Individuality in Religion by A.T. Jones

[Steve Billiter]

I have some things to say to our teachers in reference to the new book, "The Living Temple." Be careful how you sustain the sentiments of this book regarding the personality of God. As the Lord represents matters to me, these sentiments do not bear the indorsement of God. They are a snare that the enemy has prepared for these last days. I thought that this would surely be discerned, and that it would not be necessary for me to say anything about it. But since the claim has been made that the teachings of this book can be sustained by statements from my writings, I am compelled to speak in denial of this claim. There may be in this book expressions and sentiments that are in harmony with my writings. And there may be in my writings many statements which, when taken from their connection, and interpreted according to the mind of the writer of "The Living Temple," would seem to be in harmony with the teachings of this book. This may give apparent support to the assertion that the sentiments in "The Living Temple" are in harmony with my writings. But God forbid that this opinion should prevail. {RH, October 22, 1903 par. 1}

We need not the mysticism that is in this book. Those who entertain these sophistries will soon find themselves in a position where the enemy can talk with them, and lead them away from God. It is represented to me that the writer of this book is on a false track. He has lost sight of the distinguishing truths for this time. He knows not whither his steps are tending. The track of truth lies close beside the track of error, and both tracks may seem to be one to minds which are not worked by the Holy Spirit, and which, therefore, are not quick to discern the difference between truth and error. {RH, October 22, 1903 par. 2}

In regard to the faith to be cherished and preserved in these last days, very little light is given in "The Living Temple," and this light is so uncertain that it would not help God's people at this stage of their work. {RH, October 22, 1903 par. 3}

[Steve Billiter]

The 1888 Message Study Committee

Robert Wieland is a significant leader and writer for the SDA separatist group, The 1888 Message Study Committee by Robert Wieland;

“The Good News is Better Than You Think”

Page 8, and 9,

“The word “gospel” has the built in meaning of good news. Jesus came proclaiming God’s good news.(Mark 1:13, Barclay) His message majored in paths to happiness. Nine sure cure prescriptions for it glisten in His Sermon on the Mount, each one beginning Blessed are those who….(Matt. 5:3-12 GNB) you may be surprised to discover not one tells what to do in order to be “happy” but what to believe.

Wieland says here that one only has to “believe” to have the blessings of the beatitudes; however one must meet all of the conditions for salvation to have any of them.

He says we believe and do nothing. Let’s look at the Beatitudes

.

Mat 5:3 Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 5:4 Blessed are they that mourn: for they shall be comforted.

Mat 5:5 Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth.

Mat 5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after

righteousness: for they shall be filled.

Mat 5:7 Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.

Mat 5:8 Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

Mat 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

Mat 5:10 Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.

Mat 5:11 Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake.

Mat 5:12 Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.

What does Ellen White say about the beatitudes? She speaks here of the Sermon on the Mount.

Desire of Ages (page 299)

Without combating their ideas of the kingdom of God, He told them the conditions of entrance therein, leaving them to draw their own conclusions as to its nature. The truths He taught are no less important to us than to the multitude that followed Him. We no less than they need to learn the foundation principles of the kingdom of God. {DA 299.3}

Then in the next paragraph Wieland says this:

“If happiness depends on my doing the right thing, I always run into the snag of not being able to do it right. There is always an element of non-attainment. If God promises me something good dependent on the condition that I first do something right, His promises will be sure to fail because I can’t perform. God may promise me the sky, but it’s a cruel trick if His promises are nullified by an impossible pre-condition.”

He never says what the “impossible pre-condition” is, but his context is the beatitudes, and he just said prior to this that we only have to “believe.”

Nowhere in the book is the gospel taught. We must meet the conditions for salvation, which are acceptance, confession of sin, and repentance to be born again and have the blessings of the Beatitudes. We cannot “just believe and do nothing” to get them.

John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Rom 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Eze 33:11 Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

Pro 28:13 He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall have mercy.

[Steve Billiter]

“The Good News is Better Than You Think”

Page 11

By Robert Wieland

“When Christ was crucified, the devil was not killed, much to the disappointment of many, but he was paralyzed”

It is evident for the last 2000 years that Satan is not paralyzed and is enraged and working harder. And as we review world history, and our own lives it is evident Satan is far from paralyzed. Satan only knew that he must finally die, that made him angrier.

Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, you heavens, and you that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has but a short time.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

[Steve Billiter]

It is now substantiated. Wieland teaches a false gospel, period.Not only does he teach the false, he does not teach the true.

He attracts those who are loose on soteriology and are repelled by legalism. Wieland is sincere, and hard working, but he is sincerely wrong.

You said:

"Ironically, this disagrees with Ellen White herself. For example, she said that Waggoner could teach righteousness by faith better than she could."

Mr. pnattmbtc, please provide a reference for this quote.

[Guest]

She did say that, but it was before he apostisized.

[Guest]

“The Good News is Better Than You Think”

Page 11

By Robert Wieland

“When Christ was crucified, the devil was not killed, much to the disappointment of many, but he was paralyzed”

No he wasn't paralyzed.

[Steve Billiter]

Wieland and Short thought their ideas were above that of God. They actually wrote a book and tried to change the Conferences position on 1888. After they were rejected twice, they formed the current 1888 Message Study Committee. They are still separatists.

They remain members of SDA churches and like snakes in the grass try to deceive SDA's into their organization while at the same time they condemn the church for teaching "legalism." Their "legalism" is simply our commands from God to obey Him and keep the commandments and meet the conditions for salvation. To Wieland and the 1888 crew, salvation is cheap grace which is no grace and it does not correctly deal with sin.

How do I know all this? Some here in my town of Reno NV tried to get me involved in their unbiblical movement.

Weiland and Short

In the 1940s, two young Adventist missionaries, Robert J. Weiland and Donald K. Short, began analyzing the original statements of Ellen White relative to the 1888 episode. Realizing that she was in agreement with Daniells' and Bunch's earlier positions, Weiland and Short publicly challenged the recent viewpoints that Christian and Spalding were promoting throughout the denomination [46]. Not only did Weiland and Short come to the unalterable conclusion that the nineteenth-century church committed a grave error at Minneapolis, they also went on to say that the denomination must publicly repent for rejecting the 1888 message of Waggoner and Jones.

In order to make their position clear, they wrote a 204-page manuscript entitled, 1888 Re-Examined. Like Daniells' earlier 1927 book, their work also consisted of a collection of statements from Ellen White's writings relative to the history of the 1888 conflict. Armed with Danniel's primary source material, Weiland and Short boldly proclaimed that the twentieth-century church was grossly missing the point about Minneapolis.

Hoping that the Denomination would re-evaluate the history of 1888, Weiland and Short naively submitted their manuscript to the General Conference in 1950 for an official analysis and evaluation [47]. Good intentions notwithstanding, their thesis was not well received by the General Conference leadership. Instead, the church hierarchy ordered these denominational employees to cease and desist from circulating their unauthorized views. In spite of the official prohibition, however, their 1888 manuscript circulated within the Adventist community and, once again, many members began questioning the 1888 conflict and the church's official position on the matter [48].

Thanks, no doubt, to Weiland and Short's activities, the Minneapolis history was on the minds of many in the early 1950s. In 1952, this topic was publicly featured at a Bible Conference held in the Sligo Seventh-day Adventist Church, in Takoma Park, Maryland. In fact, "Practically every speaker from the first day onward" laid "great stress" upon righteousness by faith [49]. It was even reported that this emphasis on 1888 was "spontaneous" and unplanned, "impelled by the spirit of God." Undoubtedly, this turn of events must have come as a pleasant surprise to Weiland and Short, especially since the conference speakers publicly admitted that the church had "failed to build on the foundation laid at the 1888 General Conference." The church leaders went on to say, "We are years behind where we should have been in spiritual growth. Long ere this we should have been in the promised land [50]." Not only did the conference apparently support the viewpoints of both Daniells' and Bunch, it also publicly tied the success of the twentieth century church with the 1888 doctrine and the loud cry of the fourth angel. The leaders now claimed that, "The holy spirit will come in the fullness of power when the church of God lays hold by faith of the righteousness of Christ as a personal living experience [51]. "

Surprisingly, Weiland and Short, were not impressed with the conference because the leaders refused to allow the specific theology of Jones and Waggoner to be studied or discussed [52]. To make matters even more confusing, the leadership thought that they had faithfully presented the Minneapolis message even more accurately than the original 1888 version. "No longer will the question be," they stated, "'what was the attitude of our workers and people toward the message of righteousness by faith that was given in 1888? What did they do about it?' From now on the great question must be, 'What did we do with the light on righteousness by faith as proclaimed in the 1952 Bible Conference [53]?'"

As the decade of the 1950s rolled on, the agitation over 1888 increased. Consequently, in 1958, the General Conference publicly responded a second time to the original thesis of Weiland and Short with a negative reply, entitled, "A Further Appraisal of the Manuscript '1888 Re-Examined.'" In this document, the denomination's leaders strongly condemned the authors' positions and accused them of "considerable amateurishness in both research and use of facts" and charged them with working against the best interests of the church [54]. Clearly, Weiland and Short's crusade was becoming annoying and the Takoma Park hierarchy was in no mood to admit any wrongdoing in the 1888 matter, much less discuss a public apology.

(http://www.adventistreform.com/The1888Debate.html#WandS)

[Guest]

I didn't know this about Weiland. But when you say Wieland and Short, it rings a bell. I have seen the book you are talking about, I'm sure. I read part of it, but not all. I think my dad had it.

[karl]

" While good works will not save even one soul, yet it is impossible for even one soul to be saved without good works. God saves us under a law, that we must ask if we would receive, seek if we would find, and knock if we would have the door opened unto us."

378

{1SM 377.1}

Its funny, Robert Wieland also teaches no conditions for salvation, I believe Jones was the beginning of todays New Theology, a false gospel.

Good job, Steve.

[skyblue888]

"I have never read anywhere where Jones recanted the message he and Waggoner presented - a message Ellen White stated clearly and emphatically was the 3rd Angel's message in verity."

Jones was reproved by Ellen White for going off the deep end. Jones was teaching a false gospel, and he continued to do that.

The current 1888 Message Study Committee, an unbiblical SDA offshoot,(Robert Wieland) twists Ellen Whites statements from 1888 about the "most precious message" to insinuate that ALL of Jones and Waggonner writings are endorsed by Ellen White, which they are not. Not even Jones good writings do anything for me. Ellen Whites are better and Inspired as far as I'm concerned.

Here is a letter from Ellen White to Jones:

Brother A. T. Jones:

April 9, 1893

I was attending a meeting, and a large congregation were present. In my dream you were presenting the subject of faith and the imputed righteousness of Christ by faith. You repeated several times that works amounted to nothing, that there were no conditions. The matter was presented in that light that I knew minds would be confused, and would not receive the correct impression in reference to faith and works, and I decided to write to you.

You state this matter too strongly. There are conditions to our receiving justification and sanctification, and the righteousness of Christ. I know your meaning, but you leave a wrong impression upon many minds. While good works will not save even one soul, yet it is impossible for even one soul to be saved without good works. God saves us under a law, that we must ask if we would receive, seek if we would find, and knock if we would have the door opened unto us.

378

{1SM 377.1}

Its funny, Robert Wieland also teaches no conditions for salvation, I believe Jones was the beginning of todays New Theology, a false gospel.

This has already been shown to be a fraud by those in responsible position who were determined to bring the individuals to their terms. T.M.360.

So far, nobody has been able to find the original for this alleged letter to brother Jones and I have shown before from page 130 of Selected Messages why this letter cannot be an authentic one from Mrs. White.

sky

[skyblue888]

In the book Selected Messages, Vol.1, p.377 is a letter, allegedly from Mrs. White, addressed to A.T. Jones. This letter is dated April 9, 1893, which would place it only a few days after the General Conference of that year which ended on March 26.

During that conference brother Jones gave a series of 24 lectures. In #10,12,13, and 18 of these lectures, he spoke on the relation between faith and works. They are most excellent studies, the best ones anyone could ever find on this topic.

Now in that letter found on page 377 of Vol.1 of Selected Messages, it is stated thatbrother Jones' lectures on these subjects had left a wrong impression upon many minds! On the next page, she writes: "You look in reality upon these subjects as I do, yet you make these subjects, through your expressions, confusing to minds." p.378.

The first time I read this statement I was shocked! I didn't know what to think or what to make of it. I could not figure out how or why Mrs. White could have said something like this especially shortly after the Conference. I had carefully and prayerfully read all his 1893 lectures again and again over the years and far from leaving a wrong impression upon my mind or confusing me, these lectures turned out to be such a blessing to me that I couldn't imagine reading anything better on the subject except from the writings of Mrs. White herself or of brother Waggoner.

I suggest that you read lectures #10,12,13, and 18 very carefully and prayerfully and you will see for yourself what I mean. I will post a few excerpts from these lectures that all who are interested can see for themselves what I am talking about.

Now here is the statement that the Lord brought to my attention. It is also found in Selected Messages, Vol.1. It is on p.130 and it is a totally different account from Mrs. White as to what she thought of these messages. After I read what is found on that page, I became suspicious right away of that letter found on page 377 addressed tobrother Jones.

On page 130 she is stating that the reason why there was confusion in the minds of many in 1893 was for a totally different reason than given on page 377.

Here is what I believe to be the true, inspired account:

"There have been things written to me in regard to the movings of the Spirit of God at the last conference (1893), and at the college, which clearly indicate that BECAUSE THESE BLESSINGS WERE NOT LIVED UP TO, MINDS HAVE BEEN CONFUSED, and that which was light from Heaven has been called excitement. I have been made sad to have this matter viewed in this light. We must be very careful not to grieve the Holy Spirit of God, in pronouncing the ministrations of His Holy Spirit a species of fanaticism. How shall we understand the workings of the Spirit of God if it was not revealed in clear and unmistakable lines, not only in Battle Creek but in may places?"

And we must remember that brother Jones' lectures at that Conference were the repeat of his 1888 lectures "in special measure." 1893 G.C. Bulletin, p.494.

So then, at the 1893 G.C. meeting, minds were confused, not because brotherJones' lectures on these subjects were leaving a wrong impression or confusing the minds, but because these blessings were not lived up to.

For this reason alone, we have every reason to question the source of that letter found on page 377. Let us not forget the solemn words Mrs. White spoke to all the delegates in 1888:

"How long will you hate and despise the messengers of God's righteousness? God has given them His message. They bear the word of the Lord." T.M.96,97.

So I have no choice but to believe that the letter found on page 377 of Selected Messages, Vol.1 may have been fabricated and inserted by those who hated and despised him since it flatly contradicts what is stated on page 130 . Both accounts can't be true.

sky

[skyblue888]

"Here was evidence, that all might discern whom the Lord recognized as His servants. But there were those who despised the men and the message they bore. They have taunted them with being fanatics, extremists, and enthusiasts. Let me prophesy unto you: Unless you speedily humble your hearts before God, and confess your sins, which are many, you will, when it is too late, see that you have been fighting against God. Through the conviction of the Holy Spirit, no longer unto reformation and pardon, you will see that these men whom you have spoken against have been as signs in the world, as witnesses for God. Then you would give the whole world if you could redeem the past, and be just such zealous men, moved by the Spirit of God to lift your voice in solemn warning to the world; and like them, to be in principle firm as a rock. YOUR TURNING THINGS UPSIDE DOWN IS KNOWN OF THE LORD. Go on a little longer, as you have gone, in rejection of the light from Heaven, and you are lost... I have no smooth message to bear to those who have been so long as false guideposts, pointing the wrong way. If you reject Christ's delegated messengers, you reject Christ. Neglect this great salvation, kept before you for years, despise this glorious offer of justification through (the merits) of the blood of Christ and sanctification through the cleansing power of the Holy Spirit, and there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation. I entreat you now to humble yourselves and cease your stubborn resistance to light and evidence." T.M.97,98. *parenthesis supplied (1896)

"There is no pride so dangerous as spiritual pride." Ibid, 109. (1893)

"The Lord's servants will be called enthusiasts. Ministers will warn the people not to listen to them." Ibid, 233. (1895)

"And when men in the highest responsible positions make no difference between those who serve God and those who serve Him not, they evidence that their eyes are not single to the glory of God; therefore their whole body is full of darkness... they know not what spirit they are of... they evidence that they are working on the enemy's side to belittle and humiliate those whom the Lord loves, and that they strengthen the hands of the wicked, who are doing an evil work." Ibid,273. (1896)

Here Mrs. White is speaking of men in the highest position of responsibility! "They know not what spirit they are of." These men in the highest position of responsibility put God aside and accepted the devisings of men. And we should be surprised if they should manipulate the Testimonies to their own advantage in their campaign against those whom they could not lord it over, men who were not amenable to them, men whom they could not control! See T.M.360,361,480,481,366,362,363.

When one reads An Appeal for Gospel Order and Some History, Experience, and Facts, it becomes crystal clear that brother Willie White was amenable to the men of the General Conference and did their biddings as they were turning things upside down.

We have just read how Mrs. White stated that these men did not know what spirit they were of. They were resisting light and doing all in their power to prevent others from receiving that light. Was it her who turned things upside down by saying that it was brother Jones, instead, who did not know what spirit he was of! I don't think so!

"God gives men counsel and reproof for their good. He has sent His message, telling them what was needed for the time--1897. Did you accept the message? Did you heed the appeal? He gave you opportunity to come up armed and equipped to the help of the Lord. And having done all, He told you to stand. But did you make ready? Did you say, 'Here am I; send me'? You sat still and did nothing. You left the word of the Lord to fall unheeded to the ground; and now the Lord has taken men who were boys when you were standing at the forefront of the battle, and has given to them the message and the work which you did not take upon you. Will you be stumbling blocks to them? Will you criticize? Will you say, 'They are getting out of their place'? Yet you did not fill the place they are now called to fill." Ibid, 413.

sky

[skyblue888]

"I believe Jones was the beginning of todays New Theology, a false gospel."

Steve

_____________

Good job, Steve.

Karl

_____________

This is a lie!!! No greater lie has ever been perpetrated against this brother who was a true servant of God but who was maligned by those who chose darkness rather than light.

It is clear that "The prejudices and opinions that PREVAILED at Minneapolis are not dead by any means; the seeds sown there in some hearts are ready to spring into life and bear a like harvest." T.M.467.

Here are some excerpts from the 1893 G.C. Bulletin by brother Jones on the subjects of faith and works.

You be the judge.

"Don't you see then how that the works take care of themselves in him who has faith in Jesus Christ,--I do not mean that satanic belief; I mean the man who has faith. Then don't you see what those people miss who get their minds on works, more than on Christ? They miss the very incentive and the very power that alone can do the things that are good, to reach and minister to the sick in the right spirit, to visit the poor and minister to them in the right spirit. Have you not seen people that have ministered to the poor and the sick, in a way that makes those people feel worse than if they had not gone there at all? That is not the kind of ministering Jesus Christ does. No, sir. It is Christ in you. And when He goes with you and in you there stands the testimony, 'It will win even from wordlings the statement, They are like Jesus.'

Did not Paul strive, says one, and does not the Savior say, 'Strive to enter in at the strait gate'? Yes. But how can I strive when I have nothing to strive with? 'Without Me you can do nothing.'--how much? (Congregation: 'Nothing.') Is that so? (Congregation: 'Yes.') Then without Christ I want to know how you are going to strive. Paul says, "I also labor, striving according to His working, which worketh in me mightily." Col.1:29. I want you to think of that. 'Without Me ye can do nothing.' 'Dead in trespasses and sins.' Is that so? How can a dead man strive? 'When we were without strength." Rom.5:6. Were we without strength? (Congregation: 'Yes.') That is so. Then how can a man strive who has no strength? Don't you see, then, that it is an utter satanic perversion of the divine idea, to go to striving and working and wearing the life out in order to get to Christ to obtain this gift of justification. No; it is the free gift of God to every man, and every man who receives it, receives Jesus Christ Himself indeed.

Then where does the striving come in? To find the Lord? or to be used by the power which the Lord gives, which He puts into us? Which is it? 'The love of Christ constraineth us.' 2 Cor.5:14. Constrains, impels, drives on with an irresistible force. That is the idea that is in the word striving. Other translations give it, 'agonize' to enter into the strait gate. And they do really and bodily agonize and wear themselves out, doing penance, just like any other Catholic--and they will do it all in order to move the Lord, so that He will have pity on them. That is not the thought.

It is agonizing; but everybody who is acquainted with it, knows that the word is taken from the Greek games, the Greek races. One who entered the games was an agonistes. They started out to run a race. Now what does he do? He just strains every nerve to win the race; every faculty of his being is devoted to the object before him, isn't it? (Congregation: 'Yes, sir.') Now that is bodily exercise; that is bodily striving, agonizing. Is this that kind that Christ is talking about? (Congregation: 'No.') What kind is this? Spiritual. Yes, of course. Then carrying that thought from bodily exercise, that bodily straining of every nerve,--carrying that into the spiritual realm, what does it signify? Doesn't it signify that complete surrender of the will to Christ, that surrender of the heart, and the affections to Him, that makes no reserve? Then His power moving in us, His divine power urging us on, don't you see? I say again, that in all cases he who believes in Jesus Christ most fully will work most for Him.

Now let us have this word, and that will be the best close I could make to the whole thing to-night. 'Steps to Christ,' page 71. 'The heart that rests most fully upon Christ will be the most earnest and active in labor for Him.' Amen. (Congregation: 'Amen.') Do not forget that now. Do not think that the man who says that he rests wholly upon Jesus Christ is either a physical or spiritual loafer. If he shows this loafing in his life, he is not resting on Christ at all, but on his own self.

No, sir; the heart that rests most fully upon Christ will be most active in labor for Him. That is what real faith is. That is the faith that will bring to you the outpouring of the latter rain; that is the faith that will bring to you and me the teaching of righteousness according to righteousness-- the living presence of Jesus Christ--to prepare us for the loud cry and the carrying of the third angel's message in the only way in which it can be carried from this Conference." A.T. Jones, 1893 G.C. Bulletin, p.310,302.

[skyblue888]

Here is one more:

"The man that is so anxious and so dreadfully afraid that you will not let him have any works to do, and that you are going to destroy all his works--if Christ is dwelling in the heart, he will find works to do. Brethren, don't be so anxious about works; find the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will find work, more than you can do. (Congregation: 'Amen!') But the difficulty is, when the people get their minds on works, and works, and works, instead of upon Jesus Christ in order to work, they pervert the whole thing. Satan does not care how much a man professes justification by faith, and righteousness by faith, so long as he keeps his mind on works. That is just the thought that is before us here in this definition of faith that we read the other night. Let me read it again. Page 63, Steps to Christ: 'When we speak of faith there is a distinction that should be borne in mind. There is a kind of belief that is wholly different from faith. The existence and power of God, the truth of His word, are facts that even Satan and his hosts cannot at heart deny."

They believe that, but what power does their believing it bring to them to make them righteous, or to enable them to do good works? What power is there in their belief? What power does that give to them? (Congregation: 'None.') No, it is away off there, simply a theory, held off to look at, held as a theory, held as a creed; and so, a spirit even, can believe in the existence and power of God; he can believe the truth of the Bible; he can believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, the holy One of God, and be a devil. Many can believe all this in this way and profess justification by faith at the same time; and they can be great sticklers for what they call 'good works' at the same time. Yes they can work the very skin off their bones in order to do good, in order to be righteous, in order to move God, as we read the other night. You know they do it. You know they make pilgrimages, and do penances, and fairly wear themselves out; and in addition to these things they will shut themselves off from every earthly comfort.

But who is doing the work? Who in these things does the work? Self does the work in order to be righteous, in order to have that treasure of merit that will give an increase of grace in this world and an increase of glory in Heaven. That is what it is for, is it not? (Congregation: 'Yes.') Who is doing this then? (Congregation: 'Self.') Yes sir. Has the mind, has the heart been yielded to God? Are the affections fixed upon Him? Is the surrender of all to Him? No. And therefore it is still self in all. Who then is to do the work in order that it may be good works always? Let us read it: 'If Christ is dwelling in our hearts, He will work in us 'both to will and to do of His good pleasure.'" A.T. Jones, 1893 G.C. Bulletin, p.298.

Nothing confusing to the minds here. It is the 1888 message "in special measure" from the Lord. As Mrs. White stated, the only reason why there was confusion in many minds was because these blessings were not lived up to, not appreciated.

sky

[skyblue888]

"While good works will not save even one soul, yet it is impossible for even one soul to be saved without good works. God saves us under a law, that we must ask if we would receive, seek if we would find, and knock if we would have the door opened unto us."

_____________

This is not to be taken to mean that salvation is by faith and works for savation is through faith alone. Good works, even the works that the Holy Spirit enables us to do DO NOT play a part in the salvation of the soul or in merit.

It is true that good works will be rewarded for man will be rewarded according to his works but in and of themselves these good works that the Holy Spirit enables us to do do not play a part in the salvation of the soul or in merit. I repeat, these do not play a part in the salvation of the soul for only the merits of Christ will avail in our behalf.

"Works without faith are dead, and faith without works is dead. Works will never save us. It is the merits of Christ that will avail in our behalf." F.W.48.

"If you would gather together everything that is good and holy and noble and lovely in man and then present the subject to the angels of God as playing a part in the salvation of the human soul or in merit, the proposition would be rejected as treason." F.W.24.

These words are so clear that no one needs be confused on the subjects of faith and works.

sky

[skyblue888]

Its funny, Robert Wieland also teaches no conditions for salvation."

_____________

"The Lord specifies NO CONDITIONS except that you hunger for His mercy, desire His counsel, and long for His love." M.B.130.

"And if you have a sense of need in your soul, if you hunger and thirst after righteousness, this is an evidence that Christ has wrought upon your heart, in order that He may be sought unto to do for you, through the endowment of the Holy Spirit, those things which it is impossible for you to do for yourself." M.B.19.

And those things which it is impossible for us to do for ourselves and which the Holy Spirit accomplishes for us, God will reward us as though we had done them ourselves as long as we continually acknowledge ourselves as "unprofitable servants" (Luke 17:10) for we could not have done these good works in the strength of our own sinful natures.

At the gates the saints will declare that they have done nothing at all but that Christ did it all and they will acknowledge as with one voice that if they walk through the everlasting gates it will be solely on account of the MERITS of a crucified and risen Saviour and the Father will say unto them,

"Good and faithful servants! Enter in, and take possession of the kingdom prepared for you even before the foundation of the world."

sky

[skyblue888]

Brother's Jones' Appeal for Individuality in Religion amounts to this:

"Cease ye from man." Isaiah 2:22.

To look to man, to trust to man, to expect much from man instead of looking to Christ and His merits and righteousness alone is bowing the knee to Baal, hence to Satan who has set up his throne between the seas and the glorious holy mountain, between the human worshiper and God.(Dan.11:45; Ps.48:1,2; Isaiah 14:12-14)

"In this world Satan has set up a kingdom of darkness, of which he, the leader in guilt, is prince. He desired to usurp the throne of God. Failing in this, he has worked in darkness, in crookedness, in deception, tu usurp God's place in the hearts of men. He has set up his throne between God and man, to appropriate the adoration that belongs to God." E.G. White, 6 B.C.1119.

The Testimonies have told us that even in the churches that professed to have advanced truth "humanity is hailed as God." T.M.365.

"Satan has planted his satanic throne between the human worshiper and the divine Father." Manuscript Release, Vol.7,215.

It is the kingdom of man in the place of God.

"Thus the souls for whom Christ has given His life to free them from the bondage of Satan are brought under bondage to him in another form." T.M.361.

In the Testimonies of the Spirit of God we read, "I ask our people to study the 28th chapter of Ezekiel. The representation here made, while it refers primarily to Lucifer. the fallen angel, has yet a broader significance. Not one being but a general movement is described and one that we shall witness." E.G. White, See Bible Commentary, Vol.4,1162.

We have just read that in Heaven Lucifer sought to usurp the throne of God. He sought to appropriate the adoration that belongs to God alone. Failing in this he has worked in darkness, in crookedness, in deception to usurp His place in the hearts of men.

In these last days Satan, through the enforcement of Sunday worship, will succeed in bringing the whole world at his feet.(Dan.11:45; Rev.13:8)All will bow the knee to Baal except those whose names are written in the book of the Lamb's life. These faithful few, like Daniel's friends in Babylon, will not be moved.

To these faithful few in these last days, this prayer, "Thy kingdom come; thy will be done on earth as it is in Heaven" will take on a new meaning as they enter upon the closing work.

"Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the kingdom." Luke 12:32.

To them alone it is said, "The kingdom of God is within you." Luke 17:21.

These will be men and women wondered at. Zachariah 3:8.

sky

[joeb]

“The Good News is Better Than You Think”

Page 11

By Robert Wieland

“When Christ was crucified, the devil was not killed, much to the disappointment of many, but he was paralyzed”

It is evident for the last 2000 years that Satan is not paralyzed and is enraged and working harder. And as we review world history, and our own lives it is evident Satan is far from paralyzed. Satan only knew that he must finally die, that made him angrier.

Rev 12:12 Therefore rejoice, you heavens, and you that dwell in them. Woe to the inhabitants of the earth and of the sea! for the devil is come down to you, having great wrath, because he knows that he has but a short time.

Rev 12:17 And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.

I have a thing against one_sentence/partial_sentence quotes. They never show the context of the given quote, and without context a person can be made to appear to say almost anything.

[skyblue888]

"The Lord has declared that the history of the past shall be rehearsed as we enter upon the closing work." 2 S.M.390.

[skyblue888]

The debate that took place in Congress in 1888 between Senator Blair and A.T. Jones is very much in line with the light revealed in the book Individuality in Religion. Therefore, I wish to post the following for the simple reason that the principles and arguments A.T. Jones presented both from the Scriptures and the facts of History to defeat this Sunday Bill in Congress are the very same principles and arguments we need to be familiar with in case history should be repeated. And we know it will be repeated before the close of human probation.

[skyblue888]

A national Sunday law is a question of national interest. While it is true that the Sunday-rest bill did not become a law, the legislation having died with the expiration of the fiftieth Congress, it is also true that those who worked for the introduction and passage of that bill are now laying plans to have another national Sunday Bill introduced as soon as possible in the fifty-first Congress, and will do all in their power to secure its enactment into law. The scope that was given to the subject by the questions asked of me by the Senate Committee, has opened the way for a somewhat exhaustive treatment of the subject. These questions being raised by United States senators,–-men of national affairs,–-show that a wider circulation of this matter is not out of place. The subject is worthy of the careful attention of the whole American people.

[skyblue888]

The principles of the American Constitution, the proper relationship between religion and the State, the distinction between moral and civil law, the inalienable civil and religious rights of men,–-these are questions that never should become secondary in the mind of any American citizen.

An eminent American jurist has justly observed that in a government of the people "there is no safety except in an enlightened public opinion, based on individual intelligence."

Constitutional provisions against the encroachments of the religious upon the civil power are safeguards only so long as the intelligence of the people shall recognize the truth that no man can allow any legislation in behalf of the religion, or the religious observances, in which he himself believes, without forfeiting his own religious freedom.

In enlarging as I have upon the matter presented in the original hearing, the meaning or intention of any statement has not been changed in the slightest degree. The argument is submitted to the American people with the earnest hope that they will give thoughtful consideration to the principles involved. The positions taken will bear the severest test of every form of just criticism.

The bill proposed by Senator Blair, and upon which the argument was made, is as follows:–-

[skyblue888]

In the Senate of the United States, May 21, 1888, Mr. Blair introduced the following bill--"A bill to secure to the people the enjoyment of the first day of the week, commonly known as the Lord’s day, as a day of rest, and to promote its observance as a day of religious worship."

[Ted Oplinger]

The debate that took place in Congress in 1888 between Senator Blair and A.T. Jones is very much in line with the light revealed in the book Individuality in Religion. Therefore, I wish to post the following for the simple reason that the arguments A.T. Jones presented both from the Scriptures and the facts of History to defeat this Sunday Bill in Congress are the very same arguments we need to be familiar with in case history should be repeated. And we know it will be repeated before the close of human probation.

But Sky - will it be repeated exactly as it was then A. T. Jones won the debate against Sen. Blair? Or will the issue come through an unexpected avenue but same method - like the way Canada's current Sunday Law did?

We were essentially marginalized during the vote in Canada - what we thought were the greatest arguments against the issue, were thwarted simply by shifting the ground rules of why such a law was needed (family, work, and societal good). Worship was not mentioned as a reason for the law - so all our opponents needed to say in defense was that we were making a society issue into a religious argument. We lost the debate before it even started.

I would say that since there will eventually be such a law passed, it will be from an approach we will not expect and are ill-equipped to deal with.

Would we be able to make a compelling argument for the Sabbath if the US population believes enough bad things have gone wrong, and is told the only way to get back into the good graces of God is to repent - and put the majority worship back into society by Law?

Or perhaps the scenario of a Supreme Court decision, based upon the Canadian law approach?

Or if prophecy of global leadership doesn't play out we like to think we've figured it out - and it comes down from a global economic consortium, instead of by legislation?

Just a few thoughts and scenarios which could yield the same result, yet are not popularly thought of as viable playouts to prophecy.

I honestly think the SDA Religious Liberty Department thinks it has all the bases covered, and yet will be caught completely flat-footed when it really does come.

Jones won the debate, because the time was not yet.

When the time does come, though, it will happen - no matter how strong our opposition...because the time for it will have come.

Blessings,

[skyblue888]

ARGUMENT OF ALONZO T. JONES BEFORE THE SENATE

COMMITTEE, WASHINGTON, D.C. Dec.13,1888.

Senator Blair.–-There are gentlemen present who wish to be heard in opposition to the bill. Prof. Alonzo T. Jones, of Battle Creek College, Mich., is one of those who have spoken to me in regard to it. Will you not state, Prof. Jones, what your desire is? I have no doubt that we can obtain leave of the Senate to sit during its session to-day. It is exceedingly desirable to go on with this hearing, and complete it now. How would such an arrangement comport with your convenience? First, state, please, whom you represent, and your reasons for desiring to be heard.

Mr. Jones.–-Mr. Chairman, I represent the people known as Seventh-day Adventists. It is true, we have been entirely ignored by the other side. The very small "sect," as they stated it, of Seventh-day Baptists has been recognized, but we are more than three times their number, and many times their power in the real force of our work. We have organizations in every State and Territory in the Union. We have the largest printing-house in Michigan; the largest printing-house on the Pacific Coast; the largest Sanitarium in the world; a college in California and one in Michigan; an academy in Massachusetts; a printing establishment in Basel, Switzerland; one in Christiana, Norway; and one in Melbourne, Australia. Our mission work has enlarged until, besides embracing the greater part of Europe, it has also extended nearly around the world; and we desire a hearing, with the consent of the Committee.

Senator Blair.–Where do you reside?

Mr. Jones.–At present in Michigan. My home for the past four years has been in California. I am now teaching history in Battle Creek College, Mich. I must say in justice to myself, and also in behalf of the body which I represent, that we dissent almost wholly, I might say, wholly, from the position taken by the representative of the Seventh-day Baptists. I knew, the instant that Dr. Lewis stated what he did here, that he had "given his case away."

We have not given our case away, Senators, nor do we expect to give it away. We expect to go deeper than any have gone at this hearing, both upon the principles and upon the facts, as well as upon the logic of the facts.

Senator Blair.–-This matter is all familiar to you. You are a professor of history. Can you not go on this afternoon?

Mr. Jones.–-Yes, if I can have a little space between now and this afternoon to get my papers together. I have some references to read that I did not bring with me this morning.

Senator Blair.– Very well.