Bible Topics
Main Menu
Submenu
|
Original Documents
|
| 1888 to 1988 Re-Examined, Chapters 14 and 15 |
You may obtain your own copy of 1888 - 1988 Reexamined, Revised & Updated by writing to `The 1888 Message Study Committee, 2934 Sherbrook Dr., Uniontown, OH 44685; as long as supplies last. The 1888 manuscript in its original form was prepared in 1950 for the attention of the General Conference (GC) Committee. It was an appeal to "feed the flock of God" with the nutritive elements of the 1888 message. Since then, the Adventist conscience was wrestled with the conviction that there is widespread spiritual famine. The gospel commission is not yet finished, notwithstanding greater programs, activities, and promotions each passing year. Only a few days after the 1888 session closed, on November 23 Ellen White spoke at the Potterville, Michigan, state meeting [10] Her three sermons are recorded in the Review and Herald. In her sermon of November 24 she makes reference six times to the Jews, drawing comparisons with us. "In the time of the Saviour, the Jews had so covered over the precious jewels of truth with the rubbish of tradition and fable, that it was impossible to distinguish the true from the false. The Saviour came to clear away the rubbish of superstition and long-cherished errors, and to set the jewels of God's word in the frame-work of truth. What would the Saviour do if he should come to us now as he did to the Jews? He would have to do a similar work in clearing away the rubbish of tradition and ceremony. The Jews were greatly disturbed when he did this work. They had lost sight of the original truth of God, but Christ brought it again to view. It is our work to free the precious truths of God from superstition and error. What a work is committed to us in the gospel! An angel's pen could not portray all the glory of the revealed plan of redemption. The Bible tells how Christ bore our sins, and carried our sorrows. Here is revealed how mercy and truth have met together at the cross of Calvary, how righteousness and peace have kissed each other, how the righteousness of Christ may be imparted to fallen man. There infinite wisdom, infinite justice, infinite mercy, and infinite love were displayed. Depths, heights, lengths, and breadths of love and wisdom, all passing knowledge, are made known in the plan of salvation." {RH, June 4, 1889 par. 12} "When the scribes and Pharisees saw that Christ did not reverence their forms and traditions, they accused him of contempt for the law and the prophets. But Christ did not show the least contempt for the old truths. Because he did not work in the same narrow forms that they did, they said, "He is come to destroy the law." But there fell upon their astonished ears the words of Christ, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in nowise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." Christ was the originator of the law; and the blindness of the Pharisees is an illustration of how people who claim great light and knowledge can misunderstand and misrepresent the work of God. Glorious truths have been buried out of sight, and have been made lusterless and unattractive by error and superstition. Jesus reveals the light of God, and brings forth the beautiful radiance of the truth in all its divine glory. The minds of the honest are filled with admiration. Their hearts are attracted in holy affections toward him who brought forth the jewels of truth and displayed them to their understanding." {RH, June 4, 1889 par. 13} The next week's article, June 11, again five times compared us to the Jews, and referred over twenty times to the contemporary unbelief of the "ministering brethren": "Christ assumed humanity in order that he might reach mankind where they were. He came and worked in the form of man for the sake of rescuing a fallen race. He left us an example of what tenderness, what kindness, what love should be manifested in efforts to save souls from ruin. We are to imitate Christ. The people should be able to discern the Spirit of Christ in his followers; and when the Spirit of God works with your efforts, you will not work in vain. The people will see that God works in you, and they will be moved by his Spirit to accept the truths that you present before them. The preacher should do something more than simply to please the taste, and convince the intellect. His words should reach the hearts of his hearers. And when men and women are led to accept the truth through the instrumentality of man, they should not give honor to the man, but they should realize that his efforts have been successful because divine power has accompanied his work, and give the glory to God. It is the truth that he has presented to them that should receive their acceptance and favor. There are many who place themselves in a similar position to that of the Jews in the time of Christ, and they will not hear the word of truth, because their minds are filled with prejudice; but those who refuse heaven's light will be rejected of God just as his ancient people were when they refused to receive the teachings of Christ. God is no respecter of persons. He sent his truth to all, and he expects men to receive it, and to diffuse its light to others. This is the work that God would have us do." {RH, June 11, 1889 par. 2} "Let us connect with Christ, and then we shall have a power that the world cannot give, or take away. Said the apostle, speaking of the gospel, "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." God would make known to his saints what is the glory of the mystery of Christ. There are depths and heights of unsearchable riches in the truth of God. Why should ministers make the truth powerless before the people because they themselves lack spiritual life and devotion, because they are not connected with God? Are you not commanded to warn every man, and teach every man in all wisdom? Are you sharpening your powers, brethren, by bringing them in contact with difficult problems in the word of God? Says the apostle, "The wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace." When the ministers receive wisdom from above, the power of God will accompany their efforts. Why should we not present the truth in such a way that it may wield its divine influence upon the people? Why do you bring yourself with your coldness between the people and the truth, and so keep the truth from doing its work upon their hearts? Why do you go to the people with your heart as cold as an iron wedge, and expect to win souls to Christ? You want your lips touched with the living coal from off the heavenly altar. The influence of the truth is elevating and ennobling. The divine must combine with the human if you would make your way amid the moral darkness and the spiritual stagnation of the world. Let every one go to work. Search the Scriptures, plead as did Moses, "If thy presence go not with me, carry us not up hence." When the request of Moses was granted, did he settle down in content, and seek no further blessing?--No. He still pleaded with God until his faith reached the point where he could say, "I beseech thee, show me thy glory." Do you think Moses was presumptuous, and should have been rebuked? God did not rebuke him. The feet of Moses were upon hallowed ground, and when he pleaded with God for a view of his glory, the Lord said, "I will make all my goodness pass before thee, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. And he said, Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me, and live. And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: and it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a cleft of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by." {RH, June 11, 1889 par. 3} "Jesus has given us instruction as to what we should do. He says, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you." What do these words mean? They mean that our lives must be fashioned after the pattern of Christ's life. We must reach perfection of character, or we can never inherit the kingdom of heaven. There is a work for each one of us to do in God's great moral vineyard. Christ has given to every man his work. How many become so interested in the work of some other person, that they neglect their own work altogether! You are to do your work. God does not expect that the man with one talent, will do as much as the man who has five talents. Let every soul see to it that his work is done to the very best of his ability. If you grow fearful in doing the Lord's work, just stop where you are, and ask God to show you his goodness, for you have lost sight of his mercy and faithfulness. You have become separated from Christ. You have gone so far away from him, that you can scarcely hear the sound of his voice, and cannot distinguish the words of comfort that come from his lips." {RH, June 11, 1889 par. 8} Again speaking in an 1888 context, she said: "We want to understand the time in which we live. We do not half understand it. We do not half take it in. My heart trembles in me when I think of what a foe we have to meet, and how poorly we are prepared to meet him. The trials of the children of Israel, and their attitude just before the first coming of Christ, have been presented before me again and again to illustrate the position of the people of God in their experience before the second coming of Christ. How the enemy sought every occasion to take control of the minds of the Jews, and today he is seeking to blind the minds of God's servants, that they may not be able to discern the precious truth." {RH, February 18, 1890 par. 1} "I want you to know, brethren, that while you are here at this meeting I am praying for you. As I am writing on the "Life of Christ," I lift up my heart in prayer to God that light may come to his people. As I see something of the loveliness of Christ, my heart ascends to God, "O, let this glory be revealed to thy servants! Let prejudice and unbelief vanish from their hearts." Every line I trace about the condition of the people in the time of Christ, about their attitude toward the Light of the world, in which I see danger that we shall take the same position, I offer up a prayer to God: "O let not this be the condition of thy people. Forbid that thy people shall make this mistake. Increase their faith." And as I pray and work, the peace of God comes flowing back to my heart. We shall have to meet unbelief in every form in the world, but it is when we meet unbelief in those who should be leaders of the people, that our souls are wounded. This is that which grieves us, and that which grieves the Spirit of God." {RH, March 4, 1890 par. 9} A prophet's deep discernment, unshared by almost all of her contemporaries, perceived how the end result of 1888 was equivalent to a recrucifixion of Christ. The Jews maintain that they never crucified the Messiah, and we find it hard to realize the extent of what we did: "On many occasions the Holy Spirit did work; but those who resisted the Spirit of God at Minneapolis were waiting for a chance to travel over the same ground again, because their spirit was the same. Afterward, when they had evidence heaped upon evidence, some were convicted; but those who were not softened and subdued by the Holy Spirit's working, put their own interpretation upon every manifestation of the grace of God, and they have lost much. They declared in their heart and soul and words that this manifestation of the Holy Spirit was fanaticism and delusion. They stood like a rock; the waves of mercy were flowing upon and around them, but were beaten back by their hard and wicked hearts, which resisted the Holy Spirit's working. Had this been received, it would have made them wise unto salvation,-- holier men, prepared to do the work of God with sanctified ability. But all the universe of heaven witnessed the disgraceful treatment of Jesus Christ, represented by the Holy Spirit. Had Christ been before them, they would have treated him in a manner similar to that in which the Jews treated Christ." {SpTA06 19.2, p. 19,20.} Confusion and perplexity arise in a recently published statement, "In 1888, the direction of the Adventist Church took an upward turn at the Minneapolis ministerial presession" [100] The Lord's messenger speaking 14 years after 1888, said the opposite: "I have been instructed that the terrible experience at the Minneapolis Conference is one of the saddest chapters in the history of the believers in present truth." [105] Her inspired appraisal is: "cruelty to the Holy Spirit," "disgraceful treatment of Jesus Christ," which "sometime . . . will be seen in its true bearing, with all the burden of woe that has resulted from it." [115] Perhaps that "sometime" is near. Ellen White's comparison with the Jews is not casual. It penetrates to the very heart of the plan of salvation. The denial of John 3:16 is implicit in our "insubordination" because resisting Christ is involved in it. When this is seen, there will come a repentance commensurate with the transgression. The difficulty is that the transgression has not yet been appreciated for its true nature. We have not yet seen ourselves as Heaven sees us. There is a new generation on the scene now (actually every 20 to 25 years), and no living church member can testify from experience in attending the 1888 session. Everything we can learn about it now must come from inspired written records. Since 1950 a concerted effort has been made to publish books that convey the idea that 1888 was a victory for the church. Thus several authoritative books totaling nearly 1500 pages attempt to establish that "we" accepted the 1888 message. Two were endorsed by GC presidents; a third was written by a vice-president. Their publication attests the deep interest that 1888 holds for the SdA conscience. The Holy Spirit has led through all these years, and truth will emerge triumphant over all confusion. The solution to our problems lies not in criticizing church leadership or weakening church organization; it lies in repentance and reconciliation with Christ within the church organization. We dare not deny or suppress truth; fully disclosed and understood by honest hearts, truth overcomes fanaticism, legalism, and a holier-than-thou spirit of criticism. It can lead only to a humble, Christlike repentance that will bring effective healing. We turn now to a brief overview of these developments. 1888 Re-examined (204 mimeographed pages) bore no author's names, had no title page and no date. Its intent was simple - to present evidence from inspired sources (600 Ellen White exhibits) that "we" took the wrong road in 1888, that the cause of God suffered a serious set-back, that the true progress of the cause requires that we accept that message and proclaim it to the world, and that denominational repentance is appropriate in view of our history and in response to Christ's appeal to Laodicea. The appeal was firmly, officially rejected: "We do not believe that [a denominational repentance] is according to God's plan and purpose." "You will not wish to press your rather critical views nor circulate them any further." [180] The GC position was that a denominational repentance is unnecessary and inappropriate in view of our large baptisms in the "double of our membership" program in the 1950's and our widespread denominational and institutional prosperity. The authors would not rebel against GC direction. They have always firmly supported the principle of church organization and order. But they could not conscientiously retract their basic convictions which they believed were based upon the inspired testimony of Ellen White. Therefore they appealed the matter to the next higher authority - the Lord Himself in the investigative judgment and to "the disposition of His providence." They went on with their missionary duties in Africa. [190] However, a copy of the manuscript somehow found its way outside the headquarters offices. While the authors were working as missionaries in Africa, various lay members and ministers in North America laboriously copied and reduplicated it. Without the concurrence of the authors, it was widely distributed on several continents. An epochal Bible Conference was held in the Sligo (Maryland) church September 1-13, 1952. The studies "represent the best thinking on the part of sincere, honest, earnest, devoted, loyal men," the leaders of the church, according to D.E. Rebok in the Introduction to the two-volume report, Our Firm Foundation (R&H, 1953, Vol. One, p.13). Near the conclusion of the conference, the GC president acknowledged the truth of the 1888 setback, and then made an astounding claim:
But the message of righteousness by faith given in the 1888 Conference has been repeated here. Practically every speaker from the first day onward has laid great stress upon this all-important doctrine, and there was no prearranged plan that he should do so. It was spontaneous on the part of the speakers. No doubt they were impelled by the Spirit of God to do so. Truly this one subject has, in this conference, "swallowed up every other."
And this great truth has been given here in this 1952 Bible Conference with far greater power than it was given in the 1888 Conference because those who have spoken here have had the advantage of much added light shining forth from hundreds of pronouncements on this subject in the writings of the Spirit of prophecy which those who spoke back there did not have. . . .
No longer will the question be, "What was the attitude of our workers and people toward the message of righteousness by faith that was given in 1888? What did they do about it?" He again emphasized this same claim in his closing remarks: "Brethren, let us stress in all our meetings with our workers the great importance of the message that came to the Minneapolis Conference in 1888 - the message that has been repeated here in these meetings by all the speakers at this conference." [205] This Bible Conference was held nearly forty years ago. All the speakers were said to be in full harmony on "the doctrine of righteousness by faith," and it was claimed that they preached the message more clearly and more powerfully than did the 1888 messengers in the beginning of the latter rain and the loud cry. If this is true, it follows that the 1952 messengers were a "far greater" manifestation of the latter rain and the loud cry of Revelation 18 than was the 1888 message. Further, the 1952 messages were fully accepted without opposition, either officially in the GC or in the world field. If what was tragically lacking in 1888 was so abundantly supplied in 1952, should not the earth have been lightened in that generation with the glory of the loud cry message? A similar acceptance of the 1888 message sixty years earlier would have prepared a people in that generation to finish the gospel commission. Did the blessing come in the 1952 generation? A careful study of the two-volume report discloses a problem. None of the speakers reproduced the unique motifs or essentials of the 1888 message. Edward Heppenstall's messages on the two covenants were refreshingly in harmony with the 1888 position, and several other speakers said nothing contrary to it. And there is no question that they were all "sincere, honest, earnest, devoted, loyal men," and each gave thoughtful presentations. But the problem is that most, if not all, gave evidence that they were sincerely uninformed of the actual content of the 1888 message. No one gave evidence that he had as yet given careful study to the original sources of that "most precious message," which of course were all out of print. No one apparently saw any clear difference between the 1888 message and the popular Protestant doctrine of "righteousness by faith." It is painfully evident that the 1888 messengers whom Ellen White endorsed were persona non grata at this conference. [230] It was as though some "pre-arranged plan" had forbidden any recognition of them or of the content of their unique message. The essential nutriments being largely absent from the 1952 messages, they could not exert the spiritual power of the 1888 message for revival and reformation. No doubt much good came from the conference. But the latter rain and the loud cry did not have another "beginning" 35 years ago. Meanwhile, a widespread spontaneous distribution of 1888-Reexamined continued. By 1958 relevant inquiries to the GC from church members in the field had stirred up another response. Thus a new reply was prepared by the GC and made available to the church in September, 1958. Entitled A Further Appraisal of the Manuscript "1888 Re-examined," it strongly opposed the document. We will note its conclusion:
When the authors read A Further Appraisal, they were of course deeply concerned. Were they guilty of "using quotations out of their true setting," "distortion of facts," producing a "manuscript that is detrimental to the church"? This called for earnest prayer, for heart-searching, and for further study of the Ellen White sources they had used and a search for others. Accordingly in September 1958, while they were again on furlough in America, they prepared a 70-page reply, An Answer to `Further Appraisal,'" which dealt with each point raised. Unable to do research in the Ellen White Vault, they had gained access to private collections of many hitherto unpublished Ellen White documents in the libraries of retired ministers who had known Ellen White personally. This newly discovered documentation in support of their thesis was included in their Answer. Appraisal was withdrawn and no longer became available to the field.[241] During another four years, church members continued to ask serious questions. Appraisal had said in 1958 that "it was thought that the [1951] report of [the Defense Literature Committee] seven years ago had closed the matter." [244] But it would seem that providence was not willing to close off the 1888 interest. The Holy Spirit must keep it alive until repentance comes. In 1962 a book about 1888 was published by Norval F. Pease, By Faith Alone. The foreword by the GC president stated:
Dr. Pease is a very competent and careful scholar, and the GC appreciated his work. But there are problems with his book due to a failure to view the entire 1888 era in balance:
Questions from church members continue to come. Another book about 1888 appeared, by A.V. Olson, General Conference vice-president. His sudden death on April 5, 1963 left his "virtually completed" manuscript in the hands of the White Estate board, who published his 320-page book in 1966 under the title, Through Crisis to Victory, 1888-1901. Sincere and deep earnest, the author again intended to combat "misleading conclusion" regarding 1888. The foreword tells the reader that "the thirteen years between Minneapolis, 1888, and the GC session of 1901 were . . . a period over which Providence could spell out the word victory." [256] But again, there are serious problems:
Soon Norval F. Pease published a sequel to By Faith Alone, entitled The Faith That Saves (1969). Its principal concern again is 1888. There are more problems:
Froom offers no Ellen White evidence to support these statements. The reader merely assumes that such emphatic statements are backed up somewhere by inspired evidence. Such is totally lacking in his book,the reason being that such does not exist in her writings. This is something that the "sixty of our ablest scholars" who endorsed the book did not notice. Ellen White's View of the Post-1888 Leadership We must now consider in contrast what Ellen White said in retrospect, eight years after president Olsen took office:
Froom's contradiction of her is alarming, especially in light of the official support that his book enjoys. Ellen White's context is crystal clear:
"From the light God has been pleased to give me, until the home field shows more healthful heart beats, the fewer long journeys Elder Olsen shall make with his selected helpers, A. R. Henry and Harmon Lindsay, the better it will be for the cause of God. The far away fields will be just as well off without these visits. The disease at the heart of the work poisons the blood, and thus the disease is communicated to the bodies they [GC leadership] visit. Yet, notwithstanding the sickly diseased state of things at home some have felt a great burden to take the whole of believing bodies under their parental wings. But if the institutions which God has established have spiritual discernment, they will not concede to these paternal propositions. It is not in the order of God that a few men shall manage the great interests throughout the field." {1888 1608.2} Ellen White did not go behind Elder Olsen's back; she had earlier written him the same things on November 26, 1894. Again she wrote him on May 31, 1896:
"I am sorry you have not regarded the warnings and instructions which have been given you as of sufficient value to be heeded, but by disregarding them before men who care naught for them, have made them a common matter, not worthy to have weight in your practice. Your practice has been contrary to these warnings, and this has weakened them in the eyes of men who needed correction, who in their life-practice have separated from God, and who have manifested a selfishness and harshness which should have separated them from the work long ago." {1888 1556.2} "Bro. Olsen, you have lost much from your experience that should have been brought into your character building, by failing to stand firmly and faithfully for right, braving all the consequences. Had you done this, you might have had a very different showing from what you now have. The work of Christ is your work. He came not only as a consolation, but as a restorer and a reprover. Luke 4:16-27." {1888 1556.3} "Brother Olsen, you speak of my return to America. For three years I stood in Battle Creek as a witness for the truth. Those who then refused to receive the testimony given me by God for them, and rejected the evidences attending these testimonies, would not be benefited should I return." {PH080 16.1} "To a large degree the General Conference Association has lost its sacred character, because some connected with it have not changed their sentiments in any particular since the Conference held at Minneapolis. Some in responsible positions go on "frowardly" in the way of their own hearts. Some who came from South Africa and from other places to receive an education which would qualify them for the work, have imbibed this spirit, carried it with them to their homes, and their work has not borne the right kind of fruit. The opinions of men, which were received by them, still cleave to them like the leprosy; and it is a very solemn question whether the souls who became imbued with the spiritual leprosy in Battle Creek, will ever be able to distinguish the principles of heaven from the methods and plans of men. The influences and impressions received in Battle Creek have done much to retard the work in South Africa." {PH080 19.1} "As things now exist in Battle Creek, the work of God cannot be carried forward on a correct basis. How long will these things be? When will the perceptions of men be made clear and sharp by the ministration of the Holy Spirit? Some there do not detect the injurious effects of the plans which for years have been working in an underhand manner. Some of the managers at the present time are walking in the light that they have received, and are doing the best they can, but their fellow workers are making things so oppressive for them that they can do but little. The enslaving of the souls of men by their fellow men in deepening the darkness which already envelops them. Who can now feel sure that they are safe in respecting the voice of the General Conference Association? If the people in our churches understood the management of the men who walk in the light of the sparks of their own kindling, would they respect their decisions? I answer, No, not for a moment. I have been shown that the people at large do not know that the heart of the work is being diseased and corrupted at Battle Creek. [700] Many of the people are in a lethargic, listless, apathetic condition, and assent to plans which they do not understand. Where is the voice, from whence will it come, to whom the people may listen, knowing that it comes from the True Shepherd? I am called upon by the Spirit of God to present these things before you, and they are correct to the life, according to the practice of the past few years." {PH080 19.2} Ellen White later wrote to I.H. Evans saying that her only regret was that she had entrusted vital communications to president Olsen instead of sending out testimonies to the field that the people themselves might know what was going on in Battle Creek. Elder Olsen had "rejected" the trust placed in him, according to the autographed copy of the letter in the White Estate file. [730 Letter E51, 1897.] In another autographed carbon copy in a private collection, she crossed out the word "rejected" and wrote in her own handwriting, "neglected." What was the mysterious reason that motivated this continued official resistance/neglect of the Holy Spirit? It will be recalled that Froom sets forth the high ethical standard he was to follow, mandated by Daniells. His book was to be "one that would honor God and exalt truth." [737]
This of course is beyond dispute. Nothing is gained by expressing criticism of Dr. Froom's work. But we can all learn a lesson in contrition. Multitudes of Christians in popular churches place undue reliance on preconceived judgments that cannot endure the test of truth. How can we SdAs help them unless we ourselves are loyal to truth, even at the cost of personal sacrifice or reputation? Dr. Froom had charged the authors of this manuscript [1888 Re-examined] to retract publicly their insistence that the leadership rejected the 1888 message. His demand was openly recognized as directed specifically to these present authors. [750] It reads as follows:
The authors were duty-bound to respond to such an official demand from Adventism's most noted scholar, especially when endorsed by the GC officers. In late 1972 they prepared their essay entitled, "An Explicit Confession . . . Due the Church." They reiterated their conviction that the facts of our history constitute a clarion call to corporate and denominational repentance. Copies were personally delivered to GC officers, who urged that it not be published, and called a series of special committee hearings in Takoma Park to consider the evidence, which meetings took place over a period of several years. The officers and the committees considered the Ellen White evidence and were impressed by it, but again urged that Explicit Confession not be published. Then after suppressing Explicit Confession they republished Movement of Destiny with no change in its basic thesis. Two significant developments in particular grew out of this aroused interest in the 1888 history. For two years following these special committees, the Annual Councils issued very serious appeals to the world church, calling for revival, reformation, and repentance. There was an unusual earnestness and solemnity evident in them. However, candor requires us to recognize that the results have been disappointing. Committee appeals have seldom been effective in producing revival or reformation among either the ministry or laity, because administrative policy can never effect reconciliation with Christ. However, in these Annual Council appeals there was a serious misreading of the facts of our denominational history, which logically defeated the objectives of the appeals. The problem appears on the surface to be minor, but it is significant. We quote from the 1973 Appeal:
The error here is not one of semantics. Ellen White never said that the 1888 message "aroused the Adventist Church." She said the opposite: "Satan succeeded in shutting away from our people, in a great measure, the special power of the Holy Spirit." [766] The message was never allowed to arouse the church. But that is not the most serious problem of logic in this Appeal. There is a failure to identify correctly what was the "loud cry." We mention this, not to find fault with sincere and earnest endeavors, but because the hour is too late to afford the same error again. The "beginning" of the latter rain and the loud cry was not a subjective revival that supposedly "aroused the Adventist Church;" it was the objective message itself. This is evident even in the Ellen White statement quoted in the Appeal: "Let every one who claims to believe that the Lord is soon coming, search the Scriptures as never before; for Satan is determined to try every device possible to keep souls in darkness, and blind the mind to the perils of the times in which we are living. Let every believer take up his Bible with earnest prayer, that he may be enlightened by the holy Spirit as to what is truth, that he may know more of God and of Jesus Christ whom he has sent. Search for the truth as for hidden treasures, and disappoint the enemy. The time of test is just upon us, for the loud cry of the third angel has already begun in the revelation of the righteousness of Christ, the sin-pardoning Redeemer. This is the beginning of the light of the angel whose glory shall fill the whole earth. For it is the work of every one to whom the message of warning has come, to lift up Jesus, to present him to the world as revealed in types, as shadowed in symbols, as manifested in the revelations of the prophets, as unveiled in the lessons given to his disciples and in the wonderful miracles wrought for the sons of men. Search the Scriptures; for they are they that testify of him." {RH, November 22, 1892 par. 7} Why this is so important can be readily seen:
However, the Annual Councils of 1973 and 1974 did nothing practical and effective to recover and promulgate the 1888 message itself. Rather, they inadvertently ensured that the vacuum would be filled with an infusion of Calvinist "Reformationism." The 1888 message has never been freely and clearly proclaimed to the world church with full GC support. The second outgrowth of this 1973-74 interest in 1888 was in consequence of the misunderstanding evident above. Recognizing that the church needs "righteousness by faith," the GC convened the Palmdale Conference in 1976 where certain theologians dominated the discussions and demanded support for their "Reformationist," Calvinist views of "justification by faith." They claimed that their views were a true revival of the 1888 message content, when in fact they were a denial of every basic essential of that "most precious message." But their prominence in Australia and North America gave them wide influence throughout the world field. The general ignorance of the 1888 essentials plus an antipathy for "legalism" created the vacuum into which these "Reformationist" ideas rushed. Time soon demonstrated how these views are incompatible with the Adventist truth of the cleansing of the sanctuary. If the GC and our publishing houses had appreciated the unique content of the 1888 message itself and faithfully published and upheld it, these views could never have taken deep root in North America, Europe, Africa, the Far East, and the South Pacific. Misreading the history of the 1890's resulted in repeating that history, with even more tragic consequences. We can document the loss of hundreds of ministers, and no one knows how many laity and youth. There is a root from which these Calvinist views of righteousness by faith can be traced: the GC and White Estate insistence for decades that the 1888 message was only a re-emphasis of popular Protestant views. Our theologians in the 1970's were only building on a foundation laid for them beginning in the 1920's. Yet another publication was to deal with 1888, the biography of Ellen White, The Lonely Years, 1876-1891, by Arthur L. White. Elder White's contribution to the SdA Church is beyond an adequate estimate. During a long and distinguished career he has been an agent of the Lord in building confidence in the world-wide church in the Spirit of Prophecy. As the grandson of Ellen White he enjoys a unique distinction as the foremost authority on her writings. He is respected world-wide. In three chapters of his volume he discusses the 1888 history. But first "certain points of background and developments should be considered." [810] Then follow 14 points, some of which probe to the foundation of our denominational mission.[812] We will note briefly a few miscellaneous points from this section of the book: "(1) The subject of righteousness by faith . . . was but one of many pressing matters that called for attention of the delegates." Point (10) continues: "It would seem that disproportionate emphasis has come to be given to the experience of the Minneapolis GC session." We would inquire: What is the true eschatological significance of the 1888 message? Is not the beginning of the latter rain and the loud cry the one matter of paramount importance? "(4) While the business of the conference . . . was broad and significant, the feelings and attitudes of those present were molded by the theological discussions." Need we point out that in this lied the significance of the session then, and its abiding importances for the church now? Unless our "theological discussions" are sound, our business administration cannot accomplish the gospel commission and cannot be blessed. "(6) Information concerning just what took place at Minneapolis . . . has come largely from the E.G. White documents and the memory statements of a few who were present." Our present dilemma as a people stems from a failure to give due weight to that inspired perspective communicated through her ministry, and a disproportional reliance on the uninspired opinions of others. "(7) No official action was taken in regard to the theological questions discussed." Thus the oft-repeated statement implies that no actual responsible rejection took place. As we have previously noted, such votes were taken "with uplifted hand" [830] - but not recorded solely due to Ellen White's veto. We note the next statement in full: "(8) The concept that the GC, and thus the denomination, rejected the message of righteousness by faith in 1888 is without foundation and was not projected until forty years after the Minneapolis meeting, and thirteen years after Ellen White's death. Contemporary records yield no suggestion of denominational rejection. There is no E.G. White statement anywhere that says this was so. The concept of such rejection has been put forward by individuals, none of whom were present at Minneapolis, and in the face of the witness of responsible men who were there." [835]
Objective evidence indicates that:
But this is not all. The latest edition of Testimonies to Ministers has an addition that previous editions lacked - an "Historical Foreword" ad "Appendix Notes" designed to help the reader avoid the clear conviction that reading Ellen White's text brings: "These notes will aid the reader in ascertaining correctly the intent of the author in the messages here presented." How this works will be seen by an example. On page 468 occurs this clear 1890 statement: "It is the fashion to depart from Christ . . . With many the cry of the heart has been, `We will not have this man to reign over us.' . . . Righteousness by the faith of the Son of God, has been slighted, spoken against, ridiculed, and rejected." The Appendix note cautions the reader to be careful. Apparently he should not too readily believe what the text says: "While some took the attitude here referred to there were many who received the message and gained a great blessing in their own personal experience." (p. 533). This directly counters many statements in the text. This can only breed dismay among thoughtful church members who have a right to expect literary integrity, for they can read the contradicting evidence for themselves in the full context of Ellen White's words. There is another denial of a straightforward Ellen White statement about the 1888 history. On March 16, 1890 she said, "Christ . . . has been a blessing for us. He had it at Minneapolis, and He had it for us at the time of the GC here [1889]. But there was no reception." (emphasis added). This statement is made available in Release No. 253, but a footnote counters it: "The wording of this sentence is clearly faulty for, isolated, it is out of harmony with what follows and other of her statements relating to the GC of 1889." However, the entire document in context clearly supports this statement as it reads. The context indicates that its wording cannot be faulty. Always the "some" who accepted were a few of lesser influence, while those who rejected were the "many" of influence. But the matter does not end here. In 1980, Selected Messages, Book Three, was published with a 33-page chapter on "The Minneapolis Conference." Seven pages are again taken up with additional inserted "Historical Backgrounds." Although there was a "tragic setback," a "gradual change for the better . . . ensued in the five or six years after Minneapolis." [855] Yet Ellen White's strongest testimonies of reproof for post-1888 unbelief are dated seven or eight years after Minneapolis. (Ellen White's clear reference to a negative "vote" taken at Minneapolis is deleted from her Ms. 24, 1888 document that forms the bulk of the chapter; cf. p. 176). Again we are reminded that we must all seek the Lord's guidance in our search for vital truth. It would seem that 1888 presents a problem unique in the long history of God's confrontations with His people. There is a precious truth involved therein that seems more elusive than any in the history of past ages. How else could it be possible that scholars and leaders who possess the most outstanding opportunities for knowledge in all time should fail to recognize the obvious evidence? Repentance is incumbent on all of us; we should all inquire, "Lord, is it I?" Incidentally, those who are confused about reports of Ellen White's occasional literary borrowing would find the true 1888 history helpful in resolving their doubts. Her integrity and qualifications as an agent of the gift of prophecy are uniquely demonstrated in her role in that history. Without any human help whatever, she threaded her way unerringly through the theological pitfalls inherent in that difficult controversy. Her courage in standing alone against "nearly all the senior ministers" in a GC session is fantastic. Her extemporaneous sermons were taken down in shorthand and transcribed for us today. Who else could preach ten sermons without notes in the emotional heat of theological battle with every word recorded, plus writing scores of extant letters and diary entries, and stand clear of the slightest embarrassment a hundred years later? There is not an unfortunate word in any of them. Her enthusiastic endorsement of the message, against great odds, is miraculously in harmony with the keenest, most competent theology of today. Never does that little lady stand so tall as in this 1888 history. How can we explain the almost superhuman official efforts since 1950 to contradict the inspired Ellen White evidence about 1888? Could it be that the enemy of the plan of salvation has a vested interest in covering up this significant truth? Could it be that knowing the real truth has a definite bearing on our personal and corporate relationship to Jesus Christ, and Satan knows this? Our mishandling of the evidence is more serious than financial fiascoes. Were our enemies to research this history, we would be embarrassed. Our poor relation to truth keeps us in an unrepentant, lukewarm Laodicean state. The simple solution is an honest faith that includes a belief of truth and an open, contrite recognition of it. The hour is late, but thank God it is not too late for a new spirit of fidelity. We have been told that the unfallen universe is watching. The honor of the Lord Himself is at stake. We know that someday there must be a people in whose "mouth [is] found no guile." (Rev. 14:5). To consider "righteousness by faith" as merely the Protestant doctrine is to miss the point. Yet this has been the constant official approach to 1888. An example of far-reaching spiritual blindness is a quotation from A.W. Spalding (Origin and History, Vol. 2, p. 281.). Note how this position contradicts the heart of the 1888 message itself:
No one who understands the 1888 message could possibly express such a thought, for it contradicts our Lord's words that His "yoke is easy, and [His] burden is light." (Mt. 11:30). If Spalding's statement is in any way true, we face a terrible problem. The message of "justification by faith . . . is the third angel's message in verity." [895] So we have the awesome task of proclaiming to the world "the most difficult of all truths," the most "elusive application" - bad news! Yet the third angel's message is first of all "the everlasting gospel," good news which is "the power of God unto salvation." (Rev. 1:16). It is this distorted understanding of the 1888 message which makes us "modern ancient Israel." Our history is as much a part of the great sacred record of the battle between truth and error as is the crossing of the Red Sea by Israel, and their descendants' stoning of Stephen many centuries later. The root facts of our last century's history are now beginning to filter through to the world-wide church. The question now is, Will we accept our history, or will we also "stone Stephen"? After a century of delay, it is time to see how the cause of God is imperiled. We have already witnessed the first-fruit of the 1888 rejection in the "alpha" pantheistic crisis of the early 1900's. Now we are in the time when the "omega" is due. The "alpha" was "received even by men who . . . had long experience in the truth, . . . those whom we thought sound in the faith." [905] "The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given." [906] The great controversy continues and the dragon is wroth with the "woman" and will spare no efforts to win. We were told in the "alpha" days that the truth would be discarded; books of a new order would be written; a system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced; the Sabbath would be lightly regarded; the leaders would concede that virtue is better than vice, but they would place their dependence on human power. [910] We see these words fulfilled today. "Except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it." (Ps. 127:1). He has told us, "My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways may ways, saith the Lord." (Isa. 55:8). The beginning of the latter rain and the loud cry was not Madison Avenue strategy and demographics; it was a clear understanding of good news, an actual message itself, something which every believer however humble could employ efficiently. Inherent in that beautiful, heart-appealing "good news" message is the experience of the final atonement. The blood of Christ is to purge the conscience from dead works. The message is not merely to prepare a people for death, but for translation, and the power is in the objective message itself. Billions of dollars spent on the latest electronic and graphics communications will never lighten the earth with glory until "the light of the angel whose glory shall fill the whole earth" is wholeheartedly, humbly received and appreciated. The Lord's method of true and lasting church growth is simplicity itself. Note how a true message of righteousness by faith will be the "light" that will do the work:
Meanwhile, good angels are commissioned to restrain the terrible winds of strife that will someday soon break loose. They are restraining their powers to hold back the impending ruin that comes with drug abuse, alcoholism, sexual immorality and infidelity, crime, idolatrous materialism, corruption, and fearful pestilences. The most important work in the world is the work of that angel who seals the servants of God preparatory to the coming of Christ (Rev. 7:1-4). What little time of peace and prosperity we still have left is borrowed time, ours only for finishing His work. And world stability depends on the fidelity of God's people to the truth, to their message and their mission. Something must happen in the end-time that has never happened before. Millenniums of defeat must be reversed. This is the only way the cleansing of the sanctuary can be completed. Daniel's prophecy declares that it "shall" be done (8:14). The Lord will purify His church so that it may give the last message to lighten the earth. God's work can be finished in an incredible short time. But it will require the repentance of the ages, an understanding of truth for which, in our imagined prosperity and success, we have not felt a hunger and thirst. It will require the correction of theological confusion and a humbling of hearts. It will require the abandonment of worldly policies and their man-made strategies. It will produce a true and lasting unity and harmony among believers. Discordant "pluralism" will vanish. Every species of legalism will die. Fanaticism will discredit itself and die away. Finally, the ultimate experience awaiting the church is like that which Jesus went through at Gethsemane. Only His very own will be willing to accept it, but He has staked the honor of His throne on His confidence that they will. Facing the cross is what Pater would not accept, until he was converted. He denied his Lord; only a similar modern denial of Christ can account for the supreme self-centered motivation that continually expresses the concern that "I get to heaven." It was heaven that Christ forsook with no assurance that He would ever return - so that sin and death might be rededicated from the universe. True faith in Him is not centered on our receiving a reward. Now the last, the seventh church, is on the scene, and we are surely in the last moments that can be allotted to her. There is no eighth. When His people gladly accept all the truth that He has for them, they will fulfill the same role that Christ filled when He was on earth. That `short period of three years was as long as the world would endure the presence of the Redeemer." [960] When the power of Satan is broken among the Lord's people, the unbelieving world will not be able longer to endure their presence. They will have demonstrated true righteousness by faith, that closer intimacy with the Saviour that He still offers as He continues knocking at our door. How much longer will He knock? Appendix A Did A.T. Jones Teach the "Holy Flesh" Heresy? Attempts are being made to represent AT Jones' message of righteousness by faith as leading into the "holy flesh" heresy. It is said that he taught this false doctrine as early as a few months following the 1888 conference. One example, doubtless based on research at the GC, follows: "There appear to be some striking parallels between the experience of God's people around 1888 and our own times. For example, Waggoner and Jones were used by the Lord in 1888; but even as early as 1889 Jones's sermons began to show some drift in the direction of the "holy flesh" error." {Adventist Review, August 6, 1981} This charge must be examined carefully. If it is true, several consequences will immediately follow in many reasoning and logical minds:
Evidence Concerning the Charge Against Jones The supposed evidence for the charge is found in remarks attributed to AT Jones in sermons preached at the Ottawa, Kansas, tent meeting in the spring of 1889. News of the meeting and notes on the sermons were printed in the Topeka Daily Capital newspaper. Sermons were not reported verbatim. They were greatly condensed and typographical errors are found to be numerous. The incomplete reporting creates occasional gobbledygook. We turn to a non-Adventist newspaper that gives evidence of poor journalism in order to find something to discredit the man who Ellen White said had "heavenly credentials" in a unique sense and brought us "a most precious message." And this we do a century later; yet even Jones' determined opponents of that generation did not do so. The supposedly heretical remarks in fact reveal no trace of "holy flesh" fanaticism, but simply assert the possibility of overcoming sin in character perfection attained through faith. His statements are reported as follows in the Topeka newspaper:
"It is Christ's obedience that avails and not ours that brings righteousness to us. Well then let us stop trying to do the will of God in our own strength. Stop it all. Put it away from you forever. Let Christ's obedience do it all for you and gain the strength to pull the bow so that you can hit the mark . . .
In the fact that the law demands perfection lies the hope of mankind, because if it could overlook a sin to a single degree, no one could ever be free from sin, as the law would never make that sin known, and it could never be forgiven, by which alone man can be saved. The day is coming when the law will have revealed at last sin and we will stand perfect before Him and be saved with an eternal salvation . . . It is a token of His love for us, therefore, whenever a sin is made known to you, it is a token of God's love for you, because the Saviour stands ready to take it away It is only by faith in Christ that we can say we are Christians. It is only through being one with him that we can be Christians, and only through Christ within us that we keep the commandments - it being all by faith in Christ that we do and say these things. When the day comes that we actually keep the commandments of God, we will never die, because keeping the commandments is righteousness, and righteousness and life are inseparable - - so, "Here are they that keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus," and what is the result? These people are translated. Life, then, and keeping the commandments go together. If we die now, Christ's righteousness will be imputed to us and we will be raised, but those who live to the end are made sinless before He comes, having so much of Christ's being in them that they "hit the mark" every time, and stand blameless without an intercessor, because Christ leaves the sanctuary sometime before He comes to earth (May 18, 1889; the newspaper attributes this sermon to W.C. White).
We note the following:
Thus we have another example of a century of continued opposition to the "most precious message" that Heaven intended should be welcomed as the "beginning" of the latter rain and the loud cry. It is a mysterious subterranean river of unbelief, perhaps the strangest and most persistent that has flowed through all the millennia of God's attempts to help His people. Ellen White said plaintively, "I have deep sorrow of heart, because I have seen how readily a word or action of Elder Jones or Elder Waggoner is criticized." (Letter O19, 1892). This time it wasn't a "word or action." It was only an imagined one. Click Appendix B to read the righteousness by faith comparison. Appendix C One Source of the Acceptance Myth The widely popular view that the 1888 message was accepted a century ago derives from earnest, sincere, well-meaning people. Their loyalty to the church and its past leadership is commendable, and gives evidence of an enthusiastic team spirit. Nevertheless, this view is in direct conflict with history, with numerous Ellen White statements, and, what is even more serious, with the testimony of the True Witness who gave His blood for this church. The acceptance myth insists, after even a century of delay, that we are "rich and increased with goods" in this matter of accepting and understanding righteousness by faith. Our Lord says that we are "poor." The conflict in view is serious, for the spiritual condition of the world church is affected, as well as His honor. In view of the fact that Ellen White's testimony is so clear that the beginning of the latter rain and the loud cry was "in a great degree" rejected, how is it possible that the vast majority of our ministers, educators, and members world-wide believe that it was accepted by the leadership of that generation? Part of the problem is a persistent confusion of thought that appears almost to be willful. As a people we do accept the popular Protestant "doctrine" of righteousness by faith just as Protestants profess to believe it. (See Appendix B). Therefore our apologists insist that this "doctrine" was not rejected in 1888 or thereafter. But this is not the full truth of our history. Our brethren "in a great degree" did reject the message which was the beginning of the latter rain and the loud cry. This obvious fact explains the long delay, and nothing else can explain it. What is the source of this persistent and widespread confusion and misconception? Doubtless it is the human judgment of good men whose basic mindset is understandably Laodicean. We all partake of that same mindset, by nature. It is painful for any of us to believe what the True Witness says, that the truth of our history reveals us as "wretched and miserable," our 1888 history in particular being a replay of the Jews' history at Calvary. That history pinpoints our great need: denominational repentance. This unwelcome conviction must at any cost be repressed with assurances of being "rich and increased with goods." Hence the acceptance myth. One prime source of that myth enjoys such unique credibility that it has seemed impossible to anyone to question it. In his The Lonely Years 1876-1891, Arthur L. White informs us that "the concept that the GC, and thus the denomination, rejected the message of righteousness by faith in 1888 is without foundation and was not projected until forty years after the Minneapolis meeting and thirteen years after Ellen White's death." (p. 396). The author is a grandson of Ellen White. We have already noted how rejection of the 1888 message was clearly recognized by Ellen White and her contemporaries from 1893 through 1901 (see chapter 4). "Forty years after the Minneapolis meeting" would bring us to around 1928. It was in that era that Taylor G. Bunch at Pacific Union College publicly likened our 1888 history to that of Israel at Kadesh-Barnea rejecting the report of Caleb and Joshua. W.C. White, Ellen White's son, remonstrated with Bunch, assuring him that such a rejection in 1888 did not take place. He was present at that conference, he said, and he knew. It is only natural that he would convey the same acceptance view to his son, Arthur L. White, who has served for so many years as secretary of the Ellen G. White Estate, and under whose supervision and endorsement some 1500 pages of books regarding 1888 have been published since 1950. Both Ellen White's son and grandson have rightly enjoyed great esteem in the SdA Church. They have been utterly sincere in their efforts to educate several generations of our people to believe that the 1888 message was not rejected. We accord to both of them the utmost respect which their unique place in our history warrants. At the same time, we must recognize that Ellen White exercised a still more unique ministry, that of an inspired messenger of the Lord whose ministry is an expression of the testimony of Jesus, the Spirit of Prophecy. Her prophetic gift endowed her with discernment that penetrated beneath the surface. Even if a thousand eyewitnesses with uninspired judgment contradict the word of an inspired prophet, we must trust that inspired word, for a "thus saith the Lord" is implicit in it. Ellen White's testimony is so clear and straight-forward that the common man can readily understand it. The future of this church depends upon this issue of prophetic guidance being settled rightly. An indication of how the acceptance view gained official credence is found in a statement made by W.C. White in a sermon at Lincoln, Nebraska, November 25, 1905. He is describing an incident in Avondale, Australia, a decade earlier when WW Prescott was visiting. The mail had come in from America, and he and Prescott were reading to Ellen White letters from the leading brethren of the GC in faraway Battle Creek. The letters told of alleged great progress in the cause in America and of wonderful spiritual victories in respect of the 1888 issues. WC White recalls the incident thus:
Well, one day while we were living at Cooranbong, New South Wales, we received letters from the President of the GC, filled with cheering reports, telling us about the good camp meetings, and how that some of these businessmen who had been reproved by the Testimonies [C10] were going out to various states and speaking in the camp meetings, and that they were getting a new spiritual experience, and were a real help in the meetings. . ..
We [he and Prescott] were made very happy by the reading of these letters. We were fairly overjoyed about it, and we united in praising the Lord for the good report. Imagine my surprise when in the afternoon of the next day Mother told me that she had been writing to these men of whom we had received the good report, and she then read me the most far-reaching criticism, the most searching reproof for bringing in wrong plans and principles in their work, that were ever written to that group of men.[C20] This was a great lesson to me." Ellen White records her heart sorrow that throws further light on this incident. It is in no way disrespectful of their memory to note that neither WC White nor WW Prescott enjoyed the larger discernment that is divinely imparted by the gift of prophecy. The gift is not hereditary. It would be only natural for them, as it would be for us, to believe at face value letters from the GC president containing such good news. The spirit pervading the church was always up-beat, rejoicing in progress and victories. But the heart attitude of all human beings is naturally in conflict with "the testimony of Jesus," unless specifically enlightened by the Holy Spirit. Writing to the GC president, Ellen White describes how she felt when her son and Prescott tried to assure her that glowing reports from Battle Creek were true:
Last October I wrote you a long letter. . . . The burden upon me was very great, in regard to yourself and the work in Battle Creek. I felt that you were being bound hand and foot, and were tamely submitting to it. I was so troubled, that in conservation with Brother Prescott, I told him of my feelings. Both he and WCW tried to dissipate my fears; they presented everything in as favorable a light as possible. But instead of encouraging me, their words alarmed me. If these men cannot see the outcome of affairs, I thought, how hopeless the task of making them see at Battle Creek. The thought struck to my heart like a knife. I said, I will not send the communication written to Eld. Olsen.
. . . For about two weeks I remained in utter feebleness. I was like a broken reed. I could not leave my room, could not converse with Brother and Sister Prescott. I did not expect to recover. . . . But . . . my strength gradually returned to me." Because the issue of the latter rain and the loud cry is so important, it is imperative that the church and its leadership now place unqualified reliance on the inspired testimony of the Spirit of Prophecy. When human judgment conflicts with that inspired testimony, no matter how honored the human agents, the Spirit of Prophecy must take the clear precedence. For the better part of a century, we as a people have been prone to revel in this easily prevalent false optimism. The tragic consequence is a complementary widespread distrust of the counsel of the True Witness. Would not great spiritual blessings result from a full recognition of the truth? Rightly understood, our denominational history is one continual commentary on Christ's words in Revelation 3:14-21, and a call to appropriate repentance. He who controls the past controls the future. Lukewarmness and spiritual weakness are a consequence of misinterpreting history. Appendix D What is the Future of the SdA Church? It is true that the SdA Church has delayed the proclamation to the world of the everlasting gospel in its purity.[D30] We all share in the responsibility for this failure. There is a corporate involvement. Ellen White often likened our failures to those of Israel of old when each generation shared in the guilt of their fathers because they not only shared the same fallen human nature but exercised the same unbelief.[D40] There are many tragic evidences of our backsliding, disobedience to the Spirit of Prophecy, and even apostasy. Our history for the past century since 1888 is clear. Does this mean that the Lord has rejected this church or its leadership? Or if He has not already done so, will He do so in the future? Is the denominational SdA Church doomed to failure? When those who choose to follow Christ protest against what they believe is apostasy or wrong-doing in the church and find themselves opposed, should they conclude that the situation is hopeless? Should they withdraw their support and their church membership? We are told in Acts of the Apostles, page 11, that "faithful souls" have always constituted the true church. Will there be a new group or loose federation formed of "faithful souls" who will complete the gospel commission and leave the organized SdA Church behind to dissipate its existence in terminal apostasy? If we liken the church to a ship, is it doomed to sink like the Titanic? Or will it be taken over by a mutinous crew? Should "faithful souls" abandon the ship and jump into the cold water on their own? Will there be no "ship" in the last days, every former passenger individually swimming or clinging to bits of wreckage? Or will every passenger become a crew member and under the leadership of Christ as Captain sail a tight ship into port? Ellen White likened the SdA Church to a "noble ship which bears the people of God," and declared that it would sail "safely into port." [D50] What is the true church? Is the organized church still the fulfillment of the Revelation 12 prophecy of "the remnant of (the woman's) seed, which keep the commandments of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ" (vs. 17)? Or is the true "remnant" merely a non-cohesive, unorganized, non-group scattering of "faithful souls"? These questions probe into the reasons for our existence as a people for nearly 150 years. No intelligent person would dare say that a nominal connection with the organized church can guarantee and individual's personal salvation. Of course not. That is not the issue: The important question is whether church membership and supporting the church are valid duties which the Lord requires of "faithful souls." What is "the mind of Christ" toward the SdA Church? If we can determine the answer to that question, we can know what our "mind" toward it should be. There are guidelines in Scripture that are helpful, as well as numerous Ellen White statements:
All of God's promises to ancient Israel were no less conditional. Generation after generation was "found wanting" and died as failures. The history of Kadesh-Barnea was repeated many times, when an entire generation except two individuals had to perish in the wilderness. Nevertheless, the covenant keeping God remained loyal to Israel when she was disloyal to Him. He always tried again with a new generation. Never did He ordain another people to take the place of "Abraham's seed." Because ancient Israel failed repeatedly as has the church in modern times does not mean necessarily that the pattern of backsliding and apostasy will continue forever. The failures of God's corporate people have always involved the heavenly sanctuary in defilement; Satan has had occasion to taunt God with responsibility for the failure of His people. The foundation of the SdA Church is a belief in the good news of Daniel 8:14, "Then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Then shall this constant cloud of failure which has hovered over God's Israel be lifted; then shall God's name be cleared as His people demonstrate His plan of salvation to be a success; then shall the sacrifice of Christ be vindicated. A cynical attitude which says, "Suppose the church fails and the conditions are not met" is the same as saying, "Suppose the sanctuary will not be cleansed." The honor of God requires that it "shall" be cleansed! This is the ultimate issue in the great controversy. We have the privilege of standing in absolute loyalty to Christ and to His-Bride-to-be. The testimony quoted above is entitled "Shall We Be Found Wanting?" Ellen White answered her own question as she closed the chapter:
"Who can truthfully say: "Our gold is tried in the fire; our garments are unspotted by the world"? I saw our Instructor pointing to the garments of so-called righteousness. Stripping them off, He laid bare the defilement beneath. Then He said to me: "Can you not see how they have pretentiously covered up their defilement and rottenness of character? 'How is the faithful city become an harlot!' My Father's house is made a house of merchandise, a place whence the divine presence and glory have departed! For this cause there is weakness, and strength is lacking." {8T 250.2} "Unless the church, which is now being leavened with her own backsliding, shall repent and be converted, she will eat of the fruit of her own doing, until she shall abhor herself. When she resists the evil and chooses the good, when she seeks God with all humility and reaches her high calling in Christ, standing on the platform of eternal truth and by faith laying hold upon the attainments prepared for her, she will be healed. She will appear in her God-given simplicity and purity, separate from earthly entanglements, showing that the truth has made her free indeed. Then her members will indeed be the chosen of God, His representatives." {8T 250.3} "The time has come for a thorough reformation to take place. When this reformation begins, the spirit of prayer will actuate every believer and will banish from the church the spirit of discord and strife. Those who have not been living in Christian fellowship will draw close to one another. One member working in right lines will lead other members to unite with him in making intercession for the revelation of the Holy Spirit. There will be no confusion, because all will be in harmony with the mind of the Spirit. The barriers separating believer from believer will be broken down, and God's servants will speak the same things. The Lord will co-operate with His servants. All will pray understandingly the prayer that Christ taught His servants: "Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven." Matthew 6:10. Our duty now is to remove the hindrances within the church that have prevented that "thorough reformation to take place," and to learn to pray the Lord's prayer. Biography to Appendix C & D
[C10] Harmon Lindsay and A.R. Henry, "opposed to the work of God ever since the Minneapolis meeting," EGW Letter August 27, 1896.
Notes & References [010] White, A.L., The Lonely Years, p. 148. [180] GC, Defense Literature Committee letter, December 4, 1951. [190] Letter to GC officers, Feb. 5, 1952. [200] Branson, W.H., Vol. Two, pp. 616,617. [230] See for example, Vol. One, p. 256. [235] The original report of the Defense Literature Committee had said rather the opposite: `The Manuscript gives every evidence of earnest, diligent, and painstaking effort.' [240] GC, A Further Appraisal of the Manuscript `1888 Re-examined, Sept. 1958, pp. 47-49. [241] One example of how Appraisal supported the acceptance theory is its use of a single sentence excerpt from Letter 40, 1893: "We stood on the field of battle for nearly three years, but at that time decided changes took place among our people, and through the grace of God we gained decided victories." (Appraisal, p. 44). In 1893 the entire letter was released by Ellen White Trustees so that the context could be seen (Release #996). The one-sentence excerpt occurs in a discussion of the use of cheese, how Dr. Kellogg bought an entire stock of cheese offered for sale at a camp meeting grocery, and how principles of health reform gained acceptance among our people. The context contains nothing relevant to the 1888 message or its reception. [252] Pease, pp. 227, 239, 240. [256] Olson, A.V., Through Crisis to Victory, p. 7. [261] `1893 Bulletin', p. 265. [264] Ms. 9, 1888, Olson, p. 291. [265] Ms., 15, 1888, Olson, p. 301. [270] Ibid., p. 238, 239.; emphasis added. [280] Pease, N.F., The Faith That Saves, pp. 25, 39, 45, 54. [283] Who these are is not clear. The authors of 1888 Re-examined have never declared that "the denomination" rejected the beginning of the latter rain. They have only cited Ellen White evidence that the leadership rejected it, and "in a great degree" kept it away from the church at large so that "the denomination" never had a proper chance to accept it. - Cf. 1 SM 234, 235. [287] Pease, By Faith Alone, p. 164.
[295] Some who say they accept "righteousness by faith" maintain that we do not need the "most precious message" that "the Lord . . . sent . . . through Elders Waggoner and Jones," because we possess Ellen White's writings. But there are problems with this position: [297] E.g. `Christ and His Righteousness,' `The Gospel in Creation,' `The Glad Tidings,' `The Consecrated Way to Christian Perfevtion,' which use no Ellen White statements.
[500] Froom, L.E., Movement of Destiny, p. 8. [540] Seminary Studies, Andrews University, January 1972, p. 121. [550] Froom, L.E., Movement of Destiny, pp. 187, 191. [560] Daniells, A.G., Christ Our Righteousness, pp. 47, 53, 54.
[568] Dr. Froom wrote to the present authors on December 4, 1964, before the publication of his `Movement of Destiny', demanding a retraction of the positions they had taken in `1888-Reexamined'. We were required to "make a public and published disavowal ... of certain conclusions advanced by you [that is, that the 1888 leadership rejected the beginning of the latter rain and the loud cry]. . . . Ere long the full, documented story of the 1888 episode will doubtless be put into print. And unless you have modified your presentation, you may find yourself in a most unenviable position. The contrast will be marked."On April 16, 1965 he wrote to us further: "In my view, you had better act first, and without much delay. . . Your contention . . . stands out like a sore thumb, conspicuously alone, and in much conflict with the virtually unanimous verdict of our scholars. . . . You have a lot of temerity to contradict the findings of this whole group of men. . . . I . . . feel . . . no obligation to share any further evidence with you. . . . Your unhappy plight makes me think of Elijah's situation. . . . He disagreed with the historians and the experts in Israel about the situation. He was right, he felt, and they were all wrong. He only was loyally left, and was maligned and persecuted because of his claims and conclusions. . . . Elijah thus virtually defamed and villified Israel, and gave a misleading and blackening report. He bore an untrue witness, casting aspersion upon Israel and its leadership [Ahab and Jezebel?]. . . . You should cease, retreat, and retract." He claimed that he spoke with the authority of the GC behind him, as indeed their unprecedented endorsement of his book soon demonstrated. [578] Letter to Claude Holmes, May, 1921. [589] Ibid., p. 444, emphasis original. [700] These documents were placed in Dr. Froom's hands on February 21, 1965, before he published his book and receipt acknowledged. They were also placed in the hands of GC leadership in 1973 before they republished it. One GC president has withdrawn his endorsement from the revised edition. [750] Seminary Studies, Andrews University, January, 1972, p. 121. [810] White A.L., The Lonely Years, p. 394. [837] Letter B21, 1888; Mss. 9, 15, 1888. [890] Quoted in The Lonely Years, p. 415. [905] `Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, p. 37; Also 1T, PP. 382, 383. {2BIO 493.2}. [906] Ibid., No. 2, p. 50. Also {1SM 200.1} [910] Cf. Series B, No. 2, pp. 54,55. |
|
Bible Topics
Main Menu
Submenu
|