109

THE PENTECOSTAL/CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT

Among the fastest growing Christian churches in the world are the Pentecostal/
charismatic churches. Today they are estimated to have between 200-400 million members,
which is ca. 20% of all Christians. Considering that the modern Pentecostal/charismatic
movement is not yet 100 years old, this is truly amazing. The history of the Pentecostal
movement can be divided into three stages: (1) Pentecostalism, (2) Neo-Pentecostalism or the
Charismatic Movement, (3) The Third Wave.

PENTECOSTALISM
Modern or classical Pentecostalism has its roots in the 19th Century Holiness movements
in America and England.

1. Holiness Movement
The Wesleyan holiness revival of the 1880's taught a perfectionism which emphasised
eradication of unholy desires as the essential fruit of entire sanctification. Some also taught the
baptism of the Holy Spirit as a post-conversion experience which gave them power to heal
people – like the Faith-Healing movement.

2. Keswick Higher Life Movement

The Keswick Movement from ca. 1875 on was the English counterpart to the American
Holiness movement, but Keswick theologians rejected the sinless perfection doctrine. They
taught that a normative Christian life is characterised by “the fullness of the Spirit.” This fullness
of the Spirit provides victory over sin, but not eradication of tendencies to sin. There is no
evidence that tongues appeared in these two movements as they had among the Irvingites in
England and the Shakers and Mormons in the US half a century earlier.

The Twentieth Century

a. Agnes Ozman - Modern Pentecostalism had its beginning on January 1, 1901 when Agnes
Ozman a student at Bethel Bible School in Topeka, Kansas, began to speak in tongues. Bethel
Bible School had opened three months earlier under Charles Fox Parham (1873-1929), a
holiness preacher who had heard of xenolalic tongues among missionaries. Impressed with the
holiness teaching of “a latter rain outpouring’ prior to the Second Advent, he considered xenolalic
tongues as evidence of Spirit baptism, since it made all recipients into instant missionaries. He

110
established the school to prepare prospective missionaries for the outpouring of the Holy Spirit
evidenced by tongues. On January 1, 1901, Agnes Ozman (1870-1937) asked Parham to lay
hands on her and pray specifically that she receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit with the “biblical
sign.” Parham reported that after a brief prayer “a halo seemed to surround her head and face,
and she began to speak Chinese and was unable to speak English for three days.1 Several days
later Parham and about half the student body (they had a total of 34 students) likewise spoke in
tongues. News reports spread the story far and wide.

b. Azusa Street Revival - The new Pentecostal movement received its greatest impetus from
the Azusa Street revivals in Los Angeles between 1906-1909 led by William Seymour (1870-
1922), a black holiness preacher from Texas who had at one stage studied under Parham
(1905). He was asked to pastor the Azusa church in Los Angeles. He arrived in February, 1906
and on April 19 a number of people (black and white) began to speak in tongues. The LA Times
published an article and by the end of summer the 50 member church had grown to more than
300. This revival spread to other areas in the United States and the Azusa Street Missions
became the international Mecca for those seeking the Pentecostal experience. An eye witness
of the Azusa Street revival wrote:
Men and women, colored, white, and mulattoes, were talking excitedly “in
tongues.” A man in the centre of the room had hold of the post in front of his chair
and seemed to be in possession of an old-fashioned Peter Cartwright camp-
meeting case of the jerks. He was muttering and mumbling most of the time, but
at intervals would raise his voice to a veritable shriek. About sixty or seventy out
of the three hundred present were “possessed of the Spirit” and each was
apparently seeking to make enough noise to be heard above the general din.
One of the three men who were leading the meeting was praying in stentorian
tones, kneeling upon an open Bible. He was coatless and almost beside himself
with excitement. His arms waved and his body swayed. I thought at the time that
he might have been heard two blocks away.... In this meeting there was barking
like dogs, hooting like owls, and the like.... After adjourning one of the leaders
remarked in my hearing, “God had a wonderful hold on this meeting for a little
while, didn’t He?”2

In time, Pentecostalism became the strongest conservative movement in the Christian

Church during the first half of the twentieth century.

THE CHARISMATIC MOVEMENT

1. The Second Wave
1
Sarah E. (Thistle-Thwaite) Parham, Life of Charles Parham (Lake City, FL: Hunter Printing Co, 1930), 52-53.
2
C.W Shumway, A Study of the Gifts of Tongues, Thesis USC, 1914, 67-68; quoted in Nader Mikhaiel, The Toronto
Blessing and Slaying in the Spirit (Earlwood, NSW: Nader Mikhaiel, 1992), 215.

111
 In the 1960's the Pentecostal Movement entered a second stage or “second wave” in
Christian circles, when it broke out of the Pentecostal Churches and entered many traditional
churches. This was referred to as Neo-Pentecostal or the Charismatic Renewal Movement
(Charismatic Movement).

a. Dennis Bennett - The birth of this “second wave” is dated to April 3, 1960 when the
Episcopalian priest Dennis Bennett announced to his congregation in Van Nuys, CA, that he had
been baptized with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues. Because of opposition in his church, he
resigned and was given a small dying church in Seattle. Within ten years it became a major
center from which the teaching of Spirit baptism would spread worldwide. The emphasis is on
tongues, healing and prophecy.

b. Roman Catholicism - Neo-Pentecostalism has entered almost every Protestant

denomination, as well as the Roman Catholic Church. “In the nearly 25 years since it began, the
charismatic renewal movement within the Catholic Church has grown to touch some six million to
ten million Catholics around the world.“3

2. The Third Wave

a. Peter Wagner - In the 1980s a third renewal movement arose which Peter Wagner (Fuller
Seminary) calls “The Third Wave”. Third wave advocates believe that every Christian should use
New Testament spiritual gifts today and that the proclamation of the gospel should normally be
accompanied by “signs, wonders and miracles” as it was in New Testament times. Though they
believe in tongues they do not emphasize them to the extent that Pentecostals and Charismatics
do.

b. John Wimber - The most prominent representative of the Third Wave was John Wimber
(1934 -1997) of the Association of Vineyard Churches. John Wimber was raised in a non-
Christian home. In 1963 he had a dramatic conversion experience which led him into the
ministry. In 1975 he joined P. Wagner at Fuller in establishing the Institute of Evangelism and
Church Growth. In 1977 he established the Anaheim Vineyard Church and started a praying
ministry for the sick in which he began seeing dramatic results. This launched him into his
internationally well known “signs and wonders” ministry. When his church had grown to 5,000
3
Julia Duin, "Catholic Renewal Charismatic Community Split by Controversy," Christianity Today , Sept. 16, 1991,
55.

112
members he began an aggressive church-planting effort which today includes several hundred
churches affiliated with the Association of Vineyard Churches. One of these churches was the
Airport Vineyard church in Toronto, Canada.

THE TORONTO BLESSING

A. History
The beginnings of the Toronto Blessing phenomenon go back to a man called Rodney
Howard-Brown, known as the laughing evangelist.

1. Rodney Howard-Browne is from South Africa. He believes God called him to America in
1987. He also believes that God has given him a special anointing to renew the church with the
power of the Holy Spirit. He refers to himself as “The Holy Ghost Bartender,” because he is
giving to the churches the “new wine” of the Holy Spirit.

2. Randy Clark – In 1993 Randy Clark, the Vineyard pastor in St. Louis, was longing for some
manifestations of the Holy Spirit. He heard about Howard-Browne’s incredible impact on some
of his friends. So he went to hear Howard-Browne at a revival meeting in Tulsa, Oklahoma.
While there he received the laying-on of hands from Rodney Howard-Brown. He was “zapped”
by the “Spirit” and experienced tongues and holy laughter.

3. John Arnott – During that same year, 1993, John Arnott, senior pastor of the Toronto Airport
Vineyard Church, heard about the so-called “renewal” of some churches through Holy Laughter.
In the autumn of that year at a regional meeting of the Vineyard churches, John Arnott met
Randy Clark and invited him to preach at the Airport Vineyard church on January 20, 1994. At
this meeting the church in Toronto was “zapped” and the Toronto Blessing was born. Since that
day there have been meetings at the Airport church almost every evening.
On June 19, 1994 the London Sunday Telegraph told its readers: “British Airways flight 092
took off from Toronto Airport on Thursday evening just as the Holy Spirit was landing on a small
building 100 yards from the end of the runway.”4 What happens there is a source of joy for many,
but perplexing and even offensive to many others. A reporter from the Toronto Life Magazine
went to one of the meetings and wrote:
The man sitting beside me, Dwayne from California, roared like a wounded lion.
The woman beside Dwayne started jerking so badly her hands struck her face.
People fell like dominoes, collapsing chairs as they plunged to the carpeting. They
4
London Sunday Telegraph, June 19, 1994, quoted in James A. Beverley, Holy Laughter & The Toronto Blessing
Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1995), 11.

113
 howled like wolves, brayed like donkeys and - in the case of a young man
standing near the sound board - started clucking like a feral chicken. And the
tears! Never have I seen people weep so hysterically, as though every hurt they'd
ever encountered had risen to the surface and popped like an overheated tar
bubble. This was eerie . . . stuff - people were screaming, their bodies jerking
unnaturally, their faces contorted with tics.5

The animal noises and other excesses eventually led to the fall from grace. In December
1995, the Association of Vineyard Churches removed the Toronto Airport Christian Fellowship
from its membership.
Toronto Airport Vineyard Fellowship, birthplace of a renewal that has spread
throughout the world over the past two years, has been ousted from the
Association of Vineyard Churches (AVC) over what the denomination calls "exotic
practices" in renewal services. The division occurred despite the pleading of
Airport Vineyard supporters who asked Wimber for time to work out a resolution...
The issues center in part on the unusual animal-like behaviour - such as roaring or
barking. . . . Wimber said Arnott and his staff were repeatedly warned not to
promote, encourage or theologize the animal behaviour and the accompanying
sounds.6

EVALUATION
As much as possible we need to evaluate the Toronto Blessing by comparing it with
Scripture. For example:

1. Being Slain in the Spirit - That people experienced loss of physical strength and fell to the
ground when God appeared to them is clearly evident in Scripture (Dan. 10:9; Acts 9:3,4; Rev.
1:17). Ellen White at times had the same experience.7 However, there are significant differences
between the Toronto Blessing and past experiences. For example:
a. In Scripture and Adventist history, it happened primarily to prophets and not to
worshipppers during the worship hour.
b. In Scripture this event happened sporadically, not regularly.
c. In Scripture it was not initiated by man with prayer or laying-on of hands, it just
happened.
d. In Scripture it did not become the focus of the meetings.

5
Robert Hough, Toronto Life Magazine, Feb., 1995, 31, quoted in Beverley, 12.
6
Marcia Ford, "Toronto Church Ousted from Vineyard", Charisma, Feb. 1996, 12,13, quoted in, Robert Kuglin, The
Toronto Blessing-What would the Holy Spirit say? (Camp Hill, PA: Horizon Books, 1996), 232-234.
7
Letter to Loveland, 13.12.1850; to Bates, 13.7.1847; to Hastings, 29.5.48.

114
2. Self-control - Self-control is a fruit of the spirit (Gal 5:23). The Toronto Blessing is the
opposite of self control.

3. Order - Paul says in 1 Corinthians 14:40 “Let all things be done decently and in order”. The
context of this text is the worship service.

4. Strong Delusions - According to 2 Thessalonians 2:9-11, prior to Christ’s Second Advent,

Satan will work with all power, signs and lying wonders. Jesus warned, Matthew 24:24 “For false
Christ’s and false prophets will arise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible,
even the elect.”
E.G. White:
Before the final visitation of God's judgments upon the earth there will be among
the people of the Lord such a revival of primitive godliness as has not been
witnessed since apostolic times . . . The enemy of souls desires to hinder this
work; and before the time for such a movement shall come, he will endeavour to
prevent it by introducing a counterfeit. In those churches which he can bring under
his deceptive power he will make it appear that God's special blessing is poured
out; there will be manifest what is thought to be great religious interest. Multitudes
will exult that God is working marvelously for them, when the work is that of
another spirit. Under a religious guise, Satan will seek to extend his influence over
the Christian world.8

5. Mass Manipulation - The minister tells the people how the Holy Spirit works. There is loud
music and singing. Those who let themselves go can easily fall into a trance, or lie on the floor
and feel happy. This also happens in non-Christian worship services, or with people who take
drugs. It can be a psychological reaction or simply a fake behavior.

James A. Beverley:
None of the manifestations associated with The Toronto Blessing are inherently
miraculous. Each one of them can be imitated by most people. An actor could be
hired to attend an evening meeting and imitate all the manifestations, and no one
would be able to distinguish that person from others under the `real' anointing.9

Whatever it is:
The Holy Spirit never reveals Himself in such methods, in such a bedlam of noise.
This is an invention of Satan to cover up his ingenious methods for making of
none effect the pure, sincere, elevating, ennobling, sanctifying truth for this time...
A bedlam of noise shocks the senses and perverts that which if conducted aright
might be a blessing. The powers of satanic agencies blend with the din and noise,

8
Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1950), 464.
9
Beverley, 158.

115
 to have a carnival, and this is termed the Holy Spirit's working.... Those
participating in the supposed revival receive impressions which lead them adrift.
They cannot tell what they formerly knew regarding Bible principles.10

6. New Age - Alan Morrison, an English clergyman, believes it is an initiation into the New Age -
the demonic. “Just as Satan is counterfeiting the Work of the Holy Spirit through the Toronto
Blessing, so he will counterfeit the second coming of Christ”

7. Experience Replaces Doctrine - The mind is switched off and the teaching of Scripture
becomes irrelevant. A woman said, “My relationship with Jesus is more important than doctrine.”
This sounds good, however, unless you know from Scripture who Jesus is (doctrine), and what
he wants you to do (doctrine), you may be having a relationship with the wrong “Jesus.”
Matthew 24:5 “Many will come in My name, saying, ‘I am the Christ’.” Jesus is not just talking
about people; demons may claim to be Christ. Therefore, the gift that we need more than most
others is the gift of discerning the spirits.

Conclusion
While the Pentecostal/Charismatic movement has made a tremendous impact on the
Christian churches, its offspring the Toronto Blessing is an emotional phenomenon without
biblical support. Jesus, Paul and Ellen White predicted that such false revivals would happen.
Therefore, we need to be on guard and test the spirits whether they are in harmony with what
has been revealed before (Isa 8:20).

10
Ellen G. White, Maranatha: The Lord is coming, (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1976), 234.

116
 THE HOLY SPIRIT AND TONGUES

I. THE PROMISE OF THE SPIRIT

A. The Need of the Spirit

The disciples after 3 1/2 years at the feet of the greatest teacher in the universe were
unprepared and powerless to carry on His work. He said to them, “And behold, I send the
promise of my Father upon you; but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with
power from on high.” (Luke 24:49)
A few days earlier he had said “Go and make disciples of all nations “, (Matt. 28:19). Now he
said: “tarry ... until you are endued with power from on high.”
Lesson: No one is equipped for gospel service unless he/she is invested with power from on
high. Knowledge - not enough. Activity is not sufficient. We must have the power of the Holy
Spirit.
What we need is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Without this, we are no more fitted to
go forth to the world than were the disciples after the crucifixion of their Lord. Jesus
knew their destitution and told them to tarry in Jerusalem until they should be
endowed with power from on high.11

The preaching of the word will be of no avail without the continual presence and aid of
the Holy Spirit. This is the only effectual teacher of divine truth. Only when the truth is
accompanied to the heart by the Spirit, will it quicken the conscience or transform the
life.12

B. The Work of the Spirit

There are about a dozen texts in the gospels which refer to the promise of the Holy Spirit:
Matthew 3:11 - Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit (at Pentecost)
Mark 13:11 - When arrested the Holy Spirit would teach the disciples what to say
Luke 11:13 - Holy Spirit is given to those who ask
John 6:63 - Holy Spirit gives life
John 14:15 - Holy Spirit - the helper, comforter, Paraclete
John 14:26 - Holy Spirit teaches all things
John 15:26 - Holy Spirit testifies of Jesus
John 16:7-11- Holy Spirit convicts of sin, judgment, and righteousness
John 16:13, 14 - Holy Spirit guides into all truth
11
E.G. White, Review and Herald, Feb. 18, 1890.
12
Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1940), 671.

117
C. The Gifts of the Spirit
Another activity of the promised Holy Spirit is that he would give gifts. 1 Corinthians 12:7 “But
the manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.”
The gifts mentioned in 1 Corinthians 12:7-11 are:
1) wisdom 4) healing 7) distinguishing spirits
2) knowledge 5) miraculous powers 8) tongues
3) faith 6) prophecy 9) interpretation of tongues

II. SPEAKING IN TONGUES

The gift we want to focus on for the next few minutes is the gift of tongues.
A. Definitions
The phenomenon of speaking in tongues has been described by various terms:
1. Xenoglossia - strange or foreign tongues
ξέvoς- adj. Strange, foreign; noun - alien, stranger
γλσσχ - tongue

2. Xenolalia - strange or foreign speech

ξέυoς and λχλέω - speak

3. Heteroglossolalia - speaking in other tongues

τερoς - other, another + γλσσχ + λχλέω

4. Glossolalia - γλσσλλ + λχλέω

The commonly accepted and used term is the last one - glossolalia. The Encyclopedia of
Religion defines it as, “A nonordinary speech behavior that is institutionalized as a religious ritual
in numerous western and non-western religious communities.”13
In this sense glossolalia has been known in non-Christian religions in ancient and modern
times. Pagan priests, witch doctors, shamans and other religious figures have spoken in
tongues on various ceremonial and religious occasions.

B. Tongues and the Adventist Church

Seventh-day Adventists, generally, believe that the gift of tongues in the book of Acts refers
to real languages. In regard to tongues in 1 Corinthians 12-14 some believe there too real
languages are involved, while others interpret those tongues as ecstatic speech:

13
Felicitas D. Goodman, “Glossolalia” Encyclopaedia of Religion, second edition, 15 vols. (New York: Thomson
Gale, 2005), 5:3504.

118
 a. Human languages:
Gerhard Hasel
It is most reasonable to conclude that tongues-speaking throughout the New
Testament is the same gift of miraculously speaking unlearned foreign languages.14

b. Ecstatic speech:
Samuele Bacchiocchi
We have concluded that tongue-speaking in Corinth was different from that reported
in Acts. . . We have found that it is not a foreign language, but some kind of “ecstatic
speech”15

C. Is Glossolalia a Human Language?

1. Linguists
In recent decades linguists have studied glossolalia to find out whether it is an actual
language or not. The results have been rather one-sided.
a. Prof. William Welmes, professor of African languages of UCLA,in his report said:
And I must report without reservation that my sample does not sound like a language
structurally. There can be no more than two contrasting vowel sounds, and a most
peculiarly restricted set of consonant sounds; these combine into a very few syllable
clusters which recur many times in various orders. The consonants and vowels do not
all sound like English (the glossolalic's native language), but the intonation patterns
are so completely American English that the total effect is a bit ludicrous.16

b. Eugene Nida, a linguist of the American Bible Society after his investigation concluded :
The types of inventory and distributions would indicate clearly that this recording
bears no resemblance to any actual language which has ever been treated by
linguists. . . . If then it is not a human language, what is it? One can only say that it is
a form of "ecstatic speech." . . . On the basis of what I have learned about this type of
phenomena of "tongues" in other parts of the world, apparently there is the same
tendency to employ one's own inventory of sounds, in nonsense combinations, but
with simulated "foreign" features. At least in West Africa and Latin America, the types
of glossolalia employed seemed to fit into this description.17

c. William J. Samarin, Professor of Linguistics at Toronto University, studied glossolalia

extensively over five years. He assessed glossolalia to be:
Meaningless but phonetically structured human utterance, believed by the
speaker to be a real language but bearing no systematic resemblance to any
natural language, living or dead.18

14
Gerhard Hasel, Speaking in Tongues (Berrien Springs, MI: Adventist Theological Society, 1991), 150.
15
Samuele Bacchiocchi, Popular Beliefs: Are They Biblical? (Berrien Springs, MI: Biblical Perspectives, 2008), 305.
16
William Welmes, Letter to the Editor, Christianity Today, 8, Nov. 8, 1963, 19, 20.
17
Eugene Nida cited in V.R. Edman, "Divine or Devilish?" Christian Herald, May, 1964, 16.
18
William J. Samarin,Tongues of Man and Angels (New York, Macmillan, 1972), 2.

119
 2. Pentecostals
Most charismatics, therefore, have accepted that modern glossolalia is not ordinary
human language. They call it a heavenly language:
a. Robert L. Saucy, Professor of Systematic Theology at Talbot School of Theology,
California
Whether tongues referred to in Scripture were the miraculous speaking of foreign
languages unknown to the speaker or the language of glory (i.e., "tongues of
angels", 1 Cor 13:1) or both, the important point is that they were all language,
i.e., they conveyed conceptual thought. 19

b. H. Newton Malony and A. Adams Lovekin:

Glossolalia is, indeed, a language in a different sense of the word . . . the weight
of evidence, however, suggests that although there is pattern and form, speaking
in tongues is most likely not a known tongue nor a human language as the term is
presently understood.20

D. Tongues and Glossolalia

1. Glossa as Language
Revelation 5:9; 7:9; 10:11; 11:9; 13:7; 14:6; 17:15

2. Glossa as Tongues
The gift of tongues is mentioned in the gospels once, Mark 16:17, in five texts in the book
of Acts, Acts 2:4-11; 10:46; 19:6, and twenty times in 1 Corinthians 12-14 (1 Cor 12:10
[twice], 28, 30; 13:1, 8; 14:2, 4, 5 [twice], 6, 13, 14, 18, 19, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29.

3. Three Views on New Testament Tongues

Was the New Testament gift of tongues the same as modern glossolalia?
Some way “yes”, some say “no”, others says “yes and no.”
a. Ecstatic Speech
Early Christian glossolalia was the utterance of gibberish at the compulsion of
ecstatic and uncontrolled emotion - a cacophony unintelligible to all save the few
who were charismatically endowed for its interpretation.21

b. Foreign Languages

19
Robert L. Saucy in Wayne A. Grudem, ed., Are Miraculous Gifts for Today? (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1996),
131.
20
H. Newton Malony and A. Adams Lovekin, Glossolalia. Behavioral Science Perspectives on Speaking in Tongues
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1985), 38.
21
S. MacLean Gilmour, "Easter and Pentecost", Journal of Biblical Literature, 81 (March, 1967): 64.

120
 By speaking other languages, the believers provided the evidence that the Holy
Spirit is performing a miracle.22

c. Ecstatic Speech and Foreign Languages

Most scholars assume that the phenomena described in Acts 2:4 and in 1 Cor
14:2 are significantly different in that in one instance people understood it in their
own regional language or dialect and in the other instance an interpreter was
required. It is for that reason that many interpret glossa in 1 Cor 14:2 as ecstatic
speech, which was also an element in Hellenistic religions and constituted a
symbol of divine inspiration.23

III. TONGUES IN SCRIPTURE

1. Mark 16:17
The first to speak about the gift of tongues was Jesus himself. Context - the reaffirmation of
the Great Commission to go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature (vs 15).
Jesus mentions five signs one of which is speaking with new tongues. He speaks of miracles
which will accompany their proclamation of the gospel.
The fulfillment of Mark 16:17 is found in Acts 2 where the disciples spoke in new tongues.
Therefore tongues in Mark 16:17 carry the same meaning as in Acts 2.
Purpose of these new tongues in context is the proclamation of the gospel.

2. Acts 2:1-4
The first account of speaking in tongues took place on the day of Pentecost (2:1).
a. Pentecost - 50 days after the resurrection (Sunday after Passover (Lev 23:15,16,
known as feast of weeks Exodus 34:22) 10 days after the ascension. (Later Judaism -
anniversary of the giving of the law)
b. Mighty wind - symbol of the Holy Spirit (John 3:8)
c. Tongues of fire - symbol of divinity (Ex 3:2)
d. They were all filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak - There was no period of
apprenticeship; there was no period of being taught, and there was no time of
learning; they began to speak right away.
In other tongues = languages – cf. 6, 8, 11

22
Simon J. Kistemaker, Exposition of the Acts of the Apostles (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1990), 8.
23
J.P. Louw, E.A. Nida et.al., Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domain (London,
1988), 1:389-90).

121
 While there are some who see ecstatic utterances in Acts 2, most scholars agree that
languages are meant:
a. Richard N. Longenecker:
The tongues in 2:4 are best understood as "languages" and should be taken in accord
with Philo's reference to understandable language as one of the three signs of God's
presence in the giving of the law at Mount Sinai.24

b. John F. MacArthur
Nowhere does the Bible teach that the gift of tongues is anything other than human
languages. Nor is there any suggestion that the true tongues described in 1
Corinthians 12-14 were materially different from the miraculous languages described
in Acts 2 at Pentecost.25
c. E.G. White:
Every known tongue was represented by those assembled. This diversity of
languages would have been a great hindrance to the proclamation of the gospel; God
therefore in a miraculous manner supplied the deficiency of the apostles. The Holy
Spirit did for them that which they could not have accomplished for themselves in a
lifetime. They could now proclaim the truths of the gospel abroad, speaking with
accuracy the languages of those for whom they were labouring. This miraculous gift
was a strong evidence to the world that their commission bore the signet of heaven.
From this time forth the language of the disciples was pure, simple and accurate,
whether they spoke in their native tongue or in a foreign language (Acts of the
Apostles, 39-40).

Acts 2:7, 8 - Utter amazement was caused by the fact that these unlearned Galileans
suddenly spoke in the native tongues of the various listeners.
NB: It was not a miracle of hearing. The Holy Spirit came on believers only -
Glossolalia is spoken by Christians and non-Christians.

What Was the Purpose of the Tongues?

1. Evidence of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit
In Acts 1:5 Jesus had told them you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit, at Pentecost this
baptism took place.

2. Sign to Israel
John F. MacArthur, Jr.
The miraculous languages, speaking the wonderful works of God to all foreigners
gathered at Jerusalem, had a definite purpose: to be a sign of judgment on

24
Richard N. Longenecker, "The Acts of the Apostles," The Expositor's Bible Commentary, 12 vols., ed. F.E.
Gaebelein (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1981), 9:271.
25
John F. MacArthur, Jr., Charismatic Chaos (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992), 226.

122
 unbelieving Israel, to show the inclusion of other groups in the one church, and to
confirm the apostles spiritual authority.26

3. Mission
Gerhard F. Hasel
Based on the prediction of Jesus, as recorded in Mark 16:17 and its context, the
purpose of the gift of tongues was to provide the communications means for the
evangelisation of the world through the proclamation of the gospel (cf. Mk 16:16f).27

Acts 2 is the key passage in interpreting the gift of tongues in the New Testament - it is clear.

3. Acts 10:44-48
a. 10:44-48 - Cornelius received the Holy Spirit when he accepted Christ.
b. Same gift as in Acts 2
i. Both groups were believers
ii. Same outward manifestations: they received the Holy Spirit just as we have (vs
47)
iii. Same terminology
c. Purpose
i. Convince the Jews that the Gentiles also received the Holy Spirit and have a part
in the in the kingdom of God.
ii. To indicate that Jews and Gentiles alike share in the task of evangelizing the
world.
iii. To praise God - as in Acts 2:11, 10:46

4. Acts 19:1-6
12 disciples of John the Baptist. They probably did not know about Jesus’ death,
resurrection and ascension, and when they heard and believed they were baptized
in the name of Jesus.

a. Acts 19:6 - Paul laid hands on them. The laying-on of hands as such was not a
symbol of the baptism of the Holy Spirit;
1) No laying-on of hands in Acts 2 or 10
2) Laying-on of hands used in healing Acts 3:7; 28:7, 8.
3) Laying-on of hands symbol of commission to go and preach the gospel Acts
13:2, 3.
E.G. White:
26
Ibid., 178.
27
Gerhard F. Hasel, Speaking in Tongues (Berrien Springs, MI: Adventist Theological Society Publications, 1991) ,
74).

123
 Brethren of experience and of sound minds should assemble, and following the
Word of God and the sanction of the Holy Spirit, should, with fervent prayer, lay
hands upon those who have given full proof that they have received their
commission of God, and set them apart to devote themselves entirely to His
work.28

Nevertheless, a number of times baptism of the Holy Spirit follows the laying on of hands
Acts 8:17; 19:6.

b. Tongues in Acts 19 the same as in Acts 2

1) Same terminology is used as in Acts 2
S. Lewis Johnson, Jr.
There is no sound exegetical reason which would demand a different sense from
that normally to be expected. They spoke in known languages, or tongues.29

R.C.H. Lenski
It is unwarranted to state that because Luke does not write "with other tongues" as
he did in 2:4, this was not the same speaking in foreign languages that occurred
at the time of Pentecost; that there were two entirely different kinds of speaking
with tongues, etc.30

2). Same Purpose

E.G. White:
They were baptised in the name of Jesus, and Paul "laid his hands upon them",
they received also the baptism of the Holy Spirit, by which they were enabled to
speak the languages of other nations and to prophesy. Thus they were qualified to
labour as missionaries in Ephesus and its vicinity and also to go forth to proclaim
the gospel in Asia Minor.31

Prophesied - Holy Spirit gave the ability to receive a word of revelation and proclaim
the Good News with power and conviction.
Acts 1:8 Jerusalem - Judea - Samaria - end of the earth.
From Jerusalem the message went out to Caesarea (Acts 10) which was the seat of
the governor of Judea
To Samaria (Acts 8)

28
Ellen G. White, Early Writings (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1945), 101.

29
S. Lewis Johnson, Jr., “The Gift of Tongues and the Book of Acts” Bibliotheca Sacra 120 (Oct. 1963): 310.
30
R.C.H. Lenski, The Interpretation of the Acts of the Apostles (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House,
1961), 784).
31
Ellen G. White, The Acts of the Apostles (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1911). 283.

124
 To Ephesus (Acts 19)
Ephesus became the center for the Gentile mission.

5. 1 Corinthians 12-14
a. Historical Setting
Corinth
- capital of the province of Achaea
- major trading junction - eastern and western Mediterranean
- very wealthy, cosmopolitan city
- center of a number of pagan cults, e.g., Aphrodite (Greek goddess of love)
After Jerusalem, Caesarea and Ephesus, Corinth became the fourth
metropolitan city in which “speaking in tongues” was manifested in the New
Testament record.
Church in Corinth was founded on Paul’s second missionary journey (Acts
18:1-18). It had many problems;
Division 3:3
Immorality 5:1
Court cases among believers 6:1
Marriage problems 7:1
Abuse of Lord ’s Supper 11:21

b. Tongues in Corinth
Another problem concerned spiritual gifts. We do not know what the question was to
which Paul responded.
The question is, was tongues in Corinth ecstatic speech or languages?
There are good arguments on both sides of the issue:
1) Languages
a) The New Testament knows only one gift of tongues.
b) In Acts tongues are foreign languages. Therefore 1 Corinthians tongues
must be foreign languages. 1 Corinthians, must be interpreted by Acts, not Acts
by 1 Corinthians.
c) God works through man's intelligence. Would the Lord who warned against
babbling on like the heathen (Matt 6:7 NEB) inspire a meaningless gibberish?
d) 1 Corinthians 14:22 tongues are for a sign to unbelievers as at Pentecost.
Therefore tongues must be real language.
e) The gifts were given for the common good (1 Cor 12:7), this rules out using
a gift purely for personal gratification.

125
 f) Tongues in Corinth were misused. In 1 Corinthians 14:2 Paul is criticizing
the Corinthians for using their gift to speak to God and not to men. In verse 4 he
is condemning the use of tongues to edify oneself.
g) In 1 Corinthians 14:21, 22, Paul compares tongues with
Assyrian/Babylonian.
h) Glossa in LXX - thirty times as language and only twice as unintelligible
speech (not ecstatic but stammering speech (Isa 29:24, LXX 32:4).
2) Ecstatic Speech
a) Differences between Acts and 1 Corinthians:
i) Pentecost - preaching
Cor. - prayer and thanksgiving

ii) Pentecost - no interpretation

Cor. - interpretation

iii) Pentecost - tongues are important/essential

Cor. - Tongues are of minor importance

b) Characteristics of tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:

i) Speaks to God, not to man (vss.2,28)
ii) No one understands (vs.2)
iii) In the spirit he speaks mysteries (vs.2)
iv) He edifies himself (vs.4)

c) If foreign language, Paul would hardly have criticized it. He would have told
them “go out and use it in witnessing.”
d) If foreign language was necessary to spread the gospel would he have put it
at the bottom of the list.
e) Questions asked support ecstatic utterances (vss 6,9, 16, 23)

Edward Heppenstall:
This manifestation in the church at Corinth is something Paul knows nothing about. If
what they have is the genuine gift of the Spirit, then Paul does not have it. What does
Paul mean when he says: "I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all"
(verse 18)? Obviously he is contrasting his ability to speak known languages with the
incoherent tongue of the Corinthian church.32
Ellen G. White
Some of these persons have exercises which they call the gifts and say that the Lord
has placed them in the church. They have an unmeaning gibberish which they call the

32
Edward Heppenstall, "Tongues in the Corinthian Church", in The Ministry of the Holy Spirit, ed. Gerhard Pfandl
(Wahroonga: South Pacific Division of Seventh-day Adventists, n.d.) 15.

126
 unknown tongue, which is unknown not only by man but by the Lord and all heaven.
Such gifts are manufactured by men and women, aided by the great deceiver.
Fanaticism, false excitement, false talking in tongues, and noisy exercises have been
considered gifts which God has placed in the Church. Some have been deceived
here. The fruits of all this have not been good.33

Appendix
Commentators Who See Languages in Corinth:
G.H. Clark, First Corinthians, Jefferson MD: Trinity Foundation, 1975

A.R. Fausset, "1 Corinthians", A Commentary, eds. Jamieson,

Fausset and Brown, reprint, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993

R.H. Gundry, "Ecstatic Utterance?", JTS, N.S. XVII, Oct. 1966: 299-307

W. Harold Mare, "1 Corinthians", The Expositors Bible Commentary, ed. F. E. Gaebelein,
Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1976

N. Fisher (SDA), Understanding Tongues, Grantham: Stanborough Press, n.d.

Commentators Who See Ecstatic Utterances in Corinth:

Craig Blomberg, "1 Corinthians", The NIV Application Commentary, Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1994

Gordon D. Fee, "The First Epistle to the Corinthians", The New International
Commentary on the New Testament, Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987

N. Hillyer, "1 Corinthians", The New Bible Commentary Revised, eds. Guthrie, Motyer,
Stibbs and Wiseman, Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press, 1970

L. Morris, "1 Corinthians", Tyndale Commentaries, London: Tyndale

Press, 1958

W. E. Richardson (SDA), Paul Among Friends and Enemies, Pacific

Press, 1992.

33
Ellen G. White, Maranatha; The Lord is Coming (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1976), 154.

127
 INDEPENDENT MINISTRIES
INTRODUCTION

Ephesians 4:4-6

In 1 Corinthians 12:14 the Church is compared to one body with many members; and the
Seventh-day Adventist Fundamental Belief number 13 says:
The universal church is composed of all who truly believe in Christ, but in the last
days, a time of widespread apostasy, a remnant has been called out to keep the
commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. This remnant announces the arrival of
the judgment hour, proclaims salvation through Christ, and heralds the approach of
His second advent. This proclamation is symbolized by the three angels of Revelation
14; it coincides with the work of judgment in heaven and results in a work of
repentance and reform on earth. Every believer is called to have a personal part in
this worldwide witness.34

In the last days, in a time of widespread apostasy, God, according to Revelation 12:17, has a
remnant, which we believe is the Seventh-day Adventists Church. One church - not many; one
body - not many. Called to proclaim the three angels’ messages.
Until recent decades, Seventh-day Adventists had no problem with this concept. Today,
however, many private Seventh-day Adventist organizations around the world present a
challenge to this one-body-concept.

PRIVATE ORGANIZATION
What has happened? As Seventh-day Adventists we generally carry out our mission through
the organized structure of our church, which consists of conferences/ missions, unions, divisions
and the General Conference.
Part of this structure are our institutions: hospitals, schools, publishing houses, media
centers, etc. In addition, a number of "private", "independent", "supporting", or "special
ministries" have sprung up from time to time, whose stated purpose is to assist the Seventh-day
Adventist Church in fulfilling its mission. However, they function outside of the regular church
structure, e.g., The Quiet Hour, Maranatha Volunteers, 3 ABN, etc.
Of the more than 1000 private organizations existing today, the large majority are supportive
ministries. Most of them belong to ASI (Adventist Laymen's Services and Industries) - an
organization which began in 1947. At that time ASI was made up of a small group of about 25

34
Seventh-day Adventists Believe (Silver Spring, MD: Ministerial Association of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 2005), 181.

128
health care and educational ministries. Today ASI provides networking for some 800 Adventist
businesspeople who share Christ in the marketplace. Its head office is at the General
Conference. Members of ASI today run radio and television stations, restaurants, food factories,
travel agencies, attorney's offices, printing shops, old people's homes, schools, orphanages, etc.
A key reason for ASI has been to learn how to witness more effectively - their motto is "Sharing
Christ in the Marketplace".
Each year ASI organizes a convention for its members. In 2008 the convention took place in
Tampa, Florida. The Sabbath offering, which usually is between $2 - 2, 500 000 and which is
assigned to a wide variety of projects, in 2008 it exceeded $8,000 000. Most of it was for the
One-Day Church; each church costs $1, 500 000.
Overall, the Church has been richly blessed by these private, supporting ministries. They
accomplish a task that the organized church cannot do because of financial or personnel
limitations. Most of them have worked in harmony with the organized church, and we are grateful
to these committed men and women who operate these private, supporting ministries.

DIVISIVE MINISTRIES
In a small number of cases, however, private organizations work at cross-purposes with the
church:
a. They are highly critical of the church leadership
b. They undermine the confidence of members in the church
c. They drain away funds
Divisive Activities:
To illustrate these activities, I am using material produced by the Standish brothers, Russel
and Colin.35 While I agree with many of their complaints concerning the inroads of worldliness in
the church, I do not approve of their methods to counteract these developments. For the purpose
of this paper I am primarily quoting from their book The Sepulchres are Whited.
1. They accuse the Seventh-day Adventist church of apostasy from the historic faith, because
the church does not accept their interpretations of certain theological positions as the only
valid ones. They claim:
So great is the apostasy, often at high levels of our church, so widespread the abuse
of the flock of God who stand for His pure truth, so rapid the spread of error and the
acceptance of appalling standards, that a true minister can but tremble for his
church.36
35
The Standish brothers have produced a number of books, mostly on theology. Their book Holy Relics or
Revelation (Hartland, 1999) is a useful book to uncover the fraudulent claims concerning the Ark of the
Covenant and a host of other discoveries by Ron Wyatt and Jonathan Gray.
36
Colin and Russell Standish, The Sepulchres are Whited, (Rapidan VI: Hartland Publications, 1992), 4.

129
 The first 27 pages of the book The Sepulchres are Whited (chaps. 1-4) contain 19 times
the words "apostasy" or "apostate."

2. They accuse the denominational leadership of collusion in apostasy, because the leaders do
not squelch teachings that the private organizations find offensive. Whatever does not agree
with their particular theology, is termed "New Theology."
Today numerous church members have all but lost their faith in church pastors and
church leaders, counting their silence as consent to the raging apostasy, lowering of
standards, and mistreatment of God's flock rampant among us.37

3. They accuse the ministry of introducing worldly, and even immoral, practices into the church
and the denominational leadership of approving of these practices.
Undoubtedly the most telling blow against the value of the ministerial credential is its
continued issuance to men who preach open apostasy, men who have been proved
to be fiscally dishonest, and men who are known adulterers.38

Are mistakes being made in the church? Yes. But is incorrect to say that nothing is being
done about it. After careful investigation in harmony with Jesus’ counsel in Matthew 18:15-17
employees of the church, as well as church members, have been disciplined.
No one should be disciplined unless the matter has been established beyond doubt and
Paul’s counsel in Galatians 6:1 has been heeded, “Brethren, if a man is overtaken in any
trespass, you who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness. . .” 39
The Sepulchres are Whited is a collection of stories from around the world (USA,
England, Australia) where some mistakes have been made, or where the authors believe
mistakes have been made in the church.
I do not question the fact that there is sin in the church; that worldliness is creeping into
the church; that some teach things not in harmony with our doctrines or standards. But where
in Scripture or the Spirit of Prophecy writings does it say that I have to collect these facts and
publish them for all the world to read? How would anyone like to have his/her sins published
for all to read? Is this the spirit of Christ?
The leadership from the General Conference President to the church pastor is concerned
about sin in the church, about worldliness, about the lowering of standards, but they do not
publicize them for the world to read. “Remember that he who takes the position of a criticizer

37
Ibid., 5.
38
Ibid., 67.
39
All Bible texts are from the NKJV unless otherwise stated.

130
 greatly weakens his own hands. God has not made it the duty of men and women to find fault
with their fellow workers.”40

4. They seek to set up a "church within the church," which they perceive to be a true and purer
remnant that will remain when the apostates (those who disagree with them) will be shaken
out. They still believe that God called this church - the Remnant Church - into existence, but
they also see a remnant coming out of the remnant.
However, the Servant of the Lord in 1890 wrote to a church member who was misusing
her writings and misrepresenting her viewpoints in a fashion that seems very contemporary
today. “You will take passages in the Testimonies that speak of the close of probation, of the
shaking among God's people, and you will talk of a coming out from this people of a purer,
holier people that will arise. Now all of this pleases the enemy.”41
Note also this statement made in 1905, “We cannot now step off the foundation that God
has established. We cannot now enter any new organization; for this would mean apostasy
from the truth.”42
In 1915, E. G. White's son, Elder W. C. White, wrote to E. E. Andross, President of the
Pacific Union Conference:
I told [Mrs. Lida Scott] how Mother regards the experience of the remnant church, and
it was her positive teaching that God would not permit this denomination to so fully
apostatize that there would be a coming out of another church.43

5. They accuse the Seventh-day Adventist Church of activities, which may encourage loyal
Seventh-day Adventist members to divert their tithe to these private organizations rather than
to the church.
Whenever an Adventist minister or administrator around the world makes a mistake, you
can be sure to read about it in one of the independent publications. The Sepulchres are
Whited is a collection of it. Is it any wonder that people begin to question whether they should
pay tithe or not?
Because of the widespread apostasy in the church, many faithful Seventh-day
Adventists conscientiously believe that they cannot support the ministries of those
who are unfaithful to their trust, yet they are committed to returning their tithe
faithfully. While many would not agree with their evaluation, nevertheless one cannot
40
Ellen G. White, Evangelism (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1970), 634.
41
Idem., Letter 15a, 1890; cited in Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Review and
Herald, 1958), 1:179.
42
Idem., Manuscript 129, 1905, 3; cited in Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.:
Review and Herald, 1958), 2:390.
43
W. C. White Letter, May 23, 1915; cited in Arthur White, Ellen G. White: The Later Elmshaven Years
(Washington, D.C. Review and Herald, 1982), 428.

131
 deny their sincerity. In the interest of the church and the finishing of God's work on
earth, it is better, far better, that their tithe be placed in the hands of self-supporting
ministries than that their tithe be donated to some non-Seventh-day Adventist
organisation.44

While there is apostasy in the church, the church is not in apostasy. Just because
someone disagrees with something in the church, does this mean he/she can withhold the
tithe?
The tithe is sacred, reserved by God for Himself. It is to be brought into His
treasury to be used to sustain the gospel labourers in their work. For a long time the
Lord has been robbed because there are those who do not realize that the tithe is
God's reserved portion.
Some have been dissatisfied and have said: "I will not longer pay my tithe, for I
have no confidence in the way things are managed at the heart of the work." But will
you rob God because you think the management of work is not right? Make your
complaint, plainly and openly, in the right spirit, to the proper ones. Send in your
petitions for things to be adjusted and set in order; but do not withdraw from the work
of God, and prove unfaithful, because others are not doing right.45

When we are faithful, who blesses us? God does - not the church!
Those self-sacrificing, consecrated ones who render back to God the things that
are His, as He requires of them, will be rewarded according to their works. Even
though the means thus consecrated be misapplied, so that it does not accomplish the
object which the donor had in view - the glory of God and the salvation of souls -
those who made the sacrifice in sincerity of soul, with an eye single to the glory of
God, will not lose their reward.
Those who have made a wrong use of means dedicated to God, will be required
to give an account of their stewardship.46

Ellen White taught:

1. Even if church money is misapplied, the donor still receives the blessings.
2. When there are things which are wrong in the church, we should point them out in the
right spirit and in the right way. (Matt 18)
3. We are still to pay our tithes into the Lord's treasury - his church.

In 1890 Mrs. White wrote to people who refused to pay their tithe to the conference:
You who have been withholding your means from the cause of God, read the
book of Malachi, and see what is spoken there in regard to tithes and offerings.
Cannot you see that it is not best under any circumstances to withhold your tithes and
offerings because you are not in harmony with everything your brethren do? The
tithes and offerings are not the property of any man, but are to be used in doing a
44
Standish, 67.
45
Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1948), 9:249.
46
Ibid., 2:519

132
 certain work for God. Unworthy ministers may receive some of the means thus
raised; but dare any one, because of this, withhold from the treasury and brave the
curse of God? I dare not. I pay my tithes gladly and freely . . .
If the Conference business is not managed according to the order of the Lord, that is
the sin of the erring ones. The Lord will not hold you responsible for it, if you do what you
can to correct the evil. But do not commit sin yourselves by withholding from God His
own property.47

Ellen White considered the withholding of tithes and offerings from the conference treasury to
be a sinful act and not justified on the grounds that an unworthy minister might receive some
of the money.

ELLEN WHITE’S USE OF TITHE

Some may argue that E.G. White herself did not always pay her tithe to the conference - that
she used it in other ways. Yes, she did. But let's remember she was prophet.
In 1905 she wrote:
It has been presented to me for years that my tithe was to be appropriated by myself
to aid the white and coloured ministers who were neglected and did not receive
sufficient, properly to support their families. When my attention was called to aged
ministers, white or black, it was my special duty to investigate into their necessities
and supply their needs. This was to be my special work, and I have done this in a
number of cases. No man should give notoriety to the fact that in special cases the
tithe is used in that way.
I have myself appropriated my tithe to the most needy cases brought to my notice.
I have been instructed to do this; and as the money is not withheld from the Lord's
treasury, it is not a matter that should be commented upon, for it will necessitate my
making known these matters, which I do not desire to do, because it is not best.
Some cases have been kept before me for years, and I have supplied their needs
from the tithe, as God instructed me to do. I send this matter to you so that you shall not
make a mistake. Circumstances alter cases. I would not advise that anyone should make
a practice of gathering up tithe money. 48

Please note:
1. Ellen White was directly instructed by God to aid certain poverty-stricken ministers.
At that time there was no pension plan in existence. When a minister retired, he lost his
income. Not until 1911 did the church accept a retirement plan, and the American
government introduced social security only in 1935.

47
Idem, Special Testimonies, Series A, no. 1, 27.
48
Idem., Letter 267, 1905, cited in Arthur White, Ellen G. White: The Early Elmshaven Years (Washington, D.C.
Review and Herald, 1982), 395- 396.

133
2. The money was used for living expenses of poor ministers not for running institutions or
publishing literature. It was used for ministers recognised by the church.

What Ellen G. White did 100 years ago should not be used as an excuse by independent
ministries today. The situations then and now are completely different. Ellen G. White would be
very upset if she knew how some people use her writings today. The fact, that there is apostasy
in the church cannot be used as an excuse to divert the Lord's money from the church.

WHY INDEPENDENT MINISTRIES FLOURISH

1. Growth of the Church
There have always been individuals in the church who were unhappy with the leadership or
with some of our doctrines, e.g., The Marion Party (Snook and Brinkerhoff); Canright;
Kellogg; Ballenger; Conradi; Fletcher; Ford, to name a few.
We have even had offshoots like Shepherd's Rod and Reform Adventists, but as long as
the church was less than 1,000,000, the number of these dissidents was small and it was
easier to keep an eye on them and contain the damage. With the rapid growth in
membership, however, (almost 12 million today) the number of disaffected people has
skyrocketed, and it is difficult to keep track of them.

2. Mistakes Have Multiplied

The larger the church the larger the number of mistakes; and Independent Ministries
seize on them.

3. Pluralism
The larger the church becomes, the greater will be the diversity of opinions in theological
and in other matters.
4. Information Flow
With the technological advances today - computers, copy machines, fax machines, etc. -
the distribution of information has become much easier. Thirty years ago it was very difficult
to make 100 copies of a particular letter or article and send it around the world. Today
everyone can be his/her own publisher and printer.
5. Worldliness
We must admit that the church at large has drifted toward an increased worldliness and a
decreased spirituality. How many people, for example, still attend prayer meetings?

134
 Although we have seen a tremendous increase in members, there has been a steady
decline in offerings. Do we still have testimony meetings? The Adventist life-style has
changed dramatically. Television, music, books and magazines exert a tremendous influence
on the Adventist home.
Divorce in the church is as frequent as in the society at large. Dress and jewelry
standards in the church have changed. Alcohol and drugs no longer stop at the door of the
church. And church discipline is frequently no longer exercised.
Independent Ministries are usually much stricter in these matters, therefore they appeal
to many Seventh-day Adventists.

6. Loss of Confidence in the Spirit of Prophecy

During the last 20-30 years, many Seventh-day Adventists have begun to either ignore or
oppose the Ellen G. White writings. Several Anti-Ellen-White websites have appeared.
Fewer members read her books today.

7. Loss of Confidence in Our Distinctive Messages

Remnant
Creation
Sanctuary
Spirit of Prophecy

8. Fulfillment of Revelation 12:17

Satan seeks to destroy the Seventh-day Adventist Church from the inside.

HOW TO RESPOND
A. Admit mistakes
It is too late for us to stand on our dignity. There are those who, while they think that it
is perfectly proper for others to confess their mistakes, think that their position makes
it impossible for them to confess their mistakes.49

B. Deal kindly with these people:

In His mercy and long-suffering, God bears patiently with the perverse and even the
false-hearted. Among Christ’s chosen apostles was Judas the traitor. Should it then
be a cause of surprise or discouragement that there are false-hearten ones among
His workers today? If He who reads the heart could bear with him who He knew was
to be His betrayer, with what patience should we bear with those at fault.50

49
Idem, Manuscript Releases, 21 vols. (Silver Spring, MD: E. G. White Estate, 1981-90), 3:417.
50
Idem, The Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1942), 493.

135
 C. Use sound arguments:
It is important that in defending the doctrines which we consider fundamental articles
of faith, we should never allow ourselves to employ arguments that are not wholly
sound. These may avail to silence an opposer, but they do not honor the truth. We
should present sound arguments that will not only silence our opponents, but will bear
the closest and most searching scrutiny.51

D. Don’t be taken in by gifts:

In the mission field, gifts are often used to make people beholden to the independent
ministries.
E. Preach the Adventist message:
The best way to deal with error is to present the truth and leave wild ideas to
die out for want of notice.52

F. Don’t get sidetracked:

I saw that the people of God must arouse and put on the armour. Christ is
coming; the great work of the last message of mercy is of too much
importance for us to leave it and come down to answer such falsehood,
misrepresentations and slanders as the Messenger party have fed upon and
scattered abroad. Truth, present truth, we must dwell upon it. We are doing a
great work and cannot come down. Satan is in all this, to divert our minds
from the present truth and the coming of Christ. Said the angel: ‘Jesus knows
it all.’53

G. Act decisively:
After taking your position firmly, wisely, cautiously, make not one concession on any
point concerning which God has plainly spoken. Be as calm as a summer evening,
but as fixed as the everlasting hills. By conceding, you would be selling our whole
cause into the hands of the enemy. The cause of God is not to be traded away. We
must now take hold of these matters decidedly. I have many things to say that I have
not wanted to say in the past, but now my mind is clear to speak and act.54

False teachers may appear to be very zealous for the work of God, and may expend
means to bring their theories before the world and the church; but as they mingle
error with truth, their message is one of deception, and will lead souls into false paths.
They are to be met and opposed, not because they are bad men, but because they
are teachers of falsehood and are endeavouring to put upon falsehood the stamp of
truth.55

SUMMARY

51
Idem, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1948), 5:708.
52
Idem, Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1962), 165.
53
Idem, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1948), 1:123.
54
Idem, Letter 216, 1903.
55
Idem, Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1962), 55.

136
 A. Supportive ministries work in harmony with the church. They accomplish a task which the
organized church cannot do because of financial or personnel limitations. The Church is
grateful to these committed men and women who operate these private supporting
ministries.

B. Independent Ministries believe that their work is to call the church to a higher standard -
and certainly the church needs revival and reformation. But the effect of their ministry is
to divide and weaken the church rather than to empower and strengthen it.

C. Matt 16:16,17, 21-23. We are all in danger of becoming tools of Satan. Therefore we
should not support these critical ministries, because by doing so, we really help to divide
the church further.

D. The Remnant Church is one church, not many; one body, not many. Christ is Lord and
Head of the church, and He wants us to work together and with Him in saving souls.

CONCLUSION
How independent are independent ministries? They are not really independent at all - they
feed off the main church. While we recognize that mistakes are made in the church, we do not
believe that they should be published for the world to read. Independent ministries have a right to
hold beliefs that differ from the church at large but their accusations that there is apostasy in the
church, because their particular points of view are not accepted, are incorrect.

137
 WHAT IS NEW IN THE NEW THEOLOGY?

The term "New Theology" was first used by M. L. Andreasen in 1959 in his Letters to the
Churches which he wrote in response to the publication of the book Questions on Doctrine56 in
1957. In these letters Andreasen, who had been one of our most notable theologians for many
years, attacked the denominational leadership for what he considered as selling Adventism down
the river for evangelical recognition. What had happened?

ADVENTIST - EVANGELICAL CONVERSATIONS

In 1955, Walter Martin, a Southern Baptist clergyman, contacted the General Conference
with a number of questions. Martin, at that time, was a Ph.D. candidate at New York University,
researching for a dissertation on the subject "Non-Christian Religions in the United States."
In connection with his research, he was preparing a book against Seventh-day Adventists
and wanted to ascertain as accurately as possible what we really believed and taught. This
contact led to a series of official conversations with a group of evangelical leaders. The
evangelicals involved were Walter R. Martin, George E. Cannon and, later, Donald G.
Barnhouse. George Cannon was a professor of theology and Donald Barnhouse was then a
popular radio preacher in Philadelphia, pastor of a large Presbyterian Church in the same city
and editor in chief of Eternity Magazine.
The Adventist leaders who participated in these conversations were LeRoy Edwin Froom,
W.E. Read, T.E. Unruh and, later, Roy Allan Anderson, then editor of Ministry.
The purpose of these discussions was to provide Walter Martin with an accurate account of
the distinctive beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists for his book. The group met a number of times
in the offices of the General Conference throughout the period of about one year.
M. L. Andreasen, who by then had been in retirement for some years, took exception to these
discussions. To him, they represented a capitulation – a sell-out – on the part of the Adventist
leadership.
A confrontation developed between him and high-ranking Adventist leaders, particularly the
then President of the General Conference, Reuben F. Figuhr, with whom Andreasen exchanged
a series of strongly worded letters, especially during the year 1957.57

56
Questions on Doctrine (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1957).
57
See Roy Adams, The Nature of Christ (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1994), 44.

138
 When he was denied a hearing, on his terms, Andreasen went public with Letters to the
Churches. In letter 1 on page 13 he wrote, "Whoever accepts the new theology must reject the
Testimonies. There is no other choice." Under "New Theology" Andreasen understood primarily
the teachings of Christ's sinless nature and the completed atonement on the cross as presented
in the book Questions on Doctrine.
In time the term "New Theology" came to be used to describe people in the church who,
among other things, believed (1) that Christ's human nature was sinless, (2) that man is born in
sin, and (3) that the atonement was completed at the cross.

IS THE NEW THEOLOGY REALLY NEW?

There are Adventists who honestly feel that the "New Theology" is a masterpiece of Satan,
and that those who accept it have apostatised.
The "New Theology" is a worldwide problem. It has been used by Satan in an
endeavour to derail God's remnant church. We have confidence in the testimony
of Ellen White that he will not succeed, but a huge number of God's people will
sadly be lost as a result of the acceptance of this unscriptural theology.58

It is further claimed that followers of the "New Theology" deny the Sanctuary Message and
the relevance of the Spirit of Prophecy for the church today. Furthermore, the claim that the trend
toward worldliness in the church is a result of the "New Theology."
In evaluating these claims, we must first of all state that the term "New Theology" is
misleading, since it implies that it is something new which the Adventist church did not hold prior
to the 1950s when these perceived errors were supposed to have crept in.

The Nature of Christ

Some people claim that the church changed its teaching on the nature of Christ in 1957,
when the book Questions on Doctrine was published. While it is true that many of our books prior
to 1957 taught that Jesus had a sinful human nature, this does not mean that Questions on
Doctrine taught something new. The church in the 1950s, when challenged by non-Adventist
theologians, studied the question of the nature of Christ and discovered that Scripture and E.G.
White give a somewhat different answer to the one found in many of our books.
On the one hand, Jesus' physical human nature was the nature of humanity after the fall
(Rom. 8:3; Heb. 2:16,17). Ellen White said, "He took upon His sinless nature our sinful nature,
that He might know how to succor those that are tempted.”59 That is, Jesus had a deteriorated

58
Colin & Russell Standish, Deceptions of the New Theology (Hartland Publications, 1989), 28.
59
Ellen G. White, Medical Ministry, (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1963), 181.

139
human nature, a nature that did not have all the strength, vitality and capacity that Adam had at
his creation.
On the other hand, Jesus' spiritual nature was the sinless nature of Adam before the fall, i.e.,
He had no evil propensities (with which we are born), no inclinations to sin (with which we are
born) and no tendencies to sin (which we all have).
Concerning our situation, Ellen G. White wrote, "The result of eating from the tree of
knowledge of good and evil is manifest in every man's experience. There is in his nature a bent
to evil, a force which, unaided, he cannot resist,"60 and "the first Adam was created a pure,
sinless being. . . . Because of sin his posterity was born with inherited propensities of
disobedience."61
Furthermore, she said, "In order to understand this matter aright, we must remember that our
hearts are naturally depraved, and we are unable of ourselves to pursue a right course."62 This is
why all men, including infants, need a saviour. If Jesus had been just like all the other children,
he would have needed a saviour too.
In Luke 1:35 the angel speaking to Mary says, ". . . that holy thing which shall be born of thee
shall be called the Son of God."63 And Jesus Himself in John 14:30 says, ". . . the ruler of this
world is coming, and he has nothing in Me." There was nothing in Jesus that responded in any
way to Satan's temptations. He was "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners" (Heb.
7:26).
Our situation is completely different:
Sin is a tremendous evil. Through sin the whole human organism is deranged,
the mind is perverted, the imagination is corrupt. Sin has degraded the
faculties of the soul. Temptations from without find an answering chord within
the heart, and the feet turn imperceptibly toward evil.64

Jesus did not have a perverted mind or a corrupt imagination. He did not have an answering
chord within His heart which responded to evil. Ellen White in many places confirms this. She
said, “We should have no misgivings in regard to the perfect sinlessness of the human nature of
Christ,”65 and “The human nature of Christ is likened to ours, and suffering was more keenly felt
by Him; for His spiritual nature was free from every taint of sin.”66

60
Idem, Education (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1963), 29.
61
Idem in F.D. Nichol, ed., Seventh Day Adventist Bible Commentary, 7 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Review and
Herald, 1978), 5:1128.
62
Idem, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1943), 544.
63
All Bible texts are from the NKJV unless stated otherwise.
64
Ellen G. White, The Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1942), 451.
65
Idem, Signs of the Times, June 9, 1898.
66
Ibid., Dec. 9, 1897 (emphasis mine).

140
 In book one of Selected Messages she wrote, “Christ came to the earth, taking humanity and
standing as man's representative, to show in the controversy with Satan that man, as God
created him, connected with the Father and the Son, could obey every divine requirement.”67
Probably the clearest statement of Ellen White on the sinless nature of Christ is found in the
SDA Bible Commentary:
Be careful, exceedingly careful, as to how you dwell upon the human nature of
Christ. Do not set Him before the people as a man with the propensities of sin. . . .
Never, in any way, leave the slightest impression upon human minds that a taint of, or
inclination to, corruption rested upon Christ, or that He in any way yielded to
corruption. He was tempted in all points like as man is tempted, yet He is called "that
holy thing." It is a mystery that is left unexplained to mortals that Christ could be
tempted in all points like as we are, and yet be without sin. The incarnation of Christ
has ever been, and will ever remain, a mystery. That which is revealed, is for us and
for our children, but let every human being be warned from the ground of making
Christ altogether human, such an one as ourselves; for it cannot be.68

Since all our theology must be based on Scripture, let us also note the following texts: 1
Peter 2:22, "Who committed no sin, nor was deceit found in His mouth", and 1 John 3:5, "And
you know that He was manifested to take away our sins, and in Him there is no sin." Please note,
Peter says "He committed no sin", but John goes further and declares that "there was no sin in
Him," i.e., His nature was sinless. Therefore, He could be the perfect lamb which takes away the
sins of the world (Jn. 1:29). He was a mediator who knew no sin, but was made to be sin for us,
that we might become the righteousness of God in Him (2 Cor 5:21).
In the book Deceptions of the New Theology by C. and R. Standish it is claimed that:

There are over 40 statements in which the issue of the human nature of Christ is
specifically addressed by Sister White. Always she refers to the human nature of
Christ as "fallen" or "sinful", thus confirming the words of Scripture. Never once
does she use the term "unfallen" or "sinless" in relation to Christ's human nature.69

It seems that the authors missed her statement in Signs of the Times where she wrote, "We
should have no misgivings in regard to the perfect sinlessness of the human nature of Christ."70
Repeatedly she speaks of His "sinless humanity", e.g., "It was the purity and sinlessness of
Christ's humanity that stirred up such satanic hatred,"71 or, "Christ unites in His person the
fullness and perfection of the Godhead and the fullness and perfection of sinless humanity." 72

67
Idem, Selected Messages, 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1958), 1:253.
68
Idem in F.D. Nichol, ed., Seventh Day Adventist Bible Commentary, 5:1128 (emphasis mine).
69
Standish, 51.
70
Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, June 9, 1898.
71
Idem, Manuscript Releases, 21 vols. (Silver Spring, MD: E. G. White Estate, 1981-90), 16:118.
72
Ibid., 18:331.

141
 One will search in vain for expressions like "sinful nature of Christ", "fallen human nature of
Christ", or "fallen nature of Christ" in the writings of Ellen White. What she does say repeatedly is
that Christ took our "fallen" or "sinful" nature upon Himself.73
At times she quotes Romans 8:3, e.g., "Christ, the second Adam, came in ‘the likeness of
sinful flesh.’"74 This is in harmony with the view that Christ had the sinful physical nature of Adam
after the fall, but the sinless spiritual nature of Adam before the fall.
Again, the book Deceptions of the New Theology claims:
To separate Christ's physical nature from His mental and moral nature would take
us both to the Greek pagan concept of the distinction between an evil body and a
good soul. No right thinking Seventh-day Adventist dare accept that dualistic view
of man. It is a satanic deception. If Christ had a fallen physical nature, and He did,
then His entire nature was fallen75

However, this is not what we find in the writing of E.G. White. In Signs of the Times she
wrote, "The human nature of Christ is likened to ours, and suffering was more keenly felt by Him;
for His spiritual nature was free from every taint of sin."76 She clearly distinguished between his
physical and spiritual nature.
To distinguish between these two aspects in man's nature only becomes wrong when we say
that each can exist separately from each other, as is the case in the belief that the soul is
immortal.
After all, the Bible clearly states that man consists of "spirit, soul and body" (2. Thess. 5:23); and
E.G. White wrote that "the nature of man is threefold,"77 and that every follower of Christ should
"dedicate all his powers of mind and soul and body to Him who has paid the ransom money for
our souls."78
There is nothing new in the teaching of the "New Theology" concerning the nature of Christ.
100 years ago Ellen White taught what the "New Theology" is teaching today.

The Nature of Man

To understand the nature of sin is vital to our comprehension of the nature of man.
What is sin? How sinful is the sinner? How deep is our sin? Are we basically good, created in the
image of God, but because of temptations we transgress God's law; or are we basically evil, with

73
For example, White, Medical Ministry, 181 and Manuscript 80, 1903.
74
White, Manuscript 99:1903.
75
Standish, 53.
76
Ellen G. White, Signs of the Times, Dec. 9, 189 (emphasis mine).
77
Idem, Child Guidance (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing Association, 1954), 39.
78
Idem, Selected Messages, 2:124.

142
the image of God almost destroyed, and because of our evil nature we commit sin? Is sin just
what we do, or is it what we are?
The book Deceptions of the New Theology states that
Sin is wilful or negligent violation of God's law. The proponents of the new theology
present sin as any departure from the infinite will of God and as any weakness or
frailty of man.79

What, in fact, does the Bible teach about sin? Generally, the Bible defines sin as an act. 1
John 3:4 says, "Sin is the transgression of the law", or "Sin is lawlessness" (NASB).
But James 4:17 and a great number of texts in both the OT and the NT describe sin as a
state, or tendency of the heart. Jeremiah depicts sin as a spiritual sickness which afflicts the
heart. He says that "the heart is deceitful above all things and desperately wicked; who can know
it?" (17:9).
David in Psalm 51 expresses the thought that he was born a sinner, "Behold, I was shapen in
iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me." Not that his mother did anything wrong in
connection with his conception or birth - she was an honourable woman - but he recognises that
he was born with a sinful nature. He desires to be washed and cleansed from sin (vss.2, 7) and
asks God to create in him a clean heart (vs.10).
The same thought is expressed in Psalm 58:3, "The wicked are estranged from the womb:
they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies." Israel is called "a transgressor from the
womb" (Isa 48:8). And "from the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness (not a
sound spot NEB) in it", says God in Isaiah 1:6.
In the Sermon on the Mount Jesus speaks of the inward disposition as evil (Matt 5:21-22, 27-
28). To the Pharisees He said, "O generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good
things? For out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Matt 12:34). And His
disciples He told, "If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much
more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!" (Luke 11:13).
Evil actions and words stem from the evil thoughts of the heart, "For out of the heart proceed
evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies" (Matt 15:19).
This sinfulness of the human heart, which we will call SIN, produces individual acts of
transgressions which are sins. Thus by nature we are children of wrath (Eph 2:3), who are
enticed to sin by their own lusts (Jas 4:1).

79
Standish,77.

143
 This understanding was clearly spelt out by Ellen White when she said, "Sin is the
inheritance of children,"80 or "By nature the heart is evil."81 Furthermore she wrote, "The result of
the eating of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is manifest in every man's experience. There
is in his nature a bent to evil, a force, which unaided, he cannot resist."82
Thus we sin because we are born sinful. The only sinless human being in Scripture is Jesus.
Of Him alone we read that he "knew no sin" (2 Cor 5:21), that He was "separate from sinners"
(Heb 7:26) and that "no guile was found in his mouth" (1 Pet 2:22). Thus He could be the lamb
"without blemish or spot" (1 Pet 1:19).
There is nothing new in the teaching of the "New Theology" concerning the nature of man.
100 years ago Ellen White was teaching what is taught by the "New Theology" today.

The Atonement
The book Deceptions of the New Theology claims:
It is held by Evangelicals and "New Theology" supporters alike that the atonement
was completed at the cross. In weakness we have often yielded on this point
when, indeed, there are compelling biblical reasons to support the Seventh-day
Adventist position. Using one isolated statement from Sister White against a large
number that clearly state that the atonement of Jesus is completed in the
heavenly sanctuary, many have made statements to the effect that "Christ is now
ministering the benefits of His atonement in the heavenly sanctuary." But this is an
incomplete representation of the doctrine of the atonement. Christ's sacrifice was,
indeed, the central event in the atonement, but so also is His high priestly ministry.
The atoning sacrifice of Christ is completed by the ministration of His precious
blood in the heavenly sanctuary.83

The issue of whether the atonement was completed at the cross or not is largely a matter of
definition. In theological circles the term "atonement" has assumed a technical meaning and is
generally used to describe the redeeming effect of Christ's incarnation, sufferings, and death on
the cross. In this sense E.G. White uses it in the following statements:
1. “The sacrifice of Christ as an atonement for sin is the great truth around which all other
truths cluster.”84
2. “He planted the cross between heaven and earth, and when the Father beheld the
sacrifice of his Son, He bowed before it in recognition of its perfection. "It is enough", he
said, "the Atonement is complete."85

80
White, Child Guidance, 475.
81
Idem, The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1940), 172.
82
Idem, Education, 29.
83
Standish, 90, 91.
84
Ellen G. White, Gospel Workers, (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1948), 325.
85
White, Review and Herald, Sept. 24, 1901.

144
 3. “No language could convey the rejoicing of heaven or God's expression of
satisfaction and delight in His only begotten Son as He saw the completion of the
atonement.”86
4. “The ransom paid by Christ - the atonement on the cross - is ever before them.”87

Thus, those who teach that a complete atonement was made on the cross view the term in its
technical meaning as the all-sufficient atoning sacrifice of Christ offered for our salvation on
Calvary.
This is the meaning of Hebrews 9:12, "Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with His
own blood He entered the Most Holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption," and
10:10, "By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once
for all." It is described as a "sacrifice of atonement" in Romans 3:25 (NIV) and as a "ransom" in 1
Timothy 2:6.
However, the word atonement has also a wider connotation. In Scripture this is referred to as
"reconciliation", which includes the effect the atonement has on His creation. Thus, Paul writes to
the Colossians, "For it pleased the Father that in Him all the fullness should dwell, and by Him to
reconcile all things to Himself, by Him, whether things on earth or things in heaven, having made
peace through the blood of His cross" (1:19,20).
And to the Corinthians he says, "We implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God" (2.
Cor. 5:20). This wider meaning includes the application of the benefits of the atonement made on
the cross to the individual sinner. This is provided for in the priestly ministry of Jesus in the
heavenly sanctuary.
In this sense E.G. White uses it in the following quotations:
1. The great Sacrifice had been offered and had been accepted, and the Holy Spirit
which descended on the day of Pentecost carried the minds of the disciples from
the earthly sanctuary to the heavenly, where Jesus had entered by His own blood,
to shed upon His disciples the benefits of His atonement.88

2. Our Saviour is in the sanctuary pleading in our behalf. He is our interceding High
Priest, making an atoning sacrifice for us, pleading in our behalf the efficacy of His
blood.89

86
Idem, Signs of the Times, Aug. 16, 1899.
87
Idem, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1948), 5:190.
88
Idem, Early Writings, (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald,1945), 260 (emphasis mine).
89
Idem, Fundamentals of Christian Education (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing Association, 1923), 370
(emphasis mine).

145
 3. Jesus is our great High Priest in heaven. And what is He doing? - He is making
intercession and atonement for His people who believe in Him.90
Thus, Ellen White can speak of a "final atonement"91 on the Day of Atonement. She used the
word "atonement" both ways - in its technical sense as an all-sufficient, complete, once-for-all
sacrifice on Calvary, and in its wider sense which includes the application of the benefits of the
sacrificial atonement Christ made on the cross.
Again, there is nothing new in the teaching of the "New Theology" concerning the atonement.
100 years ago Ellen White was teaching what is taught by the "New Theology" today. Indeed, it
is a distortion of the truth to declare such teaching as "New Theology."
As far as the Sanctuary Message and the Spirit of Prophecy are concerned, the church at
large has never wavered from its commitment to these truths. While there may well be
individuals within the church who have doubts or reservations or an incomplete understanding
concerning these truths, the church's position has not changed as is evidenced by chapters 17
and 23 in the book Seventh-day Adventists Believe ....

THE SPIRIT OF CRITICISM - AN ISSUE OF CONCERN

The spirit of criticism exhibited by some of the critical ministries is deplorable. Church
members and critics alike do well to take note of the counsel given this church long ago:
The worst enemies we have are those who are trying to destroy the influence of the
watchman upon the walls of Zion. . . Be careful lest you be found aiding the enemy of
God and man by spreading false reports and by criticism and decided opposition.92
Remember that he who takes the position of a criticiser, greatly weakens his
own hands. God has not made it the duty of men and women to find fault with
their fellow workers. 93

The time spent in criticising the motives and works of Christ's servants might be
better spent in prayer. Often if those who find fault knew the truth in regard to
those with whom they find fault, they would have an altogether different opinion of
them.94

The Lord never blesses him who criticises and accuses his brethren, for this is
SATAN'S work.95

CONCLUSION

90
Idem, Testimonies to Ministers and Gospel Workers, 37 (emphasis mine).
91
Idem, The Great Controversy (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1950), 485; Patriarchs and Prophets,
(Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1958), 352, 355.
92
Idem, Testimonies, 5:294.
93
Idem, Evangelism (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1970), 634.
94
Idem, Testimonies, 8:83.
95
Idem, Evangelism, 102.

146
 In this study we have seen that the claims by some of the critical independent ministries that
the church in the 1950s changed its theology are not justified. What is called "New Theology" is
really not new; it is thoroughly biblical. Moreover, it is the theology which Ellen White proclaimed
100 years ago. Critics of the church need to take a closer look at these teachings before claiming
that they are evidence of apostasy in the church.

147
 THE REMNANT CHURCH

As far back as Martin Luther, Christians have recognised that there is an invisible group
of God’s people (church) which consists of members from all Christian churches, because there
are faithful members in all Christian churches, including the Roman Catholic Church. They have
accepted Christ as their personal saviour, and they are counted as His people. Therefore, in
Revelation 18:4, in the time of the end, the call is made, "Come out of her [Babylon] my people."
Many of God's people are still in Babylon; they belong to God's invisible “church;” and at the time
of the loud cry in Revelation 18:4, they will come out and join God's visible remnant church.
Traditionally Seventh-day Adventists have believed that they are God’s visible remnant
church. In recent decades this view has been challenged or modified.

NEW PROPOSALS CONCERNING THE REMNANT

During the 1950s (1955-56), Adventist entered into an unofficial dialogue with a group of
Evangelical theologians. This dialogue resulted in the publication of the book Questions on
Doctrines. Question number 20 asked:
Who constitute the "Remnant Church? It is alleged that Seventh-day Adventists teach
that they alone constitute the finally completed "remnant church" mentioned in the book of
Revelation. Is this true, or do Seventh-day Adventists recognize by the "remnant" those in
every denomination who remain faithful to the Scriptures and the faith once delivered
unto the saints?96

The answer clarifies that Adventists do not “equate their church with the church
invisible–‘those in every denomination who remain faithful to the Scriptures;”97 and it
acknowledges that “God has a multitude of earnest, faithful, sincere followers in all Christian
communions.”98 Nevertheless, the book maintains that the concept of the remnant found in Rev
12:17 applies to Adventist.99
However, the answer given goes beyond what appears to be the traditional expression of
the concept of the remnant by broadening it to include other non-Adventists:
But the fact that we thus apply this scripture does not imply in any way that we believe we
are the only true Christians in the world, or that we are the only ones who will be saved.
While we believe that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the visible organization

96
Questions on Doctrine (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1957).
97
Ibid., 186.
98
Ibid., 187.
99
Ibid., 191

148
 through which God is proclaiming this last special message to the world, we remember
the principle that Christ enunciated when He said, ‘Other sheep I have, which are not in
this fold’ (John 10:16). Seventh-day Adventists firmly believe that God has a precious
remnant, a multitude of earnest, sincere believers, in every church, not excepting the
Roman Catholic communion, who are living up to all the light God has given them. The
great Shepherd of the sheep recognizes them as His own, and He is calling them into
one great fold and one great fellowship in preparation for His return.100

The term remnant is now applied to sincere Christians anywhere else in the world,
Christians or non-Christians. As a result some are calling the Adventist Church not the remnant
church but the Church of the Remnant. Since most of the remnant is not in the Adventist Church,
we are bearers of light to the remnant.101 Hence, says Ross Cole:
We can claim to be the church of the remnant, insofar as we are bearers of the 3 angels’
messages of Rev 14:6-12, God’s gathering call to the remnant. . . . When we invite
people to become SDAs, we are not necessarily inviting them to become part of God’s
remnant, for some of them are already that, even if they have come from heathen
backgrounds. Instead, we are inviting them to become members of the church that bears
the remnant message and is the natural home of the remnant.”102

Instead of being the remnant church, we are now the church that only bears or proclaims
the remnant message of Revelation 14. The remnant church in this view is virtually identical with
the invisible “church” of God.

A Remnant within the Remnant

This seems to be the position taken by Hope International and Hartland Institute. They
are persuaded that the church is not preaching historic Adventism and that it is in apostasy. Yet,
they say, there is a group of church members who are loyal to the Lord and they are the only
ones who constitute the true remnant of God, the faithful remnant.103 These organizations seem
to consider themselves to represent God’s faithful remnant.
This understanding of the remnant deals with one of the perceived weaknesses of the
traditional view in that it recognizes that not every member of the Church is by definition a
member of God’s end-time faithful remnant. However, by suggesting or implying that their new
organizations are to some extent the embodiment of the true faithful remnant they imply that by

100
Ibid., p. 191-92. Italics mine.
101
Notice the title in the book written by R. W. Schwarz, Light Bearers to the Remnant (Mountain View, CA: Pacific
Press, 1979).
102
Ross Cole, “The Seventh-day Adventist in relation to Other Christians of Society,” unpublished paper (1998?),.
11, 13.
103
E.g., “Hartland Institute Response to the General Conference Report Concerning Hope International, Hartland
Institute and Remnant Publications,” (no date), p. 12, where, after suggesting that the church is in apostasy, it is
immediately said, “This should in no wise overlook faithful souls who are in it and comprise the Remnant of Israel.”

149
being part of their organizations one becomes a member of the faithful remnant. There is a very
strong element of exclusiveness in this approach to the concept of the remnant.

The Remnant is an Invisible Entity

While the previous view argues that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is a remnant on
its way to apostasy, this new view argues that the remnant is by its very nature invisible. The
best exponent of this position is Steve Daily. He calls on us:
To stop thinking just of ourselves as ‘God’s chosen people’ and start recognizing the
existence and ministry of ‘God’s chosen peoples.’ It is a call to move from an ethnocentric
remnant theology to a spirit of religious affirmation which acknowledges that the ‘kingdom
of God on earth’ transcends every religious movement of humankind, and rejoices that
the future ‘kingdom’ will include ‘many mansions.’”104

This proposal is in essence a rejection of the Adventist view of the remnant. In fact it is
Daily’s main purpose in his book to redefine Adventism in terms of main stream Evangelicalism.
His call is a radical one because it requires a rejection of our institutional and denominational
identity.105
Without clearly stating it, Jon Dybdahl comes very close to the idea of an invisible
remnant. He argues that, “Neither in Scripture nor in the writings of Ellen G. White is the remnant
directly equivalent to an institutional structure, church organization, or denominational entity.
People inside the church can be lost, and sincere followers outside of it can be saved.” 106
According to him, “Remnant people are those who are never satisfied with the status quo but
want to examine, learn, grow, and gather those ‘scattered gems.”107 By qualifying the connection
between the remnant and a church organization Dybdahl appears to be saying that the remnant
is scattered throughout Christianity and that at the present time is invisible.

The Remnant is not yet a Reality

Jack W. Provonsha has suggested that the remnant of Revelation is yet to appear. He
considers it almost perverse for the church to call itself “the remnant church”108 because the
remnant is more than an established institution. The remnant is to be defined in terms of a quality
of life and faith and not in terms of membership in an ecclesiastical organization. Recognizing
that the concept of the remnant is very important in Adventist theology and self-definition,
Provonsha is willing to say that, even though the remnant is still in the future, the Adventist
104
Steve G. Daily, Adventism for a New Generation (Portland, OR: Better Living Publishers, 1993), p. 314.
105
Ibid., 315.
106
Jon Dybdahl, “It is God’s Call: What it Means to be the Remnant,” Adventist Review, May 9, 1996, 14.
107
Ibid.
108
Jack W. Provonsha, A Remnant in Crisis (Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald, 1993), 35.
150
church may refer to itself as “a proleptic remnant” in the sense that its members will be absorbed
into a final remnant, the true remnant of God.109 This effectively denies the idea that the
Seventh-day Adventist church is God’s end-time remnant church and re-interprets Revelation
12:17 as a prophecy that is still unfulfilled. Provonsha assigns to the church the role of a
prophetic minority. By this he means that it, like a prophet, cries out for reform and change in the
world, thus preparing the way of the Lord.110

THE WITNESS OF SCRIPTURE

That God has a visible remnant church in the time of the end is clearly taught in
Revelation 12. In verses 1-6 we have a number of symbols: (1) The woman is a symbol of the
church (see Isa. 54:5, 6; 2Cor. 11:2); (2) The dragon is Satan (vs.9); (3) The man child is Christ
(cf. Ps. 2:9); and (4) The 1,260 days are prophetic days, i.e., years, referring to the period of
papal supremacy from the sixth to the end of the eighteenth century (538-1798).
Revelation 12:7-12 is an interlude explaining where Satan came from. The story
continues in verse 13.
12:13-17
a. Verses 13-15 describe in symbolic terms the persecution of the Christian church, first by the
Roman Empire and later by the apostate Roman church.
b. In verse 16, the earth - personified - helps the church by providing a safe haven on the newly
discovered continent of America, thereby symbolically swallowing up the persecuting armies
(see Rev. 17:15).
c. In verse 17, we are now in the time after the 1,260 day period, i.e., in the nineteenth century.
Satan, seeing that he was unable to wipe out God's faithful people, is angry with a particular
group of people called "the rest of her offspring". The symbolism in verse 17 is changed; no
longer is the focus on the woman - symbol of God's people, the invisible church, throughout
the ages - but on a particular group, "the rest of her offspring", the visible remnant church.
The invisible church (the woman) does not cease to exist at the end of the 1,260 years -
there are still many of God's people in all Christian churches - but the focus is now on the
visible remnant church of God.
Only twice in this chapter is an offspring of the woman mentioned. The first one is the
male child in verse 5, the Messiah, the second, "the rest of her offspring", the remnant
church. Both times the offspring of the woman is clearly identified, supporting the view that

109
Ibid., 163.
110
Idem, “The Church as a Prophetic Minority,” Spectrum, vol. 12/1 (1981): 18-23.

151
 "the rest of her offspring" is the visible, not the invisible, remnant church. Two identifying
marks, or signs, are given of this remnant church:
1) They keep the commandments of God
2) they have the testimony of Jesus

Keeping the Commandments of God

Whatever commandments we may want to include in the first mark, we must certainly
include the 10 Commandments. Thus, the first identifying sign of the remnant church is their
loyalty to God's commandments - all his commandments, including the fourth, the Sabbath
commandment. God in Revelation 12:17 says, "At the end of time I will have a visible church -
the remnant church - which will be recognised by the fact that they keep the commandments as I
have given them in the beginning, including the Sabbath commandment."
In the time of the apostles, or the early church, this would not have been a special sign,
because they all kept the Sabbath; but today, when most Christians keep Sunday, the Sabbath
has indeed become a distinguishing mark.

The Testimony of Jesus

The second identifying mark is "the testimony of Jesus." But what does this phrase
mean? The expression "testimony of Jesus" (marturia Iesou) occurs six times in the book of
Revelation (1:2,9; 12:17; 19:10 [twice]; 20:4).
Two grammatically possible explanations concerning its meaning have been put forward.
The first view takes marturia Iesou as an objective genitive and interprets it as man's witness to
Christ.111 Thus, the war mentioned in 12:17 refers to the "persecutions against all individuals of
the church who keep the commandments of God and bear testimony to Jesus".112 The second
view takes marturia Iesou as a subjective genitive and understands the testimony of Jesus as the
self-revelation of Jesus – His own testimony.113
A study of the word marturia in the Johannine literature, where it occurs twenty-one
times, indicates that it is used fourteen times in a genitive construction that is clearly subjective;
e. g., John 1:19; 3:11, 32, 33; 5:31; etc. The objective idea of "witness about" or "witness to" in

111
M.E. Osterhaven, "Testimony," The Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible, 5 vols. (Grand Rapids,
MI: Zondervan, 1975), 5:682; see also John J. Walvoord, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (London: Marshall,
Morgan, and Scott Ltd., 1966), 41; Petros Vassiliades, "The Translation of Marturia Iesou in Revelation," The
Bible Translator 36 (1985): 129-34.
112
Ray F. Robbins, The Revelation of Jesus Christ (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1975), 154; see also G.R.
Beasley-Murray, The Book of Revelation, New Century Bible (London: Oliphants, 1978), 206.
113
James Moffat, "The Revelation of St. John the Divine," The Expositor's Greek Testament, 5. vols. ed. W.R.
Nicoll (Grand Rapids, MI: W. B. Eerdmans, 1956), 5:465.

152
John's writings is consistently expressed by the preposition peri (about, concerning) with the verb
martureo "to witness, testify." He never uses the noun marturia (testimony, witness) with an
objective genitive construction by itself. For example, John 1:7, "To bear witness to the light"
[martureo + peri]; 5:31; "If I bear witness to myself" [martureo + peri]; 1 John 5:9, "He has born
witness to his Son" [martureo + peri].114

Revelation 1:1, 2 – The introduction to the book of Revelation sets forth the source, i. e.
God, and the content of the book -- the revelation of Jesus Christ. In verse 2 we are told that
John bore witness to "the Word of God" and "the testimony of Jesus".
"The Word of God" is commonly understood to refer to what God says; and "the
testimony of Jesus" in parallel to "the Word of God" must therefore mean the testimony which
Jesus Himself gives. How did Jesus testify of Himself? While here on earth, He testified in
person to the people in Palestine. After His ascension, He spoke through His prophets.

Revelation 1:9 – Before speaking in detail about his first vision, John introduces himself
and states his credentials. He mentions who he is - John, "your brother;" where he is - on
Patmos; why he is there - on account of "the Word of God" and "the testimony of Jesus;" and
when he received the vision - "on the Lord's day."
The parallelism between the "Word of God" and "the testimony of Jesus" is again clearly
discernible. "The Word of God" in John's time referred to the Old Testament, and the "testimony
of Jesus" to what Jesus had said in the gospels and through His prophets, like Peter and Paul.
Thus, both genitives can be taken as subjective genitives. They describe the content of John's
preaching, for which he was banished.

Revelation 19:10 – In Revelation 19:10 we read the explanation, "For the testimony of
Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." However, what is "the spirit of prophecy?" This phrase occurs
only once in the Bible, only in this text. The closest parallel to it in the Bible is found in 1.
Corinthians 12:8-10. There Paul refers to the Holy Spirit, who, among other charismata, gives the
gift of prophecy; and the person who receives this gift is called a prophet (1Cor 12:28; Eph 4:11).
Now, just as in 1 Corinthians 12:28, those who have the gift of prophecy in verse 10 are
called prophets, so in Revelation 22:8, 9, those who have the Spirit of prophecy in 19:10 are
called prophets.

114
See G. Pfandl "The Remnant Church and the Spirit of Prophecy", Symposium on Revelation, Daniel and
Revelation Committee Series, 7 vols., ed. F.B. Holbrook (Silver Spring, MD: Biblical Research Institute, 1992),
7:305-6.

153
 19:10 22:8,9
And I fell at his feel I fell down to worship before the feet
to worship him, before the feet of the angel who showed
me these things.
But he said to me, Then he said to me,
"See that you do not do that! "See that you do not do that!
I am your fellow servant, For I am your fellow servant,
and of your brethren who have and of your brethren the prophets,
the testimony of Jesus. Worship
God." For the testimony of Jesus and of those who keep the words
is the spirit of prophecy. of this book. Worship God."

The situation in both passages is the same. John falls at the feet of the angel to worship.
The words of the angel's response are almost identical, yet the difference is significant. In 19:10,
the brethren are identified by the phrase, "Who hold [have] the testimony of Jesus." In 22:9, the
brethren are simply called "prophets".
If the Protestant principle of interpreting Scripture by Scripture means anything, this
comparison must lead to the conclusion that "the spirit of prophecy" in 19:10 is not the
possession of all church members in general, but only of those who have been called by God to
be prophets. That this is not purely an Adventist interpretation can be seen from the writings of
other scholars. The Lutheran scholar Hermann Strathmann, for example, says:
According to the parallel 22:9 the brothers referred to are not believers in general,
but the prophets. Here, too, they are characterised as such. This is the point of
verse 10c. If they have the marturia Iesou, they have the spirit of prophecy, i.e.,
they are prophets, like the angel, who simply stands in the service of marturia
Iesou.115

Similarly, James Moffat explains:

"For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." This prose marginal comment
specifically defines the brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus as possessors of
prophetic inspiration. The testimony of Jesus is practically equivalent to Jesus
testifying.116

The Witness of the Targumim

The Jewish readers in John's day knew what was meant by the expression "Spirit of
prophecy". They would have understood the expression as a reference to the Holy Spirit, who
imparts the prophetic gift to man.

115
Allison A. Trite, “”Martus and Martyrdom in the Apocalypse,” Novum Testamentum 15 (1973): 75. See also
Hermann Strathmann, "Martus", Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI:
Stuttgart, 1964-1976), 4:501; Mounce, 66, 274.
116
Moffat, 5:465.

154
 Rabbinic Judaism equated the OT expressions "Holy Spirit", "Spirit of God", or "Spirit of
Yahweh" with "the Spirit of prophecy" as can be seen in the frequent occurrence of this term in
the Targumim (written translations of the OT in Aramaic):
Genesis 41:38
Hebrew Old Testament
“And Pharaoh said to his servants, ‘Can we find such a one as this, a man in
whom is the Spirit of God?’”

Aramaic Targum
“And Pharaoh said to his servants, ‘Can we find a man like this, in whom is the
Spirit of prophecy from the Lord?’”

Numbers 27:18
Hebrew Old Testament
“And the LORD said to Moses: ‘Take Joshua the son of Nun with you, a man in
whom is the Spirit’”

Aramaic Targum
“And the Lord said to Mosheh, ‘Take to thee Jehoshua bar Nun, a man upon
whom abideth the Spirit of prophecy from before the Lord.’”117

Sometimes the term "Spirit of prophecy" refers simply to the Holy Spirit, but in many
cases it refers to the gift of prophecy given by the Holy Spirit as is made clear by the context of
the Masoretic text. Commenting on this expression in the Targums, J.P. Schäfer says:
First of all it proves that the term "Spirit of prophecy" is closer to the MT than the
term "Holy Spirit". Moreover an examination of the verses where TO uses the term
"Spirit of prophecy" shows that in almost all cases there is a direct relationship to
the prophecy in the biblical context. The translation "Spirit of prophecy", although
not in the strictest sense literal, is almost always stipulated through the MT (Gen.
41:38 - Joseph had the "Spirit of prophecy" because he was able to interpret
Pharao's dream; Num. 11:25 - The Spirit that settled on the 70 Elders, according
to the MT, brought about "prophesying"; Num. 24:2 - Bileam prophesied
concerning Israel). In other words, the term "Spirit of prophecy" describes a clearly
delineated situation, namely, the Holy Spirit sent from God who imparts the
prophetic gift to man.118

F.F. Bruce comes to the same conclusion and says:

The expression "the Spirit of prophecy" is current in post-biblical Judaism: it is

117
John W. Etheridge, The Targums of Onkelos and Jonathan Ben Uzziel on the Pentateuch , 2 vols. (London:
Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1862), 1:131, 556; 2:442. Other occurrences are Gen 45:27; Exod
35:21,31; Num 11:17,25,26,28,29; 24:2; Judg 3:10; 1 Sam 10:6; 19:10,23; 2 Sam 23:2; 1 Kgs 22:24; 2 Chr 15:1;
18:22,23; 20:14; Ps 51:13; Isa 11:2. Strack-Billerbeck, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament (München, 1965),
2:129.
118
J.P. Schäfer, "Die Termini `Heiliger Geist' und `Geist der Prophetie' in den Targumim und das Verhältnis der
Targumim Zueinander," Vetus Testamentum 20 (1970):310.

155
 used, for example, in a Targumic circumlocution for the Spirit of Yahweh which
comes upon this or that prophet. Thus the Targum of Jonathan renders the
opening words of Isaiah 61:1 as "The Spirit of prophecy from before the Lord God
is upon me." The thought expressed in Revelation 19:10 is not dissimilar to that
already quoted from 1. Peter 1:11 where "the Spirit of Christ" is said to have borne
advanced testimony in the Old Testament prophets. There too Jesus is the theme
of the witness borne by the prophetic Spirit; the prophets did not know who the
person or what the time would be, but at last the secret is out: the person is
Jesus; the time is now.
In Revelation 19:10, however, it is through Christian prophets that the
Spirit of prophecy bears witness. What the prophets of pre-Christian days foretold
is proclaimed as an accomplished fact by the prophets of the new age, among
whom John occupies a leading place.119

Summary of Revelation 12:17

1. Returning now to Revelation 12:17, we can say that "the rest of her offspring. . keep the
commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ," which is the Spirit of
prophecy, or the prophetic gift.

2. This interpretation is strengthened by a study of the Greek word echo, meaning "to have".
This word indicates possession. They have a gift of God -- the prophetic gift. If the
testimony of Jesus were our testimony about Jesus, John would have written something
like this: "They keep the commandments of God and testify about Jesus", or, "they bear
testimony to Jesus." But the Greek work echo is never used in the sense "to bear a
witness".120

3. In summary we can say that the visible remnant church, which according to prophecy
exists after the 1,260 day period (after 1798), has two specific identifying marks:
a. They keep the commandments of God, including the Sabbath command as God has
given it.
b. They have the testimony of Jesus, which is the Spirit of prophecy, or the prophetic gift
in their midst.

THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH

The Seventh-day Adventist Church, from its very inception in 1863, has always claimed
these identifying signs for itself. As Adventists we proclaim the 10 Commandments, including the
Sabbath; and we believe that as a church we have the testimony of Jesus, that is, that God
manifested Himself in the life and work of Ellen G. White.

119
F.F. Bruce, The Time is Fulfilled (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1978), 105-6.
120
Pfandl,.312-3

156
 Thus, the Seventh-day Adventist Church is a church prophetically foreseen, not just one
church among many. God has called this church into existence for a very specific purpose - to
proclaim the three angels' messages. Our pioneers were quite certain that the Seventh-day
Adventist Church is the remnant church of Revelation 12:17. G.I. Butler, General Conference
president from 1871 to 1888, wrote in an article entitle "Visions and Dreams":
Is there then no people in whom these conditions combine in these last days? We
believe they truly do in Seventh-day Adventists. They have everywhere claimed to be
the "remnant" church for the last 25 years . . . Do they keep the commandments of God?
Every one knowing anything about this people can answer that this is the most important
part of their faith . . . In regard to the Spirit of prophecy, it is a remarkable fact that from
the first of their existence as a people, Seventh-day Adventists have claimed that it has
been in active exercise among them.121

Ellen White firmly believed that Seventh-day Adventists were God's remnant church and
that Revelation 12:17 applied to them. Seventh-day Adventists "are God's representatives upon
the earth."122 "We have the commandments of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ, which is
the Spirit of prophecy."123 And she counseled, "Let all be careful not to make an outcry against
the only people who are fulfilling the description given of the remnant people who keep the
commandments of God and have faith in Jesus, who are exalting the standard of righteousness
in these last days."124
And we still believe that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the visible remnant church
and that the Spirit of prophecy is one of the identifying marks.
One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the
remnant church and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. As the Lord's
messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide
for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction. They also make clear that
the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested.125

As Seventh-day Adventists, we are members of God's remnant church. However, this

identification with the remnant church does not accord us an exclusive status with God. Salvation
is not guaranteed through church membership in any church - we are saved as individuals, not
as a church. But being a part of God's remnant church means that we participate in proclaiming
God's special end-time message - the three angels' messages - to the world.

121
G.I. Butler, "Visions and Prophecy", Review and Herald, June 2, 1874, 193.
122
Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA, 1948), 2:452.
123
Idem, Testimonies to Ministers (Mountain View, CA, Pacific Press, 1962), 114.
124
Ibid., 58.
125
Seventh-day Adventists Believe (Washington DC: Ministerial Association of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 2005), 247.

157
 The prophetic origin of the Adventist movement and God's gracious guidance through the
prophetic gift of Ellen White should make us more aware of the responsibility we as the remnant
church have, and it should spur us on to finish the work God has given us to do.

158
 A TRUE PROPHET
INTRODUCTION
Why do we believe that EGW was a prophet? Even though God called her to be a
prophet, she was not immediately accepted in the church. It took several years before she was
accepted by the church at large. The pioneers tested the gift, before they accepted it.

SCRIPTURE TESTS
1 John 4:1 – One of the problems in John’s day was the nature of Christ, was he really
flesh and blood or did he only appear to have a body (Docetists). Every true prophet will point
people to Jesus, the God-Man, who is the savior and example of all mankind. Ellen White’s life
was devoted to doing just that.

A. Dreams and Visions

Numbers 12:6 – In 70 years (1844 -1915), Ellen White had about 2000 visions and
dreams. She received her first vision in December 1844; her last open vision occurred in
1884 at the camp ground in Portland. After that she only received night visions or dreams.

Why did the open visions cease?

Act 2 – God launched the Church with many supernatural phenomena:
a. Tongues – Acts 2:10, 11
b. Healings – Acts 3:6;
c. Dead raised to life – Acts 5:16
d. Sinners slain – Acts 5:5, 10

But once the Church was established, the manifestations diminished – God still worked
miracles, but these public demonstrations of his power were no longer needed. So also in the
early SDA Church – the supernatural manifestations diminished as the Church became
established and the prophet became accepted.
There is no question that Ellen White had supernatural experiences – her physical
phenomena: no breath, supernatural strength (no one could move her limbs), she was
unconscious of her surroundings, etc. Adventists and non-Adventists have testified to the
supernatural character of her visions. J. N Loughborough at the General Conference in 1893
said:

159
 I have seen Sister White in vision about fifty times . . . She has been examined while
in vision by skillful physicians, and we have testimonials from them which declare that
the phenomena of her visions are beyond their comprehension.126

The question is, were these visions from God or from Satan? “The Testimonies are of the
Spirit of God or of the devil.”127

B. Agreement with the Bible

Isaiah 8:20 – What a prophet says, must harmonize with what God has already revealed.
Anyone familiar with Ellen White’s books can testify that she used Scripture profusely – she
immersed herself in the Bible and constantly referred to the biblical text.
What she wrote harmonizes with the spirit of the Bible – she was not a theologian and did
not write an exegetical commentary, but her message is in harmony with the message of
Scripture.

C. Fulfilled Prophecy
Jeremiah 28:9 – Prophecies are an important part of Scripture, but they are not the major
part. The same is true of the writings of EGW.

1. Spiritism In 1848, in Hydesville, NY, John D. Fox and his wife traced strange tapping
sounds in their home to the room of their teenage daughters Margaret and
Katie.
-- bedclothes were pulled off the bed by invisible hands
-- chairs and tables moved
-- rapping

The Girls devised a means of intelligent communication with the unseen power by means of
rapping. This widely advertised event set off a revival of spiritism in the US that soon
extended to Britain and Europe. These events were the beginning of modern spiritualism. On
March 24, 1849 EGW wrote, “I saw that the mysterious knocking in New York and other
places was the power of Satan, and that such things would be more and more common,
clothed in a religious garb so as to lull the deceived to greater security.”128

126
General Conference Bulletin, Jan. 29, 1893.
127
Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1948), 4:230.
128
Idem, Early Writings (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1945), 43.

160
 1948 – Centennial Book of Modern Spiritualism in America
Spiritualism, with its signs, wonders, vision, and healing gifts was the religion of the
apostles; of the post-apostolic fathers, and the primitive Christians.129

Spiritualism is the coming universal religion. It is the life blood of Christianity; in fact, it
is Christianity plus.130

In 1850 EGW predicted

I was shown that by the rapping and mesmerism these modern magicians would yet
account for all the miracles wrought by our Lord Jesus Christ.131

1948 – Centennial Book of Modern Spiritualism in America declares:

A medium foretold the birth of Jesus, whose brief life on earth was filled with the
performance of many so-called miracles which in reality were spiritual phenomena.132

2. The County Treasurer and His Embezzlement

Elder Loughborough, early in the work, gives us an account of what took place at
Oswego, New York, in the winter of 1849-1850.
While Elder and Mrs. White were there laboring for souls, a revival was started in one
of the Protestant churches by a layman who was county treasurer .This man seemed
to have a great burden for the unconverted. A young man, Hiram Patch, and his
fiancee were in the balance as to whether to cast their lot with the revival or join with
the Sabbath-keeping Adventists. In vision Ellen White was shown the true character
of the man conducting the revival, and as she spoke of it to Mr. Patch, she told him
she was instructed to tell him, "Wait a month, and you will know for yourself the
character of the persons who are engaged in this revival, an who profess to have
such a great burden or sinners. He has no real burden for sinners." Mr. Patch replied,
"I will wait."
Two weeks went by and the treasurer-revivalist, in his affected agony for sinners,
burst a blood vessel in his stomach and was confined to his bed at home. When
others took aver the treasurer's work at the county office, a shortage of $1,000 in
county funds was immediately found. An inquiry made by the sheriff brought only
solemn denials from the treasurer of any knowledge of the missing money, until
another officer observed the treasurer's wife hastily hide something in a snow bank,
and found the bag containing the money, and confronted the embezzling treasurer
with the evidence.
Needless to say the revival collapsed, and Hiram Patch and his affianced, with the
words of prediction still fresh in their ears, became fruitful members of the remnant
church. This experience of a prediction fulfilled within two weeks after the words were
spoken inspired confidence in the hearts of those who looked on.133

129
Centennial Book of Modern Spiritualism in America (Chicago: The National Spiritualist Association of United
States of America, 1948), 115,
130
Ibid., 69.
131
White, Early Writings, 59.
132
Centennial Book of Modern Spiritualism in America, 68.
133
Notes and Papers Concerning Ellen White and the Spirit of Prophecy (Washington, D.C.: Ellen White Estate,
1966), 46.

161
 3. The Ecumenical Movement
In 1885, Ellen White, under inspiration, wrote:
When Protestantism shall stretch her hand across the gulf to grasp the hand of the
Roman power, when she shall reach over the abyss to clasp hands with spiritualism,
when under the influence of this three-fold union, our country shall repudiate every
principle of its constitution as a Protestant and Republican government, and shall
make provision for the propagation of papal falsehoods and delusions, then we may
know that the time has come for the marvelous working of Satan and that the end is
near.134

In 1885, when she wrote this, the ecumenical movement was not even thought of. At
that time, not only were Protestants quarreling amongst themselves, but most of them
were violently opposed to the Roman Catholic Church, as some still are today in Northern
Ireland.
But things have changed. On March 29, 1994, thirty-nine leading evangelical
Protestants and Roman Catholics—men like Pat Robertson and John Cardinal O’Connor
—signed a document entitled “Evangelicals and Catholics Together: The Christian
Mission in the Third Millennium.” Headlines emblazoned upon newspapers across
America proclaimed: “Christians Herald New Era” and “Catholics Embrace Evangelicals—
Conservatives of Both Faiths Agreed to Accept Each Other as Christians.”
In 1995, the book “Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission”
was published. The authors reported that, “European Catholics and Protestants have
concluded that the condemnations of the Reformation were based on misconceptions,
were aimed at extreme positions on the other side and no longer apply to today’s
situations.”135 We wonder what Martin Luther and the thousands who gave their lives for
the principles of the Reformation would say to that?
Over the last forty years, we believe, we have seen the first part of this prophecy
being fulfilled. We have confidence, therefore, that the second part will be fulfilled in the
future.

D. The Orchard Test

Matthew 7:15-20 – The orchard test takes time. Seventy years is a long time to live and
work before the public, under the critical eyes of millions of people, largely skeptical, doubtful,
uncertain, suspicious, and in some cases openly hostile. Errors, faults, and inconsistencies
are exposed with great satisfaction by opponents. Mrs. White lived in New England,
134
White, Testimonies, 5:451.
135
Charles Colson and Richard John Neuhaus, Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Working Toward a Common
Mission (Dallas: Word, 1995), 108.

162
Michigan, Switzerland, Australia, and California. She traveled extensively, but the fruit of her
life and labor attest to her godliness, sincerity, zeal, and earnestness, and her own Christian
conduct and experience.
If you read her books, are you drawn closer to God or are you led away from him? From
my own experience, I have to say my commitment to the Lord and his Word becomes
stronger the more I read in her books. For my personal devotion I read a portion of Scripture
and at least 2 pages in one of her books each morning. I see the fruit of her life and work as
evidence of God’s leading in her life and in the history of this church. All these tests must
apply to a true prophet, not just one or two.
Are there difficulties in the writings of EGW? Yes, plenty, but then there are plenty of
difficulties in Scripture as well. We must focus on what is clear and profitable and suspend
judgment on matters which seem ambiguous or contradictory.
When you look at the biblical prophets, we only have a small portion of their writings in
Scripture – and that still causes us problems. In the case of EGW we have pretty well
everything she wrote – and there are “some things hard to understand” as Peter says of
Paul’s writings (2 Peter 3:16). People get hung up sometimes on small details (6000 years,
reform dress, or the issue of plagiarism) but they fail to see the bigger picture:
– the way God used her to raise up this church
– the wonderful insights she received
– and the contributions she has made to this church

We would not be here anymore, if God had not lead this church through the Spirit of
Prophecy, or we would be a small, insignificant church like the Advent Christian Church – 30
000 members.

163
 THE INTERPRETATION OF THE E. G. WHITE WRITINGS

Introduction
As Seventh-day Adventists we believe that God called this church into existence for a
special purpose – the proclamation of the 3 angels’ messages of Revelation 14. We believe that
the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the remnant church of Revelation 12:17 and that God has
graciously given this church a special gift, the gift of prophecy as manifested in the life and work
of Ellen White.136
Since we do not believe in degrees of inspiration, we have to recognize that her
inspiration, though not her authority, is on the same level as the inspiration of the Old and New
Testament prophets. Therefore, when using and interpreting what she has written, we must
apply the same hermeneutical principles to her writings as we do to Scripture. Both are inspired
literature, therefore both must be interpreted by the same principles.

A. General Principles
1. Invite the Holy Spirit to Guide in the Study
A true knowledge of the Bible can be gained only through the aid of the Spirit by whom the
word was given.137

2. Be Willing to Obey the Truth

Whenever men are not seeking, in word and deed, to be in harmony with God, then, however
learned they may be, they are liable to err in their understanding of Scripture, and it is not
safe to trust to their explanations.138

3. Be Open-Minded, Willing to Surrender Previously Held Positions

a. If you search the Scriptures to vindicate your own opinions, you will never reach the truth.
Search in order to learn what the Lord says.139

b. There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be
revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without an error. The fact that
certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people, is not a proof that
our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair.
No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.140

136
Fundamental Belief no. 18 in Seventh-day Adventists Believe (Silver Spring, MD: Ministerial Association of
Seventh-day Adventists, 2005), 247.
137
Ellen G. White, Education (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1963), 189.
138
Idem, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1948), 5:705.
139
Idem, Christ=s Object Lessons (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1941), 112.
140
Idem, Counsels to Writers and Editors (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing Association, 1946), 35.

164
4. Guard Against Extreme Interpretations
a. When those who advocate hygienic reform carry the matter to extremes, people are not
to blame if they become disgusted. . . .These extremists do more harm in a few months
than they can undo in a lifetime. They are engaged in a work which Satan loves to see go
on.141

b. In reforms, we would better come one step short of the mark than to go one step beyond
it. And if there is error at all, let it be on the side next to the people.142

5. Work Together with People of Experience

a. Let none be self-confident, as though God had given them special light above their
brethren. . . . the only safety for any of us is in receiving no new doctrine, no new
interpretation of the Scriptures, without first submitting it to brethren of experience. Lay it
before them in a humble, teachable spirit, with earnest prayer; and if they see no light in
it, yield to their judgment; for "in the multitude of counselors there is safety."143

b. The wonderful truth of God is to be sought out by every mind, and the results of many
minds are to be brought together from many sources as God's hereditary trust, and the
divine power will work in such a way that true harmony will exist.144

6. Prophets also Wrote Things which were not Inspired

a. For one to mix the sacred with the common is a great mistake. In a tendency to do this
we may see the working of the enemy to destroy souls. . . . There are times when
common things must be stated, common thoughts must occupy the mind, common letters
must be written and information given that has passed from one to another of the
workers. Such words, such information, are not given under the special inspiration of the
Spirit of God.145

b. The information given concerning the number of rooms in the Paradise Valley Sanitarium
was given, not as a revelation from the Lord, but simply as a human opinion. There has
never been revealed to me the exact number of rooms in any of our sanitariums; and the
knowledge I have obtained of such things I have gained by inquiring of those who were
supposed to know. 146

7. Use Common Sense

a. We are to be guided by true theology and common sense. Our souls are to be
surrounded by the atmosphere of heaven.147

141
Idem, Counsels on Health (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1951), 153.
142
Ibid., 438.
143
White, Testimonies for the Church, 9 vols. (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1948), 5:291, 293.
144
Idem, Review and Herald, October 23, 1894.
145
Idem, Selected Messages, 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1958), 1:38, 39.
146
Ibid., 1:38
147
White, Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1943), 257.

165
 b. God wants us all to have common sense, and He wants us to reason from common
sense. Circumstances alter conditions. Circumstances change the relation of things.148

B. Specific Principles of Interpretation

1. Consider Time and Place

Every statement must be understood within its historical context. Time, place, and
circumstances under which that statement was made must be studied in order to understand
its meaning.
In 1897 Ellen White wrote an article for the Review and Herald entitled “The Bible in
Our Schools” in which she says:
There are times when Greek and Latin scholars are needed. Some must study these
languages. This is well. But not all, and not many should study them. Those who think
that a knowledge of Greek and Latin is essential to a higher education, cannot see
afar off.149

A few years ago, a ministerial student in one of our colleges refused to take Greek on the
basis of this quotation. Was he justified? What was the situation which caused Ellen White to
write these words?
Battle Creek College was founded in 1874. A few years later it offered Bachelor degrees
in Arts and Science. The curriculum, during the early decades, however, followed the
classical education curriculum of the state colleges at that time. This meant Bachelor of Art’s
students had to study classical Latin and Greek for three years each. Science students took
four years of Latin and two years of Greek.
They read Virgil, Ovid, Cicero, Seneca, Xenophon, Demosthenes, Homer, and other
pagan authors.150 Furthermore, except for the mission course, the courses offered did not
include any Bible subjects. Thus in 1877-1878 the college had an enrollment of 413 students,
but only 75 took a Bible class.151 For years Ellen White urged that the Bible and not infidel
authors should be the center of our educational program. In 1896 she wrote, “The greatest
wisdom, and most essential, is the knowledge of God. Self sinks into insignificance as it
contemplates God and Jesus Christ whom He hath sent. The Bible must be made the
foundation for all study.”152

148
Idem, Selected Messages, 3 vols. (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1958), 3:217.
149
Idem, Fundamentals of Christian Education (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing Association, 1923), 468.
150
Emmett K. Van der Vere, The Wisdom Seekers (Nashville, TN: Southern Publishing, 1972), 59.
151
Don F. Neufeld, ed., Seventh-day Adventist Encylopedia (Washington, DC: Review and Herald, 1976), 47.
152
White, Fundamentals of Christian Education, 451.

166
 During the 1890s the situation began to improve. By 1894 all students were required to
take at least one year of Bible. Then in 1897 E. A. Sutherland became president and the
classical curriculum was abolished. From 1898 on only New Testament Greek, New
Testament Latin, and medical Latin were taught.153
The two year Greek program in our colleges today is the result of the reforms in the
1890s. Ellen White never again criticized the study of Greek or Latin. Her statement in
Fundamentals of Education, therefore, cannot be used against the study of Greek or Hebrew
today.

2. Look at the Immediate Context

The immediate context refers to what comes before and what comes after a particular
statement. What is she referring to in the paragraph or chapter from which a statement is
taken?
In the book Christ’s Object Lessons Ellen White makes the statement that “those who
accept the Saviour, however sincere their conversion, should never be taught to say or to feel
that they are saved.”154 Many Christians then and now believe in the erroneous doctrine of
“once saved always saved.” Ellen White was clearly against this teaching. In context she
says,
There is nothing so offensive to God or so dangerous to the human soul as pride and
self-sufficiency. Of all sins it is the most hopeless, the most incurable. Peter's fall was
not instantaneous, but gradual. Self-confidence led him to the belief that he was
saved, and step after step was taken in the downward path, until he could deny his
Master. Never can we safely put confidence in self or feel, this side of heaven, that we
are secure against temptation. Those who accept the Saviour, however sincere their
conversion, should never be taught to say or to feel that they are saved. This is
misleading. Every one should be taught to cherish hope and faith; but even when we
give ourselves to Christ and know that He accepts us, we are not beyond the reach of
temptation. 155

The context makes it clear that she is addressing the issue of self-confidence and
temptations after conversion. We are never secure against temptations, we can never say
that we cannot fall, that we are saved and therefore secure from temptation, but this does not
mean that day by day we cannot have the confidence that in Jesus we are saved (1 John
5:12-13).

153
Neufeld, 47.
154
White, Christ=s Object Lessons, 155,
155
Ibid., 154, 155.

167
3. Study the Larger Context
The large context refers to other statements Ellen White has written on a particular topic.
For example, the Adventist health message to a large extent is based on the health visions of
Ellen White. She has written profusely on the topic and many times some of her statements
are taken out of context and misused. Because of the vast amount of material on this topic in
her writings, we need to consider all that she has written on a particular issue. On the issue
of meat eating, for example, she has very absolute sounding statements but also many
modifying statements which need to be considered before any conclusions are drawn.

a. Absolute Statements:
Vegetables, fruits, and grains should compose our diet. Not an ounce of flesh meat
should enter our stomachs. The eating of flesh is unnatural. We are to return to God's
original purpose in the creation of man.156

Anyone reading this statement by itself would have to come to the conclusion that under
no circumstances are we to eat meat. However, just a few pages further on in the book, we
find what else she had to say on this issue.

b. Modifying Statements
Where plenty of good milk and fruit can be obtained there is rarely any excuse for
eating animal food; it is not necessary to take the life of any of God's creatures to
supply our ordinary needs. In certain cases of illness or exhaustion it may be thought
best to use some meat, but great care should be taken to secure the flesh of healthy
animals. It has come to be a very serious question whether it is safe to use flesh food
at all in this age of the world. It would be better never to eat meat than to use the flesh
of animals that are not healthy. When I could not obtain the food I needed, I have
sometimes eaten a little meat; but I am becoming more and more afraid of it.157

Here we have some modifying circumstances listed: cases of illness, or when other food
was not readily available. She herself, she admits, has from time to time eaten meat.
Therefore, in a very balanced statement she counsels,

We do not mark out any precise line to be followed in diet; but we do say that in
countries where there are fruits, grains, and nuts in abundance, flesh food is not the
right food for God's people. I have been instructed that flesh food has a tendency to
animalize the nature, to rob men and women of that love and sympathy which they
should feel for everyone, and to give the lower passions control over the higher
powers of the being. If meat eating was ever healthful, it is not safe now. Cancers,
tumors, and pulmonary diseases are largely caused by meat eating. We are not to

156
White, Counsels on Diet and Foods (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1946), 380.
157
Ibid., 394.

168
 make the use of flesh food a test of fellowship, but we should consider the influence
that professed believers who use flesh foods have over others.158

We should certainly aim for a vegetarian diet, but we should never make it a test of
fellowship. For some people a diet which includes some meat may even be the best, but this
should never serve as an excuse to continue eating meat when there is no real necessity.
A meat diet is not the most wholesome of diets, and yet I would not take the position
that meat should be discarded by everyone. Those who have feeble digestive organs
can often use meat, when they cannot eat vegetables, fruit, or porridge.159

When we look a the total corpus of what she has written on a given topic, a balanced
picture emerges which is invaluable for every Christian who takes his religion seriously, but
particularly for Seventh-day Adventists whom God has called to be his witnesses in these last
days.

4. Look for Principles

Prophets convey God’s truth as principles or policies. Principles are universal and apply
to all people in all places. Policies are the applications of principles. They may change with
different circumstances and may look different in different cultures and places. “That which
can be said of men under certain circumstances, cannot be said of them under other
circumstances.”160

a. Teaching girls to drive a horse

And if girls, in turn, could learn to harness and drive a horse, and to use the saw and
the hammer, as well as to rake and the hoe, they would be better fitted to meet the
emergencies of life.161

The principle in this statement is that girls should be “fitted to meet the emergencies of
life. Applied to our time it means that girls should learn how to drive and look after a car.

b. The bicycle craze

According to the General Conference Bulletin of 1897, Ellen White said at this
conference,
The money expended in bicycles and dress, and other needless things, must be
accounted for. As God's people, you should represent Jesus; but Christ is ashamed
of the self-indulgent ones. My heart is pained, I can scarcely restrain my feelings,

158
White, Testimonies, 9:159.
159
Idem, Counsels on Diet and Foods, 394, 395.
160
Idem, Testimonies, 3:470.
161
Idem, Education, 216.

169
 when I think how easily our people are led away from practical Christian principles to
self-pleasing.162

At the end of the 19th century, the bicycle was not an economical means of transportation,
but was rather a rich man’s toy. The best early bicycle cost $150, an investment comparable
to the cost of an expensive car today. People were mortgaging their income for months in
advance to buy what was then an expensive luxury item. Within a few years’ time, the bicycle
became a useful and inexpensive means of transportation.
Her policy on bicycles was based on the biblical principle of good stewardship. If she
were alive today she would apply this principle to the way people spend money on cars,
boats, sports equipment, electronic gadgets, clothing, etc.

5. Take Note of Ellen White’s Homiletical Use of Scripture

Ellen White frequently used Scripture homiletically. She was steeped in the language of
the Bible, and whenever she spoke or wrote on a topic, she would use biblical language and
biblical texts to convey the message she had received. For example:

1) John 5:39. “Search the Scriptures” the King James Bible translates. While the Greek
ereunate can be a present indicative or a present imperative, the context clearly favors the
indicative meaning: “You search the Scriptures, for in them you think you have eternal life;
and these are they which testify of Me” (NKJV).

Ellen White frequently uses this text homiletically as an admonition to study the
Scriptures.
By carefully and closely searching His word we shall obey the injunction of Christ,
"Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they
which testify of Me." This search enables the student to observe closely the divine
Model, for they testify of Christ.163

In Desire of Ages, however, where she relates the situation as we find it in John chapter
five, Ellen White uses a different translation and gives the text its exegetical meaning.
Instead of apologizing for the act of which they complained, or explaining His purpose
in doing it, Jesus turned upon the rulers, and the accused became the accuser. He
rebuked them for the hardness of their hearts, and their ignorance of the Scriptures.
He declared that they had rejected the word of God, inasmuch as they had rejected
Him whom God had sent. "Ye search the Scriptures, because ye think that in them ye
have eternal life; and these are they which bear witness of Me." John 5:39, R. V.164
162
Idem, General Conference Bulletin, 04-01-1897.
163
Idem, Counsels on Sabbath School Work (Washington D.C.: Review and Herald, 1938), 17, cf. 21, 29, etc.
164
Idem, The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1940), 211.

170
 2) Colossians 2:21 Paul speaks of an unhealthy asceticism that diverts attention from Christ.
In verse 21 he gives examples of these doctrines of men (v. 22).

Ellen White uses this language in a positive way:

In relation to tea, coffee, tobacco, and alcoholic drinks, the only safe course is to
touch not, taste not, handle not. The tendency of tea, coffee, and similar drinks is in
the same direction as that of alcoholic liquor and tobacco, and in some cases the
habit is as difficult to break as it is for the drunkard to give up intoxicants. Those who
attempt to leave off these stimulants will for a time feel a loss and will suffer without
them. But by persistence they will overcome the craving and cease to feel the lack.
Nature may require a little time to recover from the abuse she has suffered; but give
her a chance, and she will again rally and perform her work nobly and well.165

3) Jeremiah 30:7

The context is the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC and the exile:

verse 3 captivity – Babylonian captivity
verse 7 that day – 586
verse 8 that day – return from captivity
verse 9 David – restoration – time of the Messianic kingdom
verse 10 save you – return and restoration

The destruction of Jerusalem in 586 is a type of what is going to happen at the end of
time – E. G. White uses it typologically (theologically) in the Chapter “The Sealing.”
I saw that the four angels would hold the four winds until Jesus' work was done in the
sanctuary, and then will come the seven last plagues. These plagues enraged the
wicked against the righteous; they thought that we had brought the judgments of God
upon them, and that if they could rid the earth of us, the plagues would then be
stayed. A decree went forth to slay the saints, which caused them to cry day and night
for deliverance. This was the time of Jacob's trouble. Then all the saints cried out with
anguish of spirit, and were delivered by the voice of God.166

4) Jeremiah 4:23-26
verse 1 if .. then – still time to repent
verse 3 Judah and Jerusalem – he is speaking to them
verse 6 evil from the north – the Babylonians
verse 14 Jerusalem ... you may be saved – appeal to return
verse 19 alarm of war – the prophet is distressed
verse 22 my people are foolish – prophet deplores their attitude
verses 23-26 In vision Jeremiah sees the land destroyed

165
Idem, The Ministry of Healing (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1942), 335.
166
Idem, Early Writings, 36, 37.

171
 Again this is a type of what will happen at the end – theological use.

Looking forward to the great day of God, the prophet Jeremiah declares: "I beheld the
earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light. I
beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly. I beheld,
and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled. I beheld, and,
lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down."
Here is to be the home of Satan with his evil angels for a thousand years. Limited
to the earth, he will not have access to other worlds to tempt and annoy those who
have never fallen. It is in this sense that he is bound: there are none remaining, upon
whom he can exercise his power. He is wholly cut off from the work of deception and
ruin which for so many centuries has been his sole delight.167

The lesson we need to draw from this is that when we quote Ellen White in support of a
particular interpretation of a text, we must be sure she uses the text exegetically and not
homiletically.

C. The Growth Experience of Prophets

Before concluding this topic, we need to briefly consider the fact that prophets did not
receive all the light at one time. They too experienced a growth in their understanding of
heavenly things. In Daniel 8:27 the prophet says, “I was appalled by the vision, and did not
understand it” (RSV). About ten years later the angel Gabriel comes and explains to him the
full import of the vision. Similarly Ellen White experienced growth in her understanding of
what God revealed to her.
For sixty years I have been in communication with heavenly messengers, and I
have been constantly learning in reference to divine things, and in reference to the
way in which God is constantly working to bring souls from the error of their ways to
the light in God's light.168

Hence when we compare earlier writings of Ellen White with her later works we will find
that she at times modifies, expands, or shortens her earlier writings, reflecting a deeper
insight into God’s messages.

Conclusions
In the interpretation of Ellen White we need to take into consideration the time and place
when a statement was written, and we need to look at the immediate and larger context of a
passage. The immediate context helps us to see what she is really addressing, and the larger
context makes us aware of what else she has written on a particular topic.

167
Idem, The Great Controversy, 659.
168
Idem, Selected Messages, 3:71.

172
 Because these principles of hermeneutics are often forgotten, or not applied, Scripture and
the writings of Ellen White are frequently misused. Sentences are taken out of context and
people maintain that she teaches something which in fact she does not.
By not using correct hermeneutical principles, that which was intended to be a blessing for
the church often becomes a curse.

173
 THE SANCTUARY IN ADVENTISM

Of all the doctrines we hold, the sanctuary truth is unique to our church. It has therefore,
received more criticism both from inside and outside the church than any of our other teachings.
1. Review of the Doctrine
2. Objections
3. Practical Implications

REVIEW OF THE DOCTRINE

There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not
man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of
His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on the cross. He was inaugurated as our
great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In
1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last
phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of
the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew
sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was
cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with
the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to
heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in
Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest
who, among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and
the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting
kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice of God in saving those who believe in
Jesus. It declares that those who have remained loyal to God shall receive the
kingdom. The completion of this ministry of Christ will make the close of human
probation before the Second Advent. (Fundamental Belief # 24).169

There are 10 important points in this doctrine:

1. There is a sanctuary in heaven
Hebrews 8:1-2
Now this is the main point of the things we are saying: We have such a High Priest,
who is seated at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in the heavens, a Minister
of the sanctuary and of the true tabernacle which the Lord erected, and not man.

2. Christ ministers there on our behalf

Hebrews 7:25

169
Seventh-day Adventists Believe (Washington DC: Ministerial Association of the General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventists, 2005), 347.

174
 Therefore He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through
Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them.

3. He began his intercessory ministry in AD 31

Daniel 9:24; (Heb 8:1-2)
Seventy weeks are determined For your people and for your holy city, To finish the
transgression, To make an end of sins, To make reconciliation for iniquity, To bring in
everlasting righteousness, To seal up vision and prophecy, And to anoint the Most
Holy.

4. In 1844 he began the 2nd phase of his ministry: intercession and the pre-advent
(investigative) judgment—Dan 7 and 8
Daniel 8:14
And he said to me, "For two thousand three hundred days; then the sanctuary shall
be cleansed."

175
5. This investigative judgment was typified by the YOM KIPPUR service of the Old
Testament sanctuary service—Heb 9:1-9; Dan 8 and 9
Hebrews 9:6, 7
Now when these things had been thus prepared, the priests always went into the first
part of the tabernacle, performing the services. But into the second part the high
priest went alone once a year, not without blood, which he offered for himself and for
the people's sins committed in ignorance.

176
6. In the earthly sanctuary animal blood cleansed the sanctuary; the heavenly
sanctuary = cleanses with the blood of Christ—Heb 9:22-26
Hebrews 9:22, 23
And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without
shedding of blood there is no remission. Therefore it was necessary that the
copies of the things in the heavens should be purified with these, but the
heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

7. The judgment which reveals who is saved and who is lost, deals with God’s
people
1 Peter 4:17
For the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it
begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel
of God?

8. The judgment vindicates God’s justice

The enemy of all righteousness has claimed that God is unjust. Therefore,
God in his infinite wisdom has determined to resolve every doubt forever.
During the investigative judgment God demonstrates before the universe—the
unfallen worlds and Satan—why some people will be saved and others lost. God
does not need the judgment—he knows, but his creatures in the universe do not.
Through the pre-advent judgment God is justified
Romans 3:4
For what if some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of
God without effect? Certainly not! Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar.
As it is written: "That You may be justified in Your words, And may overcome
when You are judged."

God opens the books so to speak to let the universe see what he has done.
9. Judgment declares that the saved receive the kingdom
Daniel 7:27
Then the kingdom and dominion, And the greatness of the kingdoms under the
whole heaven, Shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His
kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And all dominions shall serve and obey
Him.

10. The end of Christ’s ministration is the end of probation

177
 Revelation 22:11
"He who is unjust, let him be unjust still; he who is filthy, let him be filthy still;
he who is righteous, let him be righteous still; he who is holy, let him be holy
still."

OBJECTIONS TO THE SANCTUARY TRUTH

That non-Adventists have difficulties understanding the pre-Advent judgment is not
surprising, since most Christians believe in the immortality of the soul. For them, one’s
destiny is decided at death: heaven—hell—purgatory. A pre-Advent judgment which
decides who is saved and who is lost, has no place in their thinking.
Critics from within the church have primarily insisted that Christ began his Day of
Atonement ministry in AD31 rather than 1844. This argument is primarily based on New
Testament texts which indicate that Christ, at his ascension, went into the presence of
the Father:
Hebrews 9:24
For Christ has not entered the holy places made with hands, which are copies
of the true, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us;

Acts 7:55
But he, being full of the Holy Spirit, gazed into heaven and saw the glory of
God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God,

Romans 8:34
Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen,
who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us.

Ephesians 1:20
He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly
places

Their argument: “Where is God’s presence in the Heavenly Sanctuary?—in the Most
Holy—presupposes two apartments.
Now, if Christ is in the presence of God, he must be in the Most Holy, therefore, he
must have begun his Day of Atonement ministry in AD 31 and not in 1844. It is as clear
as day—isn’t it?

178
 Not quite—I agree that Christ since his ascension is in the presence of the father, but
that does not mean he is performing the Day of Atonement ministry since AD 31.
We do not know exactly what the heavenly sanctuary looks like, but neither the critics
nor I believe that you can separate Christ from the father through a curtain or door in
heaven—Christ wasn’t locked up for 1800 years.
Please note: Fundamental Belief #23 does not even mention compartments in the
heavenly sanctuary—all it talks about are two phases of Christ’s ministry.
He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory
ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic
period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning
ministry.

When he ascended he entered the presence of the father and began the first phase
—antitype to daily service. 1844 began the second phase—antitype to yearly service.
Now those who say Christ began the second phase in AD 31 must find room for the
first phase because the type had two phases. Dr. Ford claims, “The first apartment
symbolizes the whole Jewish sanctuary during that age, and the second apartment the
Christian era and its heavenly sanctuary.”170
Old Testament is the first apartment ministry - daily;
New Testament is the second apartment ministry - yearly.

For Ford the first apartment of the earthly sanctuary symbolizes the whole earthly
sanctuary service during the Old Testament times.
170
D. Ford, Daniel 8:14; The Day of Atonement and the Investigative Judgment (Casselberry, FL: Euangelion Press,
1980), 151.

179
 The Problem with this view is:
A. That the Old Testament sanctuary becomes a type of itself -- first apartment
ministry becomes a type of the Old Testament ministry -- 364 days.
But a type is never a type of itself, it always refers to something else. It is a
symbol.
Old Testament sacrifices were types of Christ’s sacrifice.
Old Testament sanctuary service was a type of Christ’s ministry.
David was a type of Christ.
NEVER is a type a type of itself.

B. In Dan 8:11 what is taken away from the prince of the host (Christ) by the little
horn (papacy) is the tamid—the daily sacrifice—not the yearly sacrifice.
In other words, prophecy says that during the Christian age (long after AD 31)
the little horn will rule for 1260 days (years) and during this time it sill take away
from the prince the daily sacrifice—the intercessory ministry. We know this
happened in history—confessional, the mass.
N.B. Prophecy says nothing of the yearly or Day of Atonement ministry. If
Christ began the Day of Atonement ministry in 31 (Ford) how could the little horn
take away the daily or first apartment ministry which stood for the Old Testament.

SO WHAT?
Now, let’s come to the punch line. What does it all mean for us today? This is where
the rubber meets the road. So what if the historic Adventist message concerning the
antitypical Day of Atonement is true? What difference does it make in our personal lives?
How does the doctrine of the investigative judgment impinge upon our lifestyle, upon our
work as a church?
Answer: Lev 16 and 23—These chapters outline five duties of the people of Israel
during the Day of Atonement, each of which has a message for spiritual Israel in the
antitypical YOM KIPPUR. I am indebted to Dick Davidson for this part of the lecture.

1. Lev 23:27 Gather at the Sanctuary

2. Lev 23:27 Afflict your souls

180
 3. Lev 23:27 Offer an offering by Fire
4. Lev 16:30 Undergo a work of cleansing
5. Lev 16:31 It shall be a Sabbath of rest

1. Gather at the Sanctuary

Leviticus 23:7
Also the tenth day of this seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement. It
shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall afflict your souls, and offer an
offering made by fire to the LORD.

Israel’s first responsibility was to come to the Sanctuary. As ancient Israel

gathered at the sanctuary on Yom Kippur so antitypical Israel—we—have the
privilege of coming by faith to the heavenly sanctuary.
Here is a call to turn away from ourselves to Jesus, to focus upon Him and His
work in our behalf. How much time a day do we spend thinking about Jesus and what
he means for us? You all know the quote in DA 83, “It would be well for us to spend a
thoughtful hour each day in contemplation of the life of Christ. We should take it point
by point, and let the imagination grasp each scene, especially the closing ones.” 171
One hour, I wish we would spend at least half an hour, or fifteen minutes. “God's
people are now to have their eyes fixed on the heavenly sanctuary, where the final
ministration of our great High Priest in the work of the judgment is going forward,--
where He is interceding for His people.” 172
The subject of the sanctuary and the investigative judgment should be clearly
understood by the people of God. All need a knowledge for themselves of the
position and work of their great High Priest. Otherwise it will be impossible for
them to exercise the faith which is essential at this time or to occupy the
position which God designs them to fill.173

Friends, come to the sanctuary—take time to focus on Christ.

Challenge: Family worship; personal worship.

2. Affliction of soul
Leviticus 23:7
171
Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1940), 83.
172
Idem, Life Sketches of Ellen White (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1943), 278.
173
Idem, The Great Controversy (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press, 1950), 488.

181
 Also the tenth day of this seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement. It
shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall afflict your souls, and offer an
offering made by fire to the LORD.

The second activity of the congregation on YOM KIPPUR is the afflicting of souls,
Hebrew ‘anah—to lower, to humble oneself.
The affliction of our souls is a posture of humble submission before God, both in
attitude and action. It involves fasting and prayer, deep searching of heard, sorrow for
sin, and sincere repentance. The call to afflict our souls can be applied to specific
areas of Christian behavior. Two examples are:
a) For ancient Israel “the affliction of soul” was regarded as a call to fasting Isaiah
58:3
Why have we fasted,' they say, 'and You have not seen? Why have we
afflicted our souls, and You take no notice?' "In fact, in the day of your fast you
find pleasure, and exploit all your laborers.

In the antitype we may see a parallel in the message of the health reform.
God calls his end-time remnant to a life of true temperance, abstaining from
everything hurtful and using judiciously that which is healthful. Besides all the other
good Biblical and scientific reasons for abstaining from everything hurtful, here is an
additional one from the sanctuary message.
b) The Day of Atonement may also provide further substantiation for our historic
position on adornment and the wearing of jewelry.
Our church has correctly emphasized the principles of modesty, economy, and
humility in this regard. But perhaps there is an even deeper theological issue at
stake.
First, let me correct the mistaken idea that jewelry is somehow “filthy,” defiling,
cheap, or bad. It is not. There is lots of jewelry in the Bible
Ezekekiel 28:13
You were in Eden, the garden of God; Every precious stone was your
covering: The sardius, topaz, and diamond, Beryl, onyx, and jasper, Sapphire,
turquoise, and emerald with gold. The workmanship of your timbrels and pipes
Was prepared for you on the day you were created.
Isaiah 49:18

182
 Lift up your eyes, look around and see; All these gather together and come to
you. As I live," says the LORD, "You shall surely clothe yourselves with them
all as an ornament, And bind them on you as a bride does.

Isaiah 61:10
I will greatly rejoice in the LORD, My soul shall be joyful in my God; For He
has clothed me with the garments of salvation, He has covered me with the
robe of righteousness, As a bridegroom decks himself with ornaments, And as
a bride adorns herself with her jewels.

God likens his salvation to the ornaments of a bride.

In Rev 21:2 the Holy City is described as a bride adorned for her husband.
Jewelry can be beautiful.
BUT—the Old Testament clearly indicates that in a time of corporate, investigative or
executive judgment God always asked his people to remove their ornaments as an
outward symbol of the special judgment setting.
After Israel’s idolatry at Mt. Sinai.
Exodus 33:5,6
For the LORD had said to Moses, "Say to the children of Israel, 'You are a
stiff-necked people. I could come up into your midst in one moment and
consume you. Now therefore, take off your ornaments, that I may know what
to do to you.' " So the children of Israel stripped themselves of their ornaments
by Mount Horeb.

YOM KIPPUR—judgment day par excellence. Therefore, today Jews still wear no
ornaments of gold on YOM KIPPUR.
In Isa 3:13 - 23 in the setting of the day of the Lord -- judgment day (2:12) God
indicates that he would take away the jewelry of the daughters of Zion.
Isaiah 3:18-21
In that day the Lord will take away the finery: The jingling anklets, the scarves,
and the crescents; 19 The pendants, the bracelets, and the veils; 20 The
headdresses, the leg ornaments, and the headbands; The perfume boxes, the
charms, 21 and the rings; The nose jewels . . .

In the Old Testament in a judgment setting -- no jewelry.

183
 Is it possible that since 1844 Seventh-day Adventists have the privilege of
abstaining from the wearing of jewelry as a special outward sign of the unique
present truth that we live in the time of the pre-advent judgment?
Think about it!!

3. Make an offering by fire

Leviticus 23:7
Also the tenth day of this seventh month shall be the Day of Atonement. It
shall be a holy convocation for you; you shall afflict your souls, and offer an
offering made by fire to the LORD.

What was the offering made by fire?

Leviticus 6:30
But no sin offering from which any of the blood is brought into the tabernacle of
meeting, to make atonement in the holy place, shall be eaten. It shall be
burned in the fire.

According to Leviticus 6:30 the sin offering of the Priest was to be burnt by fire.
Christ is our high priest. In other words, we are to focus on our substitute—Jesus
Christ.
Only in Christ’s substitutionary sacrifice is found the basis of our assurance and
joy in the judgment. Only by focusing upon Christ as our sacrifice will we be able to
offer ourselves as a living sacrifice to God
Romans 12:2
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of
your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect
will of God.

As we focus upon Jesus the result will be inevitable -- by beholding we become

changed into His likeness.

4. Undergo a work of cleansing

Leviticus 16:30
For on that day the priest shall make atonement for you, to cleanse you, that
you may be clean from all your sins before the LORD.

184
 The fourth responsibility was a work of cleansing.
As the heavenly sanctuary is being cleansed there is a corresponding work of
cleansing to be accomplished in the soul temple of our lives.
While the investigative judgment is going forward in heaven, while the sins of
penitent believers are being removed from the sanctuary, there is to be a
special work of purification, of putting away of sin, among God's people upon
earth.174

But lets remember who it is who does the cleansing

Ezekiel 36:25
Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse
you from all your filthiness and from all your idols.
The good news of Yom Kippur is that God himself will take responsibility for the
cleansing work, not only in heaven, but also in us.
We must be willing—but he does the cleansing.

5. A Sabbath of Rest
Leviticus 16:31
It is a sabbath of solemn rest for you, and you shall afflict your souls. It is a
statute forever.

Obviously, this does not mean that since 1844 we are to do no work
Hebrews 4:9-11 is helpful here.
There remains therefore a rest for the people of God. 10 For he who has
entered His rest has himself also ceased from his works as God did from His.
11
Let us therefore be diligent to enter that rest, lest anyone fall according to
the same example of disobedience

The rest spoken of is the rest of Grace that should pervade our lives.

We are to rest from our own works to become righteous. Emphasis is on

“righteousness by faith” and the inner peace which comes from knowing that we are
children of God.

174
Ibid., 425.

185
CONCLUSION
For a number of years, now, our church has been in an identity crisis. One of the
reasons is a loss of faith in our distinctive doctrines -- particularly the sanctuary doctrine.
Yet, once it goes—Adventism goes with it. As Clifford Goldstein says:
Despite apostasies, despite our Laodicean malaise, despite scandals, despite
anything and everything that happens within the church itself, the 1844
teaching proves beyond question that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the
remnant church of Bible prophecy and our message is present truth. The 1844
judgment – more than the state of the dead, the Sabbath, the second coming –
establishes the validity of Adventism. All those other doctrines are accepted by
some other people, but Adventists are the only people who have the 1844
investigative judgment truth. Until you see the truth of 1844, realizing that
Adventists are the only ones who teach it, you will never fully understand our
calling, our purpose, our mission.175

The sanctuary doctrine is a beautiful part of God’s message of salvation. It is a

biblical doctrine with practical implications for our daily lives. It focuses on Christ and His
work for us. No Adventist needs to be ashamed of it.
As Hebrews 4:14 says:
Since we have a great high priest who has gone through the heavens, Jesus
the son of God, let us hold firmly to the faith we profess.

175
Clifford Goldstein, 1844 Made Simple (Boise, ID: Pacific Press, 1988), 10.

186
 THE SABBATH AND THE NEW COVENANT 176

Few Bible doctrines have been under the constant crossfire of controversy as has the
Sabbath. In recent years, Dispensational and “New Covenant” Christians have renewed their
attack against the Sabbath with fresh zeal. The stock weapon of their arsenal is:
1. The allegation that the Sabbath is an Old Covenant relic that was terminated at the
Cross.
2 Their strategy is to make the Cross the line of demarcation between the Old and New
Covenants, Law and Grace, the Sabbath and Sunday.
3. Since they believe the Ten Commandments formed the core of the Old Covenant and the
Sabbath is central to the Ten Commandments, by firing on the Sabbath they hope to
destroy the validity and value of the Mosaic Law in general, and of the Sabbath in
particular.
This is largely the strategy recently adopted by former Sabbatarians such as
1. The Worldwide Church of God.
2. Dale Ratzlaff in his influential book Sabbath in Crisis.177
3. Some of the newly established “grace-oriented” congregations, which consist mainly
of former Sabbatarians. Their literature contains some of the strongest attacks against
the Sabbath ever published.
This is a surprising development of our times, because never before in the history of
Christianity has the Sabbath been attacked by so many who previously had championed its
observance. The weapons used by former Sabbatarians in their attacks against the Sabbath are
taken largely from the dispensational literature.
In contrast to most dispensational authors, both the Worldwide Church of God (WCG) and
Dale Ratzlaff are more concerned with proving the “fulfillment” and termination of the Sabbath in
Christ than in defending Sunday observance as an apostolic institution.
For them, the New Covenant does not require the observance of a day as such, but the daily
experience of the rest of salvation typified by the Sabbath rest. In Sabbath in Crisis, Ratzlaff
does include a chapter, “The First Day of the Week,” where he makes a feeble attempt to justify
176
Adapted from chapter three of the book The Sabbath under Crossfire by Samuele Bacchiocchi.
177
Dale Ratzlaff, Sabbath in Crisis: Transfer/Modification? Reformation/ Continuation? Fulfillment/Transformation?
(Applegate, CA: Life Insurance Ministries, 1990).

187
the biblical origin of Sundaykeeping, but this is not the major concern of his book.

A LOOK AT THE OLD AND NEW COVENANTS

A major characteristic of the “New Covenant” theology is the dispensational emphasis on the
radical distinction between the Old and New Covenants. For example:

1. Joseph Tkach’s View of the Two Covenants

In his Pastor General Report of December 21, 1994, Pastor Joseph Tkach, Jr., devotes 20
pages to explain to his ministers the fundamental difference between the Old and New
Covenants. He argues that the difference lies in the fact that the Old Covenant was conditional
upon obedience to a “package of laws,” while the New Covenant is unconditional, that is, without
obedience as a requirement.178 For Tkach, the Sabbath is part of the Old Covenant “package of
Laws” and this is why “we don’t find the Sabbath commanded in the New Covenant.”179
Something was seriously wrong with the Israelite covenant. The people did not have
the heart to obey, and God knew it (Deut 31:16-21, 27- 29). Unlike Abraham, they did
not believe and were not faithful (Heb 3:19). . . . Therefore, God predicted a New
Covenant. He hinted at it even in the old . . . There would be no need for a New
Covenant, of course, unless the Old was deficient.180

If it were true that “something was seriously wrong” with the Old Covenant, then why did God
in the first place give a faulty covenant that could not change the hearts of the people? Was
something “seriously wrong” with the covenant itself? Or was it with the way the people related to
the covenant? If the human response was a factor with the Old Covenant, could it also be a
factor with the New Covenant?
Superiority of the New Covenant – “The New Covenant is superior to the Old, because it is
founded on better promises (Heb 8:6).”181 Tkach argues that the New Covenant is the renewal of
the Abrahamic covenant which was based on God’s unconditional promises. “God didn’t say, I’ll
do this if you do that. Abraham had already done enough. He had accepted God’s call, went to
the land as God had commanded, and he believed God and was therefore counted as
righteous.”182

Like Abraham, “New Covenant” Christians accept salvation by faith and not by works of

178
Joseph Tkach, Jr., “The New Covenant and the Sabbath,” Pastor General Report (December 21, 1994), 8, 11.
179
Idem, Pastor General’s Report (January 5, 1995), 1.
180
Idem, “Covenant in the Bible,” a Bible study prepared by the Worldwide Church of God and posted on their Web
page (www.wcg.org – September 15, 1998), 3.
181
Ibid., 4.
182
Idem, “The New Covenant and the Sabbath,” Pastor General Report (December 21, 1994), 2.

188
obedience. Tkach writes:
In the New Covenant, faith is required . . . . Christians have a relationship with God
based on faith, not on Law. . . . We are saved on the basis of faith, not on Law-
keeping, . . . In other words, our relationship with God is based on faith and promise,
just as Abraham’s was. Laws that were added at Sinai cannot change the promise
given to Abraham . . . That package of Laws became obsolete when Christ died, and
there is now a new package.”183

The problem with this statement is the assumption that salvation was possible in the Old
Covenant through Law-keeping. This is completely untrue, because obedience to the Law
represented Israel’s response to the gracious provision of salvation. Law-keeping has never
been the basis of salvation.
According to Tkach, the Old Covenant did not work because it was based “on a package of
Laws” that “could not cleanse a guilty conscience.”184 On the other hand, the New Covenant
works because it is based on the blood of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart.
The Holy Spirit changes their [believers] hearts. The people are transformed, and they
grow more and more like Christ. . . . The New Covenant affects our innermost being.
The blood of Jesus Christ changes us. . . . His sacrifice sanctifies us, makes us holy,
sets us aside for a holy purpose.185

Does this mean that the blood of Christ has some kind of magic power to automatically
change people, whether or not they are willing to obey God’s commandments? Does the atoning
sacrifice of Christ and the ministry of the Holy Spirit render obedience to God’s commandments
unnecessary or possible?
They acknowledge that “no New Testament verse specifically cites the Sabbath as
obsolete.”186 But since WCG believes that the Sabbath is part the Old Covenant terminated by
Christ’s coming, the Sabbath also is no longer required.
There are verses that say that the entire Old Covenant is obsolete. The law of
Moses, including the Sabbath, is not required. We are commanded to live by the
Spirit, not by the Law inscribed in stone. The Sabbath is repeatedly likened to things
now obsolete: temple sacrifices, circumcision, holy bread, a shadow.187

Evaluation of the WGC “New Covenant” Theology – One fundamental problem in the
WCG “New Covenant” understanding of the Plan of Salvation is the faulty dispensational
assumption that, during the course of human history, God has offered salvation on different

183
Ibid., 11.
184
Ibid., 6.
185
Ibid., 7
186
“The Sabbath in Acts and the Epistles,” a Bible study prepared by the Worldwide Church of God and posted on
their web page (www.wcg.org, September 1998), p. 3.
187
Tkach, 3, 4.

189
bases to different people. God started out by offering salvation to Abraham unconditionally on
the basis of faith; but at Mt. Sinai He agreed to save the Israelites conditionally on the basis of
obedience to His commandments, or what Tkach calls “the old package of Laws.” When God
discovered that such an arrangement did not work—because the Law “could not make anyone
perfect. It could not change their hearts”—He reverted to the “faith arrangement” He had with
Abraham. To make things easier, in the New Covenant, God did away with most of the old
package of laws, including the Sabbath, and decided this time to work in the heart through the
Holy Spirit.
If this scenario were true, it would surely open to question the consistency and fairness of
God’s saving activities. It would imply that, during the course of redemptive history, God has
offered salvation on two radically different bases: on the basis of human obedience in the Old
Covenant and on the basis of divine grace in the New Covenant.
It would further imply that God learned through the experience of His chosen people, the
Jews, that human beings cannot earn salvation by obedience because they tend to disobey.
Consequently, He finally decided to change His method and implement a New Covenant plan
where salvation is offered to believing persons exclusively as a divine gift of grace rather than a
human achievement (trial and error method).
Such a theological construct makes God changeable and subject to learning by mistakes as
human beings do. The truth of the matter, however, is that “Jesus Christ is the same yesterday
and today and for ever” (Heb 13:8). Salvation has always been in the Old and New Covenants,
first and foremost a divine gift of grace and not a human achievement. Obedience to the Law
provided Israel with an opportunity to preserve their covenant relationship with God, not to gain
acceptance with Him. This is the meaning of Leviticus 18:5: “You shall therefore keep my
statutes and my ordinances, by doing which a man shall live.” The life promised in this text is not
the life in the age to come (as in Dan12:2), but the present enjoyment of a peaceful and
prosperous life in fellowship with God. Such a life was God’s gift to His people, a gift that could
be enjoyed and preserved by living in accordance with the principles God had revealed.

Sinai Covenant: Law and Grace – Part of the problem of the “New Covenant” theology is
the failure to realize that the Sinai Covenant reveals God’s gracious provision of salvation just as
much as the New Covenant does. God revealed to Moses His plan to deliver Israel from Egypt
and to set her up in the land of Canaan (Ex 3:7-10, 16) because Israel is “His people” (Ex 3:10).
God’s deliverance of the Israelites from the bondage of Egypt reveals His gracious provision
of salvation just as much as does His deliverance of New Testament believers from the bondage
of sin. In fact, in Scripture, the former is a type of the latter.

190
 What Tkach ignores is the fact that the Israelites responded with faith to the manifestation of
salvation: “Thus the Lord saved Israel that day from the hand of the Egyptians . . . and the
people feared the Lord; and they believed in the Lord and in his servant Moses” (Ex 14:30-31).
When the Israelites believed, God revealed to them His covenant plan:
Now therefore, if you will obey my voice and keep my covenant, you shall be my own
possession among all peoples; for all the earth is mine, and you shall be to me a
kingdom of priests and a holy nation (Ex 19:5).

These words show the gift-character of the divine election of Israel. God chose Israel without
merit on her part (Deut 9:4ff), simply because He loved her (Deut 7:6ff). Having separated her
from pagan nations, He reserved her for Himself exclusively. “I bore you on eagles’ wings and
brought you to myself” (Ex 19:4).
Through the Sinai covenant, God wished to bring people to Himself by making them a
worshipping community dedicated to His service, living by the principles of His Law. This divine
plan revealed at Sinai was ultimately realized at the Cross when types met antitype.
The prophets appeal to the Sinai Covenant with emotional overtones drawn from human
experiences to explain the relationship between God and His people.
Israel is the flock, and the Lord is the shepherd.
Israel is the vine, and the Lord the vinedresser.
Israel is the son, and the Lord is the Father.
Israel is the spouse, and the Lord is the bridegroom.
These images, as Pierre Grelot and Jean Giblet bring out, “These images make the Sinaitic
covenant appear as an encounter of love (cf. Ez 16:6-14): the attentive and gratuitous love of
God, calling in return for a love which will translate itself in obedience.”188 All of this hardly
supports Tkach’s contention that “something was seriously wrong with the Israelite covenant.”

Faith Is Not Alone – The obedience called for by the Sinaitic covenant was meant to be a
loving response to God’s provision of salvation, not a means of salvation. Unfortunately, during
the intertestamental period, the Law did come to be viewed by the Jews as the guarantee of
salvation, just as faith alone is considered by many Christians today as the only basis for their
salvation. But a saving faith is never alone because it is always accompanied by loving
obedience (Gal 5:6). No one truly obey God’s laws without faith?
At Sinai, God invited His people to obey His commandments because He had already saved
them, not in order that they might be saved by His laws. As George Eldon Ladd affirms in his
classic work, A Theology of the New Testament,

188
“Covenant,” Dictionary of Biblical Theology, ed., by Xavier Leon-Dufour (New York: Chapman 1970), 95.

191
 [T]he line of thought in Galatians 3 and Romans 4 is that all the Israelites who trusted
God’s covenant of promise to Abraham and did not use the Law as a way of salvation
by works were assured of salvation. . . . The Law was added (pareiselthen) not to
save men from their sins but to show them what sin was (Rom 3:30; 5:13, 20; Gal
3:19). By declaring the will of God, by showing what God forbids, the Law shows what
sin is.189

Another point overlooked in the Pastor General Report is that at Sinai, God revealed to the
Israelites not only principles of moral conduct but also provision of salvation through the typology
of the sacrificial system. It is noteworthy that when God invited Moses to come up on the
mountain, He gave him not only “the tables of stone, with the Law and the commandment” (Ex
24:12), but also the “pattern of the tabernacle” (Ex 25:9) which was designed to explain
typologically His provision of grace and forgiveness.
The major difference between the Old and New Covenants is not one of methods of
salvation, but of shadow versus reality. The Old Covenant was “symbolic” (Heb 9:9) of the “more
excellent” redemptive ministry of Christ (Heb 8:6). Consequently, it was necessary for Christ to
come “once for all at the end of the age to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself” (Heb 9:26).
Greg Bahnsen rightly notes that
If we allow the Bible to interpret itself and not infuse it with a preconceived theological
antithesis between the Old and New Covenants (Law and Gospel), we are compelled
to conclude that the Old Covenant—indeed the Mosaic Law—was a covenant of
grace that offered salvation on the basis of grace through faith, just as does the Good
News found in the New Testament. The difference was that the Mosaic or Law-
covenant looked ahead to the coming of the Savior, thus administering God’s
covenants by means of promises, prophecies, ritual observances, types, and
foreshadowings that anticipated the Savior and His redeeming work. The Gospel or
the New covenant proclaims the accomplishments of that which the Law anticipated,
administering God’s covenant through preaching and the sacraments [baptism and
the Lord’s Supper]. The substance of God’s saving relationship and covenant is the
same under the Law and the Gospel.”190

The Old Testament does not offer a way of salvation or teach justification differently than the
New Testament. Justification is grounded in the Old Testament in “the Lord our Righteousness”
(Jer 23:6). The saints of the Old Testament were people of faith, as Hebrews 11 clearly shows.
Abraham himself, the father of the Jews, was a man of faith who trusted God’s promises
(Gen 15:6; Rom 4:3; Gal 3:6). The prophet Isaiah proclaimed, “In the Lord shall all the seed of
Israel be justified” (Is 45:25; KJV). Paul came to understand that in the Old Testament “the
righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith; as it is written [in Hab 2:4], ‘He who
189
George E. Ladd, A Theology of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1974), 507.
190
Greg Bahnsen, “The Theonomic Reformed Approach to the Law and Gospel,” in W. A. Vangemeren; W. C. Jr.
Kaiser; G. L. Bahnsen, eds., The Law, the Gospel, and the Modern Christian (Grand Rapids, MI, Zondervan, 1993),
97.

192
through faith is righteous shall live’” (Rom 1:17. cf. Gal 3:11).
The result of Christ’s coming is described as “setting aside” (Heb 7:18), making “obsolete”
(Heb 8:13), and “abolishing” (Heb 10:9) all the Levitical services associated with the Old
Covenant. It is unfortunate that these statements are interpreted as meaning that Christ by His
coming abrogated the Mosaic Law, in general, including the Sabbath. This interpretation, which
is at the heart of much misguided thinking about the Law today, ignores the fact that the
termination statements found in Hebrews refer to the Levitical priesthood and services of the Old
Covenant, not to the principles of God’s moral Law which includes the Sabbath Commandment.
Main Menu
2. Dale Ratzlaff’s View of the Two Covenants
Like Tkach, Ratzlaff reduces the Old Covenant to the Ten Commandments and the New
Covenant to the principle of love in order to sustain his thesis that Christ replaced both the Ten
Commandments and the Sabbath with simpler and better laws.

Law Versus Love – Ratzlaff’s fundamental thesis is that there is a radical distinction
between the Old and New Covenants because the former is based on laws while the latter is
based on love. Though he acknowledges that an important aspect of the Old Covenant was “the
redemptive deliverance of Israel from Egypt,” he concludes his study of the Old Covenant with
these words:
We found that the Ten Commandments were the covenant. They were called the
‘tablets of the testimony’ (Ex 31:18), the ‘words of the covenant,’ the ‘Ten
Commandments’ (Ex 34:28), the ‘testimony’ (Ex 40:20), the ‘covenant of the Lord’ (1
Ki 8:8, 9,21). . . . We also found that the other Laws in the books of Exodus through
Deuteronomy were called the ‘book of the covenant’ (Ex 24:7) or ‘the book of the Law’
(Deut 31:26). We saw that these Laws served as an interpretation or expansion of the
Ten Commandments.191

Again Ratzlaff says that “The Ten Commandments were the words of the covenant. There
was also an expanded version of the covenant: the Laws of Exodus through Deuteronomy.”192
(Ibid., 180).
By contrast, the essence of the New Covenant for Ratzlaff is the commandment to love as
Jesus loved. He writes:
“Part of this ‘new commandment’ was not new. The Old Covenant had instructed
them to love one another. The part that was new was ‘as I have loved you’ . . . In the
Old Covenant what made others know that the Israelites were the chosen people?
Not the way they loved, but what they ate and what they did not eat; where they
worshipped, when they worshipped, the clothes they wore, etc. However, in the New
191
Ratzlaff, 78.
192
Ibid., 180

193
 Covenant, Christ’s true disciples will be known by the way they love!”193

Ratzlaff develops further the contrast between the two covenants by arguing that
[as the Old Covenant expands the Ten Commandments in] the book of the Law, so
the New Covenant contains more than just the simple command to love one another
as Christ loved us. We have the Gospel records which demonstrate how Jesus loved.
. . . Then, in the epistles we have interpretations of the love and work of Christ. . . . So
the core, or heart, of the New Covenant is to love one another as Christ loved us. This
is expanded and interpreted in the rest of the New Testament, and also becomes part
of the New Covenant.194

According to Ratzlaff, the distinction between “Law” and “Love” is reflected in the covenant
signs. “The entrance sign to the old Covenant was circumcision, and the continuing, repeatable
sign Israel was to ‘remember’ was the Sabbath. . . . The entrance sign of the New Covenant is
baptism [and] the remembrance sign [is] the Lord’s Supper.”195 The distinction between the two
sets of signs is clarified by the following simple chart.196

The Old Covenant: The New Covenant:

Entrance sign
Circumcision Baptism
Remembrance sign
Sabbath The Lord’s Supper

The above contrast attempts to reduce the Old and New Covenants to two different sets of
laws with their own distinctive signs, the latter being simpler and better than the former. The
contrast assumes that the Old Covenant was based on the obligation to obey countless specific
laws, while the New Covenant rests on the simpler love commandment of Christ. Simply stated,
the Old Covenant moral principles of the Ten Commandments are replaced in the New Covenant
by a better and simpler love principle given by Christ.
Ratzlaff affirms this view unequivocally, “The new Law [given by Christ] is better than the old
Law [given by Moses]. . . In Old Covenant life, morality was often seen as an obligation to
numerous specific Laws. In the New Covenant, morality springs from a response to the living
Christ.”197 He claims, “In the New Covenant, Christ’s true disciples will be known by the way they

193
Ibid, 181.
194
Ibid., 182.
195
Ibid., 182-183, 185.
196
Ibid,. 185.

197
Ibid., 73, 74.

194
love! This commandment to love is repeated a number of times in the New Testament, just as
the Ten Commandments were repeated a number of times in the Old.”198

Evaluation of Ratzlaff’s Covenants Construct – The attempt by Ratzlaff to reduce the Old
and New Covenants to two different sets of laws with their own distinctive signs, the latter being
simpler and better than the former, is designed to support his contention that the Ten
Commandments, in general, and the Sabbath, in particular, were the essence of the Old
Covenant that terminated at the Cross.
The problem with this imaginative interpretation is that it is devoid of biblical support besides
incriminating the moral consistency of God’s government. Nowhere does the Bible suggest that
with the New Covenant God instituted “better commandments” than those of the Old Covenant.
Why would Christ need to alter the moral demands that He has revealed in His Law? Why would
Christ feel the need to change His perfect and holy requirements for our conduct and attitudes?
Paul declares that “the [Old Testament] Law is holy, and the commandment is holy and just
and good” (Rom 7:12). He took the validity of God’s moral Law for granted when he stated
unequivocally: “We know that the Law is good, if one uses it lawfully” (1 Tim 1:8). Christ came
not to change the moral requirements of God’s Law, but to atone for our transgression against
those moral requirements (Rom 4:25; 5:8-9; 8:1-3).
It is evident that by being sacrificed as the Lamb who takes away the sins of the world (John
1:29; 1 Cor 5:7), Christ fulfilled all the sacrificial services and laws that served in Old Testament
times to strengthen the faith and nourish the hope of the Messianic redemption to come.
But the New Testament makes a clear distinction between the sacrificial laws that Christ by
His coming “set aside” (Heb 7:18), made “obsolete” (Heb 8:13), “abolished” (Heb 10:9), and the
moral law, including the Sabbath, which” gives freedom” (James 2:10-12).
Why should God first call the Israelites to respond to His redemptive deliverance from Egypt
by living according to the moral principles of the Ten Commandments, and later summon
Christians to accept His redemption from sin by obeying simpler and better commandments? Did
God discover that the moral principles He promulgated at Sinai were not sufficiently moral and,
consequently, needed to be improved and replaced with simpler and better commandments?
Such an assumption is preposterous because it negates the immutability of God’s moral
character reflected in His moral laws. The Old Testament teaches that the New Covenant that
God will make with the house of Israel consists not in the replacement of the Ten
Commandments with simpler and better laws, but in the internalization of God’s Law. “This is the
covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, says the Lord: I will put my

198
Ibid., 185.

195
Law within them, and I will write it upon their hearts; and I will be their God” (Jer 31:33). This
passage [Jer 31:33] teaches us that the difference between the Old and New Covenants is not a
difference between “Law” and “love.” Rather, it is a difference between failure to internalize
God’s Law, which results in disobedience, and successful internalization of God’s Law, which
results in obedience. The New Covenant believer who internalizes God’s Law by the enabling
power of the Holy Spirit will find it hard to break the Law because, as Paul puts it, “Christ has set
him free from the Law of sin and death” (Rom 8:2).

Internalization of God’s Law – The internalization of God’s Law in the human heart applies
to Israel and the Church. In fact, Hebrews applies to the Church the very same promise God
made to Israel (Heb 8:10; 10:16). In the New Covenant, the Law is not simplified or replaced but
internalized by the Spirit. The Spirit opens up people to the Law, enabling them to live in
accordance with its higher ethics.
Ratzlaff’s argument that under the New Covenant “the Law no longer applies to one who has
died with Christ” (Ratxzlaff, 207) is mistaken and misleading. Believers are no longer under the
condemnation of the Law when they experience God’s forgiving grace and, by the enabling
power of the Holy Spirit, they live according to its precepts.
But this does not means that the Law no longer applies to them. They are still accountable
before God’s Law because all “shall stand before the judgment seat of God” (Rom 14:10) to give
an account of themselves.
The Spirit does not operate in a vacuum. The function of the Spirit is not to bypass or replace
the Law, but to help the believer to live in obedience to the Law of God (Gal 5:18, 22-23). Eldon
Ladd notes that “more than once he [Paul] asserts that it is the new life of the Spirit that enables
the Christian truly to fulfill the Law (Rom 8:3,4; 13:10; Gal 5:14).”199
Any change in relation to the Law that occurs in the New Covenant is not in the moral Law
itself but in the believer who is energized and enlightened by the Spirit “in order that the just
requirements of the Law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh, but
according to the Spirit” (Rom 8:4).
Guidance by the Spirit without respect for the Law of God can be dangerous to Christian
growth. This is a fundamental problem of “New Covenant” theology espoused by the WCG,
Ratzlaff, and countless Evangelicals today: it is a theology that ultimately makes each person a
Law unto himself. This easily degenerates into irresponsible behavior. It is not surprising that
America leads the world not only in the number of evangelical Christians (estimated at almost
199
Ladd, 128.

196
100 million) but also in crime, violence, murders, divorces, etc. By relaxing the obligation to
observe God’s Law in the New Covenant, people find an excuse to do what is right in their own
eyes.
Perhaps as a reaction to the popular “abrogation of the Law” perception, there is a hunger
today for someone to help the Christian community to understand how to apply the principles of
God’s Law to their lives. To a large extent, this is what the Basic Youth Conflict seminars have
endeavored to accomplish since 1968, drawing thousands of people to its sessions in every
major city in North America. Referring to this phenomenon, Walter Kaiser writes, “This is an
indictment on the church and its reticence to preach the moral Law of God and apply it to all
aspects of life as indicated in Scripture.”200

No Dichotomy Between Law and Love – No dichotomy exists in the Bible between Law
and Love in the covenantal relationship between God and His people because a covenant
cannot exist without the Law. A covenant denotes an orderly relationship that the Lord graciously
establishes and maintains with His people. The Law guarantees the order required for such a
relationship to be meaningful.
The Decalogue is not merely a list of ten laws, but primarily ten principles of love. There is no
dichotomy between Law and love, because one cannot exist without the other. The Decalogue
details how human beings must express their love for their Lord and for their fellow beings.
Christ’s new commandment to love God and fellow beings is nothing else than the embodiment
of the spirit of the Ten Commandments already found in the Old Testament (Lev 19:18; Deut
6:5). Christ spent much of His ministry clarifying how the love principles are embodied in the Ten
Commandments. He explained, for example, that the sixth commandment can be transgressed
not only by murdering a person but also by being angry and insulting a fellow being (Matt 5:22-
23). The seventh commandment can be violated not only by committing adultery but also by
looking lustfully at a woman (Matt 5:28).

Christ spent even more time clarifying how the principle of love is embodied in the Fourth
Commandment. The Gospels report no less than seven Sabbath-healing episodes used by
Jesus to clarify that the essence of Sabbathkeeping is people to love and not rules to obey.
Jesus explained that the Sabbath is a day “to do good” (Matt 12:12), a day “to save life” (Mark
3:4), a day to liberate men and women from physical and spiritual bonds (Luke 13:12), a day to

200
Walter Kaiser, “The Law as God’s Gracious Guidance for the Promotion of Holiness,” in W. A. Vangemeren; W.
C. Jr. Kaiser; G. L. Bahnsen, eds., The Law, the Gospel, and the Modern Christian (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan,
1993), 198.

197
show mercy rather than religiosity (Matt 12:7).
Ratzlaff’s attempt to divorce the Law of the Old Covenant from the Love of the New Covenant
ignores the simple truth that in both covenants love is manifested in obedience to God’s Law.
Christ stated this truth clearly and repeatedly: “If you love me, you will keep my commandments”
(John 14:15). “He who has my commandments and keeps them, he it is who loves me” (John
14:21). “If you keep my commandments, you will abide in my love” (John 15:10). Christ’s
commandments are not an improved and simplified set of moral principles, but the same moral
principles He promulgated from Mt. Sinai.
Under both covenants, the Lord has one moral standard for human behavior, namely,
holiness and wholeness of life. Wholeness of life is that integration of love for God and human
beings manifested in those who grow in reflecting the perfect character of God (His love,
faithfulness, righteousness, justice, forgiveness). Under both covenants, God wants His people
to love Him and their fellow beings by living in harmony with the moral principles expressed in
the Ten Commandments. These serve as a guide in imitating God’s character. The Spirit does
not replace these moral principles in the New Covenant. He makes the letter become alive and
powerful within the hearts of the godly.

Jesus and the New Covenant Law – The contention that Christ replaced the Ten
Commandments with the simpler and better commandment of love is clearly negated by the
decisive witness of our Lord Himself as found in Matthew 5:17-19:
“Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to
abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear,
not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from
the Law until everything is accomplished. Anyone who breaks one of the least of
these commandments and teaches others to do the same will be called least in the
kingdom of heaven” (NIV).

In this pronouncement, Christ teaches three important truths: (1) Twice He denies that His
coming had the purpose of abrogating “the law and the prophets”; (2) all of the Law of God,
including its minute details, has an abiding validity until the termination of the present age; and
(3) anyone who teaches that even the least of God’s commandments can be broken stands
under divine condemnation. This indictment should cause “New Covenant” Christians to do some
soul-searching.
There is no exegetical stalemate here. Christ gave no hint that with His coming the Old
Testament moral Law was replaced by a simpler and better Law. It is biblically irrational to
assume that the mission of Christ was to make it morally acceptable to worship idols,
blaspheme, break the Sabbath, dishonor parents, murder, steal, commit adultery, gossip, or

198
envy. Such actions are a transgression of the moral principles that God has revealed for both
Jews and Gentiles.
It is unfortunate that Ratzlaff, the WCG, and Dispensationalists try to build their case for a
replacement of the Old Testament Law with a simpler and better New Testament Law by
selecting a few problem-oriented texts (2 Cor 3:6-11; Heb 8-9; Gal 3-4), rather than by starting
with Christ’s own testimony. The Savior’s testimony should serve as the touchstone to explain
apparent contradictory texts which speak negatively of the Law.
In dealing with problem texts, we must remember that when Paul speaks of the law in the
context of salvation (justification—right standing before God), especially in his polemic with
Judaizers, he clearly affirms that law-keeping is of no avail (Rom 3:20). On the other hand, when
Paul speaks of the law in the context of Christian conduct (sanctification—right living before
God), especially in dealing with antinomians, he upholds the value and validity of God’s law
(Rom 7:12; 13:8-10; 1 Cor 7:19).

Ratzlaff’s Interpretation of Matthew 5:17-19 – Ratzlaff examines at some length Matthew

5:17-19 in chapter 14 of his book entitled “Jesus: The Law’s Fulfillment.” He bases his
interpretation of the passage on two key terms: “Law” and “fulfill.” A survey of the use of the term
“Law” in Matthew leads him to “conclude that the ‘Law’ Jesus makes reference to is the entire
Old Covenant Law, which included the Ten Commandments.” (Ratzlaff, 228).
This conclusion per se is accurate, because Jesus upheld the moral principles of the Old
Testament, in general. For example, the “golden rule” in Matthew 7:12 is presented as being, in
essence, “the Law and the prophets.” In Matthew 22:40, the two great commandments are
viewed as the basis upon which “depend all the Law and the prophets.”
The problem with Ratzlaff’s rationale is that he uses the broad meaning of Law to argue that
Christ abrogated the Mosaic Law, in general, and the Ten Commandments, in particular. He
does this by giving a narrow interpretation to the verb “to fulfill.” He argues that “in the book of
Matthew every time the word ‘fulfill’ is used, it is employed in connection with the life of Christ, or
the events connected with it. In every instance it was one event which ‘fulfilled’ the prophecy. In
every instance Christians are not to participate in any ongoing fulfillment.”201
On the basis of these considerations, Ratzlaff concludes that the word “fulfill” in Matthew
5:17-19 refers not to the continuing nature of the Law and the prophets but to the fulfillment of
“prophecies regarding the life and death of Messiah.”202
To support this conclusion, Ratzlaff appeals to the phrase “You have heard . . . but I say unto

201
Ratzlaff, 228.
202
Ibid., 229.

199
you,” which Jesus uses six times in Matthew 5:21-43. For him, the phrase indicates that
[the Lord was asserting His authority to] completely do away with the binding nature
of the Old Covenant. This He will do, but not before He completely fulfills the
prophecies, types and shadows which pointed forward to His work as the Messiah
and Savior of the world which are recorded in the Law. Therefore, the Law must
continue until he has accomplished everything. This happened, according to John, at
the death of Jesus.”203

The conclusion is clear. For Ratzlaff, the Cross marks the termination of the Law.

The Continuity of the Law – Ratzlaff’s conclusion has several serious problems which
largely derive from his failure to closely examine a text in its immediate context. The immediate
context of Matthew 5:17-19 clearly indicates that the fulfillment of the Law and the prophets
ultimately takes place, not at Christ’s death as Ratzlaff claims, but at the close of the present
age: “I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least
stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished”
(Matt 5:18). Since, at Christ’s death, heaven and earth did not disappear, it is evident that,
according to Jesus, the function of the Law will continue until the end of the present age.
Ratzlaff’s claim that the six antitheses, “You have heard . . . but I say unto you,” indicate that
Jesus intended to do away completely “with the binding nature of the Old Covenant” is untenable
because in each instance Christ did not release His followers from the obligation to observe the
six commandments mentioned. Instead, He called for a more radical observance of each of
them. As John Gerstner points out, “Christ’s affirmation of the moral Law was complete. Rather
than setting the disciples free from the Law, He tied them more tightly to it. He abrogated not one
commandment but instead intensified all.”204

Christ did not modify or replace the Law. Instead, He revealed its divine intent which affects
not only the outward conduct but also the inner motives. The Law condemned murder; Jesus
condemned anger as sin (Matt 5:21-26). The Law condemned adultery; Jesus condemned lustful
appetites (Matt 5:27-28). This is not a replacement of the Law, but a clarification and
intensification of its divine intent. Anger and lust cannot be controlled by Law, because legislation
has to do with outward conduct that can be controlled. Jesus is concerned with showing that
obedience to the spirit of God’s commandments involves inner motives as well as outer actions.

203
Ibid.
204
John Gerstner, “Law in the NT,” International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, 5 vols., revised edition, (Grand
Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1960), 3:88.

200
 The Continuation of the Law – Ratzlaff is correct in saying that “to fulfill” in Matthew
generally refers to the prophetic realization of the Law and prophets in the life and ministry of
Christ. This implies that certain aspects of the Law and the prophets, such as the Levitical
services and messianic prophecies, came to an end in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ.
But this interpretation cannot be applied to the moral aspects of God’s Law mentioned by Jesus,
because verse 18 explicitly affirms that the Law would be valid “till heaven and earth pass away.”
In the light of the antitheses of verses 21-48, “to fulfill” means especially “to explain” the fuller
meaning of the Law and the prophets. Repeatedly, in Matthew, Jesus acts as the supreme
interpreter of the Law who attacks external obedience and some of the rabbinical (Halakic)
traditions (Matt 15:3-6; 9:13; 12:7; 23:1-39).
In Matthew, Christ’s teachings are presented not as a replacement of God’s moral Law but as
the continuation and confirmation of the Old Testament. Matthew sees in Christ not the
termination of the Law and the prophets but their realization and continuation. The “golden rule”
in Matthew 7:12 is presented as being the essence of “the Law and the prophets.” In Matthew
19:16-19, the rich young man wanted to know what he should do to have eternal life. Jesus told
him to “keep the commandments,” and then He listed five of them.
In Matthew 22:40, the two great commandments are viewed as the basis upon which
“depend all the Law and the prophets.” Ratzlaff should note that a summary does not abrogate or
discount what it summarizes. It makes no sense to say that we must follow the summary
command to love our neighbor as ourselves (Lev 19:19; Matt 22:39) while ignoring or violating
the second part of the Decalogue which tells us what loving our neighbor entails. We must not
forget that when the Lord called upon people to recognize “the more important matters of the
Law” (Matt 23:23), He immediately added that the lesser matters should not be neglected.
We might say that, in Matthew, the Law and the prophets live on in Christ who realizes,
clarifies, and, in some cases, intensifies their teachings (Matt 5:21-22, 27-28). The Christological
realization and continuation of the Old Testament Law has significant implications for the New
Testament understanding of the Sabbath in the light of the redemptive ministry of Jesus.

201