventism today. But none

has appeared. The very silence of the multitude of the Adventist world

proves their endorsement of it.

From all this, the following conclusions must be taken as the only truthful and correct possibilities.





In      1915  In      1949


Adventists taught Adventists expunged

through Bible Readings this teaching

the Full Deity       replacing it with

and    The Full Deity

The Full Humanity        but not

of Christ     The Full Humanity

in harmony of Christ.

with the Bible,      Instead they taught

the Spirit of Prophecy,  the sinless flesh of Christ

and the message   in harmony with

God gave through the Protestant

Waggoner and Jones.     and Catholic churches.


In      1955

The Adventist Church


through Dr. Froom as their spokesman,

appealed to Dr. English not to judge Adventism in 1955, by

what she had written and taught back in 1915, but by what

was now being taught as the Church's established belief.


There had been a change.


Dr. English was assured that, if he would do that, he

would find that evangelical Protestantism and modern

Adventism stand together and not in opposition to each

other on the question of Christ's nature in His Incarnation.

Dr. English did this and found for himself that it was true.


In      1955










LeRoy E. Froom has gone on record in immortal print to identify modern Adventism as a part of the great body of antichrist and therefore at enmity against God.

Elder Pierson, the then General Conference President, by his strong endorsement and recommendation of the book has thereby underlined the assertions of Dr. Froom. He, also, has located Adventism today as being part of the body of antichrist.

The Review and Herald committee of scrutineers, together with the

publishing manager, have added their sanction by passing it for publication.

They too, join the chorus declaring the Adventist Church to be antichrist.

Beyond this nucleus of influence and authority, there are the thousands

upon tens of thousands of "loyal" Seventh-day Adventist presidents,

teachers, pastors, Bible and other workers, and the laity who all, by their

silence and their consent, if not by their active teaching, collectively add

strength to the certainty that the church has indeed become a part of the

body of antichrist.

Of course, they have not said it in so many words. Babylon herself denies that she is antichrist. No professed religionist is going to openly admit that he is antichrist. Such never have, and never will until the day when the conviction finally fixes upon them and they have no recourse but to do that. It will be in that terrible day when the deceptive power of Babylon is forever broken. It is the very nature and character of antichrist to profess to be of Christ wholly and solely.

Therefore, it is too much to look for outright statements on the part of

antichrist that she is such. Instead, it is necessary to study the implications of

her claims and professions. This is what must be understood. In the case of

the Adventist Church under study here, it is not at all difficult to see the

implications of her own statements as they are made today.

The Adventists have changed their doctrine to agree exactly with that of

Babylon and have then rightly declared that they and Babylon are in perfect

agreement on these doctrines. This is the point to which Adventism has

come today. Upon them rests the mark of antichrist which is the denial that

Jesus Christ came in the same flesh and blood as the children.

Having changed their doctrine into perfect agreement with Babylon on this point, they have been most anxious that the body of antichrist be aware of this and accord them the position among those fallen churches which the Adventists rightly recognize as now being their place.

In this they have not been unsuccessful. There is still a great deal of prejudice which has to be overcome, but it will be in time. A new day has dawned for the Adventist Church. It is a day of accord and fellowship with that of the fallen churches of antichrist.

What is the destiny of such a movement as Adventism has become





Teachers Of

The Immaculate Conception







There are two statements made by Dr. English and quoted here by Dr.

Froom which are quite significant. Accordingly, a little further study on

them is necessary for a fuller understanding of the developments under consideration here.

The first is his declaration on the nature of Christ in His incarnation.

"He [Christ] was perfect in His humanity, but He was none the less God,

and His conception in His incarnation was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit

so that He did not partake of the fallen sinful nature of other men."

The second is his re-evaluation of Seventh-day Adventists. He wrote,

"Seventh-day Adventists believe implicitly in the Deity of our Lord Jesus


There is a very close connection between these two statements. When

this connection is better understood, there will be clearer understanding of

what the present position of the Adventist Church really is. It needs to be

remembered that Dr. Froom assured Dr. English that the Adventist Church

believed precisely what that statement said. It was upon the basis of such

assurances that Dr. English was able to express the personal conviction

after twelve months of study on the question that "Seventh-day Adventists

believe implicitly in the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Consider then, the first statement. This is a clear expression of the

doctrine of the immaculate conception of Jesus Christ. Naturally enough,

neither the writer of it nor Dr. Froom has titled it as such. The expression

"The Immaculate Conception," is associated with the Roman Catholic

Church. This doctrine has been preached against for too long in the past

history of Adventism, for Adventists or even Protestants to accept it under

that name. Satan knows this well, so he is happy to introduce the same

doctrine without the stigma of that name. He is not concerned about the

name. That is not the essential thing. It is the doctrine itself which does the







To help strengthen the disguise, there is a variation to the teaching.

With the Roman Catholic Church, it is Mary, the mother of Jesus, who was

given the immaculate conception by the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit.

This was given to her in papal theology, so that she automatically passed on

to Christ an equally immaculate conception. Thus the Roman Catholic

Church teaches the immaculate conception of Mary so that she might teach

the immaculate conception of Christ.  Of the two, the former is not

important. It is the birth of Christ which is important, for He is the Saviour

of the world.

Dr. English, as a spokesman for the evangelical Protestant churches, arrives at the same end result, but without going through Mary. In his theology,  Christ obtained immaculate conception directly through the overshadowing of the Holy Spirit so that the flesh and blood body in which His divinity dwelt was not like that of other men.

Thus, so far as the end result is concerned, there is no difference

between the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church and those Protestant

churches represented by Dr. English. Both Catholic and Protestant believe

in  the  immaculate  conception  of  Jesus  Christ.  They  all  deny  that

"Forasmuch then as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, He also

Himself likewise took part of the same [flesh and blood as the children];"

"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 2:14,      16,     17.

The immaculate conception is not concerned with the divinity or the

deity of Christ but with His humanity. It is concerned with the kind of flesh

and blood body which He had. It is for this reason that the conception of

Mary who was to contribute the flesh and blood of Christ, was made

immaculate  in  the  Roman  Catholic  teaching.  Likewise,  Dr.  English

specifically states that he is talking about the human nature of Christ in this

statement. He says, "Christ was perfect in His humanity ..." Then he goes

on to say that it was this humanity which was overshadowed by the Holy

Spirit so that Christ did not partake of the fallen sinful nature of other men.

In this way, Dr. English unmistakably declares that the birth of Christ

was an immaculate conception on the human side of the incarnation. So,

his is the doctrine of the antichrist as truly as is that of the Papal church


Where then, does this put the teachings of Dr. Froom and the Adventist

Church of which he is reporting and which supports him in his writing and

reporting? He declares that his belief and the belief of the church are

precisely what Dr. English believes. If the teaching of Dr. English is that

Christ had an immaculate conception, then Froom's being precisely the






same, must be the teaching of the immaculate conception of Christ as well

and  as fully.

Therefore, between the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church on the

humanity of Christ in His incarnation and the teaching of the Adventist

Church today as Froom has reported that teaching to be, there is not a

shadow of difference. The only difference lies, not in the teaching of the

nature of Christ, but the way in which it is taught that the immaculate

conception came to Christ. The Roman Catholic Church teaches that it

came through Mary. Dr. English and the Adventists teach that it came to

Christ directly. The end result of such teaching is identical.

Further confirmation of the position of the Adventist Church today as

re-evaluated by Dr. English is given by the second statement which he

made: "Seventh-day Adventists believe implicitly in the Deity of our Lord

Jesus Christ."

To the Catholic and the Protestant mind, it is impossible for the pure

and holy God to dwell in sinful flesh. The very thought of it is anathema to

them. To their minds, Jesus Christ would have to cease to be the eternal,

pure, holy sinless God, if He came to dwell in the same sinful, fallen flesh as

men have. Therefore, when they investigate the teachings of a church, a

group, or an individual, they will regard as contradictory the position of any

who, on the one side, teach the full deity of Jesus Christ and on the other,

teach that that deity was housed in fallen sinful flesh. In other words, no

matter how clearly and emphatically a man might teach that Christ was

truly the holy, eternal God, neither the Catholic Church nor Dr. English

would say that he believed "implicitly in the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ,"

if he taught that Christ came in sinful flesh.

No one ever taught more emphatically that Christ was the eternal, sinless God than did Waggoner and Jones. But we do not find Dr. English or the  Catholic  Church  declaring that Waggoner and Jones believed implicitly in the deity of Christ. Nor would they, for both these men also taught that that same sinless, eternally pre-existent God dwelt in sinful, fallen, human flesh and blood.

Likewise, if Dr. Froom and the Adventist Church whom he represents and for whom he is reporting, taught that Christ, the eternal God, came down and dwelt in sinful, fallen, human flesh and blood, Dr. English would never have declared that "Seventh-day Adventists believe implicitly in the Deity of our Lord Jesus Christ."

It was when he read their writings as contained in the   1915 Bible

Readings wherein, as can be read on page 189 of this book, it is taught that the sinless God dwelt in sinful flesh, that he declared that Adventists disparaged the Person and work of Christ. To "disparage" is to belittle, to discredit,  to  lower  in  esteem,  and  to  depreciate.  He  accused  them therefore, of presenting Christ as being less than God.

But, when they deleted the statement which set forth the fullness of

Christ's deity and His humanity, and taught instead that He came with an






immaculate conception, then Dr. English had no difficulty in regarding them as teachers of the full deity of Christ.

A true teacher of the gospel of Jesus Christ will, of course, believe

implicitly in the deity of Christ. But, it is one thing to believe in it and teach it

and another thing to be recognized as a teacher of it. To the true teacher as

sent from God, such acknowledgement is of value, but never if it comes

from the lips of Babylon. To be judged by the Babylonian mind as being a

true teacher of the nature of Christ, is to be judged according to the

standard of their theology. No true teacher desires to be judged by this.

Only by the Word of God and those who believe implicitly in the God-given

truths of that Word does the man of God wish to be judged. Let the

Catholic and Protestant world condemn his teachings as heresy and error!

He knows that from them he can expect nothing else. He knows that to

seek approval from them is the most dangerously compromising thing he

can possibly do.

Following the contact with Dr. English came the conversations with Drs. Walter R. Martin and Donald Barnhouse. What happened with these men was a repeat of what happened with Dr. English except that it was even more thorough and long lasting. Dr. Froom devotes pages 472-492 to this and the resulting book Questions on Doctrine.

It is not necessary for us to make a close analysis of the work of Drs. Martin  and  Barnhouse  in  their  investigation  and  re-evaluation  of Adventism.  What has already been said in regard to Dr.  English is applicable to this later investigation for the same conclusions were reached in the same way by these men, as had been reached by Dr. English. Their work and reports are only further confirmations of the position to which the Adventist Church had come, namely, to that place where, in the judgment of Babylon, they had become Christians.

Let it be remembered that when Babylon says you are to be regarded as

a Christian because you have passed her examination of your beliefs

according to the Babylonian standard of theology, then Babylon is saying

that you are a "Christian" of the same nature and character as she is.

What is the nature and character of the "Christianity" of the Papal and

Protestant churches? It is pseudo-Christianity. It is professed, a counterfeit,

a masquerade. In short, it is not Christianity at all but antichristianity. It is

not for God in the least but wholly and solely against Him. It is the greatest

piece of deception ever perpetrated upon the world and woe to that man

who is deceived thereby, for he will share her judgments and her plagues,

terrible as they will be.

As you read for yourself the history of the contacts with Martin and

Barnhouse and the resulting book Questions on Doctrine, note especially

on page 474, the following statement from Dr. Martin. "Seventh-day

Adventists believe without reservation,  and in  the context of historic

orthodox Christianity, the following doctrines: (1) the complete authority of

the Bible as the sole rule of faith and practice and the inerrant Word of God;

(2) the virgin birth of Christ;   (3) the eternal Trinity and Deity of Christ;

(4) the personality of the Holy Spirit; (5) the perfect sinless human nature of






Christ; (6) the sinless life and vicarious atoning death of our Lord; (7) the physical resurrection and ascension of Christ; (8) His intercessory ministry for man before the Father; (9) the second personal premillennial coming of Christ; (10) the everlasting bliss of the saints; (11) the physical resurrection of the body; (12) justification by faith alone; (13) the new creation; (14) the unity of the Body of Christ; (15) salvation by grace apart from the works of the law through faith in Jesus Christ."

So it was that Dr. Martin, after his very exhaustive inquiry into the present beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists, found that they believed this list in the context of historic Christianity.

Historic Christianity is one thing in the mind of such men as Dr. Martin.

It is another thing in the minds of those who have kept pace with the

advancing light. Dr. Martin, like Dr. English, is a rejecter of the special

truths for this time. He is part of the great body of antichrist and therefore

his understanding of what historic Christianity is, would be in line with the

teachings of Babylon and not truly in line with the real historic Christianity.

Therefore, when Martin states that Adventism is in line with historic

Christianity as he understands it to be, then he is saying that he has found

that Adventism today is the same as Protestantism today. Special attention

is called to point number five in the list. Here Martin testifies that in the

matter of the human nature of Christ, he has found that the Adventist belief

on this question is in line with his own and also with his understanding of

what historic Christianity is.

Paul is part of the stream of historic Christianity. He did not believe as

Drs. English, Martin, Barnhouse, and Froom believe. He believed quite the

opposite in regard to the human nature of Christ. So it was with the apostle

John and all the great men whom God called to be His messengers down

through the ages.

So it is then, that the Adventist Church has made such changes as qualify her for recognition and acceptance into the ranks of the great body which Babylon proudly and confidently calls the body of Christ but which is in fact, the body of antichrist.

What is the destiny of such a movement?

Will it be the fulfilling of a glorious and successful role in the finalizing of the message of the ages, or will it be the disaster of receiving the outpouring of the plagues with Babylon?

The way in which that question is answered will depend upon the viewpoint of the person making the answer. This is not to suggest that the answer given will influence the final outcome. The church has stepped into a certain position. That is what will decide the outcome, no matter what the prediction by one or the other may be at the present time.

As one considers the  entire development of argument throughout

Movement of Destiny, one sees that its whole burden is to prove that the

Adventist Church could never finish the work until the elements in the

teaching  of the  nature  of Christ  which  had  been  an  offence  to the

evangelical Protestant churches, who are in turn antichrist and Babylon,

had  been  removed.  Over  and  again  it  is  emphasized  that  until those







changes had taken place, the loud cry could never be given; the church

could never enter into the glowing hours of her glorious, divinely appointed


It is to be expected then, that the closing chapters would be challenging

and warm affirmations of the expected glory ahead. So they are. Froom

paints a picture of a movement going on from power to power and strength

under direct leadership from above, the head and not the tail, the bearer of

the last great Christ-centred message of salvation. He says, "Our greatest,

most searching, and most glorious days are clearly ahead. We stand on the

threshold of the great final advance outlined by Inspiration. The past that

we have covered must be but the prologue to our future role—with its

destined climax as our impelling incentive." Movement of Destiny, 655.

"This Movement that began in a whisper will finish as an impelling Loud Cry, reverberating to the ends of the earth. It will assuredly compass its mission. . . . The gross darkness of the last days will be penetrated by the light of God as the piercing rays of the Sun of Righteousness break through the dense, blanketing clouds of the final storm. They will reveal to mankind a people being prepared to meet their God, as the light of Truth as it is in Jesus presses back the enveloping darkness.

"BLAZE OF GLORY; NOT TRAGIC FADE-OUT.—That is the heartening

message of Revelation 18:1-4. It is God's inspired portrayal of the final

triumph, the final outburst of augmenting power, with the final issues

brought out clearly, wisely, and fully before the whole world, ere the Great


"The witness of God to the world will close in a blaze of glory, not in a tragic fade-out. There is no failure with God. And we are to be part of His outshining witness." ibid., 662.

This, then, is the picture of the full and final destiny of the Movement of

Destiny as Dr. Froom sees it. It is a very grand, wonderful, and desirable

picture. What is more, it is a truthful picture provided the basis for it is

sound. God's work will finish triumphantly and gloriously. There will be the

manifestation of the character of God through a people who know their

God and know Him truly.

But the basis for Dr. Froom's assumptions of future glory must not be

forgotten. His predictions are based upon the evidence that the Adventist

Church has changed those things in her teachings and writings which gave

offence to the evangelical churches and thus prevented access to the hearts

of these people because of this. While this situation existed, it would be

impossible for her to fulfil her divinely appointed destiny.

What makes the whole argument still more plausible and deceptive is

that it is partly true. Certainly, there was the need to delete Uriah Smith's

statement in Daniel and the Revelation because it erroneously taught his

personal view that Christ was a created being. It did give justifiable offence

to the evangelical churches, and constituted a barrier against access to


But the statement in Bible Readings stands in a different category

altogether. It is the truth exactly as taught in the Bible, the Spirit of






Prophecy, and as brought out so clearly by the Lord's messengers, Dr. E. J. Waggoner and A. T. Jones. Its expurgation from the book constitutes a rejection of the very heart of the fourth angel's message. As such, it is a rejection of the former three.

This  statement  also  gave  offence  to  Babylon,  but  without  the

justification that the statement in Daniel and the Revelation gave. Uriah

Smith's statement was error, but the one in Bible Readings was truth.

When, in order to have fellowship with and access to the hearts of Babylon,

we have to expunge truth from our literature and our teaching, then the

whole basis for any realizations of future dreams of glory is totally removed.

But, according to the carefully argued and well documented recital of

Adventist history which Dr. Froom has given us in Movement of Destiny,

this is exactly what the Adventist Church has done. Not only has truth been

expunged. Error of the most deadly kind has been instituted in its place. It is

the very error which, when held, marks that body as being possessed of the

spirit of antichrist. Like attracts like. It is no wonder then, that, when this

change had taken place in Adventism so that she taught the doctrine of

antichrist, and was therefore, according to the plain "Thus saith the Lord,"

possessed of the spirit of Babylon, the other bodies of antichrist recognized

her as being of the same company as themselves.

As surely as she has become a part of that company, then just so surely

does their destiny become her destiny. To know the true destiny of modern

Adventism then, we have but to read the destiny of the body of antichrist as

a whole.

Their future is that first of all they will combine to erect the image to the

beast. They will war against the living truth of God as it will be proclaimed

by those who have made no concessions to Babylon. They will be utterly

defeated in that warfare and will suffer the fearful outpouring of the wrath of

God in the seven last plagues.

This is not a destiny of glory but of disaster; not of triumph but of

defeat; not of joy but of sorrow; not of life eternal but of death everlasting.

          What a tragic repetition of the history of the past. As one reads the

history of ancient Israel, sees the great commission given to them, studies

the glorious destiny open to that people, then witnesses the continual

turning away from truth to join in the belief and practice of the Babylonians

of their day, one can only re-echo the words of Inspired warning, "We are

repeating the history of that people." Testimonies 5:160.

          With unfailing consistency, every time they turned to join in the worship

of Baal, the judgments of God fell upon them with disastrous severity. The

lesson from it all is crystal clear, and not one of us has the least excuse if we

follow in those same footsteps. But, even at this late hour it is not too late to

repent. Let the mistakes and wrong turnings of the past be utterly rectified.

Let the present Adventist leadership with the backing of the laity, openly

declare in the most public way that they have erred in making those

concessions to Babylon. Let this all be put right, no matter how terrible the

consequences might appear to be. Then the Lord will work for them and

the true destiny of the movement will be fulfilled.




The Wine Of Babylon





Arguments sufficient to fill volumes could be advanced from the sacred records to prove beyond any doubt what the true destiny of the movement is. But this, neither time nor space will allow so far as the limitations of this volume are concerned.

In conclusion then, we will confine our study to one such evidence.

          There is only one sure way to understand the outworking of the

movements of the present and that is to study the development of past movements. The record of movements in the past is expressly given to us for this purpose. Some people strongly object to the use of this kind of parallelism,  but they do  so at the peril of their souls and  in  direct disobedience of God's commands.

"We need to beware lest we suffer the same fate as did ancient Israel.

The history of their disobedience and downfall has been recorded for our

instruction, that we may avoid doing as they did. It has been written 'for our

admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come.' If we pass by

these cautions and warnings, developing the same traits of character

developed by the Israelites,  what excuse can we plead?" Review and

Herald, July          10,     1900.

"We are standing on the threshold of great and solemn events. Many of

the prophecies are about to be fulfilled in quick succession. Every element

of power is about to be set to work. Past history will be repeated; old

controversies will arouse to new life, and peril will beset God's people on

every side. Intensity is taking hold of the human family. It is permeating

everything upon the earth. . . ." Testimonies to Ministers, 116.

Not only are we here warned of the danger of following in the footsteps of ancient Israel, but we are told that we are actually doing this. "We are repeating the history of that people." Testimonies 5:160.

"The work of God in the earth presents, from age to age, a striking

similarity in every great reformation or religious movement. The principles

of God's dealing with men are ever the same. The important movements of

the present have their parallel in those of the past, and the experience of

the church in former ages has lessons of great value for our own time." The

Great Controversy, 343.

Without the least shadow of doubt, the Seventh-day Adventist Church

organization is an important movement of the present. As surely as it is,






then it has its parallel in the past. It will be found that this is not a singular instance but rather, a repeated one; that again and again situations will have developed in the past which have their counterpart in the present and future history of this important movement.

Therefore, in selecting one such parallel, it is not to be inferred thereby

that this is the only one, nor that the message contained in it is different

from the others. The message is the same all the way through and it is when

the doctrines of Babylon become the teaching of those who were called to

be the people of God, that those people will share the fate of Babylon.

Babylon,  as well as the professed people of God, is an important movement of the present and therefore as verily has her parallel in the past. Thus it is that she appears in the prophecies of Revelation as well as in those of Jeremiah,  Ezekiel,  and  Daniel.  In  each  and  every  appearance  her character, purposes, work, and teachings are the same.

For us, Babylon's final manifestation is the most important, but she will be truly understood in that role only if, firstly, careful study is given to her place and work in the past. In these last times, she offers her wine to the peoples of the world who prove themselves only too eager to drink it. "What  is  that  wine?—Her false  doctrines."  The  Review  and  Herald, December 6, 1892. To the people of the past she offered the same. They proved to be just as eager to drink it.

The people of God are those to whom Babylon is most anxious to give her wine. With the cunning and patience of the serpent, she relentlessly pursues  this  objective.  Thus  God's  people  are  tested  with  a  proving involving eternal consequences for life or for death.

Daniel and his three companions faced that test. When they were

selected by the king of Babylon to be taught "the learning and the tongue of

the Chaldeans," "the king appointed them a daily provision of the king's

meat, and of the wine which he drank: so nourishing them three years, that

at the end thereof they might stand before the king." Daniel 1:4, 5.

These four were not the entire number of those selected in this way. We

have no way of knowing how many young Jews were chosen. We only

know that there were more than the four, for it is written, "Now among

these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and

Azariah." Verse 6. All told, there might have been twenty of them or fifty,

or a hundred, or even more. We do not know, nor do we really need to

know beyond the important fact that the four were but a minority among

the larger group.

Before all of them were placed the food and wine of Babylon. Four of

them refused to touch it. The remainder partook of it. It is doubtful if, at the

time, any from either group fully understood the significance of the choice

they made.  That did not alter the consequences or the rewards of the

respective decisions.

A great deal of stress has been laid upon the fact that it was basically a

test of temperance, and this is entirely true. Much less emphasis has been

given to the other implications of the test. The food and the drink offered to

them, had first of all been presented to their idol gods and carried the






supposed blessing of those gods upon it.

Therefore, anyone who partook of that food was entering into the

religious practices of the Babylonians. They had become partakers of the

false doctrines of Babylon. That this is so is verified in these words: "But a

portion having been offered to idols, the food from the king's table was

consecrated to idolatry; and one partaking of it would be regarded as

offering homage to the gods of Babylon. In such homage, loyalty to

Jehovah forbade Daniel and his companions to join. Even a mere pretense

of eating the food or drinking the wine would be a denial of their faith. To

do this would be to array themselves with heathenism and to dishonor the

principles of the law of God." Prophets and Kings, 481.

Thus there were three courses open to the faithful four and to the rest. They could openly eat and drink of the provision brought to them from the king, as did the majority in the group. Their doing that placed them where they became directly participant in the worship of the gods of Babylon. They literally became a part of the body of antichrist, and ceased effectually to be a part of the body of Christ.

Secondly,  they might have refused to eat and to drink, but only

secretly, all the while by pretense making it appear to the Babylonians that

they were in fact partaking of it. To have done that would still have been a

denial of their faith and would have been to array themselves on the side of

heathenism. In other words, even though they did not themselves actually

partake of the food, giving the impression that they had would still have

constituted them part of the body of antichrist and no part of the body of

Christ. So far as the record reveals, none of the young men did this, though

it is possible that there were those who, for a time at least, did pursue this


The third and final option was to calmly, courteously, but firmly reveal

that no matter what the personal cost, they could not, and would not,

partake of the king's bounties. This is what the four worthies did. This was

the only course whereby they could avoid being identified as a part of the

body of antichrist and remain in the body of Christ. It was the only way.

This is the inescapable truth as revealed in this paragraph. It is a truth which

is as pertinent and applicable today as it was then. Today, it is still the only

way to remain in the body of Christ and escape identification with the body

of antichrist.

This is indeed a sober thought. Only he who is able to grasp the

significance, the verity, the gravity, and the urgency of it, and, at the same

time, through the living power of God pattern his life by it, will come

through the last great test unscathed by the corruption of Babylon. Only

such will stand with Christ and see the plagues destroy a thousand at his

side and ten thousand at his right hand. All others will perish eternally.

It is sadly evident that modern Israel has not seen the gravity and the

seriousness of it all. Exactly as did the Babylonians in Daniel's day, so the

antichrist of today has offered the wine of Babylon, the pernicious doctrine

that Christ came in sinless flesh, to the Adventist leadership and through

them, to the people.






By the vast majority of the church, the wine has been accepted and the

doctrine of Babylon has become the doctrine of the church. It is foolish to

pretend that it has not. There may be some who will believe such a denial,

but no careful, earnest student of the Bible and of Adventist history will

quarrel  with  the  accuracy  of  Froom's  reporting.  While  his  own

understanding of what the message given in 1888 actually was, is quite

wrong, and while he has lost all grasp of the warning contained in the

second angel's message, yet the presentation of the historical data is sound,

objective, and well documented. His conclusion that the Adventist Church

has become a confirmed subscriber to the teaching that Christ came in

sinless flesh, exactly as the fallen churches teach, is attested to by the

multiplied evidences to this effect.

Consider the world wide support of Movement of Destiny from the

General Conference President down to the laity. Add to this the absence of

any objection to the conclusions reached in the book.  Talk with the

ministry, read the articles appearing in current Adventist literature, and

examine the material on this subject taught to the theological students in the

ministerial colleges around the world. Such an investigation, if honest,

candid, and thorough, will reveal beyond any doubt that the doctrine that

Christ came in sinless flesh is the doctrine of the Adventist Church today.

No possible question can remain. The Adventist Church today is drinking

the wine of Babylon.

Of course, such a charge is denied by any Adventist to whom you may

make  it.  In  my  own  personal  conversations  with  leading  men  in

Washington D.C., I found that they sought to lightly dismiss the book as

being merely Dr. Froom's opinion. It was just as personally his opinion as

were the thoughts expressed by Uriah Smith in Daniel and the Revelation

on the deity of Christ. These men declared that there were many who did

not agree with the book and there was quite a movement toward its


If the book was purely a theological discussion, then that would be one

thing and some point could be admitted for their arguments. It could be

classed to some extent at least, as being the personal opinion of Dr. Froom.

Further support would be given to such arguments if Dr. Froom found it

necessary to  have  the book published  and  distributed  by  other than

Adventist channels.

But the book is not a study in theology. It is a history book, the work of

a  chronicler,  a reporter,  a recorder.  It is the revealing of what has

happened and the facts are true. Dr. Froom is a very careful and thorough

writer  whose  documentation  of  the  historical  presentation  leaves  no

question as to the veracity of the facts. Furthermore, we are not dependent

on Movement of Destiny alone for these facts. Dr. Froom stated that there

had been the expurgation of the "offending" note from the 1915 edition of

Bible Readings. Anyone who doubts this has only to compare the 1915

edition with the present edition to see that it is so.

Dr.  Froom reports a new evaluation of Adventists by evangelical

Protestants. That re-evaluation can be read in such books as The Truth






About Seventh-day Adventists by Walter R. Martin. Again it will be found that what Dr. Froom said happened, did happen.

However, it is neither to be overlooked nor denied that Dr. Froom

includes his own appraisal of these events. For instance, he judges the

change of attitude on the part of the evangelicals as being a praiseworthy

and desirable thing. Further back, he reduces the revelations of the fourth

angel's message in 1888 to a mere confrontation over the deity of Christ.

Not for one moment are we saying that these opinions are true judgments

of the significance of these events. We are not saying that. What we are

saying, is that the historical facts presented are accurate.

This leads to another fine but necessary distinction. While we deny that

Froom has formed the correct conclusions in regard to these developments,

yet, the very expression of his thought becomes an accurate historical

report. He was not alone in dealing with these men. There were others with

him  and  everything  was  constantly  reported  back  to  the  General

Conference Committee with whom they all worked in the closest liaison.

Therefore, the expression of Froom's evaluation of the discussion with

Drs. English, Martin, and Barnhouse, is in truth, the reporting of the

Adventist leadership's general reaction in the whole affair, how they and

the evangelicals related themselves to it all. In his reporting of that as

history, Froom is quite accurate and reliable.

At this point, a further important distinction must be established. It is the

difference  between the  history  itself and the  report of that history.

Movement of Destiny is only the latter.  As such,  it is of little real

significance. Let the book be withdrawn from publication. This will change

nothing. What has been done in the developments of the years has been

done, and nothing can change the history of the past. Movement of Destiny

was written to justify, in the eyes of Adventists generally, the actions of the

leadership in all of these steps. It was not written for the evangelicals. They

had  read  all they  needed to  and  had  made their adjustments with

Adventism to the point where they were able to recognize it as being a part

of the body of Christ as Babylon understood that body to be.

In order for Adventism today to come back into the favour and service of God, much, much more than the mere withdrawal of Movement of Destiny will be necessary. The principles laid out in the story of the faithful four in the court of the king of Babylon reveals what must be done, and the consequences of failure to do so.

As already noted in that story, there were three courses of action open

to those young men. Firstly they could, as the majority did, openly partake

of the wine and food. To do this was to identify themselves fully with the body of antichrist. Movement of Destiny is the historical record of the Adventists having done the same thing today.

Secondly, they could have pretended to eat of the king's provisions without actually doing so. To have done this would also have aligned them fully on the side of Babylon against the God of heaven.

Finally, they could and should have done as Daniel and his three

companions did—quietly, respectfully, but firmly revealed that they stood






solidly on the platform of truth, no matter how hostile Babylon might be to that position. As in the days of Daniel, the vast majority did not do this, but, and for this we can praise the Lord above, there were those, few in number though they be, who in those crisis days and to this moment, have stood firmly for the great principles of the third angel's message, refusing to make any concessions to Babylon.

It is not too late for any individual in the church to rectify the wrongs of yesterday. Despite the betrayal of the past, God's hand is still outstretched to save. For the church at large to put the matter back where it should be, involves much more than the quiet withdrawal of Movement of Destiny. There would have to be, initially, a very genuine confession that wrong steps had been taken in the past. This confession must be firstly by the leadership to the church and to the people in Babylon until the whole world knows that Adventism has returned to the faith of its fathers, and will have nothing to do with the doctrines of Babylon.

There was great diligence to see that the Protestant, Catholic, and

Jewish world were made aware of the changes which had been effected in

the church. Questions on Doctrine was especially published for this purpose

and "Its total circulation by 1970 had exceeded 138,000." Movement of

Destiny,      489.

Nothing  less  than  equal,  or  even  greater  earnestness  would  be

necessary to carry to the minds of such leaders everywhere, the corrections

in the Adventist position from error to the real truth once again. The

insulted paragraph from Bible Readings would need to be reinstated, along

with deletions from other books. Any worker, be he General Conference

President or lowly colporteur, who was not prepared to participate in this

thorough work of correction, would of necessity be relieved of his position

in the church.

Nothing less than this would be the dashing of the goblet of Babylon

from the lips of Adventism today. It would require a fearful price to do it. It

would result in awful humiliation in the eyes of the whole world, and

shattering divisions within the church, for not all would be prepared to pay

that kind of price. It would unleash the hostility of the great body of

antichrist against the people of God. It would result in so great a shaking in

Adventist membership as would disastrously reduce the financial intake to

the point where many of the church's vaunted programs would have to

close down. This is a fearful penalty to have to suffer.

But what is the alternative?

To find that answer, one has only to study further into the history of Daniel and his three companions.

There came a time when the king of Babylon erected the great golden

image on the plains of Dura. What he did there will be repeated to the very

letter in the erection of the image to the beast in the very near future.

"History will be repeated. False religion will be exalted. The first day of

the week, a common working day, possessing no sanctity whatever, will be

set up as was the image at Babylon. All nations and tongues and peoples

will be commanded to worship this spurious sabbath. This is Satan's plan to







make of no account the day instituted by God, and given to the world as a memorial of creation.

"The decree enforcing the worship of this day is to go forth to all the world. In a limited degree, it has already gone forth. In several places the civil power is speaking with the voice of a dragon, just as the heathen king spoke to the Hebrew captives.

"Trial and persecution will come to all who, in obedience to the Word

of God, refuse to worship this false sabbath. Force is the last resort of every

false religion. At first it tries attraction, as the king of Babylon tried the

power of music and outward show. If these attractions, invented by men

inspired by Satan, failed to make men worship the image, the hungry

flames of the furnace were ready to consume them. So it will be now. The

papacy has exercised her power to compel men to obey her, and she will

continue to do so. We need the same spirit that was manifested by God's

servants in the conflict with paganism." Signs of the Times, May 6, 1897.

S.D.A. Bible Commentary 7:976.

This  statement  makes  it  quite  clear  that  the  image  erected  by

Nebuchadnezzar was a type of the image of the beast to be raised in the last

days. That image imposed a fearful test upon the people of God. So will it

be again. But, Satan is far too cunning to bring the great test of the image as

the very first test. He prepares the world for it today as he did back there.

Firstly, he provides them with the wine of Babylon, gently and kindly

inviting them to drink of it and they do. Then he is satisfied, for he knows

that, when he has them intoxicated with this wine, they will bow to the


In the records of the Book of Daniel, only four young men are shown to

have resisted the wine of Babylon. No doubt, many a Jew argued that this

was but a small matter, that expediency insisted that they give some ground

to the king to lead him to respect their spirit of co-operation, so that when

the big tests came, such as the call to worship a Babylonian image, the king

would grant their request to be exempted. On the basis of that expediency

so pleasing to the flesh, they ate and drank of the things offered to idols, not

realizing that thereby they aligned themselves fully on the side of the great


One concession led to another. Each compromise was followed by a

further departure from strict rectitude. A few short years passed and the

king called the world to the foot of the image. "Forming this great image,

Nebuchadnezzar commanded that it should receive universal homage from

all, both great and small, high and low, rich and poor." S.D.A. Bible

Commentary 4:1169.

On that day then, when the glittering golden image towered above the

plain, there were many Jews among the hosts from every nation, kindred,

tongue, and people. But the only ones in that vast multitude who did not

bow to the image were those who had refused to partake of the wine of

Babylon earlier, together with any who, like Daniel, were not present at the


What is the message of this to us today?






It is this.

As surely as we drink of the wine of Babylon today, then just so surely will we bow to the image tomorrow.  This is the plain and irrefutable testimony of the Holy Scriptures, the lesson designed for our admonition in the story of the image of old.

What, then, is the present destiny of the movement known as the Seventh-day Adventist Church organization?

The witness of the history as recorded in the Movement of Destiny is that she has drunk deeply of the wine of Babylon,  numbers herself and is numbered by Babylon as being part of the body of antichrist.

Therefore, as surely as this is so, then just so surely will she bow before the image when it towers again above the world in the very near future. This is her destiny. This is where she is going and nothing short of a total confession with all that that involves, will save her from it.

As terrible a betrayal of sacred trusts as that will be, bowing to the image is not the final destination. It is but a step towards that. That ultimate is contained in the warning of the third angel's message.

"If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand,

"The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of His indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:

"And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and

they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and

whosoever receiveth the mark of his name." Revelation 14:9-11.

That is the end for all such. Beyond it is nothing—cold, dark, and eternal nothing.

There is not one person — no matter if he has strayed from the path of

God's righteousness—who needs to come to this end. There is still time to

repent and turn again. But it is an individual matter. Anyone who waits for

the church at large to be converted and to turn again, will wait in vain and

perish with the church. Dash Babylon's wine glass from your lips, unfurl the

banner of truth for all to see, and take your stand with those who have

already done that.

God is never without the faithful few who stand true to Him in witness

to His power and His truth. They are little-known, obscure people as were

Daniel and his three companions, but they are His chosen and faithful ones


During those very years when the conversations were taking place

between the Adventist and evangelical Protestant leaders, and while the

masses of Adventists blindly followed their leaders, there was a nucleus of

faithful souls who would not go along with this betrayal of sacred trusts.

They are the Daniels, Hananiahs, Mishaels, and Azariahs of this day. They

are scattered throughout the world. They are the ones who believe and

hold the third angel's message in the verity in which Waggoner and Jones

presented it in 1888 and thereafter. They are the ones through whom the

Lord will finish His work.” Fred T. Wright, Destiny of a Movement, pp. 165-218.