Letters to the Churches by M.L. Andreason

[doug yowell]

Eternity magazine was published from 1950 to 1988.

I'm not sure about the publication date of With Cloak and Dagger. I'll do what I can to find out and post it here.

Thanks

[ClubV12]

Yes indeed Doug, Bob makes an excellent point concerning "definition". Man, that is a CONSTANT problem on so many levels with so many issues. Depending on the definition you can be on one side of the road or the other. Makes it hard to find the middle.

[John317]

I believe the book was published in the 1980s. That's when I read it.

With Cloak and Dagger appears to have been written while Robert Pierson's was still in retirement. He retired in 1979 and passed away in 1989. Notice that there are parts of this chapter which refer to letters written by Pierson in October of 1988. Therefore it seems clear that the book was originally published in late 1988 or early 1989. See also the last two comments on this post.

I found this part extremely interesting and significant. It is Chapter 23, "We Still Believe":

Quote:

When Robert Pierson became General Conference president, the plan to pervert Adventist doctrine received a setback. Questions on Doctrine went out of print. LeRoy Froom had to act to salvage the situation, so he wrote the book, Movement of Destiny under the guise of fulfilling Elder Daniells' wish that he explain to the church the meaning of righteousness by faith.

In reality, MOD turned out to be a defense of the book Questions on Doctrine which, if its real purpose were known, was not likely to evoke the enthusiasm of President Pierson. Froom must have realized that it was vital to have the president's approval and recommendation for his book to have wide distribution and acceptance. So Froom had printed thousands of copies of a promotional pamphlet titled The Fascinating Story of Movement of Destiny. In it he made great store of the fact that he was about to fulfill Elder Daniells' commission, and that the Foreword to Movement of Destiny contained a glowing recommendation by the president of the General Conference-Elder Robert Pierson. Neither was he backward in proclaiming that the vice-president, Neal C. Wilson had given a similar recommendation in his Preface.

However, after publication of Movement of Destiny, President Pierson received a rude shock. He was reading things that he had not seen in the manuscript! His reaction was to forbid the publishers to use his Foreword in any future editions.* So when the next edition came out, Pierson's Foreword was deleted, but Elder Wilson must have agreed wholeheartedly with the book, for his Preface of approval remained.

* On October 6, 1988, Elder Robert Pierson wrote the author: "Some portions of Elder Froom's manuscript Movement of Destiny I had not read before its publication. Much of it I had read however, and what I read I heartily agreed with and was glad to write the requested Foreword. After reading some portions later, I declined to have my Foreword used in any subsequent editions."

36

Elder Pierson was troubled! He had been unwittingly and unfairly used. So he set about to write a book titled We Still Believe (Review and Herald Publishing Assoc., 1975). The very title indicates that he was aware that heresy was abroad. In it he reaffirmed the doctrines worked out by our pioneers, including our belief in Christ's continuing work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary. Commenting on Fundamental Fourteen of the SDA Yearbook, 1973-1974 which states that "the priestly work of our Lord is the antitype of the work of the Jewish priests," he says:

“The Seventh-day Adventist Church today still believes the great truths presented in these symbols of salvation. We have neither changed our minds nor our position-the sanctuary truth is present truth today just as it was October 23, 1844, when the Lord revealed it initially to Hiram Edson" (We Still Believe, p. 111).

On page 119, he quotes the Lord's Messenger:

“The Sanctuary in heaven is the very center of Christ's work on behalf of men.” (GC 488).

And again,

“The intercession of Christ in man's behalf in the sanctuary above is as essential to the plan of salvation as was His death upon the cross.” (ibid. p. 489).

Then he makes crystal clear his belief that Christ's present work in the sanctuary is a continuation of the atonement by quoting from The Great Controversy, p. 489:

“We are now living in the great day of atonement.” (We Still Believe, p. 120).

In 1978, Elder R. H. Pierson retired from the presidency of the General Conference before his term of office had expired.* During the Annual Council of the General Conference (1978) he was moved to give a farewell address in which he gave an impassioned plea for the preservation of the faith. He warned of the approach of the omega of apostasy:

“Brethren, I beg of you, study, know what is ahead, then with God's help prepare your people to meet it.

“Regrettably there are those in the church who belittle the inspiration of the total Bible . . . who question the Spirit of Prophecy's short chronology of the earth, and who subtly and not-so-subtly attack the Spirit of Prophecy. . . . There are some who point to the reformers and contemporary theologians as a source and the norm for Seventh-day Adventist doctrine.... There are those who wish to forget the standards of the church we love. There are those who covet and would court the favor of the evangelicals; those who would throw off the mantle of a peculiar people; and those who would go the way of the secular, materialistic world.

“Fellow leaders, beloved brethren and sisters don't let it happen! . . . I appeal to Andrews University, to the Seminary, to Loma Linda University don't let it happen! We are not Seventh-day Anglicans, not Seventh-day Lutherans, we are Seventh-day Adventists! This is God's last church with God's last message!

* While it is generally believed that Elder Pierson retired for reasons of health, some who are close to the G. C. consider that he was "eased" out of the presidency. In view of his adherence to historic Adventism (as shown by his repudiation of some teachings in MOD in his book We Still Believe, this claim appears credible.

Further, it will be noted that since his retirement, practically every one of the warnings given in his farewell speech have gone unheeded; on the contrary, it seems that some Curia-like body has seen to it that they have been put into practice.

[ClubV12]

If I'n not mistaken here, John, what you seem to be presenting is the idea that our "official" position at the GC level on these issues may not be in harmony with some of our institutional view points on the same issues?

I don't know much about Loma Linda, or Andrews, or hardly any of our institutions, medical centers, etc. What I DO know is how troubling the evolution problems were at LSU. That whole thing was an astonishing revelation to me. What I hear about HERE on this forum as to what is happening in some California SDA churches I find quite troubling as well.

I think I'm pretty sheltered in my little church here in the country, I might want to stay here awhile. That SDA world "out there" sounds a little frightening.

[John317]

I agree with a lot that I find in With Cloak and Dagger, but I have some problems with Chapter 24, The Washington "Curia" and Chapter 25, "Romes Little Helper." These pertain to the various translations of the Bible as well as the changes in the SDA hymnal. These two chapters are written from the viewpoint of "King James Only," and I reject that view entirely because it simply does not fit the historical facts. The KJV is my favorite translation, but I believe it is wrong to claim that it's the only translation of the Bible that has authority and that SDAs should use.I see these things as side-issues which take our attention off those things which are most important for us as a church. Side-issues divide us on things that are not essential, something that God's prophet warned against a long time ago.

There are parts of chapter 25 which attack Dr. Graham Maxwell's position on the translations, and my own study of the manuscripts support Maxwell's position. I think it's a big mistake to make "King James Only" part of the argument of With Cloak and Dagger. Seventh-day Adventists teachings can be found in both the Critical and the Recieved/Majority Texts of the NT.

Heartland Institute takes the King James Only position, and the Institute just happens to be the publisher of With Cloak and Dagger. I don't know if there's a connection there but it could be.

[John317]

Nothing is happening in the world or in the SDA church that God didn't tell us about long beforehand.

I don't have any fears of what's coming in our church because I know God wins in the end and that the ship will make it through the storm. Stay with the ship!

[BobRyan]

If I'n not mistaken here, John, what you seem to be presenting is the idea that our "official" position at the GC level on these issues may not be in harmony with some of our institutional view points on the same issues?

I don't know much about Loma Linda, or Andrews, or hardly any of our institutions, medical centers, etc. What I DO know is how troubling the evolution problems were at LSU. That whole thing was an astonishing revelation to me. What I hear about HERE on this forum as to what is happening in some California SDA churches I find quite troubling as well.

Agreed. 3SG 90-91 states clearly that theistic evolutionism is the "worst form of infidelity" because it is infidelity "in disguise". Far worse than the "living temple" is evolutionism - which is embedded in almost all of our upper division biology science text books in almost all of our schools. Until we start publishing our own science texts or go to something that another creation science group has produced - we are stuck teaching the essence of this new "living temple" problem in almost all schools.

Furthermore - we often tell professors that we "prefer" to hire SDA professors from degrees from non-SDA university doctoral programs for the sake of accreditation and scope of faculty training. Which means that we are encouraging people to go to evolution-indoctrination environments where one must swear allegiance to evolutionism if they ever hope to graduate with a ph.d. Then we hire them.

This is one of the key candidates on the "What is the OMEGA of deception" thread on this board.

in Christ,

Bob

[skyblue888]

In the book Cloak and Dagger, there is still some confusion about the atonement. Mrs. White made it clear that brother Crozier had the "true light" on the atonement, that Jesus did not begin the atonement until He ascended up on High by pleading before the Father the merits of His shed blood in behalf of sinners but especially in behalf of those who believe. The sacrifice was the condition for the atonement and that is why it is refered to as the "sacrificial atonement" which was complete but the atonement itself could not begin until Christ began His priestly ministry in the first apartment of the sanctuary above at His ascension and on the 22nd of October 1844 He entered the second apartment to begin the last phase of the atonement which involved an investigative jugement of the dead first and followed by the living at the end of the loud cry.

sky

_________________________

It all gets down to definitions.

For Calvinists "Atonement" is largely the "Atoning Sacrifice" - beyond that they have very little concept of the Work of Christ. Therefore when they hear Andreason talk about Atonement in heaven - they immediatetly go into scenarios about Christ having to "suffer more" in heaven so that Adventist Theology can be correct.

Conversly - Andreason apparently placed not part of the cross in his understanding of the term "Atonement" - for him atonement cannot even start until the cross is completed.

This is a wide open field of "inconsistent definitions for the SAME word" where people can jump in and "Talk past each other".

Meanwhile when we read Lev 16 on the subject of the Day of Atonement we see that it STARTS with the the selection and sacrifice of the "Lord's Goat" called "The sin offering" and it ends with the completed work of the High Priest.

All this slicing and dicing trying to cut out one part or the other from the term "Atonement" is not serving to make the Lev 16 point that God authored.

in Christ,

Bob

__________________________

In a small pamphlet entitled, "A Word to the Little Flock," published by James White in Brunswick, Maine, May 30, 1847, is a statement by Sister White on the sanctuary. It is dated April 21, 1847, and written from Topsham, Maine. On page 12,we read:

"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 Crozier 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.

On pages 40 and 41 of that Extra dated Feb.7,1846, all can read Brother Crosier's words:

"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 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.

No atonement took place at Calvary. It was not until Christ began His priestly ministry in the first apartment of the sanctuary above that He began the atonement by pleading the merits of His infinite sacrifice before the Father in our behalf.

sky

[Gordon1]

Nothing is happening in the world or in the SDA church that God didn't tell us about long beforehand.

I don't have any fears of what's coming in our church because I know God wins in the end and that the ship will make it through the storm. Stay with the ship!

John, Nothing happened to Israel or to the Jewish church which the Lord had not foretold. The Lord is fully open with His people. No surprises.

For this reason of righteousness (right doing & dealing), the Lord warned in advance: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place...flee into the mountains" (Mt. 24:15)

Though applied to the Destruction of Jerusalem, it is principally an end-time prophecy. The Lord does not at this point say "stay with the ship". This is a Catholic doctrine which declares 'our system is infallible - it can never fall'. Rather the Lord says flee to the mountains, just as Sister White also recommends.

[ClubV12]

All in good time Gordon, until then, I'll man the oars.

Even when that time comes, as I'm sure you know, the Saints will be crying and sighing for the church and pleading for God's mercy on it.

[skyblue888]

All in good time Gordon, until then, I'll man the oars.

Even when that time comes, as I'm sure you know, the Saints will be crying and sighing for the church and pleading for God's mercy on it.

There is a time of probation for the church and we may know when it will close which is by rejecting the last invitation to receive the Gospel as presented in 1888 and Gospel order. This last invitation is given prior to the loud cry to the world.

It is now time to pray for individuals that their eyes may be anointed that they may see.

sky

[skyblue888]

John, Nothing happened to Israel or to the Jewish church which the Lord had not foretold. The Lord is fully open with His people. No surprises.

For this reason of righteousness (right doing & dealing), the Lord warned in advance: "When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place...flee into the mountains" (Mt. 24:15)

Though applied to the Destruction of Jerusalem, it is principally an end-time prophecy. The Lord does not at this point say "stay with the ship". This is a Catholic doctrine which declares 'our system is infallible - it can never fall'. Rather the Lord says flee to the mountains, just as Sister White also recommends.

Gordon

_______________

Gordon, I agree with you that "stick with the ship" is catholic doctrine. Could you share your view based on Scripture and Testimonies when this abomination of desolation stands in holy place today? I agree there is a second application for us tdoay. Just want to know what you have found on this.

Thanks

sky

[ClubV12]

Righteousness by faith is currently another "hot topic" being widely discussed within my local church. While the organization, at some point, may make a final rejection of it, MAY, I think the church remains a vessel for this important message. As in 1888 many will yet accept it. It's a message not just to our people, but for the world.

The "law" means nothing without it.

[skyblue888]

Righteousness by faith is currently another "hot topic" being widely discussed within my local church. While the organization, at some point, may make a final rejection of it, MAY, I think the church remains a vessel for this important message. As in 1888 many will yet accept it. It's a message not just to our people, but for the world.

The "law" means nothing without it.

True the law means nothing without it. "Let the law take care of itself. Let us trust in the merits of Jesus Christ of Nazareth." E.G. White, 1888 Materials, Vol.2, p.557.

The law will not be taken care of unless we trust wholly in the merits of a crucified and risen Saviour, day after day.

You said, "As in 1888 many will yet accept it."

Where did you read that many accepted it in 1888?

If that were true, Club, the Lord could have finished the work.

sky

[ClubV12]

I get that DISTINCT impression from my studies on the subject! What happened in the Official channels is one thing, what happened with those in the pews is a different matter. They were being fed large morsels of truth, and some were digesting it. As I've said before, we do not preach and teach to reach the majority, but to reach the few that will hear and rejoice. We know that only a remnant of the remnant will accept it, it is for those I strive. The church is where I go to gain spiritual growth, understanding and skills to reach those few.

My calling is for folks who might not be welcome in church at that point in their lives. Homeless, destitute, often with substantial road blocks against my helping them as much as I would like to. When your primary concern is your next meal the SINGLE message they can grasp and hold onto is righteousness by faith. That God loves them right where they are at, right now, they can have that peace of acceptance.

I've seen that "salt of a message" taking hold in my own neighborhood. I see the leavening effect happening. I praise God for it, it is enough. Some want more, I can help with that.

Where do you read that everyone rejected the message?

[skyblue888]

I get that DISTINCT impression from my studies on the subject! What happened in the Official channels is one thing, what happened with those in the pews is a different matter. They were being fed large morsels of truth, and some were digesting it. As I've said before, we do not preach and teach to reach the majority, but to reach the few that will hear and rejoice. We know that only a remnant of the remnant will accept it, it is for those I strive. The church is where I go to gain spiritual growth, understanding and skills to reach those few.

My calling is for folks who might not be welcome in church at that point in their lives. Homeless, destitute, often with substantial road blocks against my helping them as much as I would like to. When your primary concern is your next meal the SINGLE message they can grasp and hold onto is righteousness by faith. That God loves them right where they are at, right now, they can have that peace of acceptance.

I've seen that "salt of a message" taking hold in my own neighborhood. I see the leavening effect happening. I praise God for it, it is enough. Some want more, I can help with that.

Where do you read that everyone rejected the message?

Club

__________________________

"The prejudices and opinions that prevailed at Minneapolis are not dead by any means... The true religion, the only religion of the Bible, that teaches forgiveness only through the merits of a crucified and risen Saviour, that advocates righteousness by the faith of the Son of God, has been slighted, spoken against, ridiculed, and rejected. It has been denounced as leading to enthusiasm and fanaticism." T.M.467.

In 1901 or 1903 Mrs. White said that she could not name anyone who had received this message wholeheartedly. I have read that statement but I can't remember where it is right now. I will look for it.

In 1 S.M.234,235 Mrs. White is talking about Minneapolis and says that "the light that is to lighten the whole earth with its glory was resisted, and by the action of our own brethren has been in a great degree kept away from the world."

You know Club, you talk so much like I used to when I joined the church. I can indentify with you and with your zeal. I was the same exactly until I went to take theology in one of our schools.

That's when I realized that we had been wandering in the wilderness ever since the church fell into the Laodicean condition in the 1850s. That's when I heard about 1888, not from the teachers, but from a student who shared some literature with me. I asked the teachers why we were not studying the Spirit of Prophecy and I was told that we were not there to study the Spirit of Prophecy.

sky

[ClubV12]

I am less and less impressed with our schools as I learn more about them, sad to say.

[John317]

If I'n not mistaken here, John, what you seem to be presenting is the idea that our "official" position at the GC level on these issues may not be in harmony with some of our institutional view points on the same issues?

I don't know much about Loma Linda, or Andrews, or hardly any of our institutions, medical centers, etc.

From my reading of Ellen White's Loma Linda Messages and her other writings on how our church should operate medical institutions, it's safe to say that we're not following the counsels that God sent us through the Spirit of prophecy.

I grew up in Loma Linda, only a few blocks from the hospital. I love the town and it was a wonderful place to grow up, so I'm not bashing Loma Linda at all. I'm just being forthright about the difference between the counsels of Ellen White and the way things are.

[John317]

The Lord does not at this point say "stay with the ship". This is a Catholic doctrine which declares 'our system is infallible - it can never fall'. Rather the Lord says flee to the mountains, just as Sister White also recommends.

You're misunderstanding what I'm saying, Gordon. Of course the church can make big mistakes. I'm not suggesting that the church is infallible. I'm just saying the same thing that Ellen White wrote.

Neither the Bible nor Ellen White indicate that there will come a time when God's people will abandon the Seventh-day Adventist Church. On the contrary.

The shaking shakes the tares out, not the wheat.

The people, and the message, as described in Rev. 12: 17 and 14: 12, go through to the end.

[ClubV12]

I've met so many SDA's now who grew up in the faith, left at some point, then returned. Recognizing the same potential danger for ME, all excited then your out, I'm trying to pin point what happened?

I know several cases where this happened to folks and their walk with God now seems especially Christ centered again. Like they have a new understanding of grace and the law. A deeper understanding of righteouness by faith.

I came across a comment by Sister White, don't recall the location, where she said people simply get tired of doing all the "stuff" they need to do. Keeping the commandments, not enjoying the sin's of a season or whatever. Various reasons of course. No doubt some of it tied to what appears to be a super legalistic attitude of the church in the 70's and 80's. Perhaps well before that for all I know, maybe it continues? If THAT is a major part of the problem it ties directly into not understanding the righteousness by faith message.

One friend of mine told me about an SDA meeting he attended. The question was asked of the attendee's, "Do you have to keep the law to be saved?" Almost every hand went up in agreement, the law was paramount to salvation. He was shocked, the majority totally misunderstood the concept of righteouness by faith. There is NOTHING we can do to warrant salvation, period! He understood this does not do away with the law, we see it in a different light. We recognize our hopeless condition of ever achieving salvation through works, but we don't discount them. We accept His righteousness as we move forward.

So what is the antidote for loosing that first love and falling away? I'm thinking it's "work"! Get involved in working for the Lord, make it your everything, your every thought, your every plan is centered around it. Stay so busy "working" to save souls, to uplift mankind, to help where, when you can, you don't have time to look at others, to grumble or complain. You find joy only in that which promotes the message.

We could bring in concepts like "conversion", when does that happen? It didn't happen to Peter after he walked with Jesus three years! It happened only when he recognized how pathetic he was, how hideous sin was. Perhaps some, like myself, need to sink to the lowest depths before they figure it out. Perhaps some won't need to go there IF they would fully immerse themselves in the work at hand and find their joy in that.

I really admire the Jehovah Witness and the Mormon concepts of "working" for the Master. It's a given, it's what you do, there are no alternatives, that IS the life you lead. Why don't WE have that spirit? What do we need to do to establish it? Especially concerning our young people BEFORE they leave the church.

[Guest]

Originally Posted By: BobRyan

It all gets down to definitions.

For Calvinists "Atonement" is largely the "Atoning Sacrifice" - beyond that they have very little concept of the Work of Christ. Therefore when they hear Andreason talk about Atonement in heaven - they immediatetly go into scenarios about Christ having to "suffer more" in heaven so that Adventist Theology can be correct.

Conversly - Andreason apparently placed not part of the cross in his understanding of the term "Atonement" - for him atonement cannot even start until the cross is completed.

This is a wide open field of "inconsistent definitions for the SAME word" where people can jump in and "Talk past each other".

Meanwhile when we read Lev 16 on the subject of the Day of Atonement we see that it STARTS with the the selection and sacrifice of the "Lord's Goat" called "The sin offering" and it ends with the completed work of the High Priest.

All this slicing and dicing trying to cut out one part or the other from the term "Atonement" is not serving to make the Lev 16 point that God authored.

in Christ,

Bob

An important point to notice.....in case anyone is paying attention.

I agree Doug...

[BobRyan]

After I pointed out places where Ellen White admits that the Atoning Sacrifice was full and complete at the cross - I also point to a post where someone views all of the Atonement as taking place in heaven and none of it on earth.

And conclude with this

It all gets down to definitions.

For Calvinists "Atonement" is largely the "Atoning Sacrifice" - beyond that they have very little concept of the Work of Christ. Therefore when they hear Andreason talk about Atonement in heaven - they immediatetly go into scenarios about Christ having to "suffer more" in heaven so that Adventist Theology can be correct.

Conversly - Andreason apparently placed not part of the cross in his understanding of the term "Atonement" - for him atonement cannot even start until the cross is completed.

This is a wide open field of "inconsistent definitions for the SAME word" where people can jump in and "Talk past each other".

Meanwhile when we read Lev 16 on the subject of the Day of Atonement we see that it STARTS with the the selection and sacrifice of the "Lord's Goat" called "The sin offering" and it ends with the completed work of the High Priest.

All this slicing and dicing trying to cut out one part or the other from the term "Atonement" is not serving to make the Lev 16 point that God authored.

[skyblue888]

Bob, again, the words "atoning sacrifice" do not mean that atonement was made at the cross. It simply means that Christ's sacrifice was the condition for the atonement. "Christ's sacrifice in behalf of man was full and complete. The condition for the atonement had been fulfilled." A.A.29.

I don't know how she could have made this more clear. Why is that so difficult to grasp especially that this is what is taught in the type? And on top of that the Lord told us that Crozier had the "true light" on that and what did he teach? he taught that there was no atonement made at the cross, that the atonement began when Christ ascended up on High and that is what Mrs. White says too. "He ascended up on High to make atonement for our transgressions." F.W.105.

You only quoted a sentence from Crozier which could be easily misinterpreted. But when one reads all he said about it, there can't be no misunderstanding, especially when the Lord told Mrs. White it was the true light:

"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 is the "true light" and therefore the statements you quoted about "atoning sacrifice" must be understood or interpreted in the light of the above and not the other way around like you are doing.

sky

[skyblue888]

Bob, you quoted this statement from Mrs. White which can be easily misunderstood if not careful:

"All who have truly repented of sin, and by faith claimed the blood of Christ as their atoning sacrifice, have had pardon entered against their names in the books of heaven..."

To claim the blood of Christ is to claim its merits which merits Jesus must plead before the Father in our behalf in order to obtain pardon for the sins that have been confessed, in order to atone for these sins. These sins are then forgiven but they are not yet canceled. They won't be until the final atonement if the sinner is found with the wedding garment at that time.

What's the difference between what you get from that statement and what the evangelicals teach?

sky

[ClubV12]

I get that, Sky, and I don't see a problem with either your conclusion or Bob's. The sins remain on the book, but they are pardoned. At the appointed time, they will also be blotted out.