Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[sky]

Letters to the Churches

Post 25

THE MINISTRY REPORT

"The further question has likewise arisen: 'Just why were these counsels, clarifications, and expositions on the atonement, and its priestly manifestations, not brought together for our use before this? The answer, we believe, is equally simple and straightforward and obvious. No one had taken the time for the sustained effort involved in laborious, comprehensive search necessary to find, analyze them.

"Since our leaders were largely unaware of this latent evidence and its priceless value, the need was not felt, and the time for such a vast project was not considered available. Access to the complete files of all the old periodicals containing Ellen White's two thousand articles is not easy, for there is no complete file in any one place. More than that, the priceless manuscript statements are not available in published form.

"Further, as a church we have been so engrossed in giving our special message to the world, in keeping with our complex movement rolling onward in its multiple activities, that no one seemed to have the time or even the burden for such a huge task. It was known that the search would be a most laborious one because of the vast amount of material that must be compassed.

"However, when the need clearly arose and the time for such a search had obviously come, the necessity was recognized and the time taken to compass not only the familiar book statements, but the vast array of periodicals, articles, and manuscript counsels bearing thereon."

It will be noticed that the author does not minimize the task that faced him--and it was a great task. It is to be regretted that he should take the opportunity to inform us that the leaders had not felt the need of this work, did not have the time for it, and did not even have any burden for it.

It was in this search that he discovered that Mrs. White did not contradict or change what she said in the beginning of her work. The author puts it in his peculiar phraseology that "Mrs. White's later statements do not contradict or change her earlier statements." He had evidently hoped that she had changed her position on the atonement, which position he had criticized and attempted to explain by saying that she never, nor even in a single case, had contributed anything initially to doctrine or prophetic interpretation.

It is clear that if she intended to change her position, she had abundant opportunity to do so in the sixty or more years she lived after making her position clear on the atonement. But she did not contradict or change what she had once written. This is the testimony of the very one who had challenged her early position, and who now is compelled to testify that she did not change. It is a poetic justice that the author of the Ministry article should be the one to testify after he had examined all the material that there is no evidence that she ever changed her mind or contradicted what she had written after.

to be continued

[sky]

LETTERS TO THE CHURCHES

POST # 26

PLAYING WITH FIRE

This created another dilemma for our author. He must now let stand all she had ever written, and could not argue she had authorized any change whatsoever. What then could he do or did he do? A most unique solution he had: he calmly asserted that Sister White did not mean what she said!

Note again his peculiar use of the English language, not a direct statement but a passive approach: he says, "... a distinct clarification of terms and of meaning emerges that is destined to have far-reaching consequences." Her later statements "invest those earlier terms with a larger, truer meaning inherently there all the time." And so he explains when she says that Christ is making atonement (he is omitting the word now), she is "obviously applying the completed atonement to the individual."

This is in complete harmony with the statement in Questions on Doctrine where the author boldly asserts that if any one "hears an Adventist say, or reads in Adventist literature--even in the writings of Ellen G. White--that Christ is making atonement now, it should be understood that we mean simply that Christ is now making appllication of the benefits of the sacrificial atonement He made on the cross."

This is news indeed. I have written several books, one of them on the Sanctuary service and hence these may come under what he calls "Adventist literature". And now some unauthorized individual proclaims to the world that when I say that Christ is making atonement now, I do not mean it. It means that He is making application, but not atonement which was made 1800 years ago. However, it is only a minor matter that he presumes to act as my interpreter and tell what I mean by what I say. But when he undertakes to tell the world that when Ellen White says that Christ is making atonement she means simply that He is making application. That is serious.

And so when I read, "... even in the writings of Ellen G. White," that Christ is making atonement, I am not to believe it. He made the atonement 1800 years ago, not now; and even if she affirms that Christ is making atonement now, that "today He is making atonement", that "We are in the great day of atonement, and the sacred work of Christ for the people of God is going on at the present time (1882) in the heveanly sanctuary should be our constant study", I am still to apply to the interpreter to find out what she means. (See Testimonies, Vol.5, p.520.)

Such is playing with words, it is playing with fire, and makes any interpretation possible. If the author is right, I am permitted to take any word of an author and say that he means something else than what he says. Such makes inter-communication impossible, and the world a Babel. What would agreements amount to, or contracts, or words of mouth, if I am permitted to put my own constructions on what another man says? The Bible says that the seventh day is the Sabbath. That seems plain enough. But the author's theory would permit me to hold that the Bible means no such thing. Absurd, you say. And I say Amen. When the Bible says seven, it does not mean one. With the author's philosophy, however, words become meaningless.

"Let your nay be nay, and your yea be yea" James says. That is, mean what you say. To make the plain statement that "Christ is making atonement now" mean that He is making application now is indefensible on grammatical, philological, theological, or common-sense ground. And to go farther and upon such false interpretation build a new theology to be enforced by sanctions, is simply out of this world. Undue assumption of authority coupled with overconfidence in the virtue of bestowed honors have borne fruit. And the fruit is not good.

to be continued

[Murcielago]

Sky, would it be possible for you to give a brief, bullet-point overview of what you are trying to say? It might make it easier for some of us who are not theologians to read through the rest.

[Bob Pickle]

I have appreciated Elder Leroy Moore's book on the topic, which purports to show that Andreason was correct on some points regarding Questions on Doctrine, and incorrect on others.

From what I recall, Moore holds that QoD's position on the atonement was not a change from what Adventists taught, but was instead an attempt to explain to evangelicals what Adventists believe, using terminology that evangelicals could understand. It can be confusing if one uses different definitions for common words than what the hearer or listener is accustomed to.

From what I recall, Moore holds that QoD did represent a change on the nature of Christ, and that Andreason was correct in his assessment of that point.

I seem also to recall that Moore feels that Andreason was wrong on its assessment of QoD's position regarding the mark of the beast or some such.

[Johann]

Virginia Steinweg was a great fan of Elder Milian Lauritz Andreasen, and she decided to write/edit his biography, Without fear or favor. You can read it on the net at:

www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/andreasen/

It was published by the Review and Herald 1979. Virginia worked on this book for many years, although a substantial part of it is written by M L Andreasen himself, where he with his typical Danish humor draws pictures of himself, his work, his Danish first wife, Annie, and daughters. Annie was older and more mature, and for "forty-two years she would be the great stabilizing influence in his life." P.38.

Lauritz was a fundamentalist, originally a tailor who had a fair collection of clothes when he became an Adventist. Then he read in Scripture what to do if he had more than one. . .   and he took it literally. So on Friday night when the rain came pouring down and he had to trail through the mud coming home from the youth meeting. That left him without proper clothing for Sabbath School and Church. So he had a fight with God.

Later Annie straightened him out on so many matters.

Virginia believes that M L Andreasen might not have written those letters to the churches if Annie had still been alive.

Before M L fell asleep he requested a visit by the president of the General Conference. "He went, accompanied by the president of the Pacific Union Conference." "M. L. made it plain that although he differed regarding some of the procedures followed in handling his case, he wanted to be at peace with his brethren and with God. He wanted no animosities. The president responded in kind. Then each prayed. The bitterness was eliminated. At last the old warrior was ready to leave the whole matter in the Lord's care. There were tears of gratitude in his eyes as the visitors left. 'Now I can die in peace,' he told his [second] wife." P. 181.

These words are from the obituary: "This man of God, who achieved so much in his lifetime, wrote of himself a few hours before his death that his was an ordinary life, that he came from nowhere in particular, accomplished no feats of strength or wisdom, but was a mere man who lived a quiet life without ostentation. . . who left no footprints on the sands of time. As he stated, he was not a Columbus, an Einstein, or an Edison. But to hundreds who knew and loved him, he was more than these--he was a trusted friend, a wise counselor, and a spiritual strength. He had an intimate acquaintance with God, and to the best of his ability he endeavored to share his friendship with all whose lives he touched. . ." P 185.

[Johann]

Having spent a few days with Ellen G. White at her St. Helena home, M L Andreasen gave this comment:

"Let me make this clear: I am not to worship Sister White or her writings. I am to worship God. I am not to preach Sister White. I am to preach Christ. I am not to consider her writings another Bible. As a protestant I must stand on the Bible and the Bible only. I am not to consider her writings an addition to the Bible, presenting new light. I am to use them as a magnifying glass that does not create new truths but makes planer that which is already revealed. In my own life and thinking I find them of surpassing value. I most highly recommend them to others." WFOF, p. 78.