I stumbled across something interesting today. Our friend västergötland, who has posted here as well, asked this question over on the “Maritime SDA Online” Forum:

[quote author="västergötland"]
http://www.forthegospel.org/appeal
What do you think about the five page article? What in it is true? What is not true? What can be learned from it?

Please no shooting of the authors in this thread. I am not interested in anyones opinion concerning them, only interested in knowing how well what they wrote adheres to truth.

What follows are a few excerpts of the reviews we received from the SDA regulars there.

“I don’t know how it’s possible for someone to focus just on a dozen passages of Ellen White, twisting them, and forget the hundreds of passages of her which speak about righteousness by faith and the wonderful work of Christ for us.”

“Another quote which is completely twisted is that of My Life Today, pg. 250, about which they say: “This idea of justification implies that man’s ‘best service’ must be combined with Christ’s divine merit to ‘make up for the deficiency’ in the character of the believer, as if the believer can contribute anything to his own salvation.” Of course what Ellen White is saying is completely the opposite. Anyone who reads the passage attentively will see that what she is saying is that our best service cannot save us because it is deficient, and that it can only be accepted through Christ’s divine merit. IOW, Christ’s righteousness must cover not only our sins but also our good works. This is the same that Luther is saying here...”

“For a while I worked with one of our older evangelists, and when he heard my ideas, he said that was no good adventist preaching. He maintained we should be proclaiming the prophecies, our doctrines, focusing on the Sabbath and health. He maintained we should leave all of that preaching on Christ to the fallen churches. He was a good man and won a good number of souls. ... People want to hear the gospel, and this is what we must proclaim. This is what Ellen White states again and again must be our main and primary thrust in our preaching. So there is nothing wrong in following the admonition and guidance Ellen White has given us in proclaiming the real gospel of justification by faith.”

“These guys remind me of my parents and their friends. They are like the Prodigal Son - running away from that which they do not understand, seeking happiness where it cannot be found. Hopefully, they will someday realize that Jesus loves us the way we are, but loves us too much to leave us the way we are. Sons who live in the pigsty do not enjoy the father’s blessings.”

“I think they get the notion that agreement with RCC would be inherently bad due to moving to churches that are more anticatholic than our parts of the adventist church. They give an overal reformed impressioin in what I have thus far read.  Good works are surely part of the gospel and thus effort has a place, though not nessessarily the place assigned to it in part of adventism.”

“That anti-Adventist article linked at the start of this thread fails to understand what justification by faith is: the renewal of our minds by receiving the mind of Christ - regeneration, on the basis of God’s legal declaration that Christ is our righteousness - indeed the world’s - before we each experience regeneration, so that we can receive the mind of Christ.”

The entire thread can be read here.

So the basic criticism appears to be that 1) the appeal I wrote took the quotes of Ellen White out of context and 2) because of the focus here on justification by faith alone, we’re essentially wallowing in a pigsty of our own sin, not wanting God to continue any good work in us beyond justification.

Criticism #1 has been answered many times and is quite predictable. There always seems to be an excuse for Ellen White’s anti-biblical counsel, and it is usually “context”. While fewer Adventists will try to make her infallible these days, when asked to point out her flaws, examples of her errors are not usually given. Regarding context, if the SDA Bible Commentary, in its exegesis of Romans 8:1 can use this Ellen White quote: “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 am certainly not guilty of taking the same quote out of context in my appeal. This quote by Ellen White takes Romans 8:1 and turns it on its head, but the problem, as always, lies with the critics, not with the prophetess. Interesting enough, the sentiment of at least one poster on the thread was that it wasn’t necessarily bad to agree with the Roman Catholic idea of justification by faith and works, and he received no objection to this!

Criticism #2 is patently false, but this is a common criticism of anyone who clings to the doctrines of grace as their most treasured hope. This accusation is answered definitively in the Reformed faith by the Heidelberg Catechism:

Question 62. But why cannot our good works be the whole, or part of our righteousness before God?

Answer: Because, that the righteousness, which can be approved of before the tribunal of God, must be absolutely perfect, (a) and in all respects conformable to the divine law; and also, that our best works in this life are all imperfect and defiled with sin. (b)

(a) Gal.3:10 For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them. Deut.27:26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen. (b) Isa.64:6 But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Question 63. What! do not our good works merit, which yet God will reward in this and in a future life?

Answer: This reward is not of merit, but of grace. (a)

(a) Luke 17:10 So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do.

Question 64. But does not this doctrine make men careless and profane?

Answer: By no means: for it is impossible that those, who are implanted into Christ by a true faith, should not bring forth fruits of thankfulness. (a)

(a) Matt.7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. John 15:5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing.

I have a sneaking suspicion that anyone who does not accept the Adventist understanding of Sabbath or who doesn’t acknowledge Ellen White as a prophet is assigned to the category of the disobedient, and therefore can never find his way out of the pigsty unless he leaves his “fallen” non-Adventist church.

Greg

Interesting responses Greg from the folks on Maritime. These responses seem quite predictable. Most people in Adventism and other Arminian leaning churches prefer the doctrines of Rome, over the doctrines of the Reformers. The Reformer’s doctrines--the same doctrines of Jesus and the apostles--are not popular and always generate a lot of animosity. The doctrines of grace create so much controversy, that some websites have either banned the discussion or relegated the discussion to secret locked portions of their websites.

I thank Vastergotlund for posting this thread over on Maritime. I am praying that many folks will come over here and be blessed.

Soli Deo Gloria,

Stan

I have long been disatisfied with the way some SDA’s view other churches as “fallen” merely over a disagreement in theology.  That has been a problem with some parts of Adventism for a while, at its heart it is nothing short of pride which is bassically a sin that needs to be repented of.  I will not try to brush away some of ellen whites statements that may be problematic with the age old context remark, I will say however that in the quote you shared where the idea of the fallen churches are mentioned she seems to be speaking against the prejudice and pride of the individual in seeing other churches as fallen, thought I could be wrong on that.  The idea that other churches are fallen is nothing short of pride and prejudice and should be repented of, it is an unchristian attitude that I would hope is not tolerated anywhere in Adventism.  I know among my generation there are many who who are not content with that view and do not agree with the minority who may, consciously or unconsciously share it.  I think there is another side to this though, and it is the same pride and prejudice that some adventists have can actually be continued by former adventists after they leave Adventism against current Adventists.  This is why I really appreciate the gracious attitude exhibited by most on your site, rarely do I see someone sink to the depths of stereotyping all adventists as a bunch of legalistic ellen white sycophants like so many other sites might.  Thank you for acknowledging the complexity within Adventism and the fact that their are a lot of Christ loving people within the denomination.

Stan Ermshar - 19 February 2008 02:28 PM

Most people in Adventism and other Arminian leaning churches prefer the doctrines of Rome, over the doctrines of the Reformers. The Reformer’s doctrines--the same doctrines of Jesus and the apostles--are not popular and always generate a lot of animosity. The doctrines of grace create so much controversy, that some websites have either banned the discussion or relegated the discussion to secret locked portions of their websites.

I agree with this completely however I am not sure it is fair to say that most arminian leaning people love the doctrines of Rome.  Arminianism does not automatically mean one believes in salvation by works, Arminianism does have its pitfalls, but then so does calvinism I might dare to say.  (I.E some of the more extreme ends of calvinism that some mainline calvinists such as mark driscoll would even speak against)
Basically my point is because some have taken an extreme end of Arminianism and because of a misunderstanding have espoused a non biblical belief such as salvation by works is not a reason to say that characterizes all Arminians, im sure Arminians could (and probably have) done the same with calvinists.  My point here is let us both (calvinists and arminians) stop pointing our guns at the lunatic fringe of the other and fight what really matters and die on the same hill if we have to, fighting (and dying) together while contending for the true gospel against those who would preach a different one.  I do not think Calvinists and Arminians preach a different Gospel, just disagree on some of the finer points that in my eyes we can just assume we will find out in heaven.

Hi Chia, it is good to hear from you again. I find much to agree with you about, and it is my prayer—as I’m sure it is yours—that many Adventists will see beyond the pride of being members of “God’s remnant church” and will find themselves without anything to recommend them to the Father except the blood of His Son.

Thanks for noticing the care with which we are critical of Adventism. It is not our desire to be critical without consideration of being accurate. The “remnant mentality” of Adventism can certainly give rise to more of the same upon leaving, with unrestrained pride at the root. No matter what side we’re on, pride is still a sin.

By the way, I agree with what you said about the extreme brand of Calvinism, also known as hyper-Calvinism. The hyper-Calvinist mentality is at odds with the biblical doctrines of grace. I’m reading through Calvin’s Golden Book of the True Christian Life and I am continually struck by how deeply he cared for those around him, whether they were professed Christians or not. To paraphrase him, he wrote, “God doesn’t benefit from our good works—He asks us to use them to benefit our neighbor.”

It is only because God opens our eyes that we can see our need for Jesus, and because He has taken the initiative to do this, we have nothing to boast about. It is from this position of total dependence upon God that I find great hope for my brothers and sisters who are still in the Adventist church and who may still be hearing an impoverished or blatantly false gospel. If God could open my eyes, He can open theirs too.

Greg