Leading Evangelical Journal Decides the Adventist Movement is Too Big to Ignore
By AT News Team, Jan. 10, 2014: It is the Christian magazine with the largest circulation in the United States, but Christianity Today (CT) has published almost nothing about the Seventh-day Adventist denomination in recent decades. The January-February issue of the journal broke its silence with “The Season of Adventists,” page 18.
The article acknowledged that the Adventist faith has become “the fifth-largest Christian communion worldwide, after Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy, Anglicanism and the Assemblies of God.” It reported the rapid growth of the Adventist movement. “In 2014, for the 10th year in a row, more than 1 million people became Adventists, hitting a record 18.1 million members.”
It quoted Pastor Ted Wilson, president of the Adventist denomination, about the fear that the movement may be too successful and in danger of losing its “distinctive biblical truths.” It also quoted an independent ministry with the same concerns and stated that Wilson listed “people moving ‘independently’ from the main church” as one of the “ways that Satan is attacking Adventism.”
The reporter evidently interviewed Wilson as well as had access to the transcript of his sermon in October during the annual meeting of the denomination’s General Conference (GC) executive committee. Other concerns that Wilson shared with CT included Adventists who identify with the larger Christian community, “cheap grace,” making it easier to join the Adventist faith, and “advancing Pentecostal worship styles.”
The article also quoted David Neff, the recently retired editor of CT, who was raised in the Adventist denomination and served as an Adventist pastor until the early 1980s when he was hired as an editor by Inter Varsity Christian Fellowship, the Evangelical campus ministry. The report also attributed tension between the GC and the denomination’s North American Division (NAD) to similar issues.
“Many NAD members are seeking more dialogue with mainstream evangelicals,” the article stated. “The NAD has also overwhelmingly approved women’s ordination, despite a global denominational ban.”
” It is the Christian magazine with the largest circulation in the United States, but Christianity Today (CT) has published almost nothing about the Seventh-day Adventist denomination in recent decades.”
Whoever wrote this is might benefit from an introduction to the use of, for example, the Google search engine or a similar service.
“Almost nothing about the Seventh-day Adventist denomination in recent decades”? Really? Here are some examples which challenge that assertion, although some links may be behind the magazine’s paywall, meaning the full text is not available free of charge:
— In April 1999 (almost 16 years ago and therefore still within the “recent decades” timeframe, CT Published an article on the resignation of Elder Robert Folkenberg as General Conference president and the election of Elder Jan Paulsen as his successor. You can find it online here: http://bit.ly/17tZeDr.
— In July 2000, CT included a detailed report on the Toronto General Conference session, including a resolution to “to intensify efforts to inform all church members, especially young members, about the gift of prophecy through the ministry of Ellen G. White.” http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2000/september4/25.41.html
— In July 2002, the magazine published a news report about a suit involving religious conscience rights and quoting Seventh-day Adventist religious liberty advocate Alan J. Reinach. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2002/july8/9.13.html
— In October 2003, CT featured a lengthy interview with Pastor Barry C. Black, Jr., (Radm., USN, Ret.) on his role as the first African-American and first Seventh-day Adventist to be Senate Chaplain. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2003/october/14.26.html
— February 2005, CT reported on the court martial and sentence of Joel D. Klimkewicz, who became a Seventh-day Adventist and a conscientious objector while serving in the U.S. Marine Corps. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2005/march/7.20.html
— In April 2010, LaVonne Neff, who was raised Seventh-day Adventist, penned a balanced and gracious review of the film, “The Adventists.” http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2010/aprilweb-only/adventistadvantage.html
— In September 2011, Seventh-day Adventist lay preacher DeVon Franklin was featured in a Q&A by writer Mark Moring. http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2011/september/whos-next-devon-franklin.html
— In November 2012, new Adventist Angus T. Jones was interviewed about his faith: http://bit.ly/17u3AL1
And in December 2013, CT’s website featured a report on Seventh-day Adventist church retention, with a photo of one Monte Sahlin, who I believe is connected with the Atoday foundation. http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2013/december/seventh-day-adventists-assess-why-1-in-3-members-leave-sda.html
“Almost nothing” indeed! 😉
“The NAD has also overwhelmingly approved women’s ordination, despite a global denominational ban.”
Which proves the NAD has abandon the bible. So what else is new?
NAD has to acknowledge a lot of opposition to women’s ordination is internal. NAD leadership isn’t exactly reflective of NAD membership.
“NAD leadership isn’t exactly reflective of NAD membership.”
I wonder to what degree the membership is reflective of NAD. Do we have any indications or stats? I do know a number of members have to me they do not approve of Jackson’s leadership.
Maranatha
No, Bill. It proves no such thing. I consider myself a fundamental Bible believer and devoted Christian, and I was once on the side of being very much against WO, but since that time my thinking has changed, and I’ll explain why.
One of the important measuring sticks that ordination committees use concerns the fruit of a candidate’s ministry, whether it is evident that the Holy Spirit has empowered them for preaching, soul-winning, etc., all the gifts necessary for service. And of course, their conduct in their homes and in the community, and their devotion to God, are likewise important considerations. Then when ordination follows it is just the church giving recognition to a work that has already been done by the Holy Spirit.
Notwithstanding that some have abused their powers (in my humble opinion) by going ahead of the world body’s vote, and others were motivated by a feminist agenda, when a woman obviously demonstrates in her life that the Holy Spirit has empowered her, who am I to deny that she is qualified?
In actuality, we have been “ordaining” women and men teachers and others for years! We just play a tricky game and call it “commissioning.” But it’s really all the same–the church is giving official recognition to a work of the Holy Spirit in that person’s life.
No, Bill. In your opinion, the NAD has NOT abandoned the Bible, but only according to your particular way of interpreting the Scriptures.
Jim Hoffer-
In my view you are considerably off track.Just because a woman believes God is calling her maybe she is called to be a Bible Worker. Has that become too humble a position for aspiring females?
And it definitely is the feminist movement that has invaded the SDA church and trapped it into making WO an agenda item in the 2015 GC when we should be using that energy on spreading the gospel and saving our secondary schools from extinction.
Finally, yes, NAD has shown its true colors by rebelling against higher authority.
Maranatha
I couldn’t agree more Jim! Thanks for such a clear summary!
I couldn’t agree more Jim. Thanks for such a clear summary!
I wonder what advice Ellen White might have given if she was alive and knew of the opportunity to bring our church into the limelight. Might she have given some of the following guidelines:
1. “Of all professing Christians, Seventh-day Adventists should be foremost in uplifting Christ before the world” (Gospel Workers, p. 156).
2. “In improving these opportunities, remember the words of the Saviour, ‘Be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.’ Do not arouse the malignity of the enemy by making denunciatory speeches… In word and deed be wise unto salvation, representing Christ to all with whom you come in contact. Let all see that your feet are shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace, and good will to men. Wonderful are the results we shall see if we enter into the work imbued with the Spirit of Christ.” (Evangelism, p. 564).
3. “We should not, upon entering a place, build up unnecessary barriers between us and other denominations, especially the Catholics, so that they shall think we are their avowed enemies….From that which God has shown me, a great number will be saved from among the Catholics” (Evangelism, p. 574).
4. Let the world know what we believe the heart of the three angels’ message is – “Several have written to me, inquiring if the message of justification by faith is the third angel’s message, and I have answered, ‘It is the third angel’s message in verity'” (Selected Messages, I, p 372)
5. Help the public to see that the heart of our message is found in life in Christ. “The gates of eternal life are thrown open to all who believe on Jesus Christ. All believers who pass through a natural death, have, through eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the Son of God, eternal life in them, which is the life of Jesus Christ. In dying, Jesus has made it impossible for those who believe on Him to die eternally” (E G White, SDA Bible Commentary, 7A, p. 926).
6. “Hanging upon the cross Christ was the gospel. Now we have a message, ‘Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world.’ Will not our church members keep their eyes fixed on a crucified and risen Saviour, in whom their hopes of eternal life are centered? This is our message, our argument, our doctrine, our warning to the impenitent, our encouragement for the sorrowing, the hope for every believer. If we can awaken an interest in men’s minds that will cause them to fix their eyes on Christ, we may step aside, and ask them only to continue to fix their eyes upon the Lamb of God” (E G White, SDA Commentary, 7A, p 1113).
In all of our witnessing let us pray that we will be a part of that final revelation of the character of God [His love] in the closing of the gospel work as the earth is lightened with the glory of God.
Very well stated.
I wish you would have spoken to the CT reporters. Your message is right to the heart of who we are and should be. Thank-you!
More than curious, I subscriber online so I could read the full story.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2015/januaryfebruary/season-of-adventists-can-ben-carson-church-stay-separatist.html?start=1
This is not a feature story, but appears in the “News” section. And there are 113 entries when searching ‘seventh-day adventist’ on the website dating back to November 1994. This is roughly an entry every other month since then.
The core news component is attributed to Elder Ted Wilson, as the reporter explains:
“But even as Adventist schools and hospitals spread, president Ted N. C. Wilson is concerned about assimilation.
“Don’t be tempted by the Devil to blend in with the crowd or be ‘politically correct,’ ” Wilson said during his annual sermon in October. “Don’t proclaim a ‘generic’ Christianity or a ‘cheap-grace Christ,’ which does not point to the distinctive biblical truths to be declared worldwide” by Adventists (who regard themselves as God’s faithful remnant).
Wilson listed ways that Satan is attacking Adventism, including attempts to make it easier to join; advancing Pentecostal worship styles; and people moving “independently” from the main church.”
Being a thoroughly Evangelical magazine, the reporter also addressed Seventh-day Adventist and Evangelicalism.
“Wilson’s speeches highlight the separatist values of the 150-year-old denomination. Its belief that God began judging Christians in 1844 and its reverence for Ellen G. White’s teachings have led to a rocky relationship with evangelicals. Adventists explored joining the World Evangelical Alliance in 2007, but the groups could only agree “to cooperate, where advisable, in areas of shared interest.””
What troubles me is not so much an interest in remaining Seventh-day Adventist, but rather the idea that Elder Wilson seems to have that there is a ‘generic’ Christianity.
There can be no edge-case Christianity, but there certainly can be a more revolutionary Christianity. Seventh-day Adventist teachings are regretfully more edge-case than revolutionary. The Three Angels Message is potentially revolutionary, though it remains anchored in an ecclesiastical back-water debate rather than embracing the whole-world revolution the Fist Angel proclaims.
Then, again, the Three Angels Message is proclaimed by angels, not a church. Indeed, the Three Angels message is not a message about a church, but about the Gospel. And there is nothing generic about the Gospel. The proclamation of the Gospel destroys Babylon’s power crafted by an adulterated Gospel that claims humans are redeemed by a combination of their own efforts described by Babylon plus Jesus’ sacrifice. And those struggling to contribute their own efforts are described by the Third Angel as trudging along under a hail of burning limestone, while the Saints rest peacefully in the shade of God’s promises and embracing the faith of Jesus.
When will Seventh-day Adventists proclaim they…
“And those struggling to contribute their own efforts are described by the Third Angel as trudging along under a hail of burning limestone, while the Saints rest peacefully in the shade of God’s promises and embracing the faith of Jesus.”
And this is the “whole ball of wax” in the SDA church debate, isn’t it, Bill. Did God save man to moral accountability to participate in his own salvation or not? Paul seems to think so when he stated, “Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling…….”
Are there two factors in redemption or just one? Is there a divine factor and a human factor? If there is no human factor, then even faith is not relevant. You are saved whether you like it or not and you have no choice in the matter. And we must ask, “Is following the example of Jesus part of salvation?” Jesus did say, “Follow me”.
Well, we should all agree on one thing. This is the real issue and boils down to what does “righteousness by faith alone” mean as used by the historic Protestant context? And is there such a thing as “righteousness by faith and works”? Or, is it all one and the same thing as some claim?
Hi Bill,
I appreciate your engagement here as I noted elsewhere earlier.
Before further commenting, I would like to restate how I sense you understand salvation to your satisfaction.
I am drawn to your sense that how a person comes to be saved is not well understood or articulated by many Seventh-day Adventists. I also sense that we agree that this subject is rarely the topic of sermons.
I spent just this past week with eight friends who all were 16 years educated in Seventh-day Adventist schools and colleges forty years ago. We agreed that the teaching with regard to salvation deeply involves our engagement and our response to Jesus’ offer of salvation to those who are doing their best.
My sense is that you share the belief that salvation is not by grace or by faith but by responding to the call of Jesus, committing ourselves to by contemplating His life become every more like Him in thought and dead. And in such a state, where we fall short, we are judged by our heart rather than our deeds. Indeed, it is with a heart wholeheartedly responding to Jesus’ invitation that we pass through the judgment to eternal life, as promised in John 3:16.
Please further clarify your sense of salvation where you can put it into words with which you are more comfortable.
How would you in casual conversation explain salvation to one not acquainted with Christianity before setting about to explain your explanation using Biblical passages?
Again, thanks for joining in the conversation, Bill.
I don’t think salvation is really understood or taught well in any denomination. We came close once to hitting it on the head with Jones and Wagoner in 1888, when they promoted (what some contemporary Adventists are calling) “Universal Legal Justification” ULJ).
The ULJ holds, as I understand it, that we are all automatically and universally saved, unless we make a conscious decision to opt-out of salvation. It turns Augustine’s teachings about original sin on its head. It also finds a third way between Calvinistic predestination and Arminian free will. In many respects it has similarities to Karl Barth’s view of salvation.
Unfortunately alas, the GC scholars in Washington have condemned it, and by consequence condemned the 1888 message of Jones and Wagoner. If we were to embrace that message, then we would truly have something unique to tell the world about not merely how to get saved, but that we are saved.
Steve Ferguson,
As I have previously written, I do not believe in “Universal Legal Justification” because I do not believe in “Legal Justification”. I submit that “Legal Justification” is part of the “Cage of Doctrines” that Theologians have built for God.
As you are a lawyer by profession, this might not please you. As you are a scholar by avocation, I would urge you to study the book “The Lost Meaning of the Seventh Day” by Sigve K Tonstad. Dr Tonstad is a physician by profession and a scholar by avocation.
This book is on my Very Short List of Very Good Books for deep Christian thinkers.
Cheers!
You have got it right again in my opinion. It seems like the only reasonable and still biblical answer. It’s not universalism, because many or most will reject Christ. This can be done in many ways. The need for evangelism is still there for those who will reject Christ’s way of love. Remember all those mission stories of head hunters who embraced the love of Christ when they heard it and were converted? God is more wonderful than we can imagine.
Steve Ferguson,
My reply was to you and not Jim Hamstra where it appeared below.
I believe this message should be out there, but we will be called devisive as has already happened to those giving it.
As you can see by the responses below, Bill, that a clear understanding is not in the near future. As I have stated in other places, there is a divine factor and a human factor in salvation. The meritorious and legal requirements of the law have been fulfilled by Christ and no one can merit or earn heaven. This is the “whole ball of wax” in Paul’s emphasis where he contrasts Christ with the ceremonial law. The ceremonial law represented the legal aspects of redemption and the moral law tells us the moral imperatives necessary to complete the whole process.
While “Christ alone” is the correct way to explain how merit is imputed to a believer by way of a legal agreement and covenant. This means we must “marry” Christ and in this legal illustration, we are “in Him” and have a legal right to heaven. This is our title. But a fitness is also required or salvation is not complete. The sinner must accept Christ as Lord and Savior. That is, he must believe in the legal atonement and also submit to Christ’s authority in the relationship. And unless and until he agrees to this context of redemption, he is not redeemed from sin. This is the error of those who advocate “universal salvation” claiming all are already saved, we only need to remain saved. This is false and not biblical.
In fact, we are born lost and must accept Christ and until we do, we remain lost. Rom. 5 is very clear on this matter. “Ye must be born again” is not simply saying, “You are already saved, just stay that way.” Such an idea is convoluting the teaching of Paul totally outside his context and meaning. Neither is the 1888 message that some try to defend in this false context.
Only if and when we understand the legal and moral concepts of the law can we hope to understand and articulate salvation in its true biblical context. Even faith is a moral quality in man that earns nothing, but is still a moral requirement for salvation. Faith is not automatic. While faith is gendered by the gospel, it is not forced on anyone.
Hopefully I have stated the issue clearly enough so anyone can understand it. If you disagree with what I have stated, fine. But hopefully you understand how I have presented the issue. And it can be seen that “faith alone” only applies to the legal and meritorious aspects of salvation. Faith and works explains the moral imperative and the human factor.
No matter how you want dress up what you are saying works won’t get you into heaven. It is by faith alone. Works build faith because faith without works will die. And the works God wants us to do will reflect even dimly the love He as shown to us and that is why we do it. There isn’t anyone who can earn salvation by what we do. Following the letter of the law won’t get us into the kingdom and it doesn’t bring us into salvation in any stretch. We should be doing what Christ asks of us because of the love He shows us and in doing so we will see that love affect others and it builds our faith. We aren’t born lost but become lost because of our sinful nature. All need to accept Christ for who He is and allow the Spirit to lead us into truth. Also, your missing the entire point that faith alone saves you. Look simply to the thief on the cross. He knew he deserved death but it was his faith that saved him and not the works of his life. There is no such thing as righteousness by faith and works but if you don’t do the work God has given you then your faith will die out and your love will grow cold. I will agree with you that universal salvation is not correct either but we are held accountable for what we know and what the Spirit chooses to direct us to. It is only by rejecting God’s Spirit that we are truly not saved and that happens on an individual basis between Christ and the individual. Christ said that there were things the disciples couldn’t bear but the Spirit would make that clear over time. God never changes and if He worked that way back then He will still work the same way today.
You have just left out the great majority of all the people who have ever lived along with all children who die before the age of choice. That is not my God who is fair and more wonderful than we can imagine.
I believe in taking the Bible as a whole, and not select proof-texts. The Bible is all about Christ from beginning to end, even when His name is not used. He is there in symbol, metaphor, in biblical characters, at the creation, in revelation, etc.
His righteousness covers all who do not reject him. Many hear His voice through nature and the Holy Spirit speaking to them. Have you noticed that the Bible talks about names being in the Cook of Life and some being taken out. But it never says they were put in at conversion. I believe we are all born with our names in the Book of Life.
However, I do respect your belief in a narrower salvation. I do think more would accept Jesus if they knew His death was for them, and He had accepted them first from the foundation of the world.
Paul makes clear in his epistles that it is the faithfulness of Christ rather than the “faithfulness” of humans, that is decisive in our salvation. This is the whole point of his comments on the New Covenant, where he draws also from OT sources including Moses and Jeremiah.
Trying in any way to ascribe any effectiveness to human resolve or human efforts, even with Divine assistance, is to take us right back to mediaeval Roman Catholic theology.
Those who hang on Ellen’s every word should read Steps to Christ. Then read Christ’s Object Lessons. Then go to Desire of Ages for a deeper dive. Nowhere in any of these books does she claim that our own efforts add anything whatsoever to our salvation.
And that Third Angel in Revelation? Those who worship the Beast or the Image have NO REST because they have not accepted Christ’s Righteousness. Their false worship is based upon seeking to gain God’s favor or avert God’s wrath by their own efforts, including their worship, sacraments, charitable works or whatever else they may devise. This is the essence of Paganism.
Jim, I really appreciated your entire statement on the question of salvation. Your comment on the ‘faithfulness of Christ’ was significant. You wrote, “Paul makes clear in his epistles that it is the faithfulness of Christ rather than the faithfulness of humans, that is decisive in our salvation.”
I was impressed when at a GC sponsored Youth Convention held in Pretoria, South Africa in July 2012, I personally heard David Asscherick expound this very same thought in his evening addresses to the crowds. I wonder if he has put these powerful thoughts into written form?
A simple reading of Romans 6:23 reminds us that salvation is a gift – “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” The moment we want to pay for part of a gift it ceases to be a gift. We cannot earn a gift – but we can neglect it, or despise it, or give it away.
“Paul makes clear in his epistles that it is the faithfulness of Christ rather than the “faithfulness” of humans, that is decisive in our salvation. This is the whole point of his comments on the New Covenant, where he draws also from OT sources including Moses and Jeremiah.
Trying in any way to ascribe any effectiveness to human resolve or human efforts, even with Divine assistance, is to take us right back to mediaeval Roman Catholic theology.”
If this is true, then of course the historic SDA doctrine of the Investigative judgment is totally bogus. The purpose of this final judgment is to detemine the “decisive factor” of whether a person is converted and fit for heaven. And to claim the sole decisive factor is Christ alone, is simply false doctrine. As I have clearly stated, there are two factors, not just one. The sinner must believe and respond by repentance and obedience to what Christ has done, or he is simply not saved. And to negate the human factor is simply antinomianism in its most obvious application.
Several months ago I wrote a paper entitled “The Bible Butchers in Adventism” and Jim and his presentation is so classic of this reality. To deny the faith of the believer plays any part in salvation is certainly not historic Protestant. Protestantism has alway claimed that the faith of the believer is instrumental in salvation. No one is saved without faith. Neither is it solely the faith of Christ as some would claim. If people don’t see what this is about, they simply don’t reason clearly nor apparently read the bible. To negate and destory the moral accountability of man to believe, repent, and obey is hyper-Calvinism.
God saves us to responsible freedom, not irresponsible freedom as many advocate. Jesus said, “A little leaven, leaveneth the whole lump.” This means even a little false doctrine will destroy the Christian faith and more than a little false doctrine is embraced and advocated by some in the church today.
Bill, Your frequent appeal to historic Protestantism indicates that you have a thorough grasp of the actual theological issues with which the Reformers wrestled.
In your opinion, which article of the Augsburg Confession best addresses issues SDA are concerned about?
Do you believe that the general thrust of “Christian Liberty” is compatible with “Steps to Christ”? Which volume do you think best sets forth the doctrine of justification by faith.
Do you agree that the word “alone” is required by the context of Romans 3:28 as Luther argued in “On Translating”?
I’ve wondered about these things myself but don’t know many people with the height, breadth, width, and depth of “historic Protestant” knowledge you possess.
You are confusing justification with sanctification. We are justified (saved) by our belief and trust in Christ and His promises to us and that alone is what saves us. It is what wipes out our sins so they don’t exist. Sanctification (which has nothing to do with salvation) is the day to day walk with Christ where we work with God to bring ourselves closer to Him. Everything boils down to who do you trust and love. Do you trust and love Christ and accept Him. If so then He will send His Spirit into your heart and work with you to gain a closer walk with Him and you’ll want that because of the love He as shown you. What you are proposing is completely salvation by works and salvation can’t be obtained by anything we do expect our faith and trust we put in God. That is how the thief on the cross was saved. He wasn’t saved by works but by his faith in Christ. You simply can’t earn your way into heaven. Also, just a little food for thought. What we are called to do because of the investigative judgment isn’t anything different from what Paul spoke of in Romans. We are to work on our sinful nature daily and this isn’t a new teaching just like he describes there. The only thing the investigative judgment let’s us know is that we should be all the more diligent in doing this because of what is going on right now with Christ.
This is a response to righteousness by faith and works that Bill Sorensen posted. We aren’t saved by works but works build faith and as Adventists I firmly believe we are missing this point and we need to get back to some fundamental principles taught by Christ Himself when it comes to evangelism. We have been caught in a trap in that we have become intellectual followers of God but we are forgetting the heart of His message that everything we do we need to be doing it out of love. So often we only look to evangelistic seminars to bring people into the church but we need at the local church level be feeding the hungry, providing clothing to those who need it and finding ways to comfort those in the community who have losses. We do an adequate job of taking care of our members but Christ said to not just take care of friends and family but everyone and we tend to miss that point. My wife and I just started a ministry at our church with feeding and clothing the homeless in our area by taking the food and clothing to them on the streets and the most unexpected thing is occurring. Even though this is being run directly under our Church the next time we go out we will have as many non-Adventist joining us as we have Adventists. Those who know Christ will come to us much quicker if we promote not just the truth but also show the love that Christ commanded us to show in scripture. It is a better Evangelistic tool than any seminar we put together and I believe that if we truly want to hasten Christ’s return we should focus more on spreading His love and letting the Spirit present opportunities for us to share the truth we know. This is what the early Church did in Acts and I believe we need to get back to.
Only those who believe that God is love will be saved.
If that’s universal salvation, prove why it’s not. He is ready to save all; but some have never known him (perhaps half the world) so have not rejected who they could not know.
Why does John write that there were be innumerable numbers on the sea of glass? Heaven is big enough for all.
Hansen posted…..
“Bill, Your frequent appeal to historic Protestantism indicates that you have a thorough grasp of the actual theological issues with which the Reformers wrestled.
In your opinion, which article of the Augsburg Confession best addresses issues SDA are concerned about?
Do you believe that the general thrust of “Christian Liberty” is compatible with “Steps to Christ”? Which volume do you think best sets forth the doctrine of justification by faith.
Do you agree that the word “alone” is required by the context of Romans 3:28 as Luther argued in “On Translating”?
I’ve wondered about these things myself but don’t know many people with the height, breadth, width, and depth of “historic Protestant” knowledge you possess.”
First let me state that Adventism was based on a 3rd use of the law emphasis that the Reformers had articulated to affirm their faith in the necessity to obey the law. Rome had accused them of “forbidding good works”. But good works are only forbiden as a means to earn and/or merit heaven. As I stated before, there is a legal requirement for salvation that includes merit. There is also a moral requirement for heaven called a “fitness”.
Our fitness is not our legal right to heaven, nor can the legal work of Christ to earn our salvation be our fitness. Paul deals with the legal components of salvation precisely because the Jews were rejecting Christ and advocating the ceremonial law, which law typifies the legal and meritorious aspects of redemption.
When Paul states, “By the deeds of the law shall no flesh be justified” he is negating the ceremonial law in favor of Christ’s ministry in heaven. If you will simply insert the word “forgiveness and/or forgiven” in place of the word “justified” you will see what Paul means clearly. The issue is the basis of forgiveness of sin. And so “Christ alone” makes this atonement and earns heaven for humanity. Thus “faith alone” only refers to what Christ has done for us.
But, a fitness for heaven requires not only faith, but repentance and obedience to the law. Sanctification is never by “faith alone” or we have no moral accountability before God. Neither does Jesus get in us and keep the law for us as the spiritualistic mystics often claim in the SDA church today.
Melancthon formulated the Lutherean confession of faith and in fact, he was a far better theologian than Luther, and Luther knew it. Luther was often antinomian in his explanation of faith and even thought the book of James should not have been in the bible.
Simply put, Paul defends the legal aspects of salvation and James affirms the moral imperative. There are two components for salvation, God’s part, and the sinner’s response. And the sinner’s response is salvational as the moral imperative, even though it has no merit to earn the favor of God. As John says, “Blessed are they that do His commandments that they may have right to the tree of life…….” It is…
Bill, Maybe some SDA will rest easier knowing that a scholar of your capacity reigns over the field of “historic Protstantism.”
Well, Hansen, not many people will ever learn, because they don’t “listen”. So “few there be that find it.” And honestly, why would any one “listen” if they think they already know. This has always been the major problem as God tries to communicate Himself and His will to “religious” people who are convinced they “know” the way it is, even when they don’t.
No doubt more non-SDA’s will find the truth who are outside Adventism, just as more Gentiles got the picture than the Jews.
Thanks, Bill. Perhaps you can recommend some good resources on Protestant historical theology that have enriched your experience, books that you yourself have studied?
Bill and Hansen and Mike and Jim and Eric and friends,
Even though this article is about the church beyond its confines, we are wrestling away here within our confines with abstractions such as justification, sanctification, law, works, grace, belief, choice and, well, with the whole of Scripture itself.
This wrestling is worthy of note I’m thinking, and is perhaps more an artifact of these comments being hosted by Adventist Today.
This wrestling is associated with whether we commonly here sense, indeed ought to commonly sense that God has designated Scripture as the determinant channel for humans to discover God’s will with regard to us individually and collectively as well as past, present and future.
And however we might come to sense that God has designated Scripture as such, might we do well to consider whether Scripture itself validates such a belief?
Indeed, is it not incumbent on us to check whether God infiltrates Scripture with correctives with regard to our possibly misconsidering Scripture as the determinant channel for us to know God’s will?
So, what do the reporters authoring Scripture have to say about communication channels between God and each of us?
To use a metaphor, is picturing God’s will something other than assembling a jigsaw puzzle of sorts, all the pieces of which are contained in a box labeled Scripture?
And if so, just how is the authenticity of our picture of God to be perceived?
Bill Sorensen,
I think that you’ve/we’ve misunderstood, and are misrepresenting, the ‘Investigative Judgment’—or maybe our perception of it IS bogus.
Isn’t it Christ’s righteousness that qualifies us for heaven, and not our “filthy” righteousness? Any IJ determines who has retained Christ as their Advocate and who has not. If Christ is our Advocate and Judge, we cannot lose and are therefore justified.
Isn’t sanctification a faith process by which the Holy Spirit renews our minds into the likeness of the mind of Christ; so that His will is our will—so effectively He is doing the obeying?
Thanks again, Bill
I’m right there with you regarding Sanctification. By beholding Jesus Christ as God’s guarantee that His love for you and for me is eternal, and thus we will not perish but will live forever, we are changed.
As for our qualification for Heaven I rather sense that the Judgment is the validation that God loves us, as he declares, because the Judgment guarantees to the Universe that not one of us who is saved deserves to be, which proves God’s love is universal rather than arbitrary, and at the same time His law is descriptive rather than prescriptive.
Stephen asks…..
“Isn’t sanctification a faith process by which the Holy Spirit renews our minds into the likeness of the mind of Christ; so that His will is our will—so effectively He is doing the obeying?”
The simple answer is no. Jesus, nor the Holy Spirit gets in you and does the obeying.
Bill Garber, I have long appreciated the cheerful attitude you bring to these discussions. The appeals to “historic Protestantism,” “Jones and Waggoner,” “EGW” are of little value as long as Adventists remain Biblically illiterate.
Even appeals to Scripture, interpreted in the strictures of previously held opinions, are useless. Your appeal to look “beyond” Scripture resonates with me.
I recently received a death threat, well deserved, from local people who had a legitimate issue with me. I was walking at night in the countryside, thinking about how David [I’m no king] was driven from his kingdom. It takes on an unfortunate realism when you are faced with losing everything. I had counseled with friends and after hearing the situation, one advised me to flee, he other– not to worry. Above me, heaven seemed as an eternal abyss. Suddenly a lady appeared on her ebike, stopped, and said to me, “Jesus loves you.”
I know there are Christians around but that had never happened before. Suddenly, the darkness above didn’t seem as black as before. The next morning, I rediscovered God’s wonderful promise to Abraham, “Don’t be afraid, I am your shield…” The HS quickened that verse in my heart and suddenly I was confident that God would see me through. He did.
It wasn’t a complex theological construct I needed, just the simple reassurance of God’s watch care over me, a sinner.
While we are 18 million and growing more then half of those names are in lukewarm condition. Numbers don’t mean a thing. God looks upon the heart, not at the heart of numbers. God looks for quality not quantity
TW’s statements do not make SDA’s sound user friendly. Jesus should be the main attraction.
I was born into an Adventist home. I grew up in the church. Whenever the doors were open, I was there. I attended SDA schools through college. I spent a lot of time debating finer points of distinctive doctrines with non-Adventists. I’m still an Adventist member, but a couple of years ago it dawned upon me that I had been subscribing to a set of doctrines rather than subscribing to a Savior. I knew all about Him, but I was not in love with Him.
Subconsciously, I used to think I had to be a “good Adventist” to be saved, and Jesus would “make up the difference” if I fell short. It was mostly me, and a little bit Jesus. Now I understand that it is all Jesus. Zero me. 100% Christ. I came unto Him laboring and heavy-laden, and He gave me rest. His yoke is easy, and His burden is light. (Matt. 11:28-30)
I began to realize that the value of our message is not found in being “distinctive” or separate from other denominations or focusing on 28 doctrines, but rather in seeking to know God, accept His love and grace, and love Him with all my heart, mind, and soul–and love my neighbor as myself.
I believe that we have the cart before the horse. We hold evangelistic crusades to persuade people to believe our list of 28 doctrines–and some analytical technical/legalistic minds are attracted to these truths and accept them. But we have never figured out how to teach people to love God, to fall in love with Jesus.
Half of the converts slink out the back door within a few months, and the other half become analytical knowledge-oriented members who are argumentative and legalistic like the teachers of the law that Jesus denounced. Then we wonder why few of them enjoy the love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control mentioned in Galatians 5:22-23 as fruits of the Spirit (and why some authors accuse us of being a cult).
Not everyone who accepts the doctrines will enter the kingdom of heaven. Many will say to Jesus on that day, “Lord, Lord, did we not subscribe to the 28 Fundamental Beliefs?” But He will tell them, “I never knew you.” (Matt. 7:21-23)
The thief on the cross didn’t know the finer points of the 2,300 days, but he knew Jesus. And that thief will be with Jesus in Paradise.
Do we know Him? Or will He say He never knew us? We can debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin, but we can’t explain how to love God and bask in His grace and mercy. I think we have put too much emphasis on being distinctive and not enough emphasis on knowing God and being in love with Him.
I think the major issue in the ordination of women is whether the church has any authrity or not. Are we headed for congregationalism?? is it right for me to exercise my own opinion in deciding church policy just because I feel that My intelectual and educatonal status places me in an approved position?
Ellen G. White’s writings are far more practical, edifying, and inspiring than a thousands of Billy Graham’s sermons and any theologians who wrote only from theories. Cursed is a church that has no prophet. We can be sure that a church is right when it’s leaders had direct access to God. I distrust a church that has no prophetic gifts. Theology without “the spirit of prophecy” is nothing but theories at its best. But even without the writings of EGW, the SDA church stands logically Biblical compared to the large goyish mass of Evangelicals who goes to church on Sundays without God’s command or Without the permission of Christ nor His apostles.
Do you really suppose that Christianity originated from gentile minds? Then why are you eating dirty foods and go to church on Sunday? God does not make any covenant with gentiles. Under the New covenant, God’s laws are to be written in the heart. The same laws that were written by His own fingers on the tablets at Sinai. The evangelicals who keep Sunday cannot be included in those who are under the New Covenant becoz they don’t have the laws written in their hearts. They resist the Sabbath commandment, as if God is not their creator. Their god is Mithra or Baal, the sun gods.