THE BEREAN EPISTLE

The Seven Faces of Seventh-day Adventism: Part II 

A Review of the Controversial Theology in the Book:

Questions on Doctrine

After reading your “Seven Faces of Adventism,” I have one question for you.

In the section, “The Cultics,” you indicate that this group takes issue with Questions on Doctrine over a wrong heading placed above some Ellen White quotes. Is this all that you perceive to have been wrong with the book?

My answer to this question is yes. I perceive that innocent little label on page 650 (“Took Sinless Human Nature”) to be the most serious flaw in the book. I would have suggested something inoffensive to the cultics like:

“Took The Nature But Not The Sinfulness Of Man”

or “Took The Nature Of Man But Possessed No Evil Propensities”

or even “The Perfect Sinlessness Of The Human Nature Of Christ” — something like that!

QUESTION TWO: If one takes issue with the book QOD because someone claims it contains deadly heresy, does this place him in the category of “The Cultics”?

If one takes issue with the book, rants and raves about it, but can’t prove it is heresy, then yes, he is a cultic. Remember, all cultics believe that the book contains deadly heresy. It’s because they are given in to conspiracy theories and believe all the hoopla, not because they have read the book. And even if a cultic were to read QOD, it wouldn’t do any good. He would still suspect something wrong. After all, cultics are not impressed with the gospel. They can’t discern fact from fancy. I see QOD as an excellent book. I recall reading the whole thing, and I do not believe that it contains any heresy.

No one has proven it contains heresy.

Please bare these facts in mind:

a). It would be surprising to find heresy in the book. QOD delivers what it claims. The introduction to the appendixes and indexes says this:

‘Because the writings of Ellen G. White have often been garbled when allegedly “quoted” by critics or detractors, we here give a comprehensive assemblage of her teachings on the deity and eternal pre-existence of Christ, and His place in the Godhead, or Trinity; His nature during the incarnation; and His atoning sacrifice and priestly ministry’ (QOD 641).

b). Ellen G. White’s position on the Atonement is not hidden from view: The reader is directed to read appendix C, which contains 32 pages on this one topic alone. See QOD 352.

c). All the hoopla over QOD is over two main issues: (a) The above mentioned allegedly misleading label (p. 650), and (b) The answers to questions 29, 30, 31 (pp. 341-364). (See Russel R. Standish and Colin D. Standish, Adventism Vindicated, p. 79; and Dave Fiedler, Our Firm Foundation, Dec. 1989, p. 16).

If you read these three questions you will see they are really one. Only one concept is involved. It can be summed up by asking: “Was the atonement completed on the cross?”

The reply was very carefully done. The very first line reads: “The answer to this question depends upon the definition given to the term ‘atonement’.” The author then proceeds with his argument. He is very thorough: He states all the relevant background information. He covers reasonably obvious usages of the term atonement in the Bible, and, in so doing, forcefully illustrates the variety of meanings given the term. He states the popular theological meaning. He even has excellent supplementary material from the writings of Ellen G. White (in the appendix of the book) to show that Ellen G. White also used the term in its popular theological sense.

The examples from Scripture are extremely clear. Likewise for those statements by Ellen G. White. If you don’t mind, I’d like to restate some of them, for the record. Let me begin with the appendix and then state the Biblical references of the main text, in response to question 29.

“Was the atonement completed on the cross?” This question is answered from the quotations supplied:

QOD 679: “By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain. Hebrews 11:4. Abel grasped the great principles of redemption. He saw himself a sinner, and he saw sin and its penalty, death, standing between his soul and communion with God. He brought the slain victim, the sacrificed life, thus acknowledging the claims of the law that had been transgressed. Through the shed blood he looked forward to the future sacrifice, Christ dying on the cross of Calvary; and trusting in the atonement that was there to be made, he had the witness that he was righteous, and his offering accepted.” Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 72.

QOD 663: “When He [Christ] offered Himself on the cross, a perfect atonement was made for the sins of the people.” The Signs of the Times, June 28, 1899.

QOD 669: “Jesus refused [after the resurrection] to receive the homage of His people until He had the assurance that His sacrifice was accepted by the Father. He ascended to the heavenly courts, and from God Himself heard the assurance that His atonement for the sins of men had been ample, and that through His blood all might gain eternal life.” The Desire of Ages, p. 790.

QOD 681: “The great Sacrifice had been offered and had been accepted, and the Holy Spirit which descended on the day of Pentecost carried the minds of the disciples from the earthly sanctuary to the heavenly, where Jesus had entered by His own blood, to shed upon His disciples the benefits of His atonement.” Early Writings, p. 260.

QOD 345:`When upon the cross He cried out, “It is finished,” He addressed the Father. The compact had been fully carried out. Now He declares: “Father, it is finished. I have done Thy will, O My God. I have completed the work of redemption”.´ The Desire of Ages, p. 834.

QOD 669: “The atonement of Christ sealed forever the everlasting covenant of grace.” Manuscript 92, 1899.

QOD 663: `He planted the cross between heaven and earth, and when the Father beheld the sacrifice of His Son, He bowed before it in recognition of its perfection. “It is enough,” He said. “The Atonement is complete”.´ The Review and Herald, Sept. 24, 1901.

So I guess we can say that the great work of redemption was completed (and the atonement complete) when Jesus died on Calvary’s cross!

Now, what saith the Scriptures? How is the word atonement understood therein?

1). Exodus 32. Moses came down the mountain and saw the golden calf and the dancing (vs. 19).

“And it came about on the next day that Moses said to the people, `You yourselves have committed a great sin; and now I am going up to the Lord, perhaps I can make atonement for your sin’ ” (vs. 30). Moses then goes up the mountain and asks God to forgive the people their sin. He is most determined. “But now, if Thou wilt, forgive their sin — and if not, please blot me out from Thy book which Thou hast written!” (vs. 32).

Atonement here means the forgiveness of sins. See QOD 343.

2). ‘Another instance [where this word is used] is the case of David in his contact with the Gibeonites. The story is recorded in 2 Samuel 21. Saul had slain many of the Gibeonites, whom Israel had solemnly sworn to preserve. David, in seeking to make amends for the wrong done, called representatives of the Gibeonites together and said to them, “What shall I do for you? and wherewith shall I make the atonement” (vs. 3). Then follows the story of what was done. When seven of the sons of Saul were hanged, the atonement was made. Here atonement means making adequate compensation for the wrong that had been done’ (QOD 344).

3). ‘Still another incident recorded in Numbers 16 well illustrates a further aspect of the atonement. Israel had grievously provoked the Lord. The people had murmured against God; 250 of the princes, men of renown, had rebelled against the Most High. Resulting from this apostasy a plague broke out in the camp of Israel. In connection with this we have the divine declaration: And Moses said unto Aaron,... “Go quickly unto the congregation, and make an atonement for them (vs. 46). And Aaron took as Moses commanded, and ran into the midst of the congregation; and, behold, the plague was begun among the people: and he put on incense, and made an atonement for the people. And he stood between the dead and the living; and the plague was stayed ” (vs. 47, 48).’

‘Here we see Aaron as a mediator, a fitting type of Christ Jesus, our blessed Lord. In thus stepping in between man and God, and by his sacrificial abnegation and devotion, standing between the living and the dead, covering the people from the wrath of God, he thereby made an atonement for them.’ (QOD 345).

4). ‘There is another aspect of the question, however, that should be considered. This grows out of the narrative recorded in Numbers 25. Israel had fallen captive to the seducing wiles of the heathen around them. They had sinned grievously in the sight of God in committing the abominations of the Canaanites. One man brought a heathen woman into the camp. God showed His displeasure by sending a plague among the people. Then Phinehas, the grandson of Aaron, realizing the gravity of the offense, went out in the name of God and slew the offenders. When this was done, the plague was stayed. Because of this man’s jealousy for the work of God, the Lord said:

‘ “Behold, I give unto him my covenant of peace: and he shall have it, and his seed after him, even the covenant of an everlasting priesthood; because he was zealous for his God, and made an atonement for the children of Israel.” (vs. 12, 13).’

‘In this instance we see that this loyal priest made an atonement by removing the incorrigible offenders. The people of Israel were taught this aspect of God’s plan in the sanctuary service as the Day of Atonement came around each year. The final act on that great day was the removal of the goat for Azazel, representing the instigator of evil. This goat was taken from the camp of Israel and banished forever. So it will be in the closing work of God. Then the last act in God’s great plan of cleansing the universe from sin will be to remove the greatest offender of all, he who was a liar from the beginning, that old enemy, the devil and Satan’ (QOD 346).

So, not counting the choice of labels (“Took Sinless Human Nature” instead of “The Perfect Sinlessness Of The Human Nature of Christ”), exactly what is the tragic departure from the historic truths of Adventism? What is the accusation? The alleged terrible heresy is this: “The assertion that the atonement was completed at the cross” (Dave Fiedler, Our Firm Foundation, Dec. 1989 p. 16).

Don’t you think it’s bad form for the book QOD to try to limit the atonement to the cross and then title the chapter with a very tall caption that reads: “A Wider Concept of the Atonement” (p. 341)? I don’t understand. Just how does one assert a limited atonement by proclaiming a larger view?

QUESTION 30: “Seventh-day Adventists are frequently charged with minimizing the atoning sacrifice completed on the cross, reducing it to an incomplete or partial atonement. Is this charge true? Does not Mrs. White state that Christ is now making atonement for us in the heavenly sanctuary? Please explain your position.”

‘May we at the outset state most earnestly and explicitly that Seventh-day Adventists do not believe that Christ made but a partial or incomplete sacrificial atonement on the cross. The word “atonement,” in the Scripture has a wide connotation. While it involves basically the atoning sacrifice of our Lord Jesus Christ on the cross, it also embraces other important aspects of the work of saving grace.’

‘The word “atonement” itself is like some other words in the Bible, such as “salvation” and “redemption.” Salvation involves something that is past, so that one can say, “I have been saved.” It also refers to an experience in progress, so that he can say, “I am being saved” (see Acts 2:47, R.S.V.). It also refers to the future; for there is a sense in which he can also say, “I shall be saved .” ’

‘Much the same is true concerning the word “redemption.” While the purchase price — the ransom — was paid at Calvary, and because of this we can say, “I have been redeemed,” yet there are also certain aspects of redemption that are yet future. In Scripture we read of “the redemption of our body” (Romans 8:23), and our Saviour, referring to His second advent, bade His followers “look up ... for your redemption draweth nigh” (Luke 21:28).’

‘The same principle obtains with reference to the word “atonement.” Most decidedly the all-sufficient atoning sacrifice of Jesus our Lord was offered and completed on the cross of Calvary. This was done for all mankind, for “he is the propitiation ... for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:2).’

‘But this sacrificial work will actually benefit human hearts only as we surrender our lives to God and experience the miracle of the new birth. In this experience Jesus, our High Priest, applies to us the benefits of His atoning sacrifice. Our sins are forgiven, we become the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus, and the peace of God dwells in our hearts.’

‘In the tabernacle days of old, when the mysteries of redemption were foreshadowed by many typical sacrifices and ordinances, the priest, after the death of the sacrificial victim, would place the blood on the horns of the altar. And the record states that in this act “the priest shall make an atonement for him [the sinner] as concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him” (Lev 4:26). Here the atoning sacrifice provided is followed by the benefits of the same atoning sacrifice applied. In Old Testament days both were recognized as aspects of the one great over-all work of atonement. The one aspect provided the atoning sacrifice; the other, the application of its benefits.’

‘Hence, the divine plan of redemption involves more than the vicarious atoning death of Christ though this is its very core; it also includes the ministry of our Lord as our heavenly High Priest. Having completed His sacrifice, He rose from the dead “for our justification” (Rom 4:25) and then entered into the sanctuary above, there to perform His priestly service for needy man. “Having obtained eternal redemption for us” (Heb 9:12) on the cross, He now ministers the benefits of that atonement for those who accept of His mighty provision of grace. Thus the atoning sacrifice, having been completed on Calvary, must now be applied and appropriated to those who are heirs of salvation. Our Lord’s ministry is thus involved in the great work of atonement. So as we think of the mighty sweep of the atonement, in its provisions and its efficacy, it is seen to be vastly more comprehensive than many have thought’ (QOD pp. 349-351).

My point is this: Even a careless reader will readily recognize that the author of QOD is defending the traditional Adventist view of the atonement.

Summary and conclusion:

The all-sufficient atoning sacrifice of Christ on Calvary’s cross was a perfect and complete atonement. The word “atonement” has a variety of meanings. Cultics don’t know what they are talking about. I invite them to put away their silly disputes, believe the gospel, and be real Seventh-day Adventists.

Sincerely,

Eugene Shubert
Senior Evangelist
www.everythingimportant.org

Let me say a few words to supplement my previous defense.

The Father is God and Jesus is someone else. Does this prove that Jesus is not God? No, of course not. So let’s stick with Scripture.

In Scripture, past and future things, like inaugurated and consummated eschatology, are often seen as one. In Rev 12:7-9 for example, there are (mingled together) two recountings of Satan’s fall. The primeval conflict waged in heaven and Satan’s subsequent expulsion (2 Pet 2:4, Jude 6) is virtually indistinguishable from the overthrow of Satan at the cross (John 12:31).

At the time of Lk 10:18, these events, one past, one future, were united in the now, in the mind of Christ, through the power of the Spirit. You know the story:

When the disciples returned with joy because of their triumph over even demons, Christ also shared with them His certain triumph He witnessed at that very moment: He exclaimed, “I was watching Satan fall from heaven like lightning.”

A similar event occurred in heaven just after the resurrection.

Says Ellen G. White:

QOD 664: “The time had come for the universe of heaven to accept their King. Angels, cherubim and seraphim, would now stand in view of the cross. ...The Father accepts the Son. No language could convey the rejoicing of heaven or God’s expression of satisfaction and delight in His only begotten Son as He saw the completion of the atonement.” The Signs of the Times, Aug 16, 1899.

Thus:

THE ATONEMENT IS PAST.

THE ATONEMENT IS FUTURE.

THE ATONEMENT IS NOW.

We can experience it now!

BY VIRTUE OF THE ATONING BLOOD OF CHRIST

QOD 685: “Today He [Christ] is making an atonement for us before the Father. `If any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous.’ Pointing to the palms of His hands, pierced by the fury and prejudice of wicked men, He says of us, ‘I have graven thee upon the palms of my hands’ (Isa. 49:16).” Manuscript 21, 1895.

You know 1 John 1:9.

“If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Thus the conclusion made in QOD is correct:

‘Christ is now making application of the benefits of the sacrificial atonement He made on the cross; He is making it efficacious for us individually, according to our needs and requests.’

I see Early Writings p. 260 as an excellent proof of this.

QOD 681: “The great Sacrifice had been offered and had been accepted, and the Holy Spirit which descended on the day of Pentecost carried the minds of the disciples from the earthly sanctuary to the heavenly, where Jesus had entered by His own blood, to shed upon His disciples the benefits of His atonement.” Early Writings, p. 260.

I have already cited Lev 4:26 and Num 16:46-48. These texts prove that the High Priestly intercession of Christ is an atonement. The key point being made by QOD is that this atonement is by virtue of the atoning death of Christ.

Christ is pointing to the palms of His hands. That in no way suggests a dual atonement theory. In fact, it exalts and glorifies the atonement already made.

“His intercession is that of a pierced and broken body, of a spotless life. The wounded hands, the pierced side, the marred feet, plead for fallen man, whose redemption was purchased at such infinite cost.” — Great Controversy, p. 416.

The same can said about the final atonement. It too is by virtue of the atoning blood of Christ. See Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 357-358.

THE TRUE AND THE FALSE: A VIVID CONTRAST

Jesus is the way, and the truth, and the life.

QOD 664: “His death on the cross of Calvary was the climax of His humiliation. His work as a redeemer is beyond finite conception. Only those who have died to self, whose lives are hid with Christ in God, can have any conception of the completeness of the offering made to save the fallen race.” Letter 196, 1901.

QOD 672: “The ransom paid by Christ — the atonement on the cross — is ever before them.” Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 190.

Cultics have no conception of the completeness of the offering made. Its denial is ever before them. And if they were able to point out real heresies in the book QOD, they should do so and make it plain. Since they can’t, we’ll just add all their hubbub to our list.

“M.L. Andreasen, a respected Adventist scholar, severely criticized QOD, stating that in his opinion it had sold Adventism down the river to the evangelicals” (*).

“Two prominent scholars, Kenneth Wood and Herbert Douglass, declared that the publishing of QOD had been a major mistake” (*).

*Kenneth R. Samples, Christian Research Journal, Summer 1988, (p. 12). I think it is interesting to note that Kenneth Samples is here quoting the author of The Adventist Crisis Of Spiritual Identity, Dr. Desmond Ford (p. 20).

Something to think about:

RH Oct 18, 1892: “To turn away from heaven’s light and refuse the Light-bearer, is to take a course similar to that which Satan took in the courts of heaven when he created rebellion in the ranks of the angels. He misrepresented the character of God, and placed in a false light His gracious commandments. He evaded the truth, and subtly worked to make good appear as evil, and evil as good. He has lost none of his tact, and through his agents, manifests the same diplomacy and skill in evading truth, in creating false issues, in misrepresenting the message and the messenger. Not only do we see his working in the world among those who openly oppose the truth, but also in the church his art is manifested in the divisions and controversies among those who profess to be the children of God.”