Introduction
Some noble proofreader has blushed to see that in this new publication, out of eight chapters listed in the "Contents" all but three have incorrect page numbers. But such mechanical mistakes are nothing when compared with historical inaccuracies. Chapter 5 in the section, "The 1888 General Conference Session," pages 87 to 95, raises questions. History is serious truth because the future of the church depends on our correctly understanding how the Lord has led us in our past history.
Dr. George Knight is a personal friend whom we hold in high esteem. Our purpose in writing is not to pick flaws or be critical. To speak up in defense of our denominational history is vitally important to the present and future prosperity of the church. This pamphlet is not in any way personal fault-finding but is another step in our common search for that objective truth that the church needs to understand more clearly. Christ promised that the Holy Spirit "will guide you in all truth."
To his credit Dr. Knight recognizes that "the Minneapolis General Conference session was one of the most explosive and significant meetings the denomination has ever had" [10] Yes! We need to understand about it. But the problem concerns his understanding of what made this meeting "significant."
He does not consider that the message the Lord sent in the 1888 era is "something unique." He is disturbed that "certain Adventist writers in the 20th century have [mistakenly] claimed that the 1888 message of Jones and Waggoner was something uniquely Adventist." [20]
It is very true that "certain Adventist writers" have said that Jones and Waggoner brought to the denomination (and to the world) a message that was powerfully unique. They are named many times by the author in the text and in the citations of his 1989 book, Angry Saints. The same is evident in his 1998 work, A User-Friendly Guide to the 1888 Message, and in his 1987 From 1888 to Apostasy, the Case of A.T. Jones (all published by the Review and Herald).
The root of this change seems to be the 1950 private document, 1888-Re-examined, later published in 1987 by these "certain Adventist writers" who author this tract. Their confidence and verification of the 1888 message and its history are based upon the Ellen White record which states to them clearly that it was "the Lord" Himself who sent this message to Seventh-day Adventists as being something very special. [22]
These "certain" authors have indeed declared that over the years this message that the Lord "sent" was endorsed by Ellen White in more than 300 expressions, and that its uniqueness was validated by many of them. She identified that 1888-era message as "the third angel's message in verity," "the beginning" of the loud cry of Revelation 18, and initial "showers from heaven of the latter rain." No other religious body in history has been given such a unique message to proclaim.
Does "Repeatedly" Mean An Ambiguous "One"?
However Dr. Knight proclaims:
"The facts do not bear out their [these writers'] contention. To the contrary, two of the most influential 1888 participants repeatedly contradicted that assertion."
To support the "repeatedly" he quotes a single transposition of two short sentences that Waggoner wrote apologetically to George I. Butler, February 10, 1887, more than 1 1/2 years before the existence of "the Minneapolis message." Knight understands Waggoner denies that there was anything unique about the message. Waggoner is defending himself against the charge of troubling the church with something novel that he has dangerously invented.
In his 71-page letter he explains to the General Conference president his "desire to vindicate the law of God, and to show its perpetuity, its binding claims upon all mankind, and the beautiful harmony between it and the gospel. The law of God is the groundwork of all our faith. It may be said to be the backbone of the Third Angel's Message". [30] Butler judged that he was preaching an unorthodox "new" doctrine. But Waggoner says his message "is simply a step nearer the faith of the great Reformers from the days of Paul to the days of Luther and Wesley."
In this letter (which came to be known as "The Gospel in the Book of Galatians") Waggoner contends that he was not proposing any teaching in conflict with what Protestants had always taught is the gospel. [40] To read his words in context raises the question as to whether Dr. Knight misreads the historical record.
Waggoner states on the same page [50] that what he is teaching is "fundamental principles of the gospel" in contrast to Butler's view that the law in Galatians refers to the ceremonial system and cannot refer to the moral law.
The Other Influential Participants
Knight quotes only one reference from Waggoner although he says that "repeatedly" Waggoner denies that his message was "uniquely Adventist." Knight then seeks support in Ellen White, but within the quotation which he cites she makes clear that she regarded Waggoner's message of righteousness by faith as something different than that of Sunday-keeping churches, but not a new or dangerous invention. She says, "God is presenting to the minds of men divinely appointed [Jones and Waggoner] precious gems of truth, appropriate for this time. [60] This can only mean an understanding in advance of the past. Clearly it was new to the Adventist conscience, and over the years this same thought was reiterated by Ellen White.
Knight then brings another quotation from her to support his word "repeatedly" [80]:
"Elder E.J. Waggoner had the privilege granted him of speaking plainly and presenting his views upon justification by faith and the righteousness of Christ in relation to the law. This is no new light, but it was old light placed where it should be in the third angel's message."
These two sentences appear on the surface to clinch Knight's argument. But problems arise when her overall testimony is examined.
The two sentences are taken from Ellen White's 27-page appraisal of the General Conference session, "Looking Back at Minneapolis" [90] In this resume she makes clear that what Jones and Waggoner were preaching was not "new" in relation to the everlasting gospel but that it was "the message for this time," "new" to our people. She is concerned about a serious preparation for meeting the mark of the beast and the soon coming of Christ. She saw that no message with such a purpose had been proclaimed by any Sunday-keeping Evangelicals since the Midnight Cry of 1844.
She uplifts the 1888 message as "present truth for this time, . . . great light for us at this time" [100], "the first clear [public] teaching of this subject from any human lips I had heard." [110]
She goes on to say,
"Satan has been having things his own way; but the Lord has raised up men to prepare for battle, for the day of God's preparation. This message Satan sought to make of none effect. . . . I stated that I had heard precious truths uttered that I could respond to with all my heart. . . .
Why did she say that Waggoner's message at Minneapolis was not "new"? She wrote in early 1889; but as she pondered the message for months and listened to Jones and Waggoner themselves becoming more mature in their understanding, her convictions grew that the message was more significant than she at first had discerned. Four years after Minneapolis she was ready to declare boldly that the message was indeed "new light," the beginning of something the world had never heard before:
"This is the beginning of the light of the angel whose glory shall fill the whole earth." [140]
Ellen White Repeatedly Confirms Unique Concepts
Her four-volume 1888 Materials give the church a wealth of biblical and historical insights that contradicts the premise that the message was imported Evangelicalism added to Adventist legalism. These volumes reveal that the message the Lord sent in 1888 was actually gems of truth "old" from eternity but explained in a new and clearer way, not a mere re-emphasis of the teaching of the 16th century Reformers. Over a period of years she further developed this insight as follows:
"Most assuredly" "the Lord has . . . new and increased light for us as a people. . . I do not only think so, but I can speak understandingly. I know there is precious truth to be unfolded to us if we are the people that are to stand in the day of God's preparation." [150]
What makes the message "significant" therefore is the cosmic Day of Atonement. Does Knight see it?
Later she said:
"In Minneapolis God gave precious gems of truth to His people in new settings." [160]
Her convictions kept on growing:
"I believe without a doubt that God has given precious truth at the right time to Brother Jones and Brother Waggoner . . . . I do say that God has sent light, and do be careful how you treat it. . . . We claim God has given us light in the right time" [170]
What God "gives" is always fresh, never stale bread.
Later she recognized that the Lord "sent" Jones and Waggoner to carry a burden that He had not necessarily laid upon her:
"The question is, has God sent the truth? Has God raised up men to proclaim the truth? I say yes, God has sent men to bring us the truth that we should not have had unless God sent somebody to bring it to us." [180]
"God has raised up his messengers to do his work for this time. . . . The light which will lighten the earth with its glory will be called a false light, by those who refuse to walk in its advancing glory. . . . Messages bearing the divine credentials have been sent to God's people." [190]
"In this time light from the throne of God has been long resisted as an objectionable thing. It has been regarded as darkness and spoke of as fanaticism, as something dangerous, to be shunned. Thus men have become guide-posts pointing in the wrong direction. They have followed the example set by the Jewish people." [200]
"An unwillingness to yield up preconceived opinions, and to accept this truth, lay at the foundation of a large share of the opposition manifested at Minneapolis against the Lord's message through Brethren Waggoner and Jones. By exciting that opposition, Satan succeeded in shutting away from our people, in a great measure, the special power of the Holy Spirit that God longed to impart to them. The enemy prevented them from obtaining that efficiency which might have been theirs in carrying the truth to the world, as the apostles proclaimed it after the day of Pentecost. The light that is to lighten the whole earth with its glory was resisted, and by the action of our own brethren has been in a great degree kept away from the world." [210]
(Early Writings p. 271 makes clear that the loud cry cannot come without the latter rain being simultaneous.)
Did the Lord indeed send a message of light and truth that was "uniquely Adventist"? If it was to lighten the whole earth with the Revelation 18 message and prepare a people for translation, it must have been something very special.
What made it "special," "appropriate for this time," "new light"? Speaking of the 1888 message she said,
"We are in the day of atonement, and we are to work in harmony with Christ's work of cleansing the sanctuary from the sins of the people. Let no man who desires to be found with the wedding garment on, resist our Lord in his office work. As he is, so will his followers be in this world. We must now set before the people the work which by faith we see our great High-priest accomplishing in the heavenly sanctuary. Those who do not sympathize with Jesus in his work in the heavenly courts, who do not cleanse the soul temple of every defilement, but who engage in some enterprise not in harmony with this work, are joining with the enemy of God and man in leading minds away from the truth and work for this time." [280]
"If we would come into possession of the heavenly inheritance, the glorious, eternal substance, we must be in covenant relation with God, and employ every faculty of our being to win souls to Christ. O, would that I could present this subject in more fitting language, that you might comprehend the matter as it really is! God's people must be a peculiar, holy people, distinct in character and practice from the world, distinguished from all the religionists of the day. They must be patterns in personal piety and good works. There is higher, holier work for us to do than we have yet done. Christ has said, "My kingdom is not of this world." It has no principles that will meet the principles of the world. The Lord has set his Church as a light in the world, to guide the world to heaven. It is to be a part of heaven on the earth, flashing divine light on the pathway of benighted souls." [290]
"The mediatorial work of Christ, the grand and holy mysteries of redemption, are not studied or comprehended by the people who claim to have light in advance of every other people on the face of the earth." [300]
"How do you know but that the Lord is giving fresh evidence of his truth, placing it in a new setting, that the way of the Lord may be prepared? What plans have you been laying that new light may be infused through the ranks of God's people?" [310]
"We have been hearing his voice more distinctly in the message that has been going for the last two years." [320]
Adventist Truths: Not Shared With Other Christians
Dr. Knight gives us a perplexing definition of the 1888 message:
"The significance of Jones' and Waggoner's preaching at Minneapolis was that it reunited the distinctively Adventist truths with the all important message of salvation in Christ alone. . . . The significance of the 1888 meetings is that they baptized Adventism anew in Christianity." [330]
In Angry Saints he calls it a "return to basic Christianity," "the historic [Reformers'] doctrine of salvation," [340] "the doctrine of faith that the holiness preachers had been uplifting." [350]
Careful study reveals heights and depths of understanding in the 1888 message of justification by faith that were lacking in Sunday-keeping "holiness preachers" who never sensed "the third angel's message in verity."
This important issue in reality concerns the unique Adventist idea of the cleansing of the sanctuary. That is why these two current "Adventist writers" are concerned. The 1888 message joined justification by faith with that one truth that Seventh-day Adventists hold that is different from all other denominations - "adventist" in that it prepares a people to meet the final issue of the mark of the beast and to be ready for the literal return of Jesus. Recognizing this is what constrained Ellen White to exclaim that "every fiber of my heart said amen."
As we near the end, modern "Babylon's" apostate "Christianity" will become more akin to the Baal worship of Elijah's day. The 1888 ideas of the gospel went far beyond so-called evangelical "basic Christianity" that increasingly aligns itself with Rome - truths that the Evangelical world of today are starving to understand in this hour of unprecedented crisis.
In this connection another point becomes strikingly apparent. Knight readily concedes that our dear elders of a century ago largely rejected the message of Jones and Waggoner. But logically, according to his thesis, we must then conclude that what our church leadership in general rejected was "basic Christianity." That is a groundless historic admission, because it logically denies the reason for us to exist as a Christian church. Offshoots and current ex-pastor, anti-Adventist critics do not need such an admission from our publishing house.
No, the truth is that our elders rejected an advanced understanding of the gospel parallel to and consistent with the unique Adventist idea of the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary. They did not become Babylon; they chose to be a retarded remnant church unwilling to "grow up" and follow the leading of the true Head of the church. As noted above, Ellen White said:
"Evil-surmising Leads to an Unbalanced Intellect--In Minneapolis God gave precious gems of truth to His people in new settings, This light from heaven by some* was rejected with all the stubbornness the Jews manifested in rejecting Christ, and there was much talk about standing by the old landmarks. But there was evidence they knew not what the old landmarks were. There was evidence and there was reasoning from the Word that commended itself to the conscience; but the minds of men were fixed, sealed against the entrance of light, because they had decided it was a dangerous error removing the `old landmarks'--when it was not moving a peg of the old landmarks." [400] (* The word "some" was later clarified by Ellen White as "many," "our own brethren" (generic), and the acceptors as "few." She stood at Minneapolis "almost alone.")
To make this very clear she lists the distinguishing truths that called Adventists out of the popular churches after 1844. None of these truths are found in nominal, popular "basic Christianity":
The "Landmarks", the "Pillars" of our Faith1) cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary; [See here]
2) its relation to God's people on earth; [See here]
3) the first, second and third angel's messages; [See here]
4) the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus; [See here and here]
5) the temple of God in heaven and the ark containing the law of God; [See here]
6) the Sabbath of the fourth commandment; [See here]
7) the non-immortality of the soul. [See here]
In harmony with these distinguishing truths [combined as: (1) Christ in His sanctuary, (2) keeping God's holy Sabbath law, (3) mortality of man, (4) healthful living] she then proclaims:
"Now at the present time God designs a new and fresh impetus shall be given to His work. Satan sees this, and he is determined it shall be hindered. He knows that if he can deceive the people who claim to believe present truth, [and make them believe] that the work the Lord designs to do for His people is a removing of the old landmarks, something which they should, with most determined zeal, resist, then he exults over the deception he has led them to believe. The work for this time has certainly been a surprising work of various hindrances, owing to the false setting of matters before the minds of many of our people. That which is food to the churches is regarded as dangerous, and should not be given them. And this slight difference of ideas is allowed to unsettle the faith, to cause apostasy, to break up unity, to sow discord, all because they do not know what they are striving about themselves. Brethren, is it not best to be sensible? Heaven is looking upon us all, and what can they think of recent developments? While in this condition of things, building up barriers, we not only deprive ourselves of great light and precious advantages, but just now, when we so much need it, we place ourselves where light cannot be communicated from heaven that we ought to communicate to others.
The men in responsible positions have disappointed Jesus. They have refused precious blessings, and refused to be channels of light, as He wanted them to be. The knowledge they
Does Sunday-keeping "righteousness by faith," limited as it was, injected into historic, legalistic "Adventism" qualify as the latter rain and the loud cry of the third angel's message? Or did we then and do we now need a "fresh impetus" to transform our entire understanding of the third angel's message?
If the 16th Century Reformers' understanding of righteousness by faith was the same as that of "the third angel's message in verity," why didn't God give them the message of Revelation 18?
There is a further possibility that Knight overlooks what keeping the commandments means. Prior to 1888, most SDA ministers failed to understand it. True justification by faith which is related to the Most Holy Apartment ministry of our great High Priest lifts commandment keeping immeasurably above the pre-1888 idea. The message began to recover Paul's original concept of justification by faith that the Sunday keeping churches were sincerely unable to grasp: only "agape" is the fulfilling of the law." (Romans 13:10). By that standard, even good Luther fell short of its total realization. In Christ's Most Holy Place ministry, the High Priest ministers a greater heart-appreciation for what it cost the Lamb of God to save us which results in a total reconciliation with God that is implicit in Ellen White's phrase, "the final atonement." Luther's "basic Christianity" is wonderful but it is not adequate to meet the test of the mark of the beast.
Here is where Seventh-day Adventists are called to tell the world of a "breadth and length and depth and height" in righteousness by faith that most Sunday keeping Evangelicals could never dream of. They cannot see it, sincere as they may be, for their minds are constricted by their natural immortality of the soul's prejudice.
What could they have given us in 1888?
Does "Broad Exposure" Equal Acceptance?
Dr. Knight correctly states that "some of the Adventist leadership accepted it, but most rejected both the men and their message," and that "Ellen White emphasized that God had chosen Jones and Waggoner to bear a special message to the Adventist Church." [480] This is true. 
But did the post-Minneapolis church leadership under O.A. Olsen undo the unbelief that permeated the Minneapolis conference? Knight suggests the answer is yes because "Olsen responded positively."
It was not long after Minneapolis that the General Conference exiled Ellen White to Australia and Waggoner to England. Thus the trio was dissolved which left the president to follow his own plans. Contrary to what Knight says, no evidence exists that Olsen had "responded positively" to the message. Neither do the preaching appointments of Jones and Waggoner, labeled by Knight as "broad exposure" and "prominence," constitute acceptance of their message.
The chief officer of the church was deeply at odds with the message and the messengers, more so than he realized; and although Ellen White was on the other side of the planet she spared no effort in writing to him about his failure to appreciate the light. [CIAS comment: Dear reader, this may be true for any other denomination - they do not appreciate the light or even new light.]
The 1888 Materials portray a sad picture of his leadership. A 15-page letter in September 1892 came to him from Australia. She asks:
"Why do not brethren of like precious faith consider that in every age, when the Lord has sent a special message to the people, all the powers of the confederacy of evil have set at work to prevent the word of truth from coming to those who should receive it? If Satan can impress the mind and stir up the passions of those who claim to believe the truth, and thus lead them to unite with the forces of evil, he is well pleased. If once he can get them to commit themselves on the wrong side, he has laid his plans to lead them on a long journey. Through his deceptive wiles he will cause them to act upon the same principles he adopted in his disaffection in heaven. They take step after step in the false way, until there seems to be no other course for them except to go on, believing they are right in their bitterness of feeling toward their brethren. Will the Lord's messenger bear the pressure brought against him? If so, it is because God bids him stand in his strength and vindicate the truth that he is sent of God. {16MR 104.3, 105.1}
When men listen to the Lord's message, but through temptation allow prejudice to bar the mind and heart against the reception of truth, the enemy has power to present the most precious things in a distorted light. Looking through the medium of prejudice and passion, they feel too indignant to search the Scriptures in a Christlike spirit, but repudiate the whole matter because points are presented that are not in accordance with their own ideas. {16MR 105.2}
When a new view is presented, the question is often asked, "Who are its advocates? What is the position of influence of the one who would teach us who have been students of the Bible for many years?" God will send His words of warning by whom He will send. And the question to be settled is not what person is it who brings the message; this does not in any way affect the word spoken. "By their fruits ye shall know them." {16MR 105.3}
Truth is often preached by one who has not experienced its power; but it is truth nevertheless, and is blessed to those who, drawn by the Spirit of God, accept it. But when the truth is presented by one who is himself sanctified through it, it has a freshness, a force, that gives it a convincing power to the hearer. The truth, in its power upon the heart, is precious, and the truth addressed to the understanding is clear. Both are needful--the word and the inward testimony of the Spirit. {16MR 106.1}
In regard to the testimony that has come to us through the Lord's messengers, we can say, We know in whom we have believed. We know that Christ is our righteousness, not alone because He is so described in the Bible, but because we have felt His transforming power in our own hearts. {16MR 106.2}
Now, although there has been a determined effort to make of no effect the message God has sent, its fruits have been proving that it was from the source of light and truth. Those who have cherished unbelief and prejudice, who in the place of helping to do the work the Lord would have them do, have stood to bar the way against all evidence, cannot be supposed to have clearer spiritual eyesight for having so long closed their eyes to the very light God sent to the people. {16MR 106.3}
If we are to bear a part in this work to its close, we must recognize the fact that there are good things to come to the people of God in a way that we had not discerned; and that there will be resistance from the very ones we expected to engage in such a work. A man that is sincere in the wrong is not justified in the wrong, because he has opened his heart to a class of evidence leading him to condemn the right, and has closed his heart to a class of evidence which, if he would not cherish prejudice, would lead him to see and acknowledge what is truth. {16MR 106.4}
How long the lord will have patience with men in their blindness, how long He will wait before leaving them to grope their way to final darkness, we cannot determine. {16MR 107.1}
Should the Lord's messengers, after standing manfully for the truth for a time, fall under temptation, and dishonor Him who has given them their work, will that be proof that the message is not true? No, because the Bible is true. "To the law and to the testimony; if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." Sin on the part of the messenger of God would cause Satan to rejoice, and those who have rejected the messenger and the message would triumph; but it would not at all clear the men who were guilty of rejecting the message of truth sent of God. {16MR 107.2}
One matter burdens my soul: The great lack of the love of God, which has been lost through continued resistance of light and truth, and the influence of those who have been engaged in active labor, who, in the face of evidence piled upon evidence, have exerted an influence to counteract the work of the message God has sent. I point them to the Jewish nation and ask, Must we leave our brethren to pass over the same path of blind resistance, till the very end of probation? If ever a people needed true and faithful watchmen, who will not hold their peace, who will cry day and night, sounding the warnings God has given, it is Seventh-day Adventists. Those who have had great light, blessed opportunities, who, like Capernaum, have been exalted to heaven in point of privilege, shall they by non-improvement be left to darkness corresponding to the greatness of the light given?"
In September 1895 she continues in apparent agony of soul:
" I do not find rest in spirit. Scene after scene is presented in symbols before me, and I find no rest until I begin to write out the matter. I have not slept since two o'clock. I think we will institute at least once each day a season of prayer for the Lord to set things in order at the center of the work, matters there are being shaped so that every other institution is following in the same course. And the General Conference is itself becoming corrupted with wrong sentiments and principles. In the working up of plans the same principles are manifest that have controlled matters at Battle Creek for quite a length of time. {1888 1425.2}
I have been shown that the Jewish nation were not brought suddenly into their condition of thought and practice. From generation to generation they were working on false theories, carrying out principles that were opposed to the truth, and combining with their religion thoughts and plans that were the product of human minds; human inventions were made supreme. The holy principles that God has given are represented by the sacred fire; but common fire has been used in place of the sacred. Plans contrary to truth and righteousness, are introduced in a subtle manner on the plea that this must be done, and that must be done because it is for the advancement of the cause of God. But it is the devising of men that leads to oppression, injustice, and wickedness. The cause of God is to be free from every taint of injustice. It can gain no advantage by robbing the members of the family of God of their individuality or of their rights. All such practices are abhorrent to God. He inspires no such practices as have been entered into by your councils in regard to the publication of books."
After several years in Australia she wrote to him in December 1896:
"Dear Brother [O. A.] Olsen: . . . I have not, I think, revealed the entire working that led me here to Australia. Perhaps you may never fully understand the matter. The Lord was not in our leaving America. He did not reveal that it was His will that I should leave Battle Creek. The Lord did not plan this, but He let you all move after your own imaginings. The Lord would have had W. C. White, his mother, and her workers remain in America. We were needed at the heart of the work. . . . But the Lord read the hearts of all. There was so great a willingness to have us leave, that the Lord permitted this thing to take place. Those who were weary of the testimonies borne were left without the persons who bore them. Our separation from Battle Creek was to let men have their own will and way, which they thought superior to the way of the Lord." {10MR 392.1}
"I have not, I think, revealed the entire workings that led me here to Australia. Perhaps you may never fully understand the matter. The Lord was not in our leaving America. He did not reveal that it was his will that I should leave Battle Creek. The Lord did not plan this, but he let you all move after your own imaginings. The Lord would have had W. C. White, his mother, and her workers remain in America. We were needed at the heart of the work, and had your spiritual perception discerned the true situation, you would never have consented to the movements made. But the Lord read the hearts of all. There was so great a willingness to have us leave, that the Lord permitted this thing to take place. Those who were weary of the testimonies borne were left without the persons who bore them. Our separation from Battle Creek was to let men have their own will and way, which they thought superior to the way of the Lord." {1888 1622.1}
In August of the same year she wrote of his pathetic condition:
"Eld. A. O. Tait, Battle Creek, Michigan. Dear Brother:-
I feel very sorry for brother Olsen. I have written him much in regard to the situation. He has written back to me, thanking me for the timely letters, but he has not acted upon the light given. The case is a mysterious one. While travelling from place to place he has linked with him as companions men whose spirit and influence should not be sanctioned, and the people who repose confidence in them will be misled. But notwithstanding the light which has been placed before him for years in regard to this matter, he has ventured on, directly contrary to the light which the Lord has been giving him. All this confuses his spiritual discernment, and places him in a relation to the general interest, and wholesome, healthy advancement of the work, as an unfaithful watchman. He is pursuing a course which is detrimental to his spiritual discernment, and he is leading other minds to view matters in a perverted light. He has given unmistakable evidence that he does not regard the testimonies which the Lord has seen fit to give his people as worthy of respect or as of sufficient weight to influence his course of action."
I have not written you much because I knew that that which I should write you would only increase your burden and intensify the painful feelings you must have, while there is no hope that you can in any way relieve the situation. {1888 1607.1}
I am distressed beyond any words my pen can trace. Unmistakably, Elder Olsen has acted as did Aaron, in regard to these men who have been opposed to the work of God ever since the Minneapolis meeting. They have not repented of their course of action in resisting light and evidence. Long ago I wrote to A. R. Henry, but not a word of response has come from him to me. I have recently written to Harmon Lindsay and his wife, but I suppose he will not respect the matter sufficiently to reply." {1888 1608.1}
Speaking directly of the ongoing resistance, she wrote Elder I.H. Evans that Olsen had "rejected" the trust given him to communicate to the General Conference brethren her messages of reproof (Letter E51, 1897; White Estate).
It would be wonderful if history could record that Olsen "responded positively to the young reformers." We wish it could have been true. "Aaron" could not accomplish much; the heart was divided. Circumstances beyond their control forced the General Conference to allow Jones and Waggoner to speak frequently. Ellen White specifies that the underground resistance continued practically unabated with the "tops cut down" but the "roots" left intact.
Positive Accountability vs. "Blank Checks"
The last problem in Knight's segment on the 1888 history may be the most serious. "Some believers in the 1890's interpreted Ellen White's enthusiastic support of Jones and Waggoner as a kind of theological blank check." And so, "she had to fight that mentality." [700]
To do this - and then Knight quotes a phrase out of context - "she flatly asserted that `some interpretations of Scripture given by Dr. Waggoner I do not regard as correct'." And then he adds a single word from a comment made over a year later, "the two reformers were not `infallible'."
The current "writers" whom Knight opposes have never imitated that Jones and Waggoner were "infallible," or that Ellen White gave them any kind of theological "blank check." They have said only that she supported them enthusiastically hundreds of times and said they had "heavenly credentials" which no other SDA minister in history is said to have had (all this short of infallibility).
What did she actually say in 1888 context?
She was speaking to the session in the first flush of her new enthusiasm when she could hardly sleep at night for joy. Her thoughts are expressed clearly:
"Dr. Waggoner has spoken to us in a straightforward manner. There is precious light in what he has said. Some things presented in reference to the law in Galatians, if I fully understand his position*, do not harmonize with the understanding I have had of this subject; but truth will lose nothing by investigation, therefore I plead for Christ's sake that you come to the living Oracles, and with prayer and humiliation seek God. Everyone should feel that he has the privilege of searching the Scriptures for himself, and he should do this with earnest prayer that God will give him a right understanding of His word, that he may know from positive evidence that he does know what is truth." [{1888 163.2} * Later she did understand his position and supported it.]
"I would have humility of mind, and be willing to be instructed as a child. The Lord has been pleased to give me great light, yet I know that He leads other minds, and opens to them the mysteries of His Word, and I want to receive every ray of light that God shall send me, though it should come through the humblest of His servants." {1888 163.3}
As she continues she says,
"Some interpretations of Scripture given by Dr. Waggoner I do not regard as correct.** But I believe him to be perfectly honest in his views, and I would respect his feelings and treat him as a Christian gentleman. I have no reason to think that he is not as much esteemed of God as are any of my brethren, and I shall regard him as a Christian brother, so long as there is no evidence that he is unworthy. The fact that he honestly holds some views of Scripture differing from yours or mine is no reason why we should treat him as an offender, or as a dangerous man, and make him the subject of unjust criticism. We should not raise a voice of censure against him or his teachings unless we can present weighty reasons for so doing and show him that he is in error. No one should feel at liberty to give loose rein to the combative spirit." {1888 164.1}** If her "I" is emphasized (as it well might have been), this remark can be understood as a plea to the brethren to lay aside their prejudice. She says in effect, Even I amd caught by surprise; but do let us study the matter!]
"There are some who desire to have a decision made at once as to what is the correct view on the point under discussion. As this would please Elder B., it is advised that this question be settled at once. But are minds prepared for such a decision? I could not sanction this course, because our brethren are exercised by a spirit which moves their feelings, and stirs their impulses, so as to control their judgment. While under so much excitement as now exists, they are not prepared to make safe decisions." {1888 164.2}
"I know it would be dangerous to denounce Dr. Waggoner's position as wholly erroneous. This would please the enemy. I see the beauty of truth in the presentation of the righteousness of Christ in relation to the law as the doctor has placed it before us. You say, many of you, it is light and truth. Yet you have not presented it in this light heretofore. Is it not possible that through earnest, prayerful searching of the Scriptures he has seen still greater light on some points? That which has been presented harmonizes perfectly with the light which God has been pleased to give me during all the years of my experience. If our ministering brethren would accept the doctrine which has been presented so clearly--the righteousness of Christ in connection with the law--and I know they need to accept this, their prejudices would not have a controlling power, and the people would be fed with their portion of meat in due season. Let us take our Bibles, and with humble prayer and a teachable spirit, come to the great Teacher of the world; let us pray as did David, "Open thou mine eyes, that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law" (Psalms 119:18). {1888 164.3}
Then she adds a detail which Dr. Knight leaves out:
"That which has been presented harmonizes perfectly with the light which God has been pleased to give me during all the years of my experience." [1050]
But the matter does not end there. She said later on:
"I believe without a doubt that God has given precious truth at the right time to Brother Jones and Waggoner. Do I place them as infallible? Do I say they will not make a statement or have an idea that cannot be questioned or that cannot be error? Do I say so? No, I do not say any such thing. Nor do I say that of any man in the world. But I do say God has sent light, and do be careful how you treat it." [1060]
The philosophy portrayed in this small section of A Brief History of Seventh-day Adventists is but the echo of the author's previous books dealing with 1888. Once again the inference is put to the church that Ellen White's post-1888 publications really provide all the message the church or the world needs. Did "the Lord in His great mercy" send a superfluous "message"? God's people have been given
Steps to Christ (1892),... but she never even hinted that these and anything else she has ever penned could take the place of the "most precious message" which "the Lord in His great mercy sent" through Jones and Waggoner.
Thoughts from the Mount of Blessings (1896),
The Desire of Ages (1898),
Christ's Object Lessons (1900)
She claimed that her writings were in harmony with their message but never intimated that they were to supplant it or make it superfluous. She would not dare to override a "message" she had declared the Lord had "sent" by others. As her writings as a "lesser light" direct us to a "greater Light," so thousands of Adventists today are testifying that the 1888 message has anointed their eyes to appreciate more deeply her writings.
Minneapolis Prejudices and Opinions Prevail
Ellen White's `Holy Spirit enlightened insight' allowed her to see the remnant church yet in the future beyond her day. In 1890 she outlined specifically the dangers facing the work of God. they are intimately connected with the tragedy of Minneapolis.
"The prejudices and opinions that prevailed at Minneapolis are not dead by any means. The seeds there sown are ready to spring into life and bear a like harvest, because the roots are still left. The tops have been cut off, but the roots are not dead, and will bear their unholy fruit, to poison the perception and blind the understanding of those you connect with, in regard to the messengers and messages that God sends. When you destroy the root of bitterness by thorough confession, then you will see light in God's light. Only study the Word of God with a purpose. You need to do this. Do not study with a purpose to confirm your ideas, but bring your ideas to the Bible to be trimmed, condemned or approved in the light of the Old and New Testaments. Make God and your Bible your constant companions. Study the Testimonies with the same purpose, with much prayer." {1888 942.1}
After fifty years since 1888-Re-examined was presented to the General Conference Committee, the story of the 1888 history and message is still a thorn to any who would rationalize the truth of Adventist history. Ellen White's portrayal of Baal worship has not lost its impact. The same prophetic insight that discloses roots that "have never been rededicated" goes on to sound a warning worthy of our attention:
"There has been a departure from God among us, and the zealous work of repentance and return to our first love essential to restoration to God and regeneration of heart has not yet been done. Infidelity has been making its inroads into our ranks; for it is the fashion to depart from Christ, and give place to skepticism. With many the cry of the heart has been, `We will not have this man to reign over us.' Baal, Baal, is the choice. The religion of many among us will be the religion of apostate Israel, because they love their own way, and forsake the way of the Lord. The true religion, the only religion of the Bible, that teaches forgiveness only through the merits of a crucified and risen Saviour, that advocates righteousness by the faith of the Son of God, has been slighted, spoken against, ridiculed, and rejected. It has been denounced as leading to enthusiasm and fanaticism. But it is the life of Jesus Christ in the soul, it is the active principle of love imparted by the Holy Spirit, that alone will make the soul fruitful unto good works. The love of Christ is the force and power of every message for God that ever fell from human lips. What kind of a future is before us, if we shall fail to come into the unity of the faith?" {1888 955.1}
What God initiated in the early 1890s must be recaptured and permitted to reach its desired end - the preparation of a people for the coming of Christ. Whether this generation faces the objective truth of our history or whether we must await one yet in the future, certainly probation cannot close until Adventist history is recognized, for in it is revealed the story of our heart-alienation from the Lamb of God. What our elders needed long ago and what we need is what Ellen White described as "the final atonement."
Those who do not understand the past correctly, say the sages, cannot be prepared to meet the future.
The Holy Spirit is arousing world-wide interest in the history and message that has come to be known as "1888".
The evidence set forth herein concerns the very vitals of the Seventh-day Adventist world mission. It is a study of the "latter rain" outpouring of the Holy Spirit which began in 1888, and has been for a century mysteriously frustrated.
Notes & References
[0010] George R. Knight, A Brief History of Seventh-day Adventists (KABH), R&H Publishing Association, Hagerstown, MD 21740; 1999, p. 87, 88.
[0020] Ibid., p. 90. [CIAS comment to the reader: Most of the quotations after ref# 200 in this booklet we present in their entire paragraph context since we are not concerned about how many pages the finished booklet would be. The `bold' printed sentences are those the authors quote in the original. In quotes with no bold print the entire paragraph was quoted.]
[0040] See this link on Protestant vs Catholic, and mixed in Adventist teachings.
[0060 Ibid., p. 91; 1888 Materials 139, 140, it. added.
[0080] 1888 Materials, p. 211.
[0120] Ibid., p. 210, 217, It. added.
[0150] Ibid., p. 219, emph. suppl.
[0160] Ibid., p. 518, of 1889.
[0170] Ibid., p. 565-567, of 1890.
[0180] Ibid., p. 608, of 1890.
[0190] Ibid., p. 673, of 1890.
[0200] Ibid., p. 915, 916, 1891.
[0210] Ibid., p. 1575, 1896;1MR 130.3.
[0280] RH, January 21, 1890 par. 4.
[0290] RH, January 21, 1890 par. 8.
[0300] R&H, February 4, 1890. (CIAS comment: Probably the reason why our brethren in the 1950's were unprepared to meet the Evangelical criticism of our sanctuary beliefs. [See here])
[0400] 11MR 243.2; also in CW 30.1.;
* The word "some" was later clarified by Ellen White as "many," "our own brethren" (generic), and the acceptors as "few." She stood at Minneapolis "almost alone."
[0420] 1888 518.3, 519.1. Whole paragraphs inserted for context, only bold quoted in this reply booklet.
[1050] Ibid., p. 163, 164 (Nov. 1888).
Bible Topics