Verdict Report t-dbroc< ifooc2028USA

July 1, 1981

To Mv Adventist Friends
Robert D. .Brinsmead

During the Glacier View Conference in August egetical monstrosity, an embarrassment to the
1980, word reached me-in Australia that scholars church and unprovable from the Bible, why run back
were trying to -reach a compromise inthe..area of in and rescue some glory for 18447 Is it so that
Advntism can still save some face and preserve the
sanctuary theology I expressed 'my concern in the Ellen White cult? I cannot follow such double -talk.
following communication.to Dr. Desmond Ford. None has tried harder than you to reconcile the 1844
doctrine to the facts derived from sound biblical
scholarship. But even your herculean efforts cannot
Tuesday, August 19_1980 reconcile the 1844 theology to the New Testament
gospel. This is no time to go -on with a 'synthesis
theology, but itis time to break the synthesis and let
the chips fall where they may.
I am appalled at the prospect of compromising the
The gospel now brings judgment to Adventism.
finality 'and all-sufficiency of-the gospel to accom-
This hour demands a clear line of decision between
modate the unbiblical Adventist doctrine of a two-
the apostolic gospel and the 1844 fantasy. We cannot
phase ministry of Christ.
be a party to having the issues fogged over by com-
The whole idea of Christ's beginning a new re-
promise. I hope that the church leadership has the in-
demptive ministry in1844 is inimical to-the-New
testinal fortitude to stand by its convictions to
Testament affirmation of a complete gospel once and
preserve the 1844 faith without compromise. I hope it
for all time given to the saints. This whole idea-of a
has the nerve to pay no attention to the 'protesting
new 1844 ministry which is supposed' to bring -a
multitudes who are motivated by sympathy for you,
special outpouring of the Spirit and a special sealing
their own jobs and their seats in the synagogue rather
to the church implies that the gospel is not all-
than by the supreme obligation of standing for the
sufficient and that faith in-it does not give all that is
truth whether it suits us or not, 'The choice is not be-
necessary as a preparation'for Christ's coming.' God
tween their interpretation of 1844 and yours. it is not
is now calling us to repent fox adding a new dimen-
between Ellen White's interpretation of 1844 and
sirin to the gospel. He is not- calling us to accom-
yours. The choice is between an unambiguous New
modate that new dimension. The gospel is -at -stake
Testament gospel ,and anyone's interpretation of
here, so let Des Ford, R.D.B. and the whole Advent-
1844, because 1844 itself is unbiblical. 'There is
ist Church be damned and .càsLdown to hell rather
nothing redeemable or salvageable init. The whole
than tarnish the glory of this-all-sufficient gospel.
history of Adventism has been characterized by one
Your position paper, Daniel 8:14, the Day of
attempt after another to justify the original 1844
Atonement, and the Investigative Judgment," says
mistake, and the latest attempts to justify the Oc-
that there is no proof for the 2,300 days, .no proof
tober 22 fiasco will be no more acceptable than the
that these evening-morning sacrifices equal years, no shut door, the investigative judgment or the Awak-
proof that the word to restore and build Jerusalem
ening's final-atonement explanation. Only those with
was the decree of a Persian king, no proof that Arta-
minds like Philadelphia lawyers will be able to follow
xerxes made szch a decree in 457 B.C., no proof that
the fancy double talk of a synthesis theology. Give
the 490 years are cut off from the 2,300 period, no
me rather the apostolic gospel, which is dear and cer-
proof that Daniel 8:14 has anything to do with
tain as well as final and all-sufficient. That gospel
cleansing the sanctuary from the sins of the eople or
makes further talk about 1844 irrelevant.
an investigative judgment. So you admit that there is
no biblical proof for the year 1844 or the work that In Christian concern,
traditi'nal Adventism claims happened in 1844. Yet
laving shown that the whole 1844 doctrine is an ex- R.D.B.
 It is a matter of concern that a party of "evangel-
ical Adventists" are still attempting to create a syn-
thesis between the gospel and the 1844 theology. I
therefore make the following points:
1. The Seventh-day Adventist system was for-
mulated 'through the'-'union of three ideas—the
sanctuarydoctrine,the Spirit of Prophecy and the
Sabbath.' Of these three, the sanctuary doctrine
was primary and foundational to the entire system.
Just as Christianity stands or fails on the resur-
rection (1 Cor. 15:1-4), so Adventism stands or
fails on the 1844 "event." If there is no resurrection,
there is nothing salvageable in Christianity. If no
event of redemptive significance occurred in heav-
en in 1844, there isTnothing salvageable in the Ad-
ventist system. We need to be intellectually honest
and face the fact that Ellen White in particular and
Adventism in general have staked everything on
the veracity of -this claim about a844.
Not only is there no biblical data to support the
apocalyptic fantasy invented to explain the Great
Disappointment fiasco, but the 1844 theology is
contrary to theNew Testament gospel. Christ's
redemption and once-and-for-all entrance into the
most holy place exclude another event of redemp-
tive significance in 1844. In proclaiming another
event of redemptive significance and exhorting
people to place .their faith in it, Adventism
preaches "another gospel" (Gal.. 1:6-8).
At Glacier View the leaders of the church proved
that they were better theologians than the scholars.
They recognized the consequences of accepting Dr.
Ford's main --contention. -The entire Adventist
system collapses if Mrs. White was mistaken on
Christ's entrance into the most holy place to begin
the investigative judgment. The leaders saw what
the scholars could not see—that Dr. Ford was real-
ly asking them to preside over the dissolution of
that system. if they were to preserve the Adventist
system, :they had to take a stand; and -now they
must maintain that stand regardless of how many
scholars, ministers and uieibers have to be dis-
missed.
2 If the 1844 theortgy falls, Ellen White and the
entire doctrine of the Spirit of Prophecy also fall.
The real issue is not Ellen White's literary borrow-
ings ("inspired plagiarism"). That is embarrassing
enough. But Mrs. White's visions endorsed the
1. See LeRoy Edwin Froom, Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers (Washing
ton, D.C.: Review & Herald Publishing Assn.. 1954). vol. 4.
1844 fable. She claimed special revelation to sup-
port ideas on 1844 and the sanctuary which are
clearly contradicted in Holy Scripture. In claiming
a 'Thus saith the Lord," she spoke presumptuously
and invalidated her claim to possess "the Spirit of
Prophecy.' It is inconsistent to say that she was
wrong on 1844 and the investigative judgment and
yet cling to the - idea that she was an inspired
author.
The beautiful material about Jesus which Mrs.
White copied from other authors did provide some
good reading material and spiritual food for the
Adventist people. But it was used in the service of
vindicating a system built on error.
I do not deny that there are good things in Ellen
White's writings, but I question the assumption
that the overall impact of her writings is salutary;
She claimed to be a lesser light" to lead to the
"greater light" of the Bible. But the opposite has
proved to be true—she leads away from the Bible.
When one reads a good biblical scholar like Martin
Luther, John Calvin, F. P. Bruce or George Eldon
Ladd, one is actually given insight into the biblical
system of thought. But Mrs. White locks people
into a system that is foreign to the New Testament.
Those who give their allegiance to this system can-
not understand the Bible. Mrs. White was ignorant
of the structure of New Testament theology.
In the area of ethicsand.a philosophy.of life,
Mrs. White's overall impact has been detrimental.
She repeatedly claimed special revelation on mat-
ters which belong to the realm of general revela-
tion. But God never designs to tell man by special
revelation what is given him to discover through
investigation, observation and experimentation.
Special revelation is not given to replace science or
-common sense. To claim special revelation on
trivial matters which may be discovered through
general revelation degrades the high purpose of
-special revelation. Mrs. White's intrusion into so
-many areas of general revelation with a supposed
word from the Lord has-robbed intelligent people
of their personhood, imprisoned them in a vast
system of legalism, emasculated them spiritually
and made pious zombies out of them. Imposing a
vast blueprint of Christian living on people has
done profound social, psychological and spiritual
damage.
3. Efforts to vindicate Adventist Sabbatarianism
will fare no better than attempts to vindicate 1844
or Mrs. White. The sanctuary, Spirit of Prophecy
and Sabbath doctrines stand or fall together. From
the beginning the Sabbath was used as an instru-
inent of extreme Adventist separatism. It was said
to be a sign that Adventists alone :were God's
special people and that all other religious bodies
were Babylon.
4.The entire theological system of Adventism is
designed to prove that Adventists alone are the
remnant church, the special people of God, and
that their existence is a.fulfillment of prophecy.
This spirit of arrogant elitism and smug trium-
phalism constitutes the essence of Adventism's self-
image. This spirit is contrary to the gospel, which
declares that no forgiven sinner can be more special
than another.
5.The attempt to prove that the three angels
messages of Revelation .14 are a prophecy of the
special mission of Adventism is an exegetical ab-
surdity from beginning to end. No reasonable ex-
egesis of Revelationl46.7.can support'the theory
of an investigative judgment beginning in 1844.
The historic Adventist interpretation of the second
angel's message is a shameful disgrace:. it saddles
the movement with the idea that all non-Adventist
bodies became Babylon because they rejected the
fanatical date-setting crusade of the Millerites. The
traditional interpretation of the third angel's
message is far -removed -from sober biblical inter-
pretation. The Sabbath becomes the badge of Ad-
ventist superiority overall other Christians. The
great final test is said to be the puny issue over
'which twenty-four-hour period on a round world
is the correct time to go to church. The fact is that
the New Testament has not the slightest interest in
such Judaistic technicalities.
6.Adventism is a totalitarian religious system
which demands an allegiance that belongs only to
God. Ironically, while Adventism has always been
so critical of the Roman Catholic system, that
system is not as totalitarian as Adventism. The
Catholic Church does not try to control people's
lives nearly as much as does the Adventist Church.
And why deride Roman Catholics for having an in-
fallible interpreter in the pope (who historically has
used such powers most sparingly) when far more is
claimed for Mrs. White;2 who speaks 'excathedra".
2. in 1911, George Aiesident of the General Conference
from 1897 to 1901, declared, "It is from the standpoint of light that has
come through the Spirit of Prophecy that the question will be con-
sidered, believing as we do that the Spirit of Prophecy Is the only in-
fallible interpreter of Bible principles, since it is Christ through this
agency giving the real meaning of his own words" (George A. Irwin,
The Mark of the Beast: Of What Does It Consist and When Is It Re-
ceived? (Angwin, Calif.: Pacific Union College Printing Dept., 19111,
p. 3).
on such minutiae as the merits of cheese, two meals
a day, and how a believer ought to behave in a
thousand matters.
The Adventist system is equated with "the
truth." When people give their allegiance to this
system ("the truth"), their objectivity is com-
promised and they are not free to think outside
that closed system. Such idolatrous allegiance cer-
tainly fits the warning of the third angel (Rev.
14:9). Ecclesiastically, ethically, intellectually and
spiritually, Adventism is a prison and a slave
camp. The incarceration and manipulation of the
Adventist people is perpetuated by a propaganda
machine which has distorted the facts of Adventist
history and fraudulently .manipulated the Ellen'
White documents. I have seen too much evidence
that the White Estate perpetuates legends by selec-
tively releasing, suppressing and manipulating the
Ellen White documents. The leaders of the system
do not take the people into their confidence and do
not trust them with access to the facts. As the
Glacier View affair proved, the system can only
operate with biased and distorted reporting.-'There
is nothing open about the Adventist system, there
is nothing open about the White Estate, and there
is nothing open about the official church papers.
Adventism is not an open society, and its people
are therefore not a free people but an exploited and
inanipulated people.
7. I must speak Out against the attempt of evan-
gelical Adventists to make an apology for the
special Adventist doctrines. We have a history of
not facing our mistakes squarely, a history of let-
ting ourselves down" gradually. Consider the
sweep of history. The Millerites were caught up in
fanatical excitement when they dogmatically set an
exact date for Christ to come. Nothing can justify
this. It is against the explicit command of Holy
Scripture and the lessons of history. When this
apocalyptic fervor dissolved in disappointment,
the pioneer Seventh-day Adventists should have
said, "Lord, we have been fools. We have spoken
presumptuously in Your name and borne false wit-
ness. Moreover, we were stubborn in that we de-
nounced all other Christians who did not agree
with our foolish date-setting and we refused to
listen." But instead of repenting for their apocalyp-
tic foolishness, they refused to face reality. They
invented the fantasy of Christ's going from one
apartment to the other and the bizarre shut-door
doctrine as face-saving devices—and then bol-
stered this ridiculous fanaticism with "heavenly vi-
sions." But time destroyed the viability of this face.
 saving explanation for, 1844..Did the pioneers then
repent and come to their senses?...No, they buried
the shut-door doctrine, and Mrs. White acted as if
she were never involved in it. Then they developed
another lace-saving explanation for, the 1844
fiasco. This was called the investigative judgment,
and like the shut door, it enjoyed the prophetic
sanction. Dr. Donald Barnhouse was quite right
when he called ...this doctrine the greatest face-
saving philosophical phenomenon in religious his-
tory. One could go into the street and select ten
sensible people and tell them the 1844 story as it ac-
tually happened,. and they would all say, "It is
nothing but..a face-saving invention." Yet.the in-
vestigative judgment has been proudly touted as
the only original contribution that Seventh-day
Adventism has made to theology. What a contri-
bution—the biggest conundrum in the history of
theology] The attempt to explain it from the Bible
is so complicated that not one Adventist ma thou-
sand could begin to give a rational biblical explana-
tion for it. The generation who knew (or thought
They knew) how to-put this amazing doctrinal edi-
fice together from the pieces of a biblical jigsaw
have died.There are probably only four or five liv-
ing experts who think they know how to assemble
this vintage edific Most are content to believe it
on the strength of Mrs. White's assertions.
We can excuse the pioneers to some extent be-
cause they were generally young and were so
theologically naive. Yet in their sheer ignorance
they ventured to challenge the entire Christian
church by denying such cardinal truths as the
Trinity, the deity of Christ and the finished atone-
ment. They did not even know the basic principles
of New Testament theology but lived in the strange
world of apocalyptic fantasy and speculation. Yet
they believed that their sanctuary schema was light
far in advance of anything possessed by "the fallen
churches."
But time has again overtaken this explanation
for 1844. Most scholars in the movement are pain-
fully aware that it will not stand investigation. In
fact, it is a great embarrassment which they would
like to forget.
But lo and behold, some evangelical Adventists
think that after 140 years they can create another
face-saving explanation for 1844. Is it not better to
face the painful trauma of admitting we were
wrong than to ask our children to experience fur-
ther disappointment?
The shut-door explanation has failed. The inves-
tigative-judgment explanation has failed. After
4
nearly 140 years no new argument will 'vindicate
1844 and let Adventism off the hook. Is there any
wisdom in trying to preserve the credibility of Ellen
White, who invalidated her prophetic authority by
endorsing the original mistake?
I suggest that the efforts to justify Adventist Sab-
batarianism are no better. The New Testament is
God's final word. To assume that old-covenant
regulations are still binding in the face of New
Testament silence is bad enough—for the New
Testament nowhere commands the Christian com-
munity to keep the Sabbath. But how can we con-
tinue defending Sabbatarianism in the light of such
clear statements as Romans 14:5, Galatians 4:10
and Colossians 2:167 Any sensible man in the street
who has no theological ax to grind can understand
the gist of these passages.
8. Evangelical Adventism is trying to make a
synthesis between the gospel and the Adventist
system. The Council of Trent and John Henry
Newman demonstrate that the gospel cannot be
maintained in a synthesis theology. We have seen
one explanation for 1844 after another fail. This
doctrine cannot be supported by the vague apotel-
esmatic schema. Given the choice .between the
pioneer arguments for 1844 and the apotelesmatic
apology for 1844, the leaders of the church have
recognized that the former are far more solid—and
I agree with them. The apotelesmatic principle is
like a parable or an analogy—it may illustrate a
point, but it provides no basis for dogmatic asser-
tion. As an interpretive device, it is somewhat like
seeing patterns in the clouds—everyone sees-what
he wants to see.
Trying to vindicate 1844 with the gospel consti-
tutes the greatest prostitution of the gospel. We
only need to answer one question: Did God send us
the gospel to vindicate our super-elitism (based on
.the phony 1844 doctrine) or to call us to repent-
ance? If evangelical Adventists think they can now
use the gospel to justify the Adventist system, they
will produce a super-Adventism—a cult Within the
cult. What traditional Adventism has failed to do,
they think the gospel will give them power to do
—namely; to capture the world with its phony
peanut-butter subculture. Spare the world such a
disaster!
Evangelical Adventism is traveling the road of
an Adventist offshoot. But there is no viability in
an Adventist offshoot. It will end in swift and sud-
den disaster. A religious existence on the fringes of
Adventism offers no future. Far, far better to be an
 orthodox member of the Adventist system.
There is only one authentic form of Adventism.
The original charter-comprising the sanctuary doc-
trine, the Spirit of-Prophecy and the Sabbath ad-
-inits no compromise or modification. An authentic
Adventist believes that a new event of redemptive
significance took place in 1844, he believes in the
full authority of Ellen White, and he believes that
the Sabbath is the sign of God's special people. If
a person cannot be an authentic Adventist, he
should not be a phony one. Evangelical Adventists
must decide whether to submit to that system or
obey the gospel, for the gospel has broken through
the Adventist system and has left it shattered
beyond repair. The new wine cannot be placed in
the old wineskins.