Clearing 1888 reflections of false concepts
---It
is a false idea that 1888 was a paradigm shift in Adventism from “legalism” to “more
Christ approach”. Why? The source of A. V. Olson cited many
cases of a proper understanding of Salvation by Christ and no salvation in one’s
own works. Righteousness by Faith and necessity of
Christ was preached Ellen White on the following dates before 1888: Profession Not Enough: Review and Herald, Jan. 25, 1887, p. 491. Too Much Formality: Ibid., Feb. 15, 1887, p. 97. Like the Pretentious Fig Tree: Ibid. A Revival of True Godliness: Ibid., March 22, 1887, pp. 177, 178. Pretended or Real Connection With Christ: Ibid., Dec. 13, 1887, p. 769. The Presence of Jesus Needed: Ibid., April 17, 1888, p. 242. The Solemn Question how we stand before God: Ibid., July 24, 1888, p. 465. Arguments Not
Enough: Ibid., Aug. 28, 1888, p. 546.
Source:
A. V. Olson, Through Crisis to Victory 1966 online downloaded from https://documents.adventistarchives.org/Books/TCV1966.pdf ---------------------------------- ---It
is a false idea to say that Adventism rejected the message of Righteousness by
Faith at 1888. Why? There were three groups listening to
the messages of Waggoner and Jones: those who accept it, those who countered it
and those who were just floating along without expression of feelings. A T Jones on 7th
of February 1893 at the GC at Battle Creek: "I know
that some there [at Mineapolis 1888] accepted it; others rejected it entirely.
. . . Others tried to stand half way between, and get it that way." —General
Conference Bulletin, 1893, p. 185. ---Truth is that there were differences of
opinion (A. V. Olson 1966 p. 36). ----------------------------------- The three groups
differentiation of ideas is also mentioned by A. G. Daniels A. G. Daniells—who
was then a successful young worker in New Zealand, but who thirteen years later
(1901) became president of the General Conference, and who continued to be
president for twenty-one years—observes in his book Christ Our Righteousness: "The
message was not received alike by all who attended the Conference; in fact,
there was serious difference of opinion concerning it among the leaders. This
division of opinion may be classified as follows: "Class 1.—Those
who saw great light in it and gladly accepted it.
. . . "Class 2.—There
were some, however, who felt uncertain about the 'new
teaching,' as they termed it. They seemed unable to grasp it... . "Class 3.—But
there were others who were decidedly opposed to the
presentation of the message."—Edition of 1926, pp. 56, 57; ed. of 1941, pp. 41,
42. -------------------------------------- ---It
is a false idea that Ellen White supported every theology of Waggoner (37 years
old) and Jones (33 years old) Why? “Dr. Waggoner has spoken to us in a straightforward manner. There is
precious light in what he has said. Some things
presented in reference to the law in Galatians, if I fully understand his position,
do not harmonize with the understanding I have had of this subject; but
truth will lose nothing by investigation….” Also she said about the hermeneutics of
Waggoner the following: “Some interpretations of Scripture given by Dr. Waggoner I do not regard
as correct. But I believe him to
be perfectly honest in his views, and I would respect his feelings and treat
him as a Christian gentleman.” Manuscript 15,
1888. See Appendix A, pages 294-302, for the full sermon. Olson page 54 ------------------------------------- ---Ellen
White says the Message of 1888 is unto Holiness "The
present message—justification by faith—is a message from God; it bears the
divine credentials, for its fruit is unto holiness."
—Review and Herald, Sept. 3, 1889, p. 545. ------------------------------------- ---Ellen White says the fullness of the Godhead is in
Christ 1890 reflecting on 1888 "Messages
bearing the divine credentials have been sent to God's people; the glory, the
majesty, the righteousness of Christ, full of goodness and truth, have been
presented; the fullness of the Godhead in Jesus Christ has
been set forth among us with beauty and loveliness, to charm all whose hearts
were not closed with prejudice. ---Review and Herald, May 27, 1890, p. 321. ------------------------------------- ---It
is not a new message for Ellen White since she has been preaching it for 40/45
years " 'I have
had the question asked, What do you think of this light that these men are
presenting? Why, I have been presenting it to you for
the last forty-five years—the matchless charms of Christ. This is what
[I] have been trying to present before your minds. When Brother Waggoner brought
out these ideas in Minneapolis, it was the first clear teaching on this subject
from any human lips I had heard, excepting the conversations between myself and
my husband.' "—Manuscript
5, 1889, pp. 9, 10. See her words at the camp meeting held at Rome, New York,
on June 17, 1889. ------------------------------------ ---Ellen
White’s agenda for the Message of 1888 was differing from Waggoner and Jones "The doctrine of justification by faith
has been lost sight of by many who have professed to believe the third angel's
message. . . . "God has
raised up men to meet the necessity of this time. . . . Their work is not only
to proclaim the law, but to preach the truth for this
time,—the Lord our righteousness."—August 13, 1889, p.
514; in Selected Messages, book 1,
pp. 360, 361. (Italics supplied.) ---She is concerned with the “backsliding
attitudes of attendees at the conference”. ---She consider Waggoner and Jones to
preach law but also gospel.
------------------------------------ ----It
was not new light that Waggoner and Jones brought, said Ellen White Why? “This was no new light, but
it was old light placed where it should be in the third angel's message. . . . "The faith
of Jesus has been overlooked and treated in an
indifferent, careless manner. It has not occupied the prominent position
in which it was revealed to John.” "Looking
Back at Minneapolis," Manuscript 24, 1888 (written about November or
December, 1888. ------------------------------------ To Summarize: So what did Ellen White support in the men's message of 1888? ---The enthusiasm
of the Message. The honest presentation of the
Message. The emphasis of the Message of
uplifting Christ. The attitude of the two
presenters of the Message. The appeal of the
Message as timely needed due to backsliding and carelessness to this message
that she has been writing about for 45 years. But, she did not accept their theology of the Message. She had
differences with the biblical content of their Message, as she explicitly said
above in statements.