There is a discussion right now going on at Revival Sermons, that I would like to link here:

http://www.revivalsermons.org/forums/index.php?topic=1719.0

A couple of us on here are familiar with this discussion already, and right now due to a lack of time, I can’t develop the topic as I would like.

The author of the book Bradley Williams is over there answering questions about his book. I am still sitting here in amazement as how on page 2 he tries to respond to Soli Deo Gloria’s question about John 5:24:

24Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.”
-----------------------------------------------------------

Soli’s question and Bradley’s response is:

“Hi Pastor Williams and welcome.

You wrote this above:

1) No matter how clear the Bible is:
Early in my book, The Silencing of Satan, I present the unmistakable evidence that Scripture from Genesis to Revelation (in at least 40 passages) teaches that believers are being investigated.
Des Ford dismisses this point in my book as a show of ingorance. He claims that the passages cited are merely anthropomorphic descriptions of God. And, therefore, basically inconsequential prophetic utterances.”
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

How would you explain this passage from scripture in John 5:24 where Jesus makes this clear statement:question:

24Truly, truly, I say to you, whoever hears my word and believes him who sent me has eternal life. He does not come into judgment, but has passed from death to life.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jesus is talking about believers in this passage and He so clearly says “HE DOES NOT COME INTO JUDGMENT, BUT HAS PASSED FROM DEATH TO LIFE”.

So how would this passage square with an Investigative Judgment of believers?

Soli Deo Gloria
----------------------------------------------------------

Here is Bradley Williams response:

Dear Soli Deo Gloria:

“Most people who use the passage as a way to dismiss our understanding of the IJ give the impression that faith alone renders us saved. And, based on this verse, their Gospel has no place for a real judgment of the saints. Yet the Bible is clear that there is such a judgment. In Roman 2:5-16 it is obvious that the saints are judged by their works. The evangelicals among us allow Jn 5:24 to destroy the rest of the inspired testimony of Jesus. This is tearing the Bible apart and confusing the saints. Jn 5:24 cannot mean that there is no judgment for believers or the Word of God contradicts itself.

So, is there anything that can clarify this passage for us? John, who understood what he wrote in Jn 5:24 better than anyone else, clarifies his quote from Jesus by saying, “We know that we have passed from death to life, because we love our brothers. Anyone who does not love remains in death.” (1Jn 3:14). So, passing from death to life is not by faith alone (belief alone); for a faith that is alone is false faith—as James makes clear. There will be evidence that we have truly believed in our love for one another. That evidence is part of what comes up in the hour of God’s judgment of the saints. In my chapter titled, The True Ground of Christian Assurance, you will find some further insight into this passage.”
------------------------------------------------------------

How would Soli Deo Gloria be advised to respond to the above without getting kicked off this site? I do know who Soli is, and I will pass on any advice to Soli on this.

But, the above reasoning he uses is just so filled with problems in reasoning and Biblical interpretation. He wants to pass of the very words of Jesus as being non-consequential, because John 5:24 doesn’t fit his preconceived ideas.

Maybe we could get Williams to come answer questions on our site as well. I only wish I had more time.

Stan

I know Soli Deo Gloria. Soli Deo Gloria is a friend of mine. Stan, you are no Soli Deo Gloria .

Seriously, I think all Williams is saying is that our faith will always be accompanied by love (I John 3), that true faith will be demonstrated in some way in faithfulness to God and genuine conversion. I.e. it will bear fruit. And I think Soli made this very point in the thread on Motivation. Soli might want to refer back to that thread and his particular comment about what it means to be saved. That would probably be relevant in this case. 

And tell Soli that I am not registered at the RevivalSermons site from my workplace Internet address, or else I would be following up a bit more today. I don’t know if I can comment anonymously. 

Williams is basically saying we shouldn’t quote one text from any particular book and base doctrine on it isolated from other scripture. So, John 5:24 should be understood in light of Matthew 7:21, “Not everyone who says to Me, Lord, Lord, will enter the Kingdom of Heaven, but only he who does the Will of My Father Who is in Heaven”.

As I’ve probably said before, for many evangelicals, John is their favorite Gospel. For many Adventists, their favorite Gospel is Matthew. 

I do not have a problem with the concept of a ‘pre advent judgment’. I believe that the verses mentioned by Williams gives some credence to the concept. However, first of all, what is the nature, purpose and function of this judgment?

That is the question that needs to be answered.

Is it to prepare us for heaven? To see who is worthy or safe to be saved? If the blood of Christ didn’t do that, then why did he have to die? None of us are or ever will be ‘worthy’, that is why grace was given. What is the purpose and consequence of our names coming up on the roll? What happens after our name comes up? If our works can do us in, then isn’t the process of judgment a continual thing? I fall in sin, I get forgiveness, I am reconciled, I fall in sin, I get forgiveness...etc. How can we try and put a timeline onto something that knows no limit and how can we honestly say that individual judgment occurs once when our name appears on the roster?

Second, can this concept of an IJ be properly derived from Daniel 8:14?

I don’t believe it can be and SDAs would have an easier time proving a pre-advent judgment without it. The concept of the IJ has morphed into something completely different from it’s original beginnings, and has really become an institution unto itself without Daniel 8:14. Yet the belief is attributed to this one passage. However, when one goes back to the passage, they have to make some pretty huge leaps and bounds to get to the current belief of the IJ from the idea of ‘cleansing the sanctuary’ due to the ‘defiling actions of the little horn’.

That’s as much stretching the limits of exegesis as eternal torment supporters interpreting’death’ ‘destruction’ ‘consume away’ and ‘become ashes’ to mean ‘conscious torment for all eternity’.

[quote author="guibox"]I do not have a problem with the concept of a ‘pre advent judgment’. I believe that the verses mentioned by Williams gives some credence to the concept. However, first of all, what is the nature, purpose and function of this judgment?

That is the question that needs to be answered.

Is it to prepare us for heaven? To see who is worthy or safe to be saved? If the blood of Christ didn’t do that, then why did he have to die? None of us are or ever will be ‘worthy’, that is why grace was given. What is the purpose and consequence of our names coming up on the roll? What happens after our name comes up? If our works can do us in, then isn’t the process of judgment a continual thing? I fall in sin, I get forgiveness, I am reconciled, I fall in sin, I get forgiveness...etc. How can we try and put a timeline onto something that knows no limit and how can we honestly say that individual judgment occurs once when our name appears on the roster?

Second, can this concept of an IJ be properly derived from Daniel 8:14?

I don’t believe it can be and SDAs would have an easier time proving a pre-advent judgment without it. The concept of the IJ has morphed into something completely different from it’s original beginnings, and has really become an institution unto itself without Daniel 8:14. Yet the belief is attributed to this one passage. However, when one goes back to the passage, they have to make some pretty huge leaps and bounds to get to the current belief of the IJ from the idea of ‘cleansing the sanctuary’ due to the ‘defiling actions of the little horn’.

That’s as much stretching the limits of exegesis as eternal torment supporters interpreting’death’ ‘destruction’ ‘consume away’ and ‘become ashes’ to mean ‘conscious torment for all eternity’.

Guibox,

I agree with most of what you just said. And you know I agree with you on eternal conscious torment.

It is interesting to note that Charles Mangino on the “Motives” thread on Revival Sermons stated that his interpretation of Williams position is that Williams clearly believes that faith plus works saves.

I liked Lazarus’ questions and responses as well. I am advising Soli how to respond as well.

Stan

I find it hard to believe that somehow 1 Peter 4:17 is being used as a proof text for the IJ. Just look at this text in context 1 Peter 4:12-17

Then read Jesus’ plain words in John 5:24

How can these two texts be contradictory, but this is what Colporteur and Williams would have us believe. This is plain eisegesis, and finding texts to support their preconceived Ellen White ideas. It is reading the Bible thru eg-white colored glasses. There is no way any poor honest seeker for truth could get the doctrine of the 2300 days, and the IJ from scripture alone.

Stan

[quote author="Stan"]I find it hard to believe that somehow 1 Peter 4:17 is being used as a proof text for the IJ. Just look at this text in context 1 Peter 4:12-17

I agree with you on this point, Stan. 1 Peter 4:17 is a lousy, nonstarter for arguing on behalf of an IJ spanning thousands of years. I believe Colporteur was the first to make this link on the RevivalSermons site.

In the book, Williams refers to Revelation 2:23 (and Jesus’s warnings to the seven churches in general) which, depending on the Bible version, says that Jesus searches, examines, or investigates the churches. Williams also refers to a number of OT texts as well that carry some implication of God being One Who searches the hearts and minds. I’ll try to remember to recite them later as I don’t have the book with me.

Now, I think there can be honest disagreement as to what form this “investigation of hearts and minds” takes. Does our every word, thought or action stay on record in some form in the “books” of Heaven or is that simply a symbolic way of saying that God knows everything and judges according to the heart, not like man who judges based on the external (1 Samuel 16:7)?

I do think there is considerable attention in both the OT and NT that by “faith” what is implied is not just an intellectual assent to, or belief in, some truth, but implies a more active response on the part of the “faither"--see Hebrews 11.

This I believe is really the heart of Adventism’s emphasis on judgment.

And while I believe this emphasis on judgment, on the need for continual faithfulness and obedience on the part of the “faither”, is valid, I also think that the Adventist treatment of this subject has tended to resemble a sort of hodge-podge, smoke and mirrors construction of proof-texts that could be made much easier and less conflictual if there was more of an agreement as to what the central issue is (the Gospel) and how we might best understand the Bible’s understanding of the Gospel--say by the most systematic treatments of the subject in Romans and Hebrews. Not that those books should determine the interpretation of everything else, but that those two books seem to me to provide the clearest expression of the Gospel and that most of what we read elsewhere should at least be compared to those texts.

Glenn,

I agree with you that the faith most Christians believe in is not merely an intellectual assent. Unfortunately this view has come across in the corrupted evangelical view of “No Lordship salvation”

If you are talking about a judgment of the saints, then I agree that this is Biblical and is described in 2 Cor. 5:10, but this judgment is of the saved determining the degree of our rewards in heaven, not in deciding whether we are saved or lost. So I don’t think you and I are that far apart on this issue either, and maybe if Williams could really explain himself, there may be points of agreement, as some of his replies to Lazarus seem reasonable, but I just get the feeling he is still trying to find someway to justify a doctrine that has no Biblical basis in the way EGW presented in GC. Williams does claim in a reply to Soli that he does believe in EGW’s view, but I get the feeling, he is still modifying the view.

Unfortuantely, I must run for now--would love to spend more time on this. I will try to talk with Soli and come up with another post over there on R/S later today.

Stan

I just noticed a few of Pastor William’s comments on R/S and would like to highlight and comment on a few points.

And therefore that the IJ may not be looking for the faultless keeping of God’s law such as Jesus accomplished.....The law accuses me, but Satan also accuses me (Rev 12:10). The accusations of the law are taken care of at the cross. The accusations of Satan are taken care of in the IJ. Ellen White, in the GC, addresses the unfaithful, unrepentant, and disobedient person. Yes their names will be erased. But to take from this that what God expected of Jesus He also expects from us is not always true… Theirs will not be a faultless obedience, but “when it is in the heart to obey God, when efforts are put forth to this end, Jesus accepts this disposition and effort as man’s best service, and he makes up for the deficiency with his own divine merit”

I wonder if some on that forum are going to pick up that this goes against their strict belief in sinless obedience at the end times. Perhaps Williams is speaking of this only in the context of what the IJ entails and not what is entailed at the end of time.

....In the IJ Jesus will defend and save the contrite repentant soul that is relying upon His promise to forgive and save them.

So what exactly do our works play in this as is traditionally thought? If I’m reading this right, I would say that the IJ is merely just a formality for what is already known.  What is the underlying factor? It is not a crap shoot lottery where your name gets drawn out of a hat and your ‘goodness’ and ‘obedience’ at the time are the reasons for your being saved or not. To me, I see the IJ for the dead to merely show and confirm the results of that person’s life. Did He accept the merits of Christ or reject it (for those who don’t affirm Calvinism )? Thus the universe sees why that person will or will not be in the kingdom.

How in the world can our names come up while we are still alive if SDAs believe that we can ‘fall away’? Is this not some form of predestination or wouldn’t our ‘judgment’ be fluctating? A pre-advent judgment is merely a process that determines those that are saved and those that are lost. It shows who gets the ‘rewards’ and who gets the ‘punishment’. Only the dead can be truly judged.

The question that is unaddressed still remains: What happens after the name comes up? Are they then forever saved? If the IJ is not based on justification as William’s points out, then what is the case in ‘confirming’ anything when salvation could be lost after the fact? What is the sense of the IJ if salvation is still a volatile concept? Again I ask, what is the purpose and nature of the investigative judgment? Is it to determine our salvation at the time our name comes up? Is it to confirm what is already a known fact? What happens if I’m not ready to be saved when my name comes up? Does God wait for me to accept Him and THEN judge me as saved?

So many questions and confusion.

and maybe Guibox can contribute to the discussion at RevivialSermons.org on this as well.

And yes, Guibox, I too noticed those items you bolded, and if noticed by some over there, will cause some fuss.

Stan, what do you think of Jesus’s warning/message to the seven churches and in particular, His message of Rev 2:23?

Guibox, Williams is a little vague about the “what happens when our names come up” issue. My sense is I don’t think he believes that that’s how the IJ works. It’s interesting I was reading a book by Herbert Douglass, thought to be a conservative SDA, and he pretty much dismisses this idea, kind of soft-pedals it, not what I expected.

[quote author="Stan"]If you are talking about a judgment of the saints, then I agree that this is Biblical and is described in 2 Cor. 5:10, but this judgment is of the saved determining the degree of our rewards in heaven, not in deciding whether we are saved or lost.

But Stan this passage indicates that the judgment, the receiving of what is due for what we’ve done in the body, will be based on whether what was done was good or evil. How can this judgment be one simply of varying degrees of awards to the saints if among the saints, some of what is received is in response to evil? Particularly if this passage is considered with Matthew 25:31-46 and Matthew 7:21-23, where there is a delineation between the righteous and the wicked?

Clearly, if nothing else, these passages indicate that in the final judgment there will be those who expect to receive a crown of life based on their good deeds or their profession of faith, and who will no doubt consider themselves “saints” in this life, who will be bitterly disappointed on “that day”. 

The delineation between the righteous and the wicked is belief in Christ.

I “do evil” everyday. That’s just a function of still living in fallen flesh. Even the ‘Good” things I may do are “Evil” if not done out of a heart for God!

Matt 7:23 And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness.’

I’m still just a sinner saved by grace!

(Not trying to answer for Stan, just throwing my .02 in!)

[quote author="glennspring"][quote author="Stan"]If you are talking about a judgment of the saints, then I agree that this is Biblical and is described in 2 Cor. 5:10, but this judgment is of the saved determining the degree of our rewards in heaven, not in deciding whether we are saved or lost.

But Stan this passage indicates that the judgment, the receiving of what is due for what we’ve done in the body, will be based on whether what was done was good or evil. How can this judgment be one simply of varying degrees of awards to the saints if among the saints, some of what is received is in response to evil? Particularly if this passage is considered with Matthew 25:31-46 and Matthew 7:21-23, where there is a delineation between the righteous and the wicked?

------------------------------------------------------------

Glenn,

Here is 2 Cor. 5:10 quoted again and Paul is writing to Christians in the church at Corinth:

“For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil.”
--------------------------------------------------------

Notice Paul is including himself in the we in that text. This is why Christians should be motivated to live a godly life, because even though we are saved, we will have to stand before God and give account of our lives.

Most evangelical commentators I have read agree uniformaly that this is a judgment of believers. So, in a sense, this is an investigative judgment of believers for the purpose of rewards, but not to determine who is saved or lost.

The great white throne judgment where the wicked stand before the throne after being resurrected is quite different. Their doom is sealed, and they will be cast into the lake of fire and receive the reward due them in response to their works.

Stan

Clearly, if nothing else, these passages indicate that in the final judgment there will be those who expect to receive a crown of life based on their good deeds or their profession of faith, and who will no doubt consider themselves “saints” in this life, who will be bitterly disappointed on “that day”.

I just saw this comment from Pastor Williams on the Revival sermons site:

What do we mean by “saved” by faith? Saved from what?
For some salvation by faith alone means that the way they live their life has no effect on whether they are granted eternal life or not. I think their misunderstanding stems in part from not having an accurate understanding of the terms being used. So let’s begin to clarify. If salvation by faith alone means salvation from the penalty of our sins, that is, the punishment we deserve for breaking God’s law, then yes, we are saved by faith alone. Justification before the law is by faith alone in terms of paying the price of our sins. But if salvation includes the outcome of the judgment, we have a different situation. The Bible is clear that the judgment is determined by our cooperation with God’s Spirit in living a victorious Christlike life. This is measured by the same law that condemned us without Christ. But while this expanded meaning of salvation includes a consideration of our works, it is a gracious consideration possible by way of the merits of Christ. Thus it is written:

“when it is in the heart to obey God, when efforts are put forth to this end, Jesus accepts this disposition and effort as man’s best service, and he makes up for the deficiency with his own divine merit” (The Signs of the Times, 6-16-90, Article title: Faith and Works, Paragraph 6).

What say you?

That Signs quote is quite reminiscent of Roman Catholicism.

CANON XI.-If any one saith, that men are justified, either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ, or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost, and is inherent in them; or even that the grace, whereby we are justified, is only the favour of God; let him be anathema. (The Council of Trent, Sixth Session)

Salvation by our effort.  This is an inevitability with a judgment of works for salvation.  I don’t have a quote in front of me but I seem to remember Mormons taking a similar position.