You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Question:
Is there any source material for the firing of Uriah Smith?
For some Adventists the claim seems unbelievable.
Here is a quote from EGW that seems to challenge the idea that she had something to do with Smith being fired or that he ever was fired.
"I feel a strong sympathy for Elder Smith, and I believe that his name should always appear in the Review as the name of the leading editor. Thus God would have it. When, some years ago, his name was placed second, I felt hurt. When it was again placed first, I wept, and said, "Thank God." May it always be there, as God designs it shall be, while Elder Smith's right hand can hold a pen. And when the power of his hand fails, let his sons write at his dictation." {2SM 225.3}
What evidence is there to support a claim that Uriah Smith was fired and that Ellen White had something to do with it?
Marvin, Florida
Offline
Uriah Smith & 1888
The Denomination has created and preserved a large database of records from the Battle Creek era. This vast collection contains written eyewitness accounts from Uriah Smith, President’s Butler and Daniels, as well as from Ellen White and her manager son WC White, and many more. It’s as if we have their recordings and can listen as they speak to one another through their letters. As a result, there is more than enough detailed information to understand exactly what the 1888 issues were about and what they were not.
Unfortunately, when the time came for the 1888 story to be made public in Takoma Park, a fabrication was substituted, which has profoundly misdirected the Advent Movement to this very day. In fact, it was Froom’s official work on 1888 that set the stage for the misguided Righteousness by Faith debates of the 1970’s that resulted in the catastrophe of Glacier View in 1980. Adventism has been in free fall ever since.
Froom loudly refuted the critics that claimed the church rejected the 1888 message. He bent over backwards to show that Uriah Smith and Butler and most everyone else eventually embraced the new light that came to the church through Waggoner and Jones. Consequently, the Denomination has no reason to repent about 1888. Case closed.
Listen to Froom’s “Unjustifiable Charge of Leadership Unfaithfulness”
1. CONTENTION OF LEADERSHIP BETRAYAL.—There is one contention that, regrettably, has periodically been brought forward that needs to be considered frankly in our quest for historic truth. Ever since the 1888 tensions there have been recurrent harpers on the note that the Church, and primarily its leaders, actually rejected the Message of 1888—at and following that fateful hour of trial.
This is perhaps as suitable a place as any to examine its validity—for echoers still persist, maintaining that the leadership of the Movement, at that time, "rejected" the message of Righteousness by Faith, and thereby incurred the continuing disfavor of God. MOD p 357.
It is well to note that after the '88 Session adjourned, men had time to reflect more calmly than was possible during those tense weeks; concerning the issues and principles involved at Minneapolis. There was a gradual turning to the right, though with some continuing division, but with increasing acceptance of Righteousness by Faith. G. I. Butler, J. H. Morrison, I. D. Van Horn, W. H. Littlejohn, R. A. Underwood, and others, had rallied around Uriah Smith at the Conference.
On the other side, along with Waggoner and Jones had stood Ellen White, S. N. Haskell, W. C. White, R. M. Kilgore (though not at first), W. W. Prescott, A. 0. Tait, J. 0. Corliss, and various others—and 0. A. Olsen, when he arrived in the States.
These were of the "some" who clearly accepted and championed the message of Righteousness by Faith. There was still that other "some," who first vacillated in uncertainty. But the proportions changed with time—more and more accepting the Minneapolis Message and rejoicing in it. That should never be forgotten, but often is. P362
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the highest church leaders endorsed Froom’s official 1888 account, it has turned out to be a travesty and fraud. Froom not only covered up the real issues, he also hid the fact that both Uriah Smith and Butler never accepted the 1888 message, even though he had the primary sources (letters) from Smith, Butler, WC White, and AG Daniels, etc that showed the facts. Not only did the Takoma Park apologists hide the facts, Froom also invented and promoted myths, further misdirecting the Adventist Community.
However, this massive fraud would only work so long as the White Estate suppressed and hid documents. Which is what they did with gusto for generations. This is why the White Estate was operated like a fortress protecting State secrets. They were hiding the real story of 1888.
I have been in the White Estate; there I found a large collection of hidden documents, including letters and dairies that tell the real story of 1888. Arthur White, Olsen, Froom, and many others, including Bill Johnsson, have been very dishonest. These incompetent leaders have been deceiving the church for generations about both church history and doctrine.
This explains why we are all shocked today to hear the true story about Uriah Smith and 1888. It is so very different, even the opposite, from what the church teaches.
Hidden Documents in White Estate
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Estate.htm
While the White Estate has released much of this material today, they have done so in a manner that makes it difficult to understand. In fact, some of these letters about Uriah Smith being removed from the Review were published by Pacific Press as part of the large 1888 dump from the White Estate in 1987. However, few had any idea what they said, much less what they meant. This was by design because the church does not want to face up to their massive 1888 fraud, much less to the explosive issues that this conflict will still ignite. So they refuse to this day to admit guilt and correct the record.
Regardless how long it has taken to understand the facts about 1888, the evidence today is clear; the Denomination has been covering up the 1888 conflict with one fabrication and fraud after another. The White Estate is a crime scene, not an honest reflection of Ellen White’s views. It is time for such corruption to stop and for the facts to replace myths - so the record can be corrected.
So the real question is not whether Uriah Smith, at the end of his life, was removed as Review Editor, (he was), but why? The answer uncovers the explosive doctrinal issues about 1888 that the Denomination has been suppressing for generations, even as it disproves the claim that the church accepted the 1888 message.
While the 1888 conflict is complex, it can be simply reduced to a battle between the powerful theologian Uriah Smith versus Ellen White, a popular founder with spiritual gifts. This battle is still ongoing today because the White Estate has long ago taken the side of Smith, all the while suppressing Ellen White’s true views. The results speak for themselves; the Advent movement is once again self-destructing.
It is time for Ellen White’s side of the 1888 story to be honestly told. Although the Takoma Park apologists correctly portrayed Uriah Smith as the greatest of all Adventist theologians, fully supported by Ellen White, this is not true. After 1888, Ellen White and Uriah Smith disagreed on fundamental points of theology. So much so, that he was demoted in 1897 to associate Editor, and finally lost his editorial position in 1902 due to a doctrinal scandal.
To understand why Uriah Smith was removed as Review Editor, is to understand the heart of 1888 conflict.
Uriah Smith’s “Open and Vicious Attack” Against 1888
Review Editor Smith had been demoted in 1897, replaced by AT Jones, a Gospel reformer. However, Jones left the Review in 1901 and Smith once again became Editor. However, within a short time, President Daniels and the Board removed him because he published a series of anti 1888 articles. Ellen White agreed with the action, but not some others.
Few have heard this account, which shows the traditional church narrative to be fiction.
Today, most everything that Adventists or their critics think they know about church history, including and especially 1888, is twisted and wrong. So while it may be true that Uriah Smith was walking to the Review in 1903 when he died; he had already been removed as Editor, (with pay), replaced by Prescott for attacking the 1888 message.
To be fair, there were some other issues involved, such as Smith’s old age and poor health, as well Smith’s racism, but the real problem was his public attack in the Review against the 1888 theology. Here is a quick look at the real story, which comes directly from eyewitness sources such as Uriah Smith, WC White, and President Daniells.
Uriah Smith Attacked RBF- 1902
Crisis to Victory, now renamed to 13 Crisis Years, (published by the White Estate in 1966), contains a reference to this incident. However, beware; this dishonest work mischaracterizes what took place and purposefully suppresses the facts in order to make Uriah Smith look good. Here is the reason why Smith was removed as Editor:
“In January and February of the year 1902 three articles dealing with the book of Galatians, written by William Brickley, a layman of Kimball, Minnesota, appeared in the Review and created some agitation. A. G. Daniells wrote of this in a letter to George I. Butler, dated April 11, 1902:
"Just before the Week of Prayer a series of articles appeared from one Brother Brickley, on Galatians. They were openly and squarely against the message that came to this people at Minneapolis and that has been embraced by thousands of our people and openly and repeatedly endorsed by the Spirit of prophecy. These articles have caused a great deal of trouble and dissatisfaction among our brethren in different States… Many of our ministers were perfectly astonished that the Review would publish them. They could not believe that they had been read by the editor, and so wrote him.”
In a clear attempt to excuse what Smith had done, Olsen claims that we should not bee too hard on the aging Smith, as he was not in the Review office very much. Listen to this dishonest spin:
“If the reader is tempted to pass judgment upon Elder Smith for having permitted the publication of these articles, he would do well to remember that he was nearing the end of his life (he died March 6, 1903) and that because of his rapidly failing health he was unable to spend much time in the office to oversee his work.” CTV, 1966, p 231
http://documents.adventistarchives.org/ … CV1966.pdf
The Review articles created a storm of controversy, both for and against the 1888 theology. At first, many assumed the anti 1888 articles were an oversight. But after interviewing Uriah Smith, it was discovered there was no mistake. This was intentional. It is what Smith had always believed. Waggoner and Jones were not only incorrect about the law in Galatians, but Smith went on to say that the Sabbath could not be defended with their view:
Listen to Smith defend his 1902 public attacks in the Review against the new 1888 theology:
“It seems to me that one thing is true and sure: if the added law and the schoolmaster referred to in the third of Galatians apply to the moral law, then, when the seed came, that is, when Christ came, there was a change in relation to the law, and we are no longer held by it as a rule of duty.”
Smith the careful theologian, correctly realized that if Waggoner’s view of the law in Galatians was correct, then the 4th Commandment could NOT be binding on anyone. Thus the primary SDA doctrine of the Sabbath would fall, and so too their eschatology.
Smith was clear: “We cannot maintain the perpetuity of the moral law with the view that has been lately introduced; and it seems to me to like making a move backward (underlined by Smith) to give ourselves away to the claims of our opponants.”
“I do not know, and never have known, of a position that fully meets the no law position, except the position that Paul in Galatians refers largely to the ceremonial law; and this does not interfere at all with the question of justification by faith.”
U Smith to LF Trubey, Battle Creek Michigan, Feb 11. 1902, p 312
President AG Daniels, who had previously been in Australia for some time, did not realize how much opposition there was in the US against the 1888 reforms. He was also shocked to discover that Smith and Butler were still opposed to the new 1888 theology. And new ministers were following their views.
In a 1902 letter to WC White, Daniells explains that “brother Smith” is playing a role to “revive the old Minneapolis controversy.” He goes on to speak about how Smith placed a series of anti-1888 articles about the Galatian law in the Review, causing a firestorm.
“These articles were an open and vicious attack on the message of righteousness by faith presented at Minneapolis, and repeated over and over again by brethren Jones and Waggoner and others since that time.”
WC White goes on to say that he assumed it was a “careless editing” and not a “designed controversy,” (which is the position published in CTV.) But WC White goes on to write that he was “surprised” to find out otherwise.
“Finally, I spoke to Elder Smith about them, and suggested that I presumed the articles were put in by a subordinate without examination. But he informed me that this was not the case. He said that he read them himself, and published them because he believed they set forth the truth.”
Smith went on to admit that these anti-1888 articles “taught what this people first taught on the question. And what he still believed.”
In other words, this episode was no accident as the White Estate pretended. Smith knew what he was doing and so too does the dishonest White Estate in covering up the facts.
Butler Supports Smith
Smith’s removal as Editor made the Old Covenant crowd angry. Butler sided with Smith and was furious. He told Daniells “how he felt about the message Jones and Waggoner brought to this Denomination in 1888.” Butler “spoke especially of their position on the law and the covenants” and said “with considerable emphasis, that he never could see light in their special messages, and that he had never taken his position.” Daniels to WC White, June 21, 1910, page 3.
As rumors were swirling about Smith’s removal as Editor, Daniels pushed back. George Butler “seems to have been informed by some brother minister in Battle Creek. I am sure from what he writes that someone has written him a false account of our dealing with brother Smith. We could not have treated anybody more considerably than we did brother Smith. Our action was taken with the deepest convictions that something must be done in order to place the Review on the highest plane…We are called and pledged to a great reform…”
In a reference to 1888, Daniells said: I am sorry to say that Brother Smith does not stand with us in all this work of reform. There is much about it that he does not understand…”
Daniells also regretted that so many were “still under the Old Covenant of works,” and that “the younger fellows who are coming on have imbibed these old heresies from the men in the field, who are still unconverted to this new light.” (p4)
Daniels had no regrets about removing Smith as Editor. After he “learned that Brother Smith is utterly at variance with the teaching, and that he is free to see it opposed in public and private, I feel clearer still that we have done right in placing Brother Prescott on the Editorial staff… God has put his seal of approval on the message that came at Minneapolis, and I can not understand how a man can proclaim his unbounded confidence in the Spirit of Prophecy, and reject the Minneapolis message.” (p5)
(A.G. Daniells to W.C. White, April 14, 1902, in Manuscripts and Memories of Minneapolis, p. 321).
http://www.lightbearers.org/the-old-covenant-brood/
Smith correctly understood that Waggoner’s new view of the Two Covenants would force a change in the doctrine of the Sabbath. As the gatekeeper for SDA doctrine, Smith viewed it his duty to protect the 4th commandment at all costs, even if it meant he had to stand up to Ellen White, which he did.
Smith pushed back hard in defense of the traditional SDA view that the law in Galatians was ceremonial, refusing to concede any doctrinal ground to Waggoner, who claimed it was also the Moral law. By 1891, in spite of Ellen White’s efforts to promote New Covenant Adventism, Uriah Smith had not changed his mind about the Law in Galatians or the Two Covenants.
However, both Waggoner and Ellen White were exiled from Battle Creek in an obvious political move. But it was too late. Many had already heard this new light about the New Covenant. Such views were a breath of fresh air for the Adventist community, which was also confused and divided by this debate. While many SDA’s embraced the new theology, most of the leaders, especially Uriah Smith, rejected Waggoner’s correct views on the Two Covenants.
From his powerful position as Editor of the Review, Smith led the charge against the 1888 theology. He championed his Old Covenant views on the Two Covenants that he published in the 1860’s and became the ringleader against what Ellen White called “new light.” By 1892 Ellen White, now in Australia, wrote to Uriah Smith, blaming him for confusing the Denomination about the Gospel and for fighting against Waggoner’s New Covenant theology:
“The many and confused ideas in regard to Christ’s righteousness and justification by faith are the result of the position you have taken toward the man and the message sent of God. But oh, Jesus longs to bestow upon you the richest blessings . . . Justification by faith and the righteousness of Christ are the themes to be presented to a perishing world. Oh, that you may open the door of your heart to Jesus!”
1888 Materials, pp. 1053–1054 Ellen White to Uriah Smith
12 years after 1888, the Battle Creek Denomination collapsed. Legalism was no longer fashionable in Battle Creek, except with the older crowd. By the turn of the century, the unresolved debate about the Two Covenants resulted not only in great doctrinal confusion, but also a backlash against SDA eschatology, including the Sabbath, as Smith predicted. The vast majorly of SDA’s left at this time as the Battle Creek Empire self-destructed, forcing the leaders to retreat to Takoma Park.
Over time, with the 1888 history securely hidden within the White Estate, Smith’s theology, not Waggoner’s became established truth in Takoma Park. Smith was never convinced he was wrong, even as the White Estate also embraced his Old Covenant view, suppressing Ellen White’s opposing position.
Conclusion
The real history of Battle Creek, including and especially the 1888 conflict, is very different from what all SDA’s have been taught. The White Estate is a criminal enterprise; guilty of promoting a massive publishing fraud, which is ongoing to this very day. The Review is also a criminal co-conspiritor in this matter, as is the GC, the owner of the White Estate and the Review.
Although the White Estate has been successful in hiding the 1888 history from generations of trusting SDA’s, they have been caught red handed. Now, in the information age, this massive, long running, publishing fraud will become exposed for all to see. It may even take a class action lawsuit to help everyone understand the scope and depth of this arrogant and massive fraud. The time has come for the Adventist Community to repent and face the real issues.
The 1888 debate, which focused on the differences between the Old and New Covenants, destroyed the 19th century SDA Empire. Uriah Smith refused to embrace the Gospel reforms promoted by Waggoner, Jones and Ellen White. Once in Takoma Park, with Ellen White dead, the Old Covenant men eventually took control of the relocated Denomination and hid the 1888 record so that Smith’s views would prevail. And so they have, with the same sad outcome of confusion, debate, and schism.
As New Covenant proponents came forward in the 20th century, like Dr. Ford, they were attacked by the White Estate and the Review Editors, slandered and exiled from the church; all in an effort to defend Uriah Smith’s Old Covenant views, which had been strongly repudiated by Ellen White.
Enough is enough. It is time for the Review and the White Estate to repent and confess what they have done and correct the record so that the Advent Movement can go forward. It is time for the Adventist Community to hear the truth about Uriah Smith, Ellen White, and 1888. They must demand that their leaders stop this massive fraud, finally telling the truth about church history and doctrine.
Tom Norris for All Experts.Com & Adventist Reform
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … d-1902.htm
Offline
The Myth Of 1888-
http://tinyurl.com/StraightTestimony
http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/sev … CFVFUINTE6
A must read for all SDA's, and everyone else too!
My brother just had them printed, and if you want a printed version it's $20!
Send cash or check to: Ricky Bokovoy (same name for check)
4906 32nd St SW
Pine River, MN 56474
I found the book to be spot on! It is a much-needed book for all of us! Christ being referred to as: He is we! In reference to His sacrifice on the cross! He became our flesh so we could become His spirit! (That would be the super duper short version of this awesome book!)
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B5K5gX … Y3ckU/view
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tom Norris replies:
This book is based on Weiland and Short's false views about the 1888 debates. While they were correct to claim that the White Estate was manipulating and hiding Ellen White's view about 1888, they were very wrong about the actual history. While they were never allowed inside the White Estate vaults, this did not stop them from promoting strange and impossible theories that many gullible SDA's have embraced over the years.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Estate.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … d-1902.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … ection.htm
Today, the SDA's live in a delusional world of their own making, with numerous false accounts of 1888 in circulation. Weiland and Short’s version is just one of many fictional accounts, along with Froom’s account and that of the White Estate.
The fact of the master is this; the SDA leaders in Takoma Park were so embarrassed and confused about what took place in Battle Creek that they hid the record and foisted a fraud on the Adventist Community. The General Conference and the White Estate needs to repent for covering up the 1888 debates and correct the record, being honest about this great feud between Ellen White and Uriah Smith.
Until Adventists can stop embracing both myth and propaganda, they will never understand what 1888 was all about. It is the key that explains where the SDA's went wrong and what they have to do to get back on track.
Today, the SDA’s are very dishonest, disoriented, and confused. They do not understand their own doctrinal development correctly, or what Ellen White was really saying about the Law and the Gospel and the Two Covenants. But the modern leaders could care less. They want nothing to do with the 1888 history, or with Glacier View, which was a repeat of the 1888 debacle. Consequently, they have gone their own way, unable to develop a coherent Gospel message for the 21st century.
Had the Battle Creek SDA’s been open to better understand the Two Covenants and the Gospel, they would have understood that their views about the Sabbath Law and the Gospel were not fully correct and neither were their Sunday based views of eschatology.
The 1888 Gospel debates hold the key to the recovery and rehabilitation of the SDA’s. If they continue to refuse to tell the truth about this important history, they are doomed, and so too any that support their false narratives.
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … oversy.htm
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Question:
Hi, Tom:
I've been reading through your answers regarding the investigative judgment, the new covenant and the Sabbath.
Most of your answers seem to negate existing beliefs.
Now I'm curious as to what you believe and why.
How about some posts on what you believe and why you believe as you do.
Patti
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
21st Century Eschatology
Today, most all the present beliefs about Gospel Eschatology are outdated and wrong. Regardless which denomination, the various views about the Sabbath and how the world will end are not credible. This includes the SDA narrative that features obedience to the 4th Commandment and persecution from Sunday Laws.
Unfortunately, as the world becomes more angry and dangerous, there is no credible eschatology for the 21st century, for which Adventists should be ashamed. They invented modern eschatology in the early 1800’s, and every denomination has since followed. But something has gone wrong with Adventism. They no longer search for prophetic truth about the end of the world. Rather, they have made the mistake of trying to protect and promote their outdated 19th century views, which make little sense in the 21st century.
Today, the Advent Movement has stalled; it is being prevented from moving forward as envisioned by the Pioneers. The SDA’s no longer focus on contemporary eschatology or Gospel truth, but on defending useless myths from the past. They have fallen into a deep sleep.
Matt. 25:5 “Now while the bridegroom was delaying, they all got drowsy and began to sleep.
The early Advent Movement, (1st Angels Message) represented cutting edge, 19th century, Protestant eschatology, which was eventually adopted by the modern church. William Miller correctly overturned many years of neglect, error, and tradition about the 2nd Coming and how the world would end. Although every denomination and seminary in 1844 refuted Miller’s pre-millennial teaching that the 2nd Coming was the last judgment and the end of the world, this view eventually changed. Miller was correct. Which is why every church today embraces what they once condemned.
Rev. 1:7 BEHOLD, HE IS COMING WITH THE CLOUDS, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the tribes of the earth will mourn over Him. So it is to be. Amen.
All modern Christians today believe there will be a pre-millennial tribulation just before the literal return of Christ to judge the world. None of Miller’s postmillennial critics are standing today. His core teaching has been vindicated. No denomination or church today teaches that the world is getting better or that Christ will return at the end of the 1,000-year millennium in peace. They all followed Miller and now view the end of the world and the apocalypse as a near term, destructive, literal event.
2Pet. 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
Thanks to Miller and the Adventist Movement he started, the modern church, meaning all denominations, has correctly embraced core Adventist eschatology. All of them.
However, with the inevitable demise of post-millennialism, it soon became apparent to the early Adventists that more details were missing about pre-millennial theology. Thus early Adventism split into many factions, each with a different, pre-millennial view about how the world would end. The SDA’s became the largest and most successful group even though they have collapsed a number of times and are now in danger of another schism.
The early SDA’s also understood that Adventist eschatology was not without error and they struggled to find a prophetic path forward to better understand how the world would end. As we all know, they discovered the 3rd Angels Message, which they added to the previous two Millerite messages. This is where the term “Three Angels Messages” derives.
Rev. 14:9 Then another angel, a third one, followed them, saying with a loud voice, “If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives a mark on his forehead or on his hand,
Rev. 14:10 he also will drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is mixed in full strength in the cup of His anger; and he will be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb.
The SDA contribution to Miller’s paradigm shifting eschatology was known as the Third Angels Message. This small group of Millerites thought they had discovered the genuine New Covenant Sabbath as well as the Mark of beast, Sunday worship. From what they read in Revelation it seemed that the last day events were focused on loyalty to God and 7th day Sabbath obedience.
For better or worse, the SDA’s developed a unique Sabbath-centric formula about how the world would end. It included the demise of America and its’ Constitution, as well as the enforcement of State laws protecting Sunday Sabbath. This unique view of eschatology ended with a Death Decree aimed at those who refused to submit to the Beast Power. The 2nd Coming would rescue the obedient church and destroy their persecutors.
Such Sabbath-centric eschatology, which became very legalistic, is what built the Battle Creek Empire in the 19th century, and also what destroyed it. The Takoma Park SDA’s also collapsed in the late 20th century as millions of SDA’s rejected the Third Angels Message once again.
Today, the SDA view that Sabbath observance is the secret to surviving the last day events is no longer compelling or theologically rational. Such an Old Covenant emphasis on law keeping does not fit with those that understand the New Covenant. Consequently, an inevitable schism typically results whenever the Gospel is emphasized over law in SDA theology.
There can be no denial that modern Adventists lack a coherent, credible, prophetic view of how our contemporary world will end. More than that, their emphasis on Old Covenant doctrines, such as tithing, and male superiority underscore why Adventists cannot grow in educated markets, such as North America. What made sense in the 19th century does not in the 21st. We have much more knowledge today about Gospel eschatology and it is foolish to think otherwise.
Dan. 12:1 “Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued.
Dan. 12:2 “Many of those who sleep in the dust of the ground will awake, these to everlasting life, but the others to disgrace and everlasting contempt.
Dan. 12:3 “Those who have insight will shine brightly like the brightness of the expanse of heaven, and those who lead the many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever.
Dan. 12:4 “But as for you, Daniel, conceal these words and seal up the book until the end of time; many will go back and forth, and knowledge will increase.”
While Adventists always need to remain mindful of the core pillars from the Three Angels Messages, they must stop embracing 19th century myths and errors, and quickly return to their mission of developing contemporary, credible, Gospel based eschatology-- for the 21st century.
History is clear that the Sabbath based eschatology of 3rd Angels Message does not hold up over time. It is full of error. Which is why there has been one schism after another over the years, even as the SDA Denomination is about to split once more. Adventist eschatology is outdated by two centuries.
Moreover, the Sunday versus 7th day debate led the SDA’s into grave legalism, including a false (IJ) judgment, which diverted them away from the Gospel and away from the 2nd Coming as the great Judgment Day. This is why they have nothing credible to say in the 21st century about the end of the world. They lost their focus on Gospel eschatology. They are stuck in the past, meaning the Old Testament and the 19th century.
Let all understand: Adventism is a work in progress. Serious errors that must be corrected at every stage or the paradigm of the 3 A’s will collapse.
Today, there are many obvious theological flaws in the SDA formula that must be corrected or the Movement will die. Denial is not an option. Adventist Reform is necessary because it is the discovery of error, - and its’ correction, that moves the church forward within the Three Angels Messages. This is how the next message is discovered and why it is embraced.
If there were no error in the 1st Angels Message, the Adventists would not have gone forward to discover the next (2nd) message, and so too with the next (3rd) Message. The discovery of error results in correction and forward progress within the Adventist Apocalyptic.
Adventism is a progressive, ecumenical, Protestant movement, developed through a number of distinct phases. This is how the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Angels Messages were developed. (Sabbath reform only became part of Adventist eschatology during the 3rd Message, which started in 1847. Prior to that, the Advent Movement was Sunday based.)
However, after so many years of schism, with millions of SDA’s leaving the church, it would be naïve to assume that the third stage of Adventism contains errorless doctrine or honest history. It is time to face the facts and admit that the 28 Fundamentals are full of myth and error, and so too the Sabbath –centric views about how the world will end.
The Advent Movement needs to better understand the core theology that governs the paradigm of the Three Angels Messages, and go forward with their mission to prepare the church for the end of the world. Now is not the time to become irrelevant or focus on rest. It is time to work.
John 9:4 “We must work the works of Him who sent Me as long as it is day; night is coming when no one can work.
Here is the good news. Although modern Adventism is full of confusion and false doctrine, the theology of the 3rd Angel was never meant to be the final Message that would mobilize the church to prepare for the Tribulation. That is good to know, because SDA theology today cannot be defended, much less presumed to be functional. It is broken beyond repair, even as the 3rd Angels Message has expired and TERMINATED. There is no future for this 19th century law based narrative about how the world will end. It is full of error and must give way to a more Gospel based view of last day events.
Today, few Adventists understand that another prophetic message; known as the 4th Angels Message, plays an important role in SDA theology. This final message was predicted to replace the 3rd Angels Message with improved doctrines, completing Sabbath Reform and propelling the Advent Movement forward as shown in Rev 18. This is the point of Adventism.
Rev. 18:1 After these things I saw another angel coming down from heaven, having great authority, and the earth was illumined with his glory.
Such long overdue prophetic progress is the answer for the present Denominational crisis. Adventists must move forward to the next phase of the Three Angels Messages, which is the 4th Angels Message. This has always been the goal of the SDA Pioneers, especially Ellen White. And now it is the only way forward.
If Adventism wants to capitalize on the growing apocalyptical fears that dominate 21st century culture, they need to repent, correct the historic record to better understand the fundamentals of the Three Angels Messages, and go forward to the next prophetic Message. Whatever is correct and true must be kept in the 4th Angels Message, but any and all errors, like the IJ, or Tithe, will not make the transition.
In order to go forward, Adventists must repent for Glacier View and stop trying to defend their many false doctrines, like the IJ. They must now move forward to develop the 4th and final Advent Message, which features credible Gospel doctrine and eschatology, including the genuine New Covenant Sabbath of Christ and the Eucharist, which uses real wine, not grape juice.
It is futile to try and defend the confused, legalistic, and corrupt 3rd Angels Message. This outdated theological narrative is dysfunctional and unsustainable. Both leaders and people must shun such Old Covenant legalism and migrate forward to the 4th Angels Message, which represents New Covenant eschatology for the 21st century.
The process must first start with repentance, followed by focused Gospel Reform, which also includes Sabbath Reform, organizational re-organization, and eschatological updating.
1. Repentance: The last Church, including SDA’s, must understand that they are spiritually blind and corrupt. Adventists, along with all others, have fallen away from the Gospel teachings of Christ. They do not have near as much truth as they claim, nor does any denomination teach a correct version of the New Covenant Sabbath. Including the SDA’s.
Matt. 3:2 “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”
Rev. 3:17 ‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,
Today, there is no defense for so many to be so wrong about so much in the name of Jesus. All Adventists, both leaders and people, must embrace the Laodicean Message, which is the genuine Pre-Advent Judgment of the last church.
Rev. 3:14 “To the angel of the church in Laodicea write: The Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God, says this:
Rev. 3:15 ‘I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot; I wish that you were cold or hot.
Rev. 3:16 ‘So because you are lukewarm, and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of My mouth.
All in Laodicea are called by Christ to zealously repent for their many false doctrines, not pretend they have Gospel truth when they do not. It is time for SDA’s to pay serious attention to the genuine Pre-Advent Judgment of Christ and repent.
Rev. 3:17 ‘Because you say, “I am rich, and have become wealthy, and have need of nothing,” and you do not know that you are wretched and miserable and poor and blind and naked,
Rev. 3:18 I advise you to buy from Me gold refined by fire so that you may become rich, and white garments so that you may clothe yourself, and that the shame of your nakedness will not be revealed; and eye salve to anoint your eyes so that you may see.
Rev. 3:19 ‘Those whom I love, I reprove and discipline; therefore be zealous and repent.
Luke 13:3 “I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.
The Advent Movement is collapsing, once again because they refuse to repent of the many errors associated with the 3rd Angels Message. Millions have left in anger and regret. It is only a matter of time before there is nothing left but memories. The only solution is to move forward within the Adventist Apocalyptic to the next level, the 4th Angels Message.
2. Gospel Pre-eminent, not Old Covenant Law: All doctrine must comply with the New Covenant teaching of Christ in the Gospels. What Jesus teaches about all things, including the Sabbath or the end of the world is what the church must embrace.
The SDA’s have a very wrong view of the Bible. Contrary to what they teach, the Old Testament is not equal to the New. The NT is far superior. The church is only under the authority of the New Covenant, not the Old.
John 9:39 And Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, so that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind.”
Today, the modern Adventists are blind to the catastrophic 1888 debate over Galatians and the Two Covenants. This is when the SDA error of blending the law and Gospel together destroyed the Battle Creek Empire. The SDA’s, like the Jews, love Old Covenant Law. Which is why they tithe and embrace Jewish Food Laws and demand obedience to the 4th Commandment by not working on the 7th day. They fail to realize that the New Covenant has replaced the Old Covenant, even as the Law of Christ has made the Law of Moses obsolete.
Heb. 8:13 When He said, “A new covenant,” He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear.
Gal. 5:4 You have been severed from Christ, you who are seeking to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.
The SDA’s must stop hiding the great theological debate between Uriah Smith and Ellen White that took place from 1886-1891. This history not only exposes the fatal errors of the 3rd Angels Message, it shows a clear path forward to Gospel Reform and the development of the 4th Angels Message.
3. The Gospel Sabbath: While the SDA’s were correct to expose Sunday worship as false doctrine, they failed to understand that Christ does not teach the 4th Commandment as they assumed. It was Jesus enemies, the Jews that defended and promoted the 4th Commandment. Which Christ broke over and over as he promoted an active and guilt free, 7th day Sabbath for the church.
John 5:16 For this reason the Jews were persecuting Jesus, because He was doing these things on the Sabbath.
John 5:17 But He answered them, “My Father is working until now, and I Myself am working.”
John 5:18 For this reason therefore the Jews were seeking all the more to kill Him, because He not only was breaking the Sabbath, but also was calling God His own Father, making Himself equal with God.
What Jesus teaches about the Sabbath is what the church must embrace. The legalistic SDA’s must repent for misunderstanding the Sabbath teaching of Christ. Under the 4th Angels Message, the genuine 7th day Gospel Sabbath will emerge; both Sunday keepers and Sabbatarians will be condemned for all to see. All must repent for being so wrong about the Gospel.
4. Eschatology; SDA theology must abandon its’ Sunday law obsession and study the Word to better understand eschatology. The end of the world is not about Sunday versus the 4th Commandment. Jesus does not teach such eschatology. But he does teach about the last days, which no denomination has fully understood as yet, including the SDA’s.
Matt. 24:42 “Therefore be on the alert, for you do not know which day your Lord is coming.
Matt. 24:36 “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone.
Matt. 24:37 “For the coming of the Son of Man will be just like the days of Noah.
Matt. 24:38 “For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark,
Matt. 24:39 and they did not understand until the flood came and took them all away; so will the coming of the Son of Man be.
The Adventists are also very wrong to ignore the State of Israel, pretending that it has no place in prophecy. Israel does a play a role in the last days and the sooner this point is understood the better.
1Chr. 17:21 “And what one nation in the earth is like Your people Israel, whom God went to redeem for Himself as a people, to make You a name by great and terrible things, in driving out nations from before Your people, whom You redeemed out of Egypt?
Rom. 11:1 I say then, God has not rejected His people, has He? May it never be! For I too am an Israelite, a descendant of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.
Rom. 11:11 I say then, they did not stumble so as to fall, did they? May it never be! But by their transgression salvation has come to the Gentiles, to make them jealous.
Rom. 11:12 Now if their transgression is riches for the world and their failure is riches for the Gentiles, how much more will their fulfillment be!
5. Tribulation Preparation: True Adventism is about the end of the world. Adventists must not only better understand how the final events will unfold, they must also take action to move out of harms way. There will be a massive terror attack on America; the power grid will go dark. Chaos and horror will result. The church is not prepared in the slightest for the tribulation.
Mark 13:19 “For those days will be a time of tribulation such as has not occurred since the beginning of the creation which God created until now, and never will.
Mark 13:20 “Unless the Lord had shortened those days, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect, whom He chose, He shortened the days.
Rev. 18:19 “And they threw dust on their heads and were crying out, weeping and mourning, saying, ‘Woe, woe, the great city, in which all who had ships at sea became rich by her wealth, for in one hour she has been laid waste!’
Rev. 18:21 Then a strong angel took up a stone like a great millstone and threw it into the sea, saying, “So will Babylon, the great city, be thrown down with violence, and will not be found any longer.
Rev. 18:22 “And the sound of harpists and musicians and flute-players and trumpeters will not be heard in you any longer; and no craftsman of any craft will be found in you any longer; and the sound of a mill will not be heard in you any longer;
Rev. 18:23 and the light of a lamp will not shine in you any longer; and the voice of the bridegroom and bride will not be heard in you any longer; for your merchants were the great men of the earth, because all the nations were deceived by your sorcery.
How can Adventists warn others when they are not prepared?
Rev. 18:2 And he cried out with a mighty voice, saying, “Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great! She has become a dwelling place of demons and a prison of every unclean spirit, and a prison of every unclean and hateful bird.
Rev. 18:4 I heard another voice from heaven, saying, “Come out of her, my people, so that you will not participate in her sins and receive of her plagues;
Those that understand contemporary eschatology will be alert and ready. It is the work of the Advent Movement to articulate how the world will really end and prepare those that are waiting for the 2nd Coming to survive the Time of Trouble, which will not be about Sunday laws.
Matt. 24:14 “This gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all the nations, and then the end will come.
Matt. 24:15 “Therefore when you see the ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION which was spoken of through Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand),
Matt. 24:16 then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains.
Matt. 24:17 “Whoever is on the housetop must not go down to get the things out that are in his house.
Matt. 24:18 “Whoever is in the field must not turn back to get his cloak.
Matt. 24:21 “For then there will be a great tribulation, such as has not occurred since the beginning of the world until now, nor ever will.
Matt. 24:22 “Unless those days had been cut short, no life would have been saved; but for the sake of the elect those days will be cut short.
Additional Information:
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Seventh-Day- … Reform.htm
http://www.atomorrow.net/fluxbb/viewtopic.php?id=234
It is time for the Advent Community to wake up and return to their core mission of preparing the church for the great Tribulation and the end of the world. Adventists must repent and move forward to develop a relevant and credible, Gospel based narrative about how the world ends. This is the reason why SDA’s exist. This is their destiny and heritage.
Mark 13:28 “Now learn the parable from the fig tree: when its branch has already become tender and puts forth its leaves, you know that summer is near.
Mark 13:29 “Even so, you too, when you see these things happening, recognize that He is near, right at the door.
Rom. 13:11 Do this, knowing the time, that it is already the hour for you to awaken from sleep; for now salvation is nearer to us than when we believed.
I hope this helps,
Tom Norris for Adventist Reform
Offline
Pages: 1