Guibox,

I also saw that post over there and I wanted so much to respond.

This is what Greg, Aaron, and I, and many others have been contending, that Adventism has the same false gospel as Catholicism. This was well documented by Geoffrey Paxton in his book “Shaking of Adventism”, which can be read on line, and can be found under links portion of this blog.

Again, saving faith will transform us unto the likeness of Christ, and if we are truly born again, we will be desiring to obey the commandments of God. But if salvation depends on our faith plus the work of the Holy Spirit in our lives to reach a certain standard of holiness to pass the IJ, then that crosses the line into the heresy of Rome.

Stan

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

guidbox wrote:

“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’.”

Well, guidbox I used to have some of the same questions and some of the same problems with the IJ. You mention also that you have no problem with a pre-advent judgment. That also used to be my position—IJ? I just couldn’t see the need or make the leaps—just like you have stated. However, now I know that God investigates believers. That is based upon the Bible alone. It is based on as many as 40 passage of scripture and it is based upon solid contextual and linguistic evidence. What we have is a judgment that is pre-advent and investigative in its nature. The Spirit then solved the problems with the “leaps.” As it turns out, there are no leaps. I will not here rewrite my book. Instead I will simplify things for myself and make my reply to this: If you want to see the evidence please refer to The Silencing of Satan: The Gospel of the Investigative Judgment. Call 888-222-1034.

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

I must agree with glennspring that 1 Peter 4:17 “is a lousy, nonstarter for arguing on behalf of an IJ spanning thousands of years.” But the emphasis must be on the “starter” in nonstarter. I do not wish to imply that this passage of itself supports the idea of an IJ. However the term “peirasmos” found in verse 12 makes a connection with the Biblical doctrine of believer testing and trials that investigate and prove the faith of the believer. Many times in the Bible this is accomplished through suffering. In the 16th verse believer suffering is the context. Then Peter identifies suffering with judgment. Interestingly, tellingly and instructively all this is not only related to the notion of investigation in the Bible, but it is also the very context of Daniel 7 and 8. And that my friends is where there is a connection but not a start in understanding the 2,300 year prophecy that is connected with the IJ.

I agree with glennspring’s concern about“more of an agreement as to what the central issue is (the Gospel).” We have so many Gospels in Adventism that we have a hard time agreeing on any issue that relates to it—and that of course explains why we have so little agreement on the IJ issue.

What is the Gospel. In my book I tackle that issue. However, I must confess that I think I do a better job explaining this in my seminar than I do in the book.

Hi Mr. Williams,

Thanks for joining us.  This forum is open for people like yourself to discuss the glorious gospel of Jesus and hopefully learn something from each other while we wrestle together with the Scriptures.  Instead of asking us to call you so that we can buy your book, would you be so kind as to interact with us and share your ideas out in the open?

I notice that one of the “authorities” you refer people to on your website (http://www.investigativejudgmentgospel.org) is Clifford Goldstein.  Many of us are familiar with Goldstein and have not found his arguments biblically or logically compelling.  Instead of referring people to his books, I suggest you will have more success using the Bible as the basis for your arguments.  I also see references to the DARCOM series, and this is even more problematic, in my opinion.  The late Adventist theologian Raymond Cottrell called it accurately when he described this series as an exercise in biblical ”obscurantism”.

If you would be so kind as to interact with us, I would very much appreciate it.  I’m curious, for instance, how you reconcile the investigative judgment doctrine with John 5:24, John 10:28-29 and Romans 8:1.  These are but three Bible texts standing in opposition to a judgment of professed Christ-followers.  Truly there is no condemnation for those who are in Him, and further, we can know with certainty that we have eternal life today (1 John 5:11-13).  Today is the day of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:2), not some point in the future when we will discover whether our sins have been blotted out.

Again, welcome, and I look forward to hearing your reply.

Greg

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

Many good questions. Man alive! seems like I have to write my book in this little comment box to give you my replies to these questions. Sorry do not have time to do that. 

The problem with books is that the communication is one-way.  The great thing about the internet is that we can share with each other in the open.  Iron sharpens iron....

The friends who gather here have given of their time so that the gospel can be shared with clarity.  If you can find the time even for a short reply, I (and I’m sure others) would appreciate it.

I sincerely believe a short but meaningful answer is more compelling than “Buy my book.” The truth of the gospel, while so profound that it can fill entire libraries, can also be stated succinctly.  If true, I would think your ideas could be summarized in a similar manner.

Thanks,

Greg

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

I am truly grateful for the challenging nature of this discussion. I am only sorry that I became aware of it so long after it began. I find myself wondering why I did not hear of this before now???

Anyway, Aaron, I am wondering how the RCC statement is like my own understanding. By the way, your argument here takes me back 28 years to Des Ford and the discussions going on then over the distinction between justification and sanctification. Some confuse justification and sanctification into one confusing mess—that is the RCC position. But I see a distinction. Justification is solely ours by faith in the promise of mercy and forgiveness through Christ. His life and death and resurrection give us the opportunity to have justification. A righteousness apart from the law comes to us through the blood of Christ that is perfect, it is faultless. No human merit can be added to justification or it is a spoiled, it is ruined, it is faulty, it is lost. However, a positive outcome in the judgment is based upon a life that demonstrates that the faith that accepts Christ’s righteousness is a faith that is genuine. How can this be demonstrated? It is demonstrated by faithfulness. Yes, faith is proven by faithfulness. And faithfulness is proven by demonstration (not by assent or agreement)—that is, a demonstration of human works, words, thoughts, motives, etc. Noah believed God and that is what saved him in the most fundamental sense. However, that faith of Noah would have been nullified if it was not demonstrated in the building of the ark. Read the 11th chapter of Hebrews. The faith of those mentioned was demonstrated by works. Faith has substance. It is not something in the head. It is something that is in the head and in the heart and in the feet and in the hands, and in the mouth. Faith in the Savior God gave the worthies of Hebrews 11 favor with God, but without works they would have been lost. They were justified by faith, not justified by their works, but their faith justified their claim to have saving faith. That is what James is talking about in his second chapter. There is a justification before the law (Christ’s work alone), and there is a justification of faith (our works washed and made acceptable in the blood of Christ).

So Pastor, the main gist of what I’m hearing you say is this:

1) We are saved by grace alone for our past sins and reconciling us back to God (kind of like moving from the negative to reset back to 0 again). In this we are made perfect before God with Christ as our substitute.

2) Our future salvation, however, rests in our faith in Christ shown through works and obedience to the law

Hence the judgement is necessary to show how we have adhered to 2) and 1) doesn’t really play a part in the IJ.

Am I off track here in summarizing this this way?

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

No guidbox. That is not what the Bible teaches and it is therefore not what I believe. The insertion of the idea of forgiveness for past sins being one thing and then something different for future sins is not anything I brougth into this.

So, I guess you are not hearing me. Sorry, I hope that is not because I am failing you. May the Spirit help us both to truly communicate.

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

Greg:
The phone number I gave is not to my home but to the bookstore. Truly, I am not interested in getting money, not just in selling books. I would like a fair hearing. But even more important an informed discussion is very helpful. You have to admit that it would be a more informed discussion if you had in black and white my conclusions. In any case, I will do what I can under the circumstances and restrictions you have.

While I respect Raymond Cottrell and would wish to honor his memory, I must say that too many people simply accept his authority over personal Spirit-led investigation of the Word of God. Much of what he and Des Ford say about the IJ depends upon their understanding of the Hebrew of Daniel. We should respect their opinion but keep it to just that—a respect of opinion. As an example of what I find problematic, I give you this instance: One former SDA woman who leads an anti SDA organization told me that after reading Des Fords 1980 work on the IJ she set his book down and said something like this, “Well, that is it! I don’t believe in the IJ any more.” Do you see what is wrong with that? No personal search for the truth. I believe it is wrong to ignore what others have to say (to deny people a fair hearing) but it is a sin to let others do our Bible study for us. So, bless brother Cottrell he is not my final authority. The Holy Spirit guiding me into all truth—that is my authority.

Ok you wrote:
I’m curious, for instance, how you reconcile the investigative judgment doctrine with John 5:24, John 10:28-29 and Romans 8:1. These are but three Bible texts standing in opposition to a judgment of professed Christ-followers. Truly there is no condemnation for those who are in Him, and further, we can know with certainty that we have eternal life today (1 John 5:11-13). Today is the day of salvation (2 Corinthians 6:2),

Jn 5:24 is about condemnation not judgment. If it was aabout judgment it would deny other passages that say that we are judged. Such as

Rom 2:6 Who will render to every man according to his deeds: 7 To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: 8 But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, 9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile; 10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: 11 For there is no respect of persons with God . . . . 16 In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.

God is no respecter of persons—including believer or unbeliever. All will be judged by their works. Matt 25:32ff shows that all nations will be divided according to a demonstrated love for Christ (works).

Jn 10:28 is preceded by John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me.

The saved follow they do not just hear. The do something they do not just think, assent, agree, or accept a gift. These who demonstrate that they agree and accept the gift of Christ shall never perish.

So also with Rom 8:1 There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.

Those in Christ Jesus do something, they walk, much as Jesus said in Matt 25 (they follow) after the guidance of the Spirit. “For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God.” Rom 8:14 “Led implies following and following implies obedience and obedience implies works.

The passage cited in 1John 5 ends in that famous and powerfully reassuring statement that we may know that we have eternal life. This passage is so important that I spend one whole presentation on it in my seminar, and a chapter on it in my book. For now I would simply give this challenge: Look carefully at this and notice what is not commonly appreciated. John says,

These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.” I Jn 5:13

What is ignored here? The first five words. Read what John has written about assurance. I assure you that it supports rather than undermines the doctrine that Christians are judged according to their works. In fact, I will go so far as to say that it shows that the IJ encourages Christian assurance.

2 Cor 6:2 says, “(For he saith, I have heard thee in a time accepted, and in the day of salvation have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted time; behold, now is the day of salvation.)”

2 Cor 6:2 does not address directly the question of assurance of salvation today, but of a decision for salvation today.

What a great discussion. My only regret is I have no time this week to participate in a meaningful way.

Stan

Welcome Pastor Williams,

I appreciate your dialogue, and TAKING THE TIME, to share your thoughts.

All of the regulars on this forum also are very busy people, so we understand what you are refering to when you speak of time constraints.

We all are, or have been SDA, and pretty much know the doctrine backwards and forwards. We all are well versed in the writings of EGW.

We are also interested in looking at, and considering the thoughts of those like yourself who are SDA apologists.

For those of us who have determined through our prayerful study, that we could no longer support the SDA distinctives with Scripture, it is always interesting to hear the new spin on the old doctrines. For most of us, it only reinforces, and validated the reasons why we rejected the doctrines in the first place.

Again welcome and thank-you for sharing your thoughts,

Randy

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

I see that I need to make a correction in what I wrote to Aaron. The change is one word. Sorry but what I meant to say was,

Faith in the Savior God gave the worthies of Hebrews 11 favor with God, but without works they would have been lost. They were justified by faith, not justified by their works, but their FAITHFULNESS justified their claim to have saving faith. That is what James is talking about in his second chapter. There is a justification before the law (Christ’s work alone), and there is a justification of faith (our works washed and made acceptable in the blood of Christ).

»

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

Dear Randy:

Thanks for the welcome. You see me as an apologist. Let me ask you this, Do you think such a person can have an open mind? And another question (since you know the participants on this forum)is this a forum of open minded individuals? Or has everyone make up their minds? It sort of sounds like everybody in this forum has locked into the view that the IJ is wrong. Like you are saying, Glad to have you along, but you are only going to convince us further that the doctrine of the IJ is laughable.

Please understand that whatever position you all take on this I will still be glad to respond for at least awhile. After all, such experiences just sharpen my sword.

God’s blessings to you all.

Sincerely in the Love of Jesus,
Pastor Bradley Williams

Posted anonymously by: Pastor Williams

By the way, I am going to be leaving for a church campout today. I will check back into this forum when I get back.

I hope everyone has a blessed Sabbath.

Pastor Williams