 |  |  |
The Real True 1888 Message!
by a concern group of true beliving Seventh-day Adventists and Remnant
Please Note: This website is now dedicated to Elder Robert J. Wieland by the original website designer.
Robert Wieland was my personal spiritual mentor and a great 1888 advisor- He passed to his rest on July 13, 2011.
| | |
Robert J. Wieland in the middle, to his right Donald K. Short and Grace - Robert's wife
This site has been visited this many times (as shown below) since July 1999.
This web site was created in July 1999! and the web designer/master has been updating it ever since.
We had to go with a new counter.
This is our sixth counter and we can't seen to get a good counter that will last!
But now we have to start the count all over again.
Last updated May 27, 2012
The 1888 Message Story of What Really Happened
Very simply told, the main details are these:
(1) The Lord raised up two young men whom Ellen White said were His "delegated messengers," "whom God has commissioned," and gave them a clearer understanding of the gospel in the third angel's message than others had; then He sent them with this "most precious message" to the General Conference delegates gathered at Minneapolis in 1888.
(2) A.T. Jones and E.J. Waggoner presented a concept of Christ's righteousness which she later identified as the "beginning" of the loud cry of Revelation 18:1-4. And since the loud cry can't come until first the latter rain is received, it was also the beginning of that.
(3) At Minneapolis and for a decade following, Ellen White endorsed their message over 370 times, using the most enthusiastic language she could find. Nothing in her long lifetime ever made her so happy. Unless we give due regard to her testimony, we may accept counterfeit messages and cast ourselves adrift at sea without an anchor.
(4) The two delegates' manner of presenting their message was simple, clear, and even at times beautiful. She said they gave evidence that God gave them "heavenly credentials," and they conducted themselves in the face of opposition as "a Christian gentleman” should. She said they presented their message "with beauty and loveliness," and "with grace, and power." This does not mean that they were perfect or that they made no mistakes; but the overwhelming impact of their presentations was on the positive side—Christlike, she often said.
(5) According to her testimony, the great majority of the delegates reacted negatively to the message. Her eyewitness accounts say: "The spirit and influence of the ministers generally who have come to this meeting is to discard light." "Our ministering brethren ... are here only to shut out the Spirit of God from the people." "Opposition rather than investigation is the order of the day." Two other eyewitnesses report:
In 1888 I was sent as a delegate from the Kansas Conference to the General Conference held that year in Minneapolis, Minnesota, that notable conference long to be remembered by many.... I am sorry for anyone who was at the Conference in Minneapolis in 1888 who does not recognize that there was opposition and rejection of the message that the Lord sent to His people at that time.
The writer of this tract, then a young man, was present at that [1888] conference meeting, and saw and heard many of the various things that were done and said in opposition to the message then presented.... When Christ was lifted up as the only hope of the church and of all men, the speakers met a united opposition from nearly all the senior ministers. They tried to put a stop to this teaching by Elders Waggoner and Jones.
Thirteen years later, a prominent speaker at the 1901 session reported:
There are many in this audience who can remember ... when, thirteen years ago at Minneapolis, God sent a message to his people.... For the past thirteen years this light has been rejected and turned against by many, and they are rejecting it and turning from it today.
A former General Conference president, not present at the 1888 conference but close to the issues, adds: "The message has never been received, nor proclaimed, nor given free course as it should have been in order to convey to the church the measureless blessings that were wrapped within it."
A. W. Spalding reports, "There was personal pique at the messengers," and "a tumult of clerical passions was let loose."
A speaker at the 1893 General Conference session openly declared that "the brethren in that fearful position in which they stood ... at Minneapolis... rejected the latter rain—the loud cry—of the third angel's message." Those present very well knew he was telling the truth; no one challenged him.
(6) A few other delegates, notably Ellen White, S. N. Haskell and Willie White, were favorable. The rejection was not total, but our “long journey" and spiritual famine of more than a century stem from this experience. Heaven was forced to withdraw for” many more years” the blessings of the latter rain and the loud cry.
In spite of the fact that the two messengers spoke at camp meetings and General Conference sessions, constant leadership rejection nullified or at least neutralized their best efforts. The brethren's persistent attitude as late as 1896 kept the message “from our people, in a great measure,” and "in a great degree ... from the world." Ellen White explains how this process operated:
The very men who need this work ... have themselves barred the way that it shall not come.... When the leaders get out of the way, the work will be progressive in Battle Creek.... The position taken at Battle Creek has been the pulse-beating of many churches.... The Lord God of Israel has opened the windows of heaven to send the earth rich floods of light, but in many cases there was no place made to receive it or give it room.... [By] ministers, pastors, and those who stand in responsible positions ... barriers have been thrown up, and the streams of salvation turned aside into another channel.
(7) What happened at Minneapolis was more serious than mere human judgment could appreciate. The inspired prophet saw beneath the surface:"The spirit which prevailed ... [which] was a controlling power at that meeting ... was cruelty to the Spirit of God." Three years later she repeated this frightful statement,"! know that at the time the Spirit of God was insulted."
(8) Ellen White, Jones, and Waggoner held meetings during the winter of 1888-1889 and even into 1890 where the Lord worked in an unusual manner. The people were ready to accept the message gladly, giving occasion for a superficial judgment prevalent today that claims the message was warmly accepted in the end. But the influence of the leaders at Battle Creek discouraged and hindered the confused but favorable laity. She wrote burning messages of reproof, pleading for the brethren to accept the message and stop hindering its impact on the people.
She said in 1890,"For nearly two years we have been urging the people to come up and accept the light and truth concerning the righteousness of Christ, and they do not know whether to come and take hold of this precious truth or not." Her article in the Review and Herald of a week later told the reason:
I have tried to present the message to you as I have understood it, but how long will those at the head of the work keep themselves aloof from the message of God? ... Our young men look to our older brethren, and ... they see that they do not accept the message, but treat it as though it were of no consequence.
(9) So persistent was the opposition that Ellen White's support upset the General Conference leadership. Robert W. Olson of the White Estate declares that she was “publicly defied." She herself said, “Elder Butler presented the matter before me in a letter stating that my attitude at that Conference [1888] just about broke the hearts of some of our ministering brethren at that meeting."
(10) So compelling was the evidence supporting the message that a number of brethren were virtually forced to confess that they had taken a wrong stand at and after Minneapolis. One after another asked for pardon, sometimes with tears. Review editor Uriah Smith and former General Conference president G. I. Butler had influenced many to reject the message and both in time confessed their wrong attitude.
However, these confessions could not undo the evil that the 1888 era rejection had caused. Their resistance of the latter rain and the loud cry, so far as that generation was concerned, was conclusive. The important factor is not the personal salvation of the erstwhile rejectors, but whether the loud cry of Revelation 18 was allowed to go to the world. "In a great degree" it wasn't.
Later on some of the most notable confessors returned to their previous stance of opposition, so that Ellen White was forced to say, "This blind warfare is continued.... They have never seen clearly since [Minneapolis], and they never will." In late 1892, after most of the "confessions" had come in, Ellen White said that "not one" of those who initially rejected the message ever recovered the blessing they had forfeited. History confirms her judgment:
Who of those that acted a part in the meeting at Minneapolis have come to the light and received the rich treasures of truth which the Lord sent them from heaven? Who have kept step with the Leader, Jesus Christ? Who have made full confession of their mistaken zeal, their blindness, their jealousies and evil surmisings, their defiance of truth? Not one.
(11) But on the surface, all appeared to be well in the 1890s. Reports of the progress of "the cause” appeared in the Review week by week as though nothing were wrong. But something was wrong. Speaking at the 1901 session regarding those dark years of the 1890s, Ellen White said:
The brethren assented to the light given, but ... the light that was given was not acted upon. It was assented to but no special change was made to bring about such a condition of things that the power of God could be revealed among His people. Year after year the same acknowledgement was made.... It is a marvel to me that we stand in as much prosperity as we do today.
A little later she added, “Many ... have been more or less out of line since the Minneapolis meeting." She hoped they would come into line.
(12) Even the new General Conference president elected in 1888 failed to stand on the right side, and he lent his influence against the message. He supported it initially, but eight years after Minneapolis Ellen White felt forced to write the following about him:
He is leading other minds to view matters in a perverted light. He has given unmistakable evidence that he does not regard the testimonies which the Lord has seen fit to give His people, as worthy of respect, or as of sufficient weight to influence his course of action.
I am distressed beyond any words my pen can trace. Unmistakably Elder Olsen has acted as did Aaron, in regard to these men [A. R. Henry and Harmon Lindsay, General Conference leaders] who have been opposed to the work of God ever since the Minneapolis meeting.
A few months earlier she had written him personally, "I have been shown that the people at large do not know that the heart of the work is being diseased and corrupted at Battle Creek." In an 1897 letter she said, “The President of the General Conference ... went directly contrary to the cautions and warnings given him” concerning the 1888 aftermath.
(13) The writer of the following is one of our most respected historians:
Ellen White presented the sublime beauty of Jesus Christ and then, in stark contrast, the evidence that leadership, laity, institutions, conferences, mission fields, and the church as a whole, were desperately in need of reformation. Over and over she stressed that "not a few, but many" (emphasis hers) have been losing their spiritual zeal and turning away from the light.... Leaders in Battle Creek have turned their backs to the Lord; many church members also have rejected His lordship and chosen Baal's instead. Conference presidents are behaving like medieval bishops, while "whole conferences" and "every institution" are being perverted with the same principles. Some leaders actually "boast" that they will not follow the testimonies. A "strange blindness!" has come upon the General Conference president so that even he is acting contrary to the light. So serious is the situation at the publishing house in Battle Creek that "all heaven is indignant." Indeed, the Lord "has a controversy with His people."
(14) In 1891 the General Conference virtually exiled her to Australia, thus ensuring the final defeat of the "beginning" of the latter rain and the loud cry. She had no light from the Lord that she should go. In 1896 she wrote plaintively to the General Conference president:
The Lord was not in our leaving America. He did not reveal that it was His will that I should leave Battle Creek The Lord did not plan this, but He let you all move after your own imaginings. The Lord would have had [us] ... remain in America. We were needed at the heart of the work, and had your spiritual perception discerned the true situation, you would never have consented to the movement made.... There was so great a willingness to have us leave, that the Lord permitted this thing to take place. Those who were weary of the testimonies borne were left without the persons who bore them. Our separation from Battle Creek was to let men have their own will and way.... Had you stood in the right position the move would not have been made at that time. The Lord would have worked for Australia by other means, and a strong influence would have been held at Battle Creek, the great heart of the work.... It was not the Lord who devised this matter. ... When we left, relief was felt by many, but not so much by yourself, and the Lord was displeased, for He had set us to stand at the wheels of the moving machinery at Battle Creek.
(15) Shortly after she was sent to Australia, E.J. Waggoner was packed off to England. According to Ellen White, there is evidence that this was also in the nature of an exile.
(16) She finally returned to her homeland to attend the 1901 General Conference. She called for reformation, revival, and reorganization. The reorganization took place, and on the surface a reformation and revival seemed to be under way. But she was forced later to declare that the latter was not deep and thorough. On January 5,1903, she wrote her poignant "What Might Have Been," lamenting in "an agony of disappointment" that the spiritual revival/reformation "at the last General Conference" was only a dream, "not a reality."
After the close of the session she wrote to Dr. Kellogg, “What a wonderful work could have been done for the vast company gathered in Battle Creek at the General Conference of 1901 ... but... the leaders closed and bolted the door against the Spirit's entrance."
Whether "the leaders" she had in mind were Kellogg and his cohorts, or the total leadership including the General Conference, has been debated. But she wrote to a friend a few months later, indicating that the problem was indeed with the total leadership. At least it seems difficult to understand her in any other way:
The result of the last General Conference has been the greatest, the most terrible sorrow of my life. No change was made. The spirit that should have been brought into the whole work as the result of that meeting, was not brought in because men did not receive the testimonies of the Spirit of God. As they went to their several fields of labor, they did not walk in the light that the Lord had flashed upon their pathway, but carried into their work the wrong principles that had been prevailing in the work at Battle Creek.
The Lord has marked every movement made by the leading men in our institutions and conferences.
Taken from Robert J. Wieland's book Grace on Trial Hey check this out! The gospel of Jesus is truely wonderful. Martin Luther was given by the Holy Spirit more light than was available in his day, concerning this wonderful gospel. About 124 years ago in the year 1888, more light was again shown by the Lord to two men who were willing to be used by the Holy Spirit. Their names were A.T. Jones and E.J. Waggoner.
Here are some of the points of this good news that we would like to share with you. If you find that you are inspired by this good news as we have been; and continue to be; then we would be happy to help you find other avenues to continue researching this exciting subject.
We will provide you with reasons that explains how beautiful this true gospel message is and how it shows more of God's (Jesus Christ) grace. Understand more and more of his Agape Love towards us sinners.
So What is Agape?
The in first century back in Christ and Apostles times the Greek had 4 different meanings to the single word "LOVE". Agape was one of them. Agape in Greek definition back then is this: A selfless love of one person for another without sexual implications (especially love that is spiritual in nature) or (In Christian theology) the love of God or Christ for mankind. You see all of us are born into sin. We know of a SELFISH LOVE and not of a (SELFLESS LOVE) which is totally opposite of SELFISH LOVE.
No problem facing our Church (the Seventh-day Adventist Church) today can be more urgent than understanding the "everlasting gospel." In the present confusion, many are not quite so sure what it is:
Something to ponder as you read on
If you have been surfing the Internet, you may find some writings by Jones and Waggoner on the true gospel message, (1888) but they are only bits and pieces, and do not provide a complete the picture! It's like trying to read a 12 chapter book when you only have the middle four chapters - 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the book! It seems that everyone has their own verison of the message and what happen. The Shepherd's Rod have their own version; the Reformed Seventh-day Adventist have their own version; Our Firm Foundation has their view on the message; and Adventist who are against this message tell you their view point, but they will not tell you the whole story. Mostly they don't know or they don't understand it and you don't get the complete picture of what the message is really about! You just got the 1888 breif history from above. Now we will give you the MEAT of this message, so you can fully understand the complete picture for yourself.
Jones and Waggoner message from God took Martin Luther's subject of Righteousness by Faith to a Higher Degree, a deeper, better understanding, an understanding of God's true character, "Agape." A picture that the world had not seen since the first century Christians turned the world upside down with this message! God, (Jesus Christ) was revealing more regarding a degree of Righteousness by Faith than what Martin Luther understood or comprehended! It was Part 2 of Righteousness by Faith from God!
It took the ideal of salvation by works or salvation + works, to HIS (Jesus) salvation for us! There is no way that we, (the human race) can do it ourselves. We cannot earn any salvation at all from God! We can not be partners with him on this subject. It is through HIS salvation alone on the cross that we can be saved! This means because of the cross there was a universal salvation for all mankind, all men, women, children were saved regardless of their sinful past, present, or future! Christ's blood covered all of our sins, past, present, and future! All of the sins that we committed was based on the ideal that they were not forgiven by God until we came to him and confess them and asked forgiveness--then God forgave them. Only then the ones in the past and the present were forgiven, but not the ones in the future!
But God has forgiven them all! Even before you go to him asking for HIS forgiveness! Now that mankind was saved doesn't mean that all mankind will go to heaven! God has given us a choice of accepting HIS FREE GIFT OF SALVATION to mankind or rejecting it! What is this free gift? Read John 3:16-18. The only way we would be lost and lose out on heaven is because we did not believe what Jesus Christ has done for us on the cross and continues to do for us! Our own personal sins are not the main issue. It is because we didn't have the faith to not believing in the good news of what Jesus Christ has done for us already is the problem! All sin is unbelief! Jesus did not make a provision or condition to salvation requiring that if we do something first. Like coming to him that he would save us, but if you don't go to him first, God is tapping his foot waiting for you to come before he will do anything about your salvation.
NO, no this is not it at all! God, (Jesus Christ) has freely pardoned all mankind! Jesus has paid the price for all mankind on the cross! He has done it for you already. The only thing you have to do is believe it and thank him for already doing it for you and there is nothing more that you can do to add on it, just believe it! Those who don't believe this are taking God's free gift to them (already) and throwing it out the window! You don't have to come begging God asking him to give you the free gift because he has already given it to you before you even ask for it! Each person has the free gift already, what you do with the free gift of salvation that God has given you is your own business. To believe it and thank him for it or not to believe it at all and throw his gift away!
The best way to describe God's salvation to mankind is comparison with the act of Abraham Lincoln during the civil war, the "Emancipation Proclamation" that declared all the slaves in the Confederate territories to be legally free! But if no one, (the slaves) knew the experiential freedom until they heard the great news of being set free from their Master's hand, believing what was done for them and acted on it! Same way with the great news of God's salvation, it is in two parts, like the Emancipation Proclamation. You have to believe what was done for you already and you have to act on it by believing it! The slaves on the Confederate territories had a personal choice to believe what the U.S. Government had done for them and leave as free men or not believe what the government has done for them and stay on the Master's land. The choice was solely theirs to make. Jesus died on the cross to legally set all mankind free from the penalty of sin, eternal death! Mankind's salvation is done; all mankind is set free from sin! But now you have to make a personal choice to believe it and act on it like so many of the slaves did, or you can choose not to believe it and remain a slave to sin and be lost (not go to heaven). I'll ask you a question? Did the slaves in the Confederate territories have to do anything extra after hearing the good news of the Emancipation Proclamation to ensure or earn their freedom from the U.S. government? NO, No, no, like God's plan, (Jesus Christ) we don't have to do anymore to ensure or earn our way into heaven! We just have to believe what has been done for us and thank him for doing it for us!
So what does this all mean? In short, all Christianity has the wrong idea, or concept of what God’s character and his grace is all about. When Christ died on the cross, blotting out all sin for mankind – past, present, and future sins that any person may commit, that person is already forgiven and pardoned from God by his son’s blood on the cross, even before that person asks for forgiveness from God! Remember it’s your unbelief that gets you lost from heaven, not your own personal sins that you haven’t confess to Him yet! Please understand, your personal sins do not keep you out of heaven!!!! Christ has died for those sins. You can openly say that you can sin all you want and God can not hold those sins against you, because of what Christ has done on the cross! But God forbid! Don’t you know that every time you openly sin is like a very hard slap on Jesus face! You are putting the nails back into his hands and feet every time you openly sin! You are hurting God and Jesus every time you sin. Christians have preached that sinners are going to hell! We should be telling sinners that they are going to heaven, because of what Christ has done for them, even while they are still in their sinful state and haven’t change yet! This is a very hard concept for most Christians to accept. Are you saying that Christ saves you in your sins? Like Paul says, God Forbid! God saves us from our sins!
The world has heard and seen the outside shell of the gospel, but has not fully experience the full power of the gospel itself. When that does happen, the world will know the power that is in gospel. If you hold a stick of dynamite in your fist without the blasting cap inside, you know that it won’t do anything! But put it inside (the blasting cap) and you won’t go near it because you know what it can do! The world has not seen the full power behind the gospel yet. They have only seen a small black cat firecracker compared to a regular stick of dynamite, and what comparison is that!
Christians also have the wrong concept of God love towards mankind. We use the word, “Love” a lot in best describing the character of God. But the word, “Love” falls far short in how God feels towards us! The apostles used a word [Greek] "Agape" in describing his love and kindness toward us. We as a human race know the word love from a sinful selfish motive! God’s love does not have a sinful, selfish, self-centered motive behind it and makes it hard for a self-centered, selfish person to understand it. As discussed above in Agape. We humans have a love, which the Greeks called Eros.
Eros loves things that are beautiful, sweet, attractive, and pleasant to the eye. It loves good things, happy times, and a warm fussy feeling! But it hates ugly looking things, bad people, and non-attractive personalities. That is the way we view love and human love can change to non-love. But God’s love is Agape love—it never changes, and it’s unconditional love! But we can’t say God’s love is like unconditional human love, because human love is CONDITIONAL! And we don’t understand unconditional from conditional love because we haven’t experienced that kind of love from anyone! And if we did, God’s love is a thousand times greater than the unconditional love that we get from a sinful human being!
God has a beautiful message and a answer to our dying world out there that is seeking answers to life's questions. A message of hope, mercy, full forgiveness, and 100% plus power over sin in our lives, is the message of God that we can have NOW!
The last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love (Agape). That supreme revelation is at the cross. But what is the meaning of the cross? Here is the continental divide between past differences of conviction. If "the third angel's message in verity" is Christ and Him crucified, this focus must be clarified. The true gospel message of Christ righteousness joined two unique truths: (1) the final atonement in the most holly place of the heavenly sanctuary, and (2) a clearer understanding of Christ's sacrificed on the cross. There are lots of our own people and evangelical's who have expressed a radically different idea of what really happened on the cross than what we see in the true gospel message. They maintained that the sacrifice of Christ "merely deferred" for humanity the second death that is the wages of sin. In their words: "Under Heaven's plan to redeem man punishment or wages of sin — eternal death — was not waived, but was deferred. . . . [It] was not annulled, but was merely deferred. . . . delayed." Great consequences follow from this view of the atonement.
If this is true, every human soul is born into the world with that sentence of eternal death still hanging over his head. The fatal sentence has been "merely deferred," temporary delayed, logic demands that a debt has been "merely deferred" can not have been paid. According to this view, if the sinner does not take the initiative (the first step towards) in his salvation, the "deferred" punishment will fall on him as if Christ had not died for him, because his debt was never truly paid. The corollary of this view is that the sinner's faith and obedience is what imitates the process of the atonement.
In contrast, the true gospel message sees Christ's sacrificed on the cross as accomplishing infinitely more than "merely deferring" the original punishment for sin. "The punishment or wages of sin — eternal death" was neither "waived," "deferred," nor "delayed," but was inflicted totally on Christ. This is the only foundation on which grace can rest. Grace that does not rest on Christ complete sacrifice must be "cheap grace." He actually and truly paid the debt of every man's sin, and therefore fully died the second death of "every man." Thus there is no reason for any human soul to die that second death except for his own personal unbelief, his refusal to appreciate what Christ has actually (not provisionally) accomplished for him on the cross (John 3:17-19). This view of the cross may take one's breath away, but it's stark Bible truth, the "objective gospel."
The truth of the cross clearly defines the gospel: (1) "We see Jesus. . . . crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste the death for every man" (Heb. 2:9). This "death" could not be the first death which the Bible calls a "sleep." It had to be the second, the total "un-deferred", "un-delayed" punishment for our sin.
(2) "Our Savior Jesus Christ. . . .Hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel" (2 Tim.1:10). Again, this "death" cannot be the first which has obviously not been "abolished." The lake of fire was never intended for human beings, only for the devil and his angels (Matt. 25:41). Another truth follows:
(3) "God. . . . gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish" (John 3:16). Thus His "sacrifice" was not only His incarnation in assuming human nature forever, but a giving-for that involved dying the second-death punishment for every man's sin. This is the foundation that makes grace possible, the death which the broken law requires.
(4) "Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures" (1 Cor. 15:3). If this was the equivalent of the second death, then He made the commitment of all He had, to give Himself to death and hell forever, withholding nothing. This is the measure of His agape.
(5) Adam and Eve would have died the second death (Instantly, Immediately) right after eating the fruit in the Garden of Eden IF (and that is the main point!) if Christ had not given Himself as "the Lamb slain from the foundation all the world" (Gen 2:7; Rev. 13:8). He did it before they could do anything good to deserve it. Adam in the garden was the entire human race, for we were all "in him" as surely as Levi was "in the lions" of Abraham when the latter paid tithe to Melchisedek (Heb. 7:9,10). Thus "in Adam" the entire human race corporately shares his condemnation, but "even so" "in Christ" they share that "verdict of acquittal" which the lamb achieved as He was "slain from the foundation of the world" (Rom. 5:16,18, NEB; Rev. 13:8).
(6) Christ "was wounded for our transgression. . . . The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all. . . . For the transgression of my people was he stricken" (Isa. 53:4-12). He was not "stricken" only for that of righteous, but for that "of us all."
(7) Therefore, the glorious conclusion follows: if the "iniquity of us all" was laid on Christ; if He died for our sins; if He "abolished death" by His sacrifice; if He "was wounded for our transgressions" and was "bruised for our iniquities," it follows that He paid the "un-waived," "un-deferred," and "un-delayed" penalty of every man's sin! This is the ABC of salvation.
(8) We prefer not to say that Christ died the second death; He died its equivalent. In other words, He corporately identified Himself with "every man" in that "anguish of the lost," the indescribable alienation from life or joy or light which Christ "tasted" for "every man." The guilt of every descendent of Adam was pressing upon his heart. Thus He was "made to be sin for us, who knew no sin" (2 Cor. 5:21). This verb "made" is no conditional. This is shocking to many of our people, but it is true that Christ has actually accomplished something for every human being. He has identified Himself intimately with the deepest recess of every person's secret soul — the ever-present yet buried fear of eternal death. He has lifted that condemnation, making present life and it's happiness possible. Thus He "lightest every man that come into the world" (John 1:9).
(9) Christ's sacrifice explains why there is no need for any human soul to die that second death--except for his unbelief. What will make the anguish of the lost so totally complete will be the full realization at last He did die for their sin, He did pay their debt! They will see their own second death as totally unnecessary except for their hard-hearted unbelief: "In the day of final judgment, every lost soul will understand the nature of his own rejection of truth. The cross will be presented, and its real bearing will be seen by every mind that has been blinded by transgression. Before the vision of Calvary with its mysterious Victim, sinners will stand condemned." (DA 58, CG 668) — Desire of Ages, Great Controversy from Ellen G. White books
The cross defines unbelief as far more than a passive neutrality, a sitting on a fence, or a human oversight which we define as "neglect." The lost will see that their unbelief was active dis-belief, a deliberate choice to cast contempt upon the sacrificial love of the Son of God. It seems that it is easy to misunderstand the profound nature of unbelief. Many of us seem to see it as merely passive do nothingness.
Christ atonement is infinitely more than we have been ready to understand. Every human being is involved: "Jesus, the world's Redeemer, stands between Satan and every soul. . . . The sins of everyone who has lived upon the earth were laid upon Christ, testifying to the conflict with Satan." (RH, May 23, 1899) What Good News! And now the world hungers to hear it! — RH (Review and Herald)
This is not to deny that the lost will indeed die the second death (the burning lake of fire or IN HELL!). In despising, rejecting, dis-believing what Christ did, they "counted the blood of the covenant. . . . an unholy thing, and. . . .[did] despite unto the Spirit of grace" (Heb. 10:29). This is the true dimension of their unbelief or disbelief. They will suffer the "wages of sin" because by repeated choice they have taken back upon themselves the sin Christ died for, and retrieved the condemnation and punishment that He has already bore for them! God does not put them in double jeopardy. If people could only see this truth now, what a difference it would make with many! The true gospel message of the cross is "the third angel's message in verity." The "loud cry" message, "Be ye reconciled to God," will make this clear to the hungering world that is darkened by a false concept of God's character.
The fundamental error which produces confusion. Some who differ with us insist that unconditional love is not unconditional pardon, which is very true. But by their "not waived but deferred. . . . delayed" doctrine, they logically take a further step — they want a conditional sacrifice. If by His death Christ did not pay the full penalty for the sins of "all men," the logical conclusion has to be that He died only provisionally, conditionally, tentatively, and the sinner's punishment was only "deferred," the divine sacrifice itself being conditional on man's faith and obedience first. Our Sabbath School Quarterly has several times in recent years said the same thing in essence — that the sacrifice of Christ is only provisional, is in vain, it does no one any good unless he takes the initiative to believe and obey. But we see the divine sacrifice as unconditional, not provisional, and "finished." Grace is given to all, totally unmerited. Christ truly, actually, died for "all men."
This fundamental "merely deferred" doctrine (doubtless sincerely held by those who teach it) naturally colors their understanding of justification by faith. The confusion stems from a subtle idea lurking in the shadows — the popular "limited atonement." In other words, God's foresight saw the eventual damnation of the lost and thus He held in abeyance, "deferred. . . . delayed" the punishment for their sin, to inflict it on them later.
In contrast, the gospel insists that the punishment which Christ bore was total for "every man." And "every man" has already enjoyed relief from the life crushing condemnation of the second death. How could those "saints or sinners eat their daily food" and even live, if a conscious "haunting fear of death [held] them in bondage though out the whole course of their lives"? (Heb. 2:15, Amplified). Christ has lifted it! He has done something for "all men," and it is far more than "a second probation or conditional "grace." Paul says grace has given, not merely offered, a "gift" — justification (Rom. 5:15).
The "merely deferred" doctrine would logically rewrite John 3:16 to make it read like this: "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son for those (only) who believe." And of course, that would be very true, but it is only a small part of the awe-inspiring truth. He also gave Himself fully as much for those who do not believe. This divinely extravagant gift of justifying love was illustrated in Mary Magdalene's "wasteful" offering of her precious perfume on Jesus' feet — which Judas and the disciples did not appreciate.
Are we still back where they were then? Is it right to re-guard as a "myth" the teaching that God effected for the entire human race "a verdict of acquittal" "in Christ"? And do we in any sense merit justification by our conversion and our obedience? Must we personally develop "a new character" before justification at the cross can take place? We must now appeal to what Christ accomplished on His cross in order to understand justification, the heart of the third angel's message.
The "most precious message" the Lord sent to us (in the year 1888) was centered in Galatians and Romans. It made sense of Revelation 14:12 — that true keeping of the commandments is by faith of Jesus. It was like a shaft of sunlight in a dark cave. It clearly presented the great sacrifice made by the Father and the Son in man's behalf. What was that "sacrifice"?
If Christ died every man's "death" (the second), then it follows that He reversed the condemnation that came on "all men" in Adam. It is the broken law which demands our death; therefore the "condemnation" has to be legal. Likewise the reverse -- a "verdict of acquittal" — has to be legal. (It is common knowledge that the opposite of a "condemnation" of the accused has to be "a verdict of acquittal".) Paul explains it:
"The free gift is not like the offense. For if by one man's offense [the] many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to [the] many [that is, all men]. And the gift is not like the that which came through the one who sinned. For judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification." (Rom 5:15, 16, NKJV; the NEB says. "a verdict of acquittal").
Thus the Greek vividly spells out the parallel: Adam's sin = condemnation for all men. Christ's "gift by grace" = justification for all men.
How? Because He truly died their second death, paid in full the penalty for their sin, nothing being "waived" or "deferred" or "delayed." With His blood, as our "second Adam," He redeemed, purchase, reclaimed, restored to favor, emancipated, delivered, release from death, liberated, the entire corporate human race (but individuals can reject Him!). The more closely the original language is examined, the more clearly shines this truth:
"Therefore, as through one man's offense judgment came to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one Man's righteous act the free gift came to all men, resulting in justification of life." (vs. 18, NKJV).
Thus Paul explains what he meant in Romans chapter 3:
"All alike have sinned, and are deprived of the divine splendor, and all are justified by God's free grace alone, through his act of liberation [redemption, KJV] in the person of Christ Jesus" (vss 23, 24, NEB).
Nothing is said in verse 24 about our personal experience of justification by faith. This "act of liberation" was accomplished on the cross solely by His grace, before we were even born, with no participation on our part, so we couldn't have done anything or even believed anything in order to merit it or to precede it. This was "the gift" that grace gave us. It is the objective gospel (the so-called "myth").
Confusion seems to come by attaching a restrictive non-biblical definition to the word "justification." When the apostle says that "all are justified" he does not say that "all were made righteous." In a commendable zeal to oppose the "new theology," those who differ with us maintain that "to justify" always means "to make righteous," that is, to effect an actual change of character. Thus they represent that when the true gospel 1888 Message Study Committee (headed by Robert J. Wieland and Donald K. Short) maintain that the cross of Christ made "all men" to be righteous and must logically therefore take "all men" to heaven, even against their will. Thus is not true.
The Bible definition of "justify" clarified the confusion: "If there be a controversy among men, . . . the judges. . . shall justify the righteous, and condemn the wicked" (Deut. 25:1). The meaning is clear: no Hebrew judge could make an accused person righteous. All he could do was to declare him so. But neither could he declare a guilty one righteous. The "new theology" definition of "justify" as only "declare" also come short of the Biblical reality. Rather, the judge must examine the evidence and then recognize when the accused must be declared righteous.
Thus the justification for "all men" accomplished by Christ's sacrifice does not "make" them righteous; neither does it unjustly "declare" the guiltily to be righteous. It recognizes that Christ has become their second Adam, their Substitute, incorporating in Himself the entire human race, dying their second death as them as well as instead of them. The Father accepts the Son, and through the atoning sacrifice of His Son accepts the sinner. When He redeemed us He lifted from us our legal verdict of condemnation "in Adam." He restored the whole race of men to favor with God," and became "the substitute and surety for the human race." Again, this does not mean that "all men" will be saved eternally. The Lord wants them to be saved, but they can choose not to be, and thus be lost.
Is Christ's "acquittal" only offered, as some say, or is it actually given?
The Greek of Romans 5 is clear:
"The judicial action. . . issued in a verdict of condemnation, but the act of grace. . .issued in a verdict of acquittal. . .It follows, then, that the issue of one misdeed was condemnation for all men, so the issue of one just act is acquittal and life for all men" (NEB; see also KJV, NKJV, and other translations).
Is this "acquittal" only for those who take the initiative to accept the gift? Is it only offered, as some say, or is it actually given?
Paul answers: it is "for all men" as surely as the "verdict of condemnation" applied to "all men," in full harmony with his statement that "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespassed unto them" (2 Cor. 5:19). Note Waggoner's grasp of this truth: (a) Christ is given to every man. . . . The life of Christ lights every man that comes into the world. . . . "Do you mean to teach universal salvation?" We mean to teach just what the word of God teaches — that "the grace of God hath appeared, bringing salvation to all men." Titus 2:11, RV. God has wrought out salvation for every man, and has given it to him; but the majority spurn it and throw it away. . . It is true that all men are redeemed, but not all have accepted redemption." Glad Tidings, pp. 11-14, 61 by E. J. Waggoner
(b) "There is no exception here. As the condemnation came upon all, so the justification comes upon all. Christ has tasted death (the second eternal death) for every man. He has given himself for all. Nay, he has given himself to all. The free gift has come upon all. The fact that it is a free gift is evidence that there is no exception. . . There is not the slightest reason why every man that has ever lived should not be saved unto eternal life, except that they would not have it. So many spurn the gift offered so freely." Waggoner on Romans, p. 101 by E. J. Waggoner
Waggoner sees the practical godliness import of this insight when he says:
"How often we hear someone say, 'I am so sinful that I'm afraid the Lord will not accept me!' Even some who have long professed to be Christians often mournfully wish that they could be sure of their acceptance with God. But the Lord has given no reason for any such doubts. Our acceptance is forever settled. Christ has bought us and has paid the price." Glad Tidings, p. 12. by E. J. Waggoner
The "price" which He paid includes that "verdict of acquittal" which is a judicial justification for "all men." Then Romans 5:17 goes a step further: when the sinner believes and "receives" this justification achieved at the cross, then by faith he is made righteous and will "reign through Christ" eternally.
Many are stunned, asking how can this gospel of justification be "satanic deception," "blasphemy," "Satan's masterpiece of deception"? Those who label it such insist that Christ's sacrifice provides only "Grace" for "all men," but definitely not a legal justification or "verdict of acquittal." It is true that grace is extended to all. But that would be "cheap grace" unless the demand of the broken law has first been met by death in behalf of all those to whom the grace is extended. This grace has to be exceedingly expensive.
Paul clearly says that "grace" gives a "gift" : "The gift by grace is of many offenses unto justification." And "the gift by grace [justification]. . . hath abounded unto [the] many," that is, to "all men." The "all men" are identified as those that "be dead," those included in Adam's condemnation (Rom. 5:15, 16, KJV). This may be a startling thought to some, but the Bible is clear, and so is the Spirit of Prophecy. Christ has "restored the whole human race of men to favor with God." God "was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them" (2 Cor. 5:19). To whom did He impute those trespasses? Unto Christ, thus setting the sinners free. But the logic of the opposing position sees it backwards, requiring that God legally impute the world's trespasses unto them -- the opposite of the legal justification which is condemned so strenuously. This turns the gospel of Christ upside down, and defines why the two views are poles apart.
The sanctuary teaching of the atonement illustrates the cross. In the Levitical service, the daily morning and the evening sacrifice prefigured this universal offering of Christ for "all men." While there were individual sacrifices for individual sinners who reprinted, the "daily" offerings of the two lambs were an unconditional sacrifice for the corporate whole of the nation, including the strangers and sojourners in the land. These lambs were offered whether or not all individuals believed and repented. John the Baptist's name for Christ was "the Lamb of God which taken away the sin of the world," an illusion to this daily unconditional ministry. This is what John means by "the propitiation. . . for the sins of the whole world." (John 2:2).
But the sacrifice of Christ for "the sins of the world" does not function as a license to sin. Opposer's fear that proclaiming this good news is dangerous and will lead to law-breaking. The brethren in 1888 also feared that the message of Jones and Waggoner would weaken the Sabbath doctrine and lower the "standards." Spirit of Prophecy warns how their attitude will reappear among us in these last days:
"In the manifestation of the power that lightens the earth with its glory, they will see only something which in their blindness they think dangerous, something which will arouse their fears and they will brace themselves against it. Because the Lord does not work according to their expectations and ideas, they will oppose the work." Review & Herald Extra, December 23, 1890.
This thread permeates Scripture. Christ declares that "my flesh, . . . I will give for the life of the world." Thus we "have known life" except what is purchased by His "flesh" and "blood" (John 6:33, 51, 53). In other words, even the wicked enjoy the blessings of this present life solely because of His sacrifice. "Never one, saint or sinner, eats his daily food, but he is nourishment by the body and the blood of Christ." (Desire of Ages, p.633) Paul tells the pagan Athenians that "in him we live, and move, and have are being" (Acts 17: 28). God "imputed" unto Him "the world's trespasses," making Him "to be sin for us," that is, for "all men" (2 Cor. 5:19, 21). This "life of the world" that Jesus speaks of is far greater than the life the animal creation enjoys. It is a "life" wherein there is relief from our death-dealing "condemnation", "in Adam." Animals do not sense that! "All men" already have enjoyed that "life," thanks to Christ, although few may realized it, due either to their ignorance of the gospel or to their hard-hardened unbelief against it.
In this sense Scripture represents Christ as already "the Saviour of all men" (1 Tim. 4:10), for He "abolished" their second death, saved them from its condemnation, and delivered from its all-encompassing fear which otherwise would have crushed out all their present life (2 Tim. 1:10; Heb. 2:14, 15). He is not only "the propitiation for our sins, . . . but also for the sins of the whole world" (1 John 2:2). But again, Christ forces no souls to be eternally saved against there will, "whether they like it or not." They can choose to reject "the gift" already given them.
The choice to believe makes the legal justification at the cross become effective in the human heart. "All are justified by God's free grace alone, through his act of liberation in the person of Christ Jesus. For God designed him to be that means of expiating sin by his sacrificial death, effective through faith" (Rom. 3:24, 25, NEB). This explains how true justification by faith makes the believer obedience to all the commandments of God (the 10 commandments including the Sabbath!). The sinner experiences a corporate oneness identity with Christ.
Is this view the same as the so-called "liberal theology"? Only superficially can it appear so. It is the opposite of the "new theology" idea of a "strictly legal justification by faith" because it is rooted in the Adventist view of the cleansing of the sanctuary. And it makes possible genuine obedience to the law. "Error often appears to lie closed to the path of truth." But it is too late to again mistake truth for error. We don't have another century to sort out confusion.
To say that justification by faith is only a legal declaration with no relation to wholly, obedient living would indeed be heresy. While the justification accomplished at the cross legally applies to the entire human race "in Christ," its gospel proclamation arouses in the receptive human heart a response, an appreciation of what it cost the Son of God to redeem us. This faith reconciles the alienated heart to Christ. It was this that rejoiced Mrs. White when she contemplated Waggoner's message, years after Minneapolis. She sensed that this deeper insight would prepare a believing people for translation.
The "new theology" does not except these principal elements of the true gospel message! It sometimes now concedes that a legal justification for all men took place at the cross, but it does not recognize that justification by faith makes the believer fully obedience, more that this ultimate experience prepares for translation. It denies the Day of Atonement ministry of Christ in the most holy apartments in distinction to His ministry in the first apartment prior to 1844. It generally sees a preparation for death as the same as preparation for translation, failing to see the corporate as well as individual nature of the final atonement. It considers justification by faith to be merely a "declaration" of individual acquittal apart from a true change of heart. It does not except the possibility of complete overcoming in preparation for the return of Jesus, affirming instead continued sinning until glorification at the return of Christ.
It also rejects the true gospel message view of the nearness of the Saviour, insisting that Christ could not have taken our fallen, sinful nature without Himself becoming a sinner. The "new theology" has been logically (though probably not consistently) sympathetic to the Roman Catholic doctrine which teaches that so long as humans retained fallen, sinful flesh, total victory over sin is impossible (the basis for the doctrine of purgatory);and it follows, if Christ had taken our fallen, sinful nature with a self to deny as we must deny self, He could not have been sinless in character. These basic principles are as different as night and day. Yet some contenders have collected superficially similar-by- appearance quotations in an effort to establish the charge of "guilty by association." The supposed similarity has now been analyzed by Leroy Moore in a recent book. He claims with both categories of readers to think carefully, to distinguish the fine line between truth and error:
"The true gospel message principal (1888) [is] that justification must perceive true obedience. We truly obeying only when we are justified (reconciled) and are in Him [Christ]. But strictly legal justification by faith [as taught by 'new theology'] is as contrary to the Bible and the writings of the spirit of prophecy as is holly flesh. . . ." Wieland answers Desmond Ford's legal, effective justification at the cross by a 'universal, legal justification at the cross that is effective only as claimed by faith' (Gold Tried in the Fire, p. 21, [23]). Knowing it would be confused with Ford's view, several years ago I wrestled with Robert Wieland over the term he used. Far from being from forensic-only doctrine, the concept he attributes to Waggoner does correct Ford's error, while it retains truth that the Plymouth Brethren abandoned in their doctrine of justification at the cross--which claims a complete and final atonement in A.D. 31. In distinguishing legal justification at the cross from justification by faith, Wieland retains an ongoing priestly atonement based upon the complete sacrificial atonement.
"His 'universal, legal justification' refers to the Lawgiver's declaration at the cross that He paid in full the debt for all stand of every person for all time (Heb. 2:9). However this complete sacrificial atonement is mediated to believers only as they claim it by personal exercise of faith." (Adventism in Conflict, RH, 1995 pp. 131, 133, 134). — RH (Review and Herald)
Waggoner's 1895-96 verse-by-verse studies in Romans affirmed a legal justification effected at the cross for "all men," and that the experience of justification by faith makes the believer obedient to all the commands of God. Waggoner's insight is the answer to the "Reformationist" contention, not a repetition of it. Even Dr. Arnold Wallenkampf of the Biblical Research Committee of the Seventh-day Adventist General Conference concluded (after reading our little pamphlet on this subject) that the idea is taught in Scripture and is supported in the Spirit of Prophecy, and immediately recognized it to be the effective answer to the Evangelical views, not a new version of them.
So where do we go from here? Some people say that Jones and Waggoner had no more new light than Wesley, Hess, or Luther about the understanding of righteousness by faith. And some say that Jones and Waggoner did have a far outstanding grasp of understanding the righteousness by faith, than Wesley, Hess, or Luther ever dreamed about, or ever knew! But one question does arise in the Adventist church, if there was no new light on this very important subject, why did the Spirit of Prophecy fully back these two men and wrote extensively about shedding new light and again new light on a old subject. Yes, righteousness by faith is an old subject that has been around for over seven centuries. Wesley, Hess, and Luther are the pioneers of this subject. But they only had seen a small glimpse, a limited understanding about this subject.