Letters to the Churches

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 13

CERTAIN SALIENT FACTS

In closing this paper, I wish to emphasize certain salient facts:

1. Questions on Doctrine, page 383, states that Christ was exempt. The Spirit of Prophecy makes clear that Christ was not exempt, from the temptations and passions that affect men. Whoever accepts the new theology must reject the Testimonies. There is no other choice.

2. Mr. Martin was instrumental in having our teaching on the mark of the beast and the nature of Christ in the flesh changed. Similar changes were made in other books, but we are not informed what those changes are.

3. Our leaders have promised not to proselytize. This effectively will stop our work for the world. And we have promised to report to Mr. Martin those who transgress.

4. We have been threatened to have the brakes applied to such as fail to believe and follow the leaders. Such are characterized as "wild-eyed irresponsibles" and are said to constitute the "lunatic fringe."

5. We are appalled to learn that in some way these evangelical clergymen have had enough influence with our leaders to cause the Voice of Prophecy and the Signs of the Times to trim their sails to "avoid charges that have been brought against them by evangelicals". This is terrifying news. These organs are instruments of God, and it is unbelievable that the leaders should permit any outside influence to affect them. In this a great sin against the denomination has been committed that can be blotted out only by deep repentance of the guilty parties, or in lieu of this, that the men concerned quietly resign from holy office.

Our members are largely unaware of the conditions existing, and every effort is being made to keep them in ignorance. Orders have been issued to keep everything secret, and it will be noted that even at the late General Conference session (1958) no report was given of our leaders' trafficking with the evangelicals and making alliances with them. Our officials are playing with fire, and the resulting conflagration will fulfill the prediction that the coming Omega of apostasy "will be of a most startling nature." Selected Messages, Vol.1, p.197.

Seven times I have asked for a hearing, and I have been promised one, but only on the condition that I meet privately with certain men, and that no record be given me of the proceedings. I have asked for a public hearing, or if it is to be a private one, that a tape recording be made, and that I be given a copy. This has been denied me. As I cannot have such a hearing, I am writing these messages which contain, and will contain, what I would have said at such a hearing. Can the reader surmise the reason why the officers do not want the hearing I ask?

I am a Seventh-day Adventist, and I love this message that I have preached for so long. I grieve deeply as I see the foundation pillars being destroyed, the blessed truths that have made us what we are, abandoned.

I am thankful to be in good health and wish that the blessing of the Lord may be with each reader. We have come to strenuous times, and it behooves each to keep close to God in these perilous times. The Lord be with you.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Good stuff.

What did you think of the sermon?

I liked it very much. He even has a great sense of humour. But I need to listen to it again.

Thanks for sharing. Are there more audios of him?

sky

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 14

THE MAY FIRST MEETING

I doubt that the Adventist leaders were fully aware of the many references in Mrs. White's works to the atonement now in progress in the heavenly sanctuary since 1844. If they were, how would they have dared to take the position they did in regard to the sanctuary question? This idea finds support in the apparent surprise of the two men who visited the vault and stated that in their research they had "become acutely aware of the E.G. White statements which indicate that the atoning work of Christ is now in progress in the heavenly sanctuary." Minutes, May 1, 1957, page 1483.

Why did they become acutely aware? The discovery seemed to surprise them. In using the plural, they admit of more than one reference. I do not know how many they found. I have found seventeen, and there are doubtless others. And why did they use the word "indicate"? Mrs. White does more than indicate. She makes definite pronouncements. Here are some of them:

"At the termination of the 2300 days in 1844, Christ then entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, to perform the closing work of atonement, preparatory to His coming." Great Controversy, 422.

"Christ had only completed one part of His work as our Intercessor, to enter upon another portion of the work, and He still pleaded the merits of His blood before the Father in behalf of sinners." Ibid, 429.

"At the opening of the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary in 1844, Christ entered there to perform the closing work of the atonement." Ibid, 433.

These statements are definite. It was at the end of the 2300 days in 1844, that Christ entered the most holy "to perform the closing work of the atonement." He had only completed one part of His work as our Intercessor, in the first apartment. Now He enters upon another portion of the work. He pleads the merits of His blood before the Father. He is continually standing at the altar. This is necessary because of he continual commission of sin. Jesus presents the oblation for every offense and every shortcoming of the sinner. This argues a continuing, present atonement. "He ever lives to make intercession for them." Hebrews 7:25.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 15

ATTEMPTED TAMPERING

It is presumed that when the two men stated that they had "become acutely aware of the E.G. White statements which indicate that the atoning work of Christ is now in progress in the heavenly sanctuary," they had read the quotations cited above and perhaps others. Would they change their former erroneous opinions and harmonize with the plain words of the Spirit of Prophecy? No, on the contrary, they "suggested to the trustees that some footnotes or Appendix notes might appear in certain of the E.G. White books clarifying very largely in the words of Ellen G. White our understanding of the various phases of the atoning work of Christ." Minutes, page 1483.

Ponder this amazing statement. They admit that Mrs. White says that "the atoning work of Christ is now in progress in the heavenly sanctuary," and then they propose that insertions be made in some of Mrs. White's books that will give our understanding of the atonement! They were, however, only acting in harmony with the official statement in Questions on Doctrine that when one reads "in the writings of E.G. White--that Christ is making atonement now, it should be understood that we mean simply that Christ is now making application", etc., pages 354,355.

If Sister White were now living and should read this, she would most certainly deal with presumptuous writers and in words that could be understood. She would not concede the right of anyone, whoever he might be, to change what she has written or interpret it so as to vitiate its clear meaning. The claim which Questions on Doctrine makes that she means what she does not say, effectively destroys the force of all she has ever written. If we have to consult an inspired interpreter from Washington before knowing what she means, we might better discard the Testimonies altogether. May God save His people.

Early in this century when the fate of the denomination hung in the balance, Sister White wrote: "Satan has laid his plans to undermine our faith in the history of the cause and work of God. I am deeply in earnest as I write this; Satan is working with men in prominent positions to sweep away the foundation of our faith. Shall we allow this to be done, brethren?" Review and Herald, Nov.12, 1903.

Answering the question, she says: "My message to you is: No longer consent to listen without protest to the perversion of truth. I have been instructed to warn our people; for many are in danger of receiving theories and sophistries that undermine the foundation pillars of the faith." Letters to Physicians and Ministers, Series B, No.2, p.15.

"For the past fifty years every phase of heresy has been brought to bear upon us, to becloud our minds regarding the teaching of the Word--especially concerning the ministration of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary... But the waymarks which have made us what we are, are to be preserved, and they will be preserved, as God has signified, through His Word and the Testimonies of His Spirit. He calls upon us to hold firmly, with the grip of faith, to the fundamental principles that are based upon unquestionable authority." Ibid, 59.

"Do you wonder that when I see the beginning of a work that would remove the pillars of our faith, I have something to say? I must obey the command, 'Meet it.'" Ibid, 58.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 16

THE MINUTES SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES

After this situation came to my knowledge, I did a great deal of praying. What was my responsibility in this matter, or did I have any? I confided in no one. I decided my first responsibility would be to the officials in Washington, so I wrote to headquarters. I was there informed that I had no right to the information I had. That was supposed to be secret, and I had no right even to read the documents.

After four letters were passed. I was told that they did not care to discuss the matter further. The matter was settled. When I inquired if this meant that the door was closed, I received this reply: "I have considered the matter to which you have referred as closed." As to the scurrilous and untrue article in the Ministry, "I have discussed this with the brethren concerned and would like to leave the matter there." So the door was closed.

Here are some of the official pronouncements:

"The minutes are confidential and not intended for public use." If wrong is committed, is it forbidden to expose it merely because some want to keep it confidential?

"You are doing this upon hearsay and upon confidential minutes which you had no right even to read." No one ever talked to me of this or informed me. I read the minutes and acted upon them. The minutes are not hearsay. They are officially documented and signed.

"... you have no right even to read."

When I have evidence that to me seems destructive of the faith, am I to close my eyes to what I consider premeditated attempts to mislead the people by the insertions of notes, explanations, and appendix notes in the books of Mrs. White? Is this officially approved?

"I wish to repeat what I wrote before, that men have a perfect right to go to boards, including the White Estate group, and make their suggestions without fear of being disciplined or dealt with as heretics."

"To suggest that good and faithful Seventh -day Adventist men sat down to tamper with the pillars of our faith is as far from fact as the poles are apart... tampering with the Testimonies, when so such thing ever took place, nor was there any attempt ever made to do this."

I leave to the reader's decision just why the men went to the committee: did they not come to have insertions, notes, Appendix notes, explanations made in "some of the E.G. White books?"

While the committee eventually decided not to do this, the guilt of the men is not changed by that fact. To assert that as for "tampering with the Testimonies when no such thing ever took place nor was there any attempt ever made to do this," the Minutes speak for themselves.

to be continued

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: Richard Holbrook

Good stuff.

What did you think of the sermon?

I liked it very much. He even has a great sense of humour. But I need to listen to it again.

Thanks for sharing. Are there more audios of him?

sky

That's the only one I know of.

I liked his sense of humor too.

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 17

A SERIOUS SITUATION

This vault episode brings into focus a serious situation. It is not merely a matter of two men attempting to have insertions made in some of Mrs. White's books. A much more serious thing is that this act had the approval of the administration, who stated that the men had a "perfect right" to do what they did. This pronouncement opens the way for others to follow, and as the matter is kept secret, great abuse could readily result. Undoubtedly, if the matter is left to a vote of the people, there will be no permission for any to tamper, or attempt to tamper, with the writings of Ellen G. White.

The men who visited the vault May 1, as related, stated clearly that they had discovered that Mrs. White taught plainly "that the atoning work of Christ is now in progress in the heavenly sanctuary." On the other hand, the Ministry of February, 1957, stated the very opposite. It said that the "sacrificial act on the cross is a complete, perfect, and final atonement for men's sins."

Questions on Doctrine attempts to reconcile these opposing views by stating that whether one "hears an Adventist say, or reads in Adventist literature--even in the writings of Ellen G. White--that Christ is making atonement now, it should be understood that we mean simply that Christ is now making application," etc. Pages 354,355.

It is clear that if the atonement on the cross was final, there cannot be a later atonement also final. When we therefore for a hundred years have preached that the great day of atonement (final atonement) began in 1844, we were wrong. It ended 1800 years before.

The hundreds of books we have published; the more than a million copies of Bible Readings we have sold; the millions of hand bills we have distributed saying that it is "court week in Heaven," were all false doctrine, the Bible instruction we have given the children and the young ministry and which they have inbibed as Bible truth, is a fable. Uriah Smith, Loughborough, J Andrews, Watson, Jones, Daniells, Branson, Johnson, Lacey, Haskell, Gilbert, and a host of others stand convicted of having taught false doctrine; and the whole denomination whose chief contribution to Christianity is the sanctuary doctrine and Christ's ministry, must now confess that we were all wrong, and that we have no message to the world for these last days.

In other words, we were a deceived and deceiving people. The fact that we may have been honest does not alter the fact that we have given a false message. Take away from us the sanctuary question, the investigative judgment, the message of the 2300 days, Christ's work in the most holy, and we have no right to exist as a denominated people, as God's messengers to a doomed world. If the Spirit of Prophecy has led us astray these many years, let us throw it away.

But no! Halt! God has not led us astray. We have not told cunningly devised fables. We have a message that will stand the test and confound the undermining theories that are finding their way in among us. It is not the people that have gone astray except as they have followed the leaders. It is time that there be a turn-about.

It is now more than four years ago that the apostasy began to be plainly evident. Since that time there has been a deliberate attempt to weaken the faith in the Spirit of Prophecy, as it is clear that as long as the people revere the gift given us, they cannot be led far astray. Of this we shall speak shortly.

The time for action has come. The time to open up the dark corners has arrived. There must no longer be any secret agreements, no compact with other denominations who hate the law and the Sabbath, who ridicule our most holy faith. We must no longer hobnob with enemies of the truth, no more promise that we will not proselytize. We must not tolerate leadership which condone tamperings with the writings entrusted to us, and stigmatizes as belonging to the lunatic fringe those who dare disagree with them. We must no longer remain silent. To thy tents, O Israel!

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 18

RECKONED AMONG THE ESTABLISHED CHURCHES

I have been uneasy since I first heard that our leaders were negotiating with the Evangelicals but had hoped that the blandishment of our church's being reckoned among the established churches as being one of them would not appeal to our men. We had heard too many sermons on the text,"The people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations,(denominations)" to be deceived. (Numbers 23:9.)

As the negotiations were considered top secret it was some time before any definite news leaked out. When it did, it was disturbing. Washington furnished little news, and all others informed me they had nothing to say. It seemed apparent, however, our leaders were being influenced and steps were being taken that would be hard to retrace.

The first authentic news did not come from our leaders or through our journals but from an Evangelical publication dated September, 1956, which issued a special edition with an account of what had taken place. This account was so unbelievable that we hesitated to give it credence. We were sure that what it reported had never taken place and that our leaders would promptly issue a denial. We waited a year, we waited two. But until this date, no protest or denial has been issued. Reluctantly, we must, therefore, accept the account as true. Let us consider the situation as it has developed.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 19

A CHANGE OF EMPHASIS

Of late years there has been a change of emphasis in the Ministry and not for the better. This change coincides with the period in which our leaders have been in close contact and rapport with the Evangelicals. The trend was in evidence before, but now has blossomed. As an example of this, I shall call attention to an article in the February, 1957, issue entitled, "The Priestly Application of the Atoning Act."

It is claimed that it "is the Adventist understanding of the atonement, confirmed and illustrated and clarified by the Spirit of Prophecy." As it has not been renounced or protested, we may justly conclude that it is officially approved.

The author gives a short tribute to the "magnifying glass", the Spirit of Prophecy, then goes on to state that the atonement "... is not, on the one hand, limited just to the sacrificial death of Christ on the cross. On the other hand, neither is it confined to the ministry of our heavenly High Priest in the sanctuary above, on the anti typical day of atonement, or hour of God's judgment, as some of our forefathers first erroneously thought and wrote." Ministry, February, 1957, page 9.

The author stresses the fact that the Spirit of Prophecy clearly teaches that both these aspects are included, "one aspect being incomplete without the other, and each being the indispensable complement of the other". Ibid.

That is, both the death on the cross and Christ's ministry in the second apartment are necessary to atonement. With this, we are in full agreement. The death was a necessary part of the atonement. The one is incomplete without the other.

This point should be noted, for a few sentences further on, the author will say that the death on the cross is complete in itself; to quote: "The sacrificial act of the cross is a complete, perfect and final atonement for man's sin." Page 10.

After having first said that the sacrificial death was incomplete, he now says it is complete, perfect, and final. He does not consider the death merely as a partial atonement, but a complete and perfect and final one. With this we disagree. The two statements are irreconcilable.

This is more than merely an unfortunate wording. While in the next paragraph the author gives lip service to the need of a ministration in the sanctuary above, he leaves out every essential feature of the atonement and omits the dates which are essential to the Adventist concept of a final atonement, which justifies our existence as a people with the message for the world at this time.

In his explanation of Christ's work in the sanctuary, he does not refer to or mention Daniel 8:14: "Then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." Without this text, Christ's work in the sanctuary becomes meaningless. He does not mention 457 B.C. or the 70 weeks, or the middle of the week which pinpoints the time of the sacrifice on the cross, and is "... as a nail in a sure place," (Isaiah 22:23) to which we fasten the whole chronological scheme in prophecy and which also justifies the date, 1844.

Remove or change these dates, and Adventists are without an anchor for the chronological system climaxing in 1844, and are unable to justify their existence as a people who are to proclaim this most important message to the world for this time: "Fear God, and give glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come." Revelation 14:7. Every one of these dates the author leaves out, and what remains, in the words of Dr. Barnhouse, "is flat, stale, and unprofitable." Eternity Extra, September 1956, page 4.

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Part 20

A COMPREHENSIVE ASSEMBLAGE!!!

In Questions on Doctrine, beginning at page 661, there is a section C consisting of collections from the writings of Mrs. White on the subject of atonement, thirty pages in all. It claims to be a "comprehensive assemblage" of Mrs. White's teachings on the atonement.

From the use of the word, "comprehensive", I expected to find a full and extensive collection. But in consulting this material, I was disappointed in its paucity and one-sidedness. I found it to be a very incomplete and meagre collection, leaving out numerous quotations that rightly belong even in a small compilation, not to say a comprehensive one.

And strangely enough, quotations that were omitted were such as must on no account be left out.

First of all, I wanted to know what Mrs. White had to say of the date, 1844, which is the "crisis year". I wanted to know if it had anything particularly to do with the atonement, or if it could safely be left out.

I found that the one author had omitted it. So I looked in turn for other quotations, not one of which I found in the assemblage. I looked for the statement: "At the termination of the 2300 days in 1844... our great High Priest enters the holy of holies, and there appears in the presence of God, to engage in the last acts of His ministration in behalf of man,--to perform the work of the investigative judgment, and to make atonement for all who are shown to be entitled to its benefits." This is said to be the "great day of final atonement." Great Controversy, 480.

I searched for this important statement in the comprehensive assemblage, but it was not there. I looked for the parallel statement: "... at the termination of the 2300 days in 1844, Christ then entered the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, to perform the closing work of atonement, preparatory to His coming." Ibid, 422. I did not find it.

I looked for this statement: "This is the service which began when the 2300 days ended. At that time, as foretold by Daniel the prophet, our High Priest entered the most holy, to perform the last division of His solemn work--to cleanse the sanctuary" I could not find it.

I looked for the statement: "The end of the 2300 days in 1844 marked an important crisis." Ibid, 429. I did not find it.

I looked for other statements, such as: "The sacred work of Christ that is going on at the present time in the heavenly sanctuary," "... the atoning work of Christ is now in progress in the heavenly sanctuary," "Today He is making atonement for us before the Father." Testimonies, Vol.5, p.520; White Board Minutes, page 1483; Manuscripts 21, 1895. I found none of these.

At first I thought that this book, Questions on Doctrine, did not have room for these texts, nor did the Ministry. But I had to abandon this reasoning when I observed that it was only a particular kind of statement that was omitted.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Lettes to the Churches

Post 21.

CAN THIS BE A MERE COINCIDENCE?

The omitted quotations all clustered about the important "crisis" date, 1844, the investigative judgment, Christ's entering into the nost holy for the final atonement; His making atonement now; His making atonement "today before the Father".

These are the statements that Dr. Barnhouse ridiculed and which he said our leaders had "totally repudiated." He had also ridiculed Hiram Edson's experience in the cornfield and had called the investigative judgment not only a "peculiar" but a "human, face-saving idea", in fact "the most colossal, psychological, face-saving phenomenon, in religious history". Eternity Extra, September 1956, pages 3,4.

And now we found all these offending statements left out of the "comprehensive assemblage."

Can this be a mere coincidence?

We wonder what effect the ridicule of the Evangelicals had upon our leaders and upon the author of the article in the Ministry, which we are discussing. One thing that kept our men from going overboard, body and soul, to the Evangelicals, was, doubtless, Mrs. White's writings. She is very emphatic on the question of the sanctuary, and it would not be easy to convert our people to the new view, as long as they had the Testimonies to sustain them in the old position.

The faith of our people in the Spirit of Prophecy must be weakened, or better yet, destroyed, before much headway can be made in bringing in the new view. The Ministry article serves well for this purpose.

It was the editor, himself, who in his research had "become acutely aware of the E.G. White statements which indicate that the atoning work of Christ is now in progress in the heavenly sanctuary". White Minutes, page 1483.

This did not at all fit in with the new view that the atonement was made on the cross, and so he suggested that "footnotes or Appendix notes might appear in certain of E.G. White's books clarifying very largely in the words of Ellen G. White our understanding of the various phases of the atoning work of Christ." Ibid. And he suggested haste in the "preparation and inclusion of such notes in future printings of the E.G. White books".

When the plan became known, it was abandoned.

The author of the article in the February, 1957, Ministry then took over and had the article printed which we are considering.

to be continued

[Guest]

[Guest]

Good Stuff

[John317]

I've read M. L. Andreason's Letters to the Churches several times before, and I completely agree with him. What he said is also supported by Herbert Douglass, who was there at the time QOD was written and was close friends of all three men who wrote it. Douglass recently wrote an important book about it, called, A Fork In the Road, a "must read" for anyone who is interested in QOD and its affect on the church.

Roy Allen Anderson was a good man who made some serious mistakes but he should not be made to appear an evil man. The same with LeRoy Froom. They both sincerely loved Christ and the SDA church, and they wrongly thought they were doing the right thing by writing what they did in QOD.

Here's a picture I took of RAA in his house in Loma Linda the year he died:

Herbert Douglass told me I "captured RAA" exactly. Anderson was talking to me about QOD when I exposed the film.

[Guest]

"The Fork In the Road" by Herbert Douglass

[Guest]

Good Capture

[John317]

That was before the days of digital photography, too.

Here's the camera I took it with:

http://www.lumieresenboite.com/collection2.php?l=2&c=Mamiya_C330

Mine is all manual, no light meter.

[Guest]

Oh man, a twin lens reflex.

[skyblue888]

Thanks Richard. I'm glad you are appreciating this series. Thank you John for that photo. First time I see a picture of him.

Letters to the Churches

Post 22

NOT IN A SINGLE CASE

The author asks this question, "Why, in the early days, in the light of all this, did not Mrs. White point out and correct the limited or sometimes erroneous concept of some of our early writers concerning the atonement? And why did she employ some of their restricted phrases without contrasting, at the time, her own larger, truer meaning when using them?" Ministry, February, 1957, page 11.

This was the dilemma. Some of our early writers had erroneous concepts about the atonement, the author claims. Sister White did not correct them, but even used some of their own restricted phrases. How could this be explained? The answer, which the author gives, is the most astonishing and astounding answer that has ever been given to such a question. Hear this:

"In answer: it is essential that we first of all remember this basic fact: No doctrinal truth or prophetic interpretation ever came to this people initially through the Spirit of Prophecy--not in a single case."

Read those words again. And have in mind that this is an article which claims to give the true meaning of the atonement, the official interpretation; that it has the approval of the administration and that the editor passed it. Also, it has not been retracted or changed. It stands.

These are bold words, almost unbelievable words, and utterly untrue words. To assert that Sister White never, not even in a single case, initially contributed any doctrinal truth or prophetic interpretation will not be believed by her thousands and millions of readers who all have been benefited by her words. For myself, I have been largely helped and instructed by her doctrinal teachings and prophetic interpretation.

Even the author himself, who on page 11 of the February, 1957, Ministry, says, "We are fundamentally Protestants, taking the Bible only as our sole rule of faith and practise", in a signed letter the next month asserts, "I take the total Spirit of Prophecy teachings on a given subject to be the authoritative Seventh-day Adventist teaching."

It does not strengthen faith to have a writer say publicly, "The Bible and the Bible only" and privately deny it. One statement is evidently made to the world for them to believe; the other to our people to quiet their fears. Some explanation is due.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Post 23

IT CAME DIRECTLY FROM GOD

The reader will have noted that the author does not say that Sister White never contributed any doctrinal truth or prophetic interpretation. He says that she never contributed anything initially, that is, she never made any original contribution. She got it from somebody else, she "lifted" it.

Our enemies have made that assertion for years, but I never thought that such would be announced to the whole world with the consent of our leaders. But here it is.

Whatever Sister White wrote, be it the counsel of the Father and Son in eternity, or Satan's inmost rebellious thoughts, "somebody told her." She never contributed a thing, initially. Never in a single case! Let me produce a single case. The following is taken from Special Testimonies, Series B, No.2, pages 56,57:

"Many of our people do not realize how firmly the foundation of our faith has been laid. My husband, Elder Joseph Bates, brother Pierce, Elder Edson, and others who were keen, noble, and true, were among those who, after the passing of the time in 1844, searched for the truth as for hidden treasure. I met with them, and we studied and prayed earnestly. Often we remained together until late at night, and sometimes through the entire night, praying for light and studying the word. Again and again the brethren came together to study the Bible, in order that they might know its meaning, and be prepared to teach it with power. When they came to the point in their study where they said, 'We can do nothing more', the Spirit of the Lord would come upon me, I would be taken off in vision, and a clear explanation of the passages we had been studying would be given me, with instruction as to how we were to labor and teach effectively. Thus light was given that helped us to understand the Scriptures in regard to Christ, His mission, and His priesthood. A line of truth extending from that time to the time when we shall enter the city of God, was made plain to me, and I gave to others the instruction that the Lord had given me."

In this case there was no human intermediary. Unless we are to believe that Sister White did not tell the truth, she got her instructions from above. In this case the instruction concerned "Christ, His mission, and His priesthood", the very subjects we have now under consideration. Whatever we may be, or not be, sure of, we know now that the instruction that came to Sister White on the subject of Christ, His mission and His priesthood came direct from God.

This means that the sanctuary question as our forefathers taught and believed it had God for its Author. It came as a result of a vision, which I do not believe can be said of any other doctrine we hold.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Post 24

A CRISIS

We have reached a crisis in this denomination when leaders are attempting to enforce false doctrines and threaten those who object. The whole program is unbelievable. Men are now attempting to remove the foundations of many generations, and think they can succeed.

If we did not have the Spirit of Prophecy we could not know of the departure from sound doctrine which is now threatening us, and the coming of the Omega which will decimate our ranks and cause grievous wounds. The present situation has been clearly outlined. We are nearing the climax.

I am well aware that oftentimes visions were given to confirm previous study. I am well aware that for some time Sister White's mind was "locked", as she expressed it, and that hence visions were given, as in the instance here considered. She herself says that "for two or three years my mind continued to be locked to an understanding of the Scriptures."

During that time the Lord gave visions. Then an experience came to her, and she records, "from that time to this I have been able to understand the word of God." ibid, page 58.

For "two or three years" Mrs. White's mind was locked. This was evidently by God to strengthen their faith in the gift; for the men knew that of herself she had no knowledge. Then, when they came to the end of their knowledge and did not know what to do, light came from a source of which they knew that of herself she could not solve their problems. It was clearly the Lord's leading, and they confessed it and "accepted as light direct from Heaven the revelations given."

In an attempt to protect himself, the author now turns completely around and says that she frequently went "far beyond the positions taken by any of the original advocates, and her counsels would often be so clear, so full, and so far reaching that they proved to be far ahead of the concepts of any of her comtemporaries--sometimes fifty years in advance of their acceptance by some." I wonder whom she copied under such circumstances!

In composing the book, Questions on Doctrine, it became necessary to do some research work in Sister White's published and unpublished manuscripts to ascertain beyond a doubt just what she had said on various subjects. This work was turned over to the Ministry author who reports as follows in the Ministry for February, 1957, page 11:

to be continued

[skyblue888]

Letters to the Churches

Post 25

THE MINISTRY REPORT

"The further question has likewise arisen: 'Just why were these counsels, clarifications, and expositions on the atonement, and its priestly manifestations, not brought together for our use before this? The answer, we believe, is equally simple and straightforward and obvious. No one had taken the time for the sustained effort involved in laborious, comprehensive search necessary to find, analyze them.

"Since our leaders were largely unaware of this latent evidence and its priceless value, the need was not felt, and the time for such a vast project was not considered available. Access to the complete files of all the old periodicals containing Ellen White's two thousand articles is not easy, for there is no complete file in any one place. More than that, the priceless manuscript statements are not available in published form.

"Further, as a church we have been so engrossed in giving our special message to the world, in keeping with our complex movement rolling onward in its multiple activities, that no one seemed to have the time or even the burden for such a huge task. It was known that the search would be a most laborious one because of the vast amount of material that must be compassed.

"However, when the need clearly arose and the time for such a search had obviously come, the necessity was recognized and the time taken to compass not only the familiar book statements, but the vast array of periodicals, articles, and manuscript counsels bearing thereon."

It will be noticed that the author does not minimize the task that faced him--and it was a great task. It is to be regretted that he should take the opportunity to inform us that the leaders had not felt the need of this work, did not have the time for it, and did not even have any burden for it.

It was in this search that he discovered that Mrs. White did not contradict or change what she said in the beginning of her work. The author puts it in his peculiar phraseology that "Mrs. White's later statements do not contradict or change her earlier statements." He had evidently hoped that she had changed her position on the atonement, which position he had criticized and attempted to explain by saying that she never, nor even in a single case, had contributed anything initially to doctrine or prophetic interpretation.

It is clear that if she intended to change her position, she had abundant opportunity to do so in the sixty or more years she lived after making her position clear on the atonement. But she did not contradict or change what she had once written. This is the testimony of the very one who had challenged her early position, and who now is compelled to testify that she did not change. It is a poetic justice that the author of the Ministry article should be the one to testify after he had examined all the material that there is no evidence that she ever changed her mind or contradicted what she had written after.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

LETTERS TO THE CHURCHES

POST # 26

PLAYING WITH FIRE

This created another dilemma for our author. He must now let stand all she had ever written, and could not argue she had authorized any change whatsoever. What then could he do or did he do? A most unique solution he had: he calmly asserted that Sister White did not mean what she said!

Note again his peculiar use of the English language, not a direct statement but a passive approach: he says, "... a distinct clarification of terms and of meaning emerges that is destined to have far-reaching consequences." Her later statements "invest those earlier terms with a larger, truer meaning inherently there all the time." And so he explains when she says that Christ is making atonement (he is omitting the word now), she is "obviously applying the completed atonement to the individual."

This is in complete harmony with the statement in Questions on Doctrine where the author boldly asserts that if any one "hears an Adventist say, or reads in Adventist literature--even in the writings of Ellen G. White--that Christ is making atonement now, it should be understood that we mean simply that Christ is now making appllication of the benefits of the sacrificial atonement He made on the cross."

This is news indeed. I have written several books, one of them on the Sanctuary service and hence these may come under what he calls "Adventist literature". And now some unauthorized individual proclaims to the world that when I say that Christ is making atonement now, I do not mean it. It means that He is making application, but not atonement which was made 1800 years ago. However, it is only a minor matter that he presumes to act as my interpreter and tell what I mean by what I say. But when he undertakes to tell the world that when Ellen White says that Christ is making atonement she means simply that He is making application. That is serious.

And so when I read, "... even in the writings of Ellen G. White," that Christ is making atonement, I am not to believe it. He made the atonement 1800 years ago, not now; and even if she affirms that Christ is making atonement now, that "today He is making atonement", that "We are in the great day of atonement, and the sacred work of Christ for the people of God is going on at the present time (1882) in the heveanly sanctuary should be our constant study", I am still to apply to the interpreter to find out what she means. (See Testimonies, Vol.5, p.520.)

Such is playing with words, it is playing with fire, and makes any interpretation possible. If the author is right, I am permitted to take any word of an author and say that he means something else than what he says. Such makes inter-communication impossible, and the world a Babel. What would agreements amount to, or contracts, or words of mouth, if I am permitted to put my own constructions on what another man says? The Bible says that the seventh day is the Sabbath. That seems plain enough. But the author's theory would permit me to hold that the Bible means no such thing. Absurd, you say. And I say Amen. When the Bible says seven, it does not mean one. With the author's philosophy, however, words become meaningless.

"Let your nay be nay, and your yea be yea" James says. That is, mean what you say. To make the plain statement that "Christ is making atonement now" mean that He is making application now is indefensible on grammatical, philological, theological, or common-sense ground. And to go farther and upon such false interpretation build a new theology to be enforced by sanctions, is simply out of this world. Undue assumption of authority coupled with overconfidence in the virtue of bestowed honors have borne fruit. And the fruit is not good.

to be continued

[skyblue888]

LETTERS TO THE CHURCHES

Letters to the Churches

POST # 27

WARNING NOT TO BE UNHEEDED

The present attempt to lessen and destroy confidence in the Spirit of Prophecy and established a new theology, may deceive some, even many, but the foundations upon which we have built these many years, still stands, and God still lives. This warning should not go unheeded. "If you lessen the confidence of God's people in the Testimonies He has sent them, you are rebelling against God as certainly as were Korah, Dathan, and Abiram." Testimonies to the Church, vol.5, page 66.

In an incomplete research which I conducted years ago I found what the author found, and more. Among other things, I found in a small pamphlet entitled, "A Word to the Little Flock," published by James White in Brunswick, Maine, May 30, 1847, a statement by Sister White on the sanctuary that immediately drew my attention. It is dated April 21, 1847, and written from Topsham, Maine. On page 12, I found these words, which I suppose our Ministry author also found. Says Sister White:

"I believe the Sanctuary to be cleansed at the end of the 2300 days, is the New Jerusalem Temple, of which Christ is a minister. The Lord showed me in vision, more than one year ago, that Brother Crosier had the true light, on the cleansing of the Sanctuary, etc., and that it was His will, that Brother Crozier should write out the view which he gave us in the Day-Star, Extra, February 7, 1846. I feel fully authorized by the Lord, to recommend that Extra to every saint. I pray that these lines may prove a blessing to you, and all the dear children who may read them." Signed E.G. White.

I lost no time to get a copy of that Extra and read it. As I write this I have before me a photostatic copy of the Day-Star Extra for February 7, 1846, and on pages 40 and 41 of that issue I read Brother Crosier's article. After having discussed certain theories in which he does not believe, Brother Crozier observes:

to be continued

[skyblue888]

LETTERS TO THE CHURCHES

POST # 28

CROZIER SPEAKS

"But again, they say that the atonement was made and finished on Calvary, when the Lamb of God expired. So men have taught us, and so the churches and world believe; but it is none the more true or sacred on that account, if unsupported by Divine authority. Perhaps few or none who hold that opinion have ever tested the foundation on which it rests.

1. If the atonement was made on Calvary, by whom was it made? The making of the atonement is the work of a Priest, but who officiated on Calvary?--Roman soldiers and wicked Jews.

2. The slaying of the victim was not making the atonement; the sinner slew the victim, Leviticus 4:1-4,13-15, etc., after that the Priest took the blood and made the atonement. Leviticus 4:5-12, 16-21.

3. Christ was appointed High Priest to make the atonement, and He certainly could not have acted in that capacity till after His resurrection, and we have no record of His doing any thing on earth after His resurrection, which could be called the atonement.

4. The atonement was made in the Sanctuary, but Calvary was not such a place.

5. He could not according to Hebrews 8:4 make atonement while on earth. "If He were on earth, He should not be a Priest." The Levitical was the earthly priesthood; the Divine Priesthood, the heavenly.

6. Therefore, He did not begin the work of making atonement, whatever the nature of that work may be, till after His ascension, when by His own blood He entered the heavenly sanctuary for us.

This, then is the "true light", which the Lord showed Sister White in vision, had His approval, and which she felt fully authorized to recommend to every saint. Only as we downgrade Sister White can we reject this testimony of hers. We are not ready to do this.

We now face this situation. Did our Ministry author in his thorough search find this statement that Brother Crozier had "the true light"? If he did not find it, he has little ground to feel pleased with his work. In either case, if I were a teacher and had sent him to do this research work and he presented the collection in Questions on Doctrine as his report, I would have to give him a straight F, which in school language stands for Failure. It is either a case of poor research, or of omission, which latter, under the circumstances, is most serious.

to be continued