Since our first writings last year against the change of attitude toward Seventh-day Adventism in Our Hope magazine, in which its editor endorsed this cult as a basically sound Christian sect, others have joined in the great right about-face movement until they seem to vie with one another to take the lead in extolling the soundness of this basic heterodoxy. Such names as Dr. Donald Gray Barnhouse, Eternity magazine, Zondervan Publishing Company, Mr. Walter Martin, Dr. E. Schuyler English, and Christian Life magazine are in the vanguard of those who have either rushed to print favorable interviews, or have come out unequivocally in favor of outright acceptance of Adventists as orthodox Christians, and of extending to them the right-hand of fellowship. The matter has not been confined to the religious press, but it has now spilled over into the secular press with a rather full account of the workings of Messrs. Barnhouse and Martin with Eternity magazine being reported in the December 31St issue of Time magazine. Thus this gigantic whitewash engineered by a few self-appointed leaders is affecting the whole of what has been generally considered fundamental Christendom. It may well shake the whole structure of fundamentalism to its very foundations, and probably make a rift which will never be healed. Many true-hearted, devoted Christians simply cannot and will not go along with such fellowship of light with darkness.
Perhaps nothing in our generation is a clearer mark of the time of the end than this capitulation to Adventism by men who were once considered very orthodox and sound. It reminds us of the conditions that existed among the Jews, as the canon of Old Testament Scripture closed, as recorded in the book of Malachi; for then everything was in disorder and confusion, and all sense of what was right before God was lost, so that God said,
Paraphrasing and quotations from Adventist literature are in italics.
"Ye have wearied the LORD with your words.. When ye say, Every one that doeth evil is good in the sight of the LORD, and He delighteth in them." Truly the Lord's words that the leaven was hidden in the meal "until the whole was leavened" have come to pass. Evil doctrine has been at work, and the seeds of the great apostasy have been sown; in fact, they are sprouting and will bring forth an abundant crop.
It is not within our province to decide what has motivated these leaders to become defenders of a false system, but we have a duty to our readers to analyze what they have done. It is our opinion that somewhere along the line they have lost their perception, and then were led into the anomalous position of seeking to be defenders of the faith and of Adventism at the same time. The most distressing thing about the whole case is that they have written as though no one else had any right to question their judgment, and they assume to act for Evangelical Christendom at large. They have sought to close the door to discussion or dispute and demand blind acceptance of their decisions, which we are persuaded are grossly in error.
These apologists casually admit that the Adventists did at one time hold some wrong views that were serious, but state that they do not now hold them. But let us see what the Adventists themselves have to say at this time. We quote from their foremost publication, Signs of the Times, for October 2, 1956: "Adventists Vindicated." "One of the most epoch-making events in recent church history is the publication of an article on Seventh-day Adventists in the September issue of ETERNITY. It exploded in religious circles like a hydrogen bomb, and its 'fall out' is being carried on the winds of theological argument clear around the world.... They have, in fact, endured a century of slander. Now at last vindication has come." Do they say, We held error which we now repudiate and abhor? No, not at all. In this official statement they make no mention of a change of position, but rather say that for one hundred years they have been slandered, and now at last vindication has come. We may ask, Just who has changed? The answer should be apparent.
Dr. Barnhouse admits that the Adventists still hold "two or three positions" which he cannot accept, although both he and Mr. Martin insist that these are not heretical and should be no bar to fellowship between them and orthodox Christians. But let us see how the Adventists feel about Dr. Barnhouse and his "two or three positions"; we again quote from the Signs of the Times: "We hold nothing against him because he found `two or three positions' with which he could not agree. That was to be expected. The best of Christians have differed on minor [we shall let the reader judge whether they are minor or not as we proceed] matters of theology all down the centuries, and will continue to do so till the end of time." Then with further reference to the "two or three positions" they say: "Further study of these matters in the same open-minded and prayerful spirit will, we trust, lead the good doctor and his fellow evangelicals to agree that Seventh-day Adventists have strong Biblical as well as historical evidence for the positions which they take." It is clearly evident that on these positions they have no intention of changing, but fondly hope that their newly-found friends will come all the way over to their positions.
Even if there has been some change in the official doctrines and beliefs of the Adventists from those held years ago, they cannot escape the sad history of that Christ-dishonoring systematized error. Job rightly asked, "Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean?" and correctly answered, "Not one." Job 14:44Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean? not one. (Job 14:4). Rank error does not perform a metamorphosis so that it gradually transforms itself into truth. Every system is the product of its own history and foundation, and blasphemy against the Person and work of Christ remains what it was. The only way out of evil is to leave it. If a saint of God finds himself a partaker of evil doctrine, he should leave it forthwith. "Let every one that nameth the name of Christ [the Lord] depart from iniquity.... If a man therefore purge himself from these [in separating himself from them] he shall be a vessel unto honor," etc. 2 Tim. 2:19-2119Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honor, and some to dishonor. 21If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honor, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work. (2 Timothy 2:19‑21).
It is all very easy for them and their apologists to blame bad doctrines on a certain "lunatic fringe," but these heresies were held and taught by men of renown among them, and not by men only, but by a woman, Mrs. Ellen G. White, who was pre-eminent among the leaders. Will they classify her in the "lunatic fringe"? NEVER! She is still honored and revered by them as "God's messenger," and Mr. Martin defends their right to do this. Of course men have a right to do as they please in their own organizations, but the Word of God should guide in the Church of God, and they profess to be that, or in that. And the Word of God says: "Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak." 1 Cor. 14:3434Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law. (1 Corinthians 14:34). "Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." 1 Tim. 2:11, 1211Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. 12But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. (1 Timothy 2:11‑12). Did God give instructions for His Church and then send a woman to violate His express word? That could not be. It is vain to argue that there were women as prophets in Old Testament times, especially in times of ruin, for that was not the Church of God. Nor will it do to contend that because Philip the Evangelist had four daughters who prophesied, women are to teach, as Mrs. White did. There is not the slightest indication that these four women taught in the Church, nor that they prophesied there. No one walking in simple obedience to the Word of God would have become ensnared in Seventh-day Adventism when he learned the place of Mrs. White; he would have said, I see that Adventism cannot be of God when a woman is their greatest teacher and leader. As an aside, it is instructive to see how prominent women have been in the promulgation of heresies, as is evident in any history of the cults.
But let us proceed to look at some of the wicked doctrines which Mr. Martin says (in Our Hope for November, 1956) were "fringe views" which the "overwhelming majority never held." First we shall consider a paramount issue; namely, that the Lord Jesus "partook of man's sinful fallen nature at the incarnation." Mrs. 'White wrote in The Desire of the Ages, chapter 11, some fanciful speculations which she added to the Word of God (albeit God warned, "Add thou not unto His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found a liar") that the Lord Jesus after His baptism in Jordan bowed "in prayer on the river bank," asking God "for the witness that God accepts humanity in the person of His Son," which "angels listened to," after which they were "eager to bear their loved Commander a message of assurance" before the Father answered Him. (This is obvious error, for we learn from Mark 1:1010And straightway coming up out of the water, he saw the heavens opened, and the Spirit like a dove descending upon him: (Mark 1:10) that it was immediately upon His coming out of the water that the Spirit descended upon Him and the voice of the Father spoke from heaven.) At this point Mrs. White clearly states her teaching regarding the nature which the Lord took, and we quote:
"This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. These words of confirmation were given to inspire faith in those who witnessed the scene, and to strengthen the Savior for His mission. Notwithstanding that THE SINS OF A GUILTY WORLD WERE LAID UPON CHRIST,
notwithstanding the humiliation of TAKING UPON HIMSELF OUR FALLEN NATURE, the voice from heaven declared Him to be the Son of the Eternal. John had been deeply moved as he saw Jesus bowed as a suppliant pleading with tears for the approval of the Father." (Emphasis ours.) Now here in clear, unmistakable language is the word of their "Messenger," saying two things we judge to be blasphemous—1. that Christ had the sins of a guilty world on Him at His baptism; 2. that He took upon Him our fallen nature. We do not have to beg the question, but we say emphatically that God did not look upon His Son with delight when He had sins on Him, for in the ONLY TIME that He had sins on Him (the three hours of darkness on the cross) God turned His face from Him. To say that sins were on Him during His life and ministry is to deny the truth as to His Person, and to make God a party to looking with favor upon sin. This is a libel upon God. The second gross error is one which Mr. Martin would fain have us believe was not held by any but a fringe group, lunatic at that. But beyond all question, Mrs. White did hold and teach that the Lord Jesus took on Him fallen human nature.
Here are some other shocking quotations from Mrs. White on the same subject and from the same book: "Christ took upon Him the INFIRMITIES OF DEGENERATE HUMANITY.
Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest depths of his degradation.... But our Savior took humanity, WITH ALL ITS LIABILITIES. He took the nature of man, with the possibility of yielding to temptation." p. 117. "It would have been an almost infinite humiliation for the Son of God to take man's nature, even when Adam stood in his innocence in Eden. But Jesus accepted humanity when the race had been weakened by four thousand years of sin. Like every child of Adam He accepted the results of the working of the great law of heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of His earthly ancestors. He came with such a heredity to share our sorrows and temptations, and to give us the example of His sinless life. Satan in heaven had hated Christ for His position in the courts of God. [This last sentence carries the implication that the Son was not God, but only had a high place in the courts of God, of which Satan could be envious.] He hated Him the more when he himself was dethroned. He hated Him who pledged Himself to redeem a race of sinners. Yet into the world where Satan claimed dominion God permitted His Son to come, a helpless babe, subject to the weakness of humanity. He permitted Him to meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, AT THE RISK OF FAILURE AND ETERNAL LOSS." p. 49.
Frankly, we loathe the defiling of our pages with such gross blasphemy against the blessed and HOLY Person of our Lord and Savior, but it seems necessary to actually quote these defamations in order to show that these most serious heresies have been propagated by the very highest authority in Seventh-day Adventism, and that their new apologists are mistaken. Adventism has been steeped in bad doctrine, and the corpus delecti is still within. Will Messrs. Barnhouse, Martin, and English say that the Adventists have banned all books containing such teachings, or that they have excommunicated a single person for such views? We strongly advise a faithful believer who finds himself within the folds where such heresy has been taught, and is still to be found, to "purge himself" from it, even though some current leader may attempt to absolve themselves of it.
We could refer to many other quotations from Mrs. White and others to prove our point, but those quoted should be sufficient for the purpose, and it should be apparent that we have not used "outdated quotations, mangled paragraphs, and extreme distortions" as Mr. Martin charges critics of Adventism have done. To attribute to the Holy Son of God as a man a fallen human nature, the possibility of sinning, or the danger of His eternal loss is most serious heresy. "God is Light," and LIGHT IS ABSOLUTELY REPULSIVE OF AND IMPERVIOUS TO EVIL. It is all very easy for Mr. Martin to aver that the Adventists believe in the "deity of Christ" and His spotless humanity, but this doctrine which has been widely disseminated among them, and is still within the body politic, undermines the very essentials of deity. It is of such error that the Word of God warns that to receive one who brings it, or to greet him, is to partake of his evil deeds (see 2 John).
The only way that presentday Adventism could clear itself of this and other serious heresies would be for them to publicly disavow Mrs. White, and to utterly reject her, for the error she taught is a part of her. They would have to reject her writings, not merely delete portions of them; but then there would be no reason for Seventh-day Adventism.
In the light of the unmistakable teachings of Mrs. White we were utterly amazed to read the following from the pen of Mr. W. Martin: "On the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith necessary to the salvation of the soul and the growth of the life of Christ, Ellen G. White has never written anything which is seriously contrary to the simple, plain declarations of the gospel.... No one can fairly challenge her writings on the basis of their conformity to the basic principles of the gospel, for conform they most certainly do!" This recalled a scripture from Isa. 42, where God asks: "Who is blind, but My servant?" Perhaps Mr. Martin does not believe that to touch the Lord Jesus in the very essential of deity affects "the cardinal doctrines of the Christian faith." But it most surely does, for if He had "our fallen nature," He could not be God. If He partook of the "infirmities of degenerate humanity... with all its liabilities," He lacked the very essentials of deity; and if He were not God, there is no Savior for fallen men. We would need to cry out with Isaiah, "Woe is me," and say with Mary, "They have taken away my Lord." The teachings of Mrs. White regarding the Person of Christ (not yet to name her teachings regarding the work of Christ) undermine the very foundation of the gospel. And if Mr. Martin were right, and the salvation of the soul not damaged, shall we be interested only in our salvation while we are callously indifferent to affront and dishonor to our blessed Savior? Far be the thought!
But we must not overlook another statement of Mr. Martin's regarding these things. He says that he "has no hesitation whatsoever in stating that those previous positions so widely seized upon by the ENEMIES OF ADVENTISM have been totally repudiated by the Seventh-day Adventist denomination FOR SOME YEARS." This is strictly a partisan statement, for he dares to challenge faithful Christian men who have through the years withstood rank Adventist heresy with being "enemies of Adventism." This is a slur to men of God who have dared to stand in the breach and seek to hold back a tide of evil doctrine. Many had no thought of being enemies of Adventism, but were at war with evil doctrine touching the Person and work of our Lord Jesus Christ, no matter by what name it was called. Has one no right to be aroused when our Lord is slandered? he certainly has; and to be devoid of righteous indignation at the propagation of such heresies is to be unfaithful to Christ. There is no middle ground when His Person is impugned or His work assailed.
Next, what does Mr. Martin mean by saying that the Adventists repudiated this error for "some years"? The book from which Mrs. White's quotations have been copied was printed by the Adventist official West Coast publishing house—Pacific Press Publishing Association, Mount a in View, California—in 1956, and the book is on sale in their So. Calif. Conference headquarters book store as this goes to press. But Mr. Martin seeks to prepare the way for such criticism by suggesting that the Adventists still have many problems to be solved in various fields such as "publications" and "public relations." He seems to be acting in this field now, so perhaps in future editions of objectionable books they can quietly expunge the damaging statements, but the fact remains that Mrs. 'White, whom they say was "inspired" to carry the "Lord's message" to them, did teach many heresies, and she herself has not been repudiated.
Concerning the recentness of the iniquitous teaching of the Lord's possessing a fallen human nature, this heresy was defended by none other than Mr. Milton E. Kern, a field secretary of the General Conference, who by his own statement was a preacher among them as early as 1914, and should know their doctrines if anyone does. His book is still on sale in their stores in January, 1957. It was printed by no less an organization than their own Review and Herald Publishing Association, at their general headquarters, Takoma Park, Washington, D.C. This book is entitled, "Bible Reasons Why You Should Be a Seventh-day Adventist," and is an answer to a book by Mr. E. B. Jones who wrote against their false doc trines.
Mr. Kern challenges Mr. Jones's statement that all men "save Christ, have possessed the nature of evil, for all have been the offspring of their father, Adam," by replying, "But is it not true that through His mother, Jesus, also, like all mankind, was the offspring of Adam?" He further adds that it was "only by becoming one with us could Christ act as our high priest and be qualified to pay the sacrificial penalty for our sins." pp. 8, 9. Mr. Kern even quotes the verse, "He bath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin," as though that supported the false teaching. He was not made sin at any time, except in the three hours of darkness; to say that it was so at any other time is fundamental error of the worst kind.
Mr. Kern attacked Mr. Jones for saying that Jesus "could not fail," and defended Mrs. White's blasphemy, saying that God permitted His Son to "meet life's peril in common with every human soul, to fight the battle as every child of humanity must fight it, at the risk of failure and eternal loss." Mr. Kern said, "Of those who, like Mr. Jones, insist that Jesus 'could not fail,' or could not sin, Dean F. W. Farrar has well said: 'Some, in a zeal at once intemperate and ignorant, have claimed for Him not only actual sinlessness but a nature to which sin was divinely and miraculously impossible. What then? If His great conflict were a mere deceptive phantasmagoria, how can the narrative of it profit us?'" Need we quote more to prove that these abominable heresies have been taught, have continued to be taught, and have been defended by leaders among the Seventh-day Adventists? We have long known this, but the new serious aspect is the effort that leading so-called fundamentalists are making to obscure the facts. Mr. Martin even takes up the cudgels for them and charges men who have dared to expose some of these facts as being "professional detractors" of the Adventists.
It is our judgment that Protestantism is passing an important milestone on the downward path to the great apostasy. When the eyes of leaders have become dim, and camels can be swallowed down like gnats, evil will come in like a flood. May God raise up men to lift up a banner against it, but our only real hope is the coming of the Lord for His own.
The Lord willing, we shall have more to say in later issues on the vital truths that are being let go.