Like a phoenix rising from embers, the ideas of the Investigative Judgment arose from the Great Disappointment of October 22, 1844, when Jesus failed to return as William Miller and others predicted. The doctrine followed the discarded Shut Door theory and provided an explanation of an event which supposedly transpired on that day, thus restoring equilibrium to a small group of visionaries, many of whom eventually founded the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This group included Ellen White whom many accepted as having a prophetic gift. Her visions confirmed the Investigative Judgment (Spiritual Gifts, vol. 1, p. 158-159) and lent what her peers considered divine authority to the idea which eventually became the unique doctrine of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
While many Seventh-day Adventists today claim little knowledge of the Investigative Judgment and further assert they don’t consider it very important, General Conference president Jan Paulsen holds a very different opinion. In his address “The Theological Landscape: Perspectives on Issues Facing the World Seventh-day Adventist Church” delivered to a group of 45 church leaders assembled in Greece in the spring of 2002 and later reprinted in the Adventist Review, Paulsen said:
The historic sanctuary message [of which the Investigative Judgment is the central event], based on Scripture and supported by the writings of Ellen White, continues to be held to unequivocally. And the inspired authorities on which these and other doctrines are based, namely the Bible supported by the writings of Ellen White, continue to be the hermeneutical foundation on which we as a church place all matters of faith and conduct. Let no one think that there has been a change of position in regard to this. (italics mine)
Paulsen’s statement underlies all attempts by others in the church to make this difficult, unique, identifying doctrine of Seventh-day Adventism palatable.
Subjective Atonement
Perhaps because of discomfort born of the lack of Biblical support for the Investigative Judgment—perhaps because of several liberal theologians’ discomfort with the idea that God would stage a judgment for the purpose of meting out condemnation to people, the Investigative Judgment has received a new face in some circles during the past two or three decades.
Instead of focusing on the pioneers’ original idea of God poring over the names of those who claim to be Christians to see who deserves salvation, this new interpretation says instead that God’s review of the heavenly books of records is for the purpose of vindicating His character to the watching universe. In the words of Dennis Priebe (an Adventist pastor who spent 11 years on the faculty of Pacific Union College and is currently affiliated with Amazing Facts, an Adventist evangelistic ministry) in the Investigative Judgment “God is opening Himself up for evaluation; in a very real sense He is the One being judged…Remember that the primary issue at stake…is not the destiny of individual persons but the character and methods of the Judge Himself. Satan’s great hope is to catch the Judge in an unfair act—an indefensible verdict, an act of favoritism. God must defend His decisions both to loyal beings and rebellious ones…God is inviting all who care to look over His shoulder as He reviews the records and His own decisions….Without this final judgment no true end to sin could be realized.” (“The Final Verdict”)
Graham Maxwell and Jack Provonsha, who both taught on the Faculty of Religion at Loma Linda University (LLU), are largely credited with introducing the “moral influence theory” into Adventist thought and practice by means of their teaching this view of the atonement to medical and dental students for over two decades. In brief, the moral influence theory claims a subjective view of the atonement. This view holds that the purpose of the cross was to demonstrate to humanity the mercy and love of God. Rather than satisfying the wrath of God or fulfilling a divine demand of sacrifice as atonement for sin, the cross revealed how far God would go in order to draw sinful man to Himself. Christ’s death was an object lesson of God’s love rather than an atonement for sin.
Maxwell has also borrowed from the “governmental theory” of atonement by further asserting that God, being the ruler of the universe, did not need Christ’s death in order to forgive humanity and atone for sin. He could have forgiven mankind just because He chose to, using His prerogative as God.
Both the moral influence theory and the governmental theory stand opposed to traditional Evangelical theology which holds an objective view of the atonement. This view holds that Jesus’ shed blood satisfied God’s justice which demanded the full payment for sin’s penalty. The book of Hebrews strongly supports this view of the atonement. Hebrews 9 and 10 discuss the necessity of Jesus’ blood as the means of paying for sin, thus reconciling rebellious humanity with the Father. Hebrews 9:22 states, “In fact, the law requires that nearly everything be cleansed with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.” According to an objective view of the atonement, death was the penalty God levied against man for sin. In order to save humanity from eternal death, Jesus had to redeem us “from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us” (Galatians 3:13). Thus, by his substitute death, Jesus paid our debt with God (Hebrews 9:14) and satisfied divine justice. God poured His wrath upon Jesus, thereby opening a way for us to be reunited with Him.
Instead of focusing on the pioneers’ original idea of Jesus poring over the names of those who claim to be Christians to see who deserves salvation, this new interpretation says instead that God’s review of the heavenly books of records is for the purpose of vindicating His character to the watching universe.
Graham Maxwell taught on the faculty of religion at LLU from 1961 to 1988. His writing and teaching helped develop the idea in Adventism that the purpose of the cross was not the forgiveness of sins but rather the vindication of the trustworthiness of God’s character. Drawing from Ellen White’s ideas of the Great Controversy, or the supposed war between Christ and Satan, Maxwell helped set the stage for the fairly widespread adoption of the idea that the Investigative Judgment was really for the purpose of revealing and vindicating God’s motives and decisions rather than for the purpose of determining which believers qualified for Christ’s “final atonement”. In his 1987 essay “How God Won His Case”, Maxwell clearly presents his view of God being on trial.
“Unless God wins this war [the Great Controversy] and reestablishes peace in His family,” he states, “our salvation is meaningless.” He further says, “The conflict is over God’s own trustworthiness, and until serious questions concerning His character have been convincingly resolved, what sound basis is there for our faith in Him?” This conflict, Maxwell continues, is not an issue of power but “is over a far more subtle issue: Who is telling the truth, God or the brilliant leader of His Angels [Lucifer]?” God’s claims of His own trustworthiness, he says, mean nothing. He must demonstrate His “trustworthiness over a long period of time and under a great variety of circumstances.”
Maxwell develops his thesis by arguing that this issue of God’s trustworthiness is not only a human concern. He declares that the angels also must see that God is just, and he further claims that Jesus’ death on the cross was not just for humanity. “Christ did not die for sinful men alone,” he says; “He shed His blood for the sinless angels, too! For they, too, needed the faith-confirming message of the cross.” Maxwell makes this claim in spite of Hebrews 2:16 –17 which states, “For surely it is not angels he helps, but Abraham’s descendants. For this reason he had to be made like his brothers in every way, in order that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest in service to God, and that he might make atonement for the sins of the people.”
Maxwell quotes Ellen White to bolster his premise: “The plan of redemption had a yet broader and deeper purpose than the salvation of man. It was not for this alone that Christ came to the earth…but it was to vindicate the character of God before the universe” (Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 68-69).
He concludes with this summary: “That the Sovereign of the universe, who has the power to run His creation any way He wishes, should humbly choose to win our agreement on the basis of adequate evidence is unbelievable—but true….How could a God like this fail to win His case—at least with me and you!”
Maxwell’s view that the cross of Jesus was primarily for convincing God’s creatures that God is loving and just, that it is not for paying the penalty for sin which God demanded, has permeated Adventism during the past 30 years. This interpretation of the atonement has laid the foundation for the corresponding reinterpretation of the Investigative Judgment (now often called the “pre-advent judgment”) which states that God pores over the heavenly records in order to subject them to His creatures’ critical scrutiny that they may see for themselves the validity of His decisions.
Attempts to merge objective atonement with Investigative Judgment
Edward Heppenstall was a professor of theology at La Sierra University and Loma Linda University, and he also taught at Andrews Theological Seminary in Berrien Springs, Michigan. In spite of his comparatively objective view of the atonement, Heppenstall was nonetheless loyal to the prophetic voice of Ellen White and the Adventist doctrine of the Investigative Judgment. In his 1972 book Our High Priest, he deals with this judgment in chapter 6. Heppenstall realized he had to acknowledge texts such as John 5:24 which states that a person who has placed trust in Jesus “does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.” (NASB). At the same time, he had to make sense of the church’s defining doctrine.
In a rather convoluted defense, Heppenstall makes the case that when, as described in Daniel 7, Christ and his followers are given dominion, or the right to rule, they are shown to be worthy of this honor because their character has been vindicated.
Throughout the controversy Satan has called in question God’s very character…The grounding of the judgment in God’s character guarantees the vindication of God and of His saints…In the same way that forgiveness and redemption are exclusively God’s work, so judgment is the vindication of God’s character and of His right to rule. As a consequence, all of God’s creatures throughout the universe will give honor, glory, and praise to God alone. Satan and his followers are dispossessed in order that the righteous love of God may prevail.
The result of Heppenstall’s need to mesh the Investigative Judgment with Biblical statements of believers’ security yielded an interpretation that veils the significance of Jesus’ shed blood as atonement for sin and fails to reckon with God’s justice and wrath against sin. Instead of emphasizing God’s investigation of believers’ qualifications as the authentic doctrine states, Heppenstall argues that this investigation is an opportunity for God to defend His decisions to a watching universe.
God vindicates Himself
In 2000, the Seventh-day Adventist Sabbath School Quarterly dedicated the week of June 17-23 to the study of the Investigative Judgment. Without explaining that the historic (and still current) doctrine of the Investigative Judgment is about delayed atonement and an uncertain future for professed believers, the Quarterly emphasized the vindication of God as the main purpose of the judgment. In the study for June 21 the lesson says, “The evil forces have been passing judgment on God, accusing Him of being precisely the opposite of what He claims to be. God cleared up this distortion on the cross through the sacrificial death of His Son as our substitute. He has also allowed His creatures to be involved in the final judgment in order to witness the justice of His decisions. According to Daniel 7:10, during the Investigative Judgment ‘A thousand thousands ministered to Him; ten thousand times ten thousand stood before Him. The court was seated, and the books were opened.…[Satan] had sought to falsify the word of God and had misrepresented His plan of government before the angels, claiming that God was not just in laying law and rules upon the inhabitants of heaven….Therefore it must be demonstrated before the inhabitants of heaven, as well as of all the worlds, that God’s government was just, His law perfect’ “ (The Great Controversy, p. 498).
The Quarterly continues this theme in the Thursday lesson where it says, “The God who cannot be judged by the universe is willing to allow the universe to witness the wonderful way in which He dealt with the sin problem, thus demonstrating once and for all that the accusations of the evil powers were false. In the final judgment God vindicates Himself.”
This idea that the Investigative Judgment is mainly for the purpose of God defending Himself against Satan’s accusations is articulated clearly by John McLarty. McLarty pastors the North Hill Christian Fellowship, a Seventh-day Adventist church in Federal Way, Washington, and he is also the editor of Adventist Today. In an article entitled “Why I Like the Investigative Judgment” in the September/October, 1998 edition of Adventist Today, McLarty says,
Someone with the power of God could have all of us singing his praise even if he were the devil himself. He could hoodwink or coerce all of us into paying obeisance. The great value of the Investigative Judgment is its role in the process which will expose to human scrutiny every detail of God’s interaction with his creation. God will ultimately have no secrets beyond the mystery of his tenacious love. Our final worship will be based on perfect knowledge, not on blind faith.
According to Adventist theology, God is not satisfied to be right. He will not rest on “Because I’m God” as the answer to questions raised by human reasoning. Instead, he has promised that eternity will not begin until every human question has been answered to our satisfaction….Most importantly, [the Investigative Judgment] is a crucial element in God’s plan to reveal himself and make himself accountable even to us for how he runs the universe.
What’s wrong here?
In spite of its kinder, gentler face, this “reinterpreted Investigative Judgment” is no more faithful to the Bible than is the official doctrine. In some ways, it is even more demoralizing. While it neglects to stress the incomplete atonement and the lack of security inherent in the original doctrine, thus superficially relieving Adventists of their continual sense of guilt and failure, it still fails to teach the all-sufficiency of Jesus’ atonement, thus depriving them of believers’ security. This reinterpreted version also deprives them of the reassurance that God is fully sovereign.
A truly sovereign God does not have to “earn” the right to rule, nor does He have to answer to His creations regarding His decisions. A God who is truly God of all does not have to prove to anyone that He is fair and Satan is lying. A truly sovereign God is not locked in a battle with Satan whose outcome is yet to be seen.
First, the outcome of Satan’s struggle against God has already been decided. Colossians 2:15 clearly says, “And having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross.” Jesus’ victory over Satan, who has exposed himself as the enemy of God and man, is also demonstrated in Matthew 12:22-29, Luke 10:17-19, and Romans 16:20.
Second, the Bible clarifies that we are not to suppose we can expect Him to explain Himself to us so we fully understand His reasoning. Neither does the Bible suggest that God does any sort of accounting to justify Himself to the universe.
Ultimately, God has the last word in the universe. He never promises that He will answer all our questions on this side of eternity, nor does He seek to justify Himself to us.
The Bible clearly states God’s sovereign authority. At the end of the book of Job, after Job and all his friends had expressed their understanding of themselves and of God, God spoke. “Who is this that darkens my counsel with words without knowledge? Brace yourself like a man; I will question you, and you shall answer me” (Job 39:2). Then, following a series of rhetorical questions and challenges no human could answer, God said, “Will the one who contends with the Almighty correct him? Let him who accuses God answer him!”(Job 40:2) Again God questions Job, and finally Job realizes that he, the “righteous” man he believed himself to be, had no answer for God, nor did he have any merit to recommend him to God for special treatment or knowledge. Job, the “righteous” man, ultimately realizes he must bow to God and repent in dust and ashes (Job 42:6). Without ever having his questions answered or understanding what lay behind God’s permission of his suffering, Job humbly submitted to God’s sovereign authority and worshiped Him because He was God.
Romans 9 also teaches the sovereignty of God. Paul quotes Isaiah 29:16 and 45:9 in verse 20 where he says, “But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? ‘Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, “why did you make me like this?”’ Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?” (Romans 9:21)
Ultimately, God has the last word in the universe. He never promises that He will answer all our questions on this side of eternity, nor does He seek to justify Himself to us. On the contrary, God “works out everything in conformity with the purpose of his will” (Ephesians 1:11).
God’s Wisdom Revealed
To be sure, God reveals His wisdom to the “rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms” (Ephesians 3:10). This revelation, though, is not a self-absolving “proof” that He is trustworthy or just, as so many of us have been taught. Neither is it attached to an “Investigative Judgment”.
What God reveals is His eternal intention for mankind and the effect of salvation on humanity: the mystery of God’s Spirit indwelling Christ-followers and bringing them to new life and to unity. This is not a unity of “tolerance” but of sharing the presence of the Eternal God through the miracle of new birth.
In Ephesians 2:8-9, Paul explains that God gave him the work of explaining to everyone “the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things.”
Paul identifies this mystery hidden in God for ages past as “Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge”(Colossians 2:2,3) who now lives in us who believe and who now is our “hope of glory”(Colossians 1:27).
Jesus—the mystery of God—changed history by opening a “new and living way”(Hebrews 10:20) to the Father with His shed blood (Hebrews 9:12) and by sending the Holy Spirit—God Himself—to indwell everyone who surrenders to Jesus as his Savior (Ephesians 1:13; Colossians 1:27). Ancient Israel never imagined the reality of God becoming man, paying for sins with His blood, and making rebels into children born of God through the Holy Spirit (John 1:12-13; 3:1-8; Romans 8:15-17).
This revelation of God’s wisdom through us, the church, is possible only because when we are in Christ, our judgment was completed on the cross.
The mystery of Christ, however, extends beyond the person and work of Jesus. It is also through His work in the church that God reveals His multifaceted wisdom “to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms”(Ephesians 3:10). God is glorifying Himself through all those who, through faith in Jesus and His completed work on the cross, are brought to life and unity of purpose through the indwelling Holy Spirit. Nowhere does the Bible suggest God “proves” Himself just and trustworthy by opening the books of record and displaying His righteous judgments to the universe. God is never on trial. On the contrary, He is the righteous judge, (2 Timothy 4:8) and He will judge the world (Acts 17:31; Romans 3:5-6). It is not records of facts which bring glory to God. Rather, by placing His presence in the world by means of new creations born of God, He reveals His unimaginable wisdom.
This revelation of God’s wisdom through us, the church, is possible only because when we are in Christ, our judgment was completed on the cross. As creatures born of the Spirit, we share in Christ’s death and resurrection (Romans 6:5). We are no longer condemned, and we pass from death to life (John 3:18; 5:24). We are not subject to any ongoing Investigative Judgment; our future is secure.
Mythical Judgment
In summary, the idea of the Investigative Judgment is fatally flawed.
No matter how it is explained, the Investigative Judgment has not changed, and, as Paulsen confirmed, it will not change. Any variations one hears on this theme are simply attempts to make it more palatable. To borrow a quotation from Dale Ratzlaff, “Black is now white, but the color has not changed.”
The original, authentic doctrine of the Investigative Judgment is flawed not only because it has no sound Biblical basis but also because it denies that Jesus completed His work of atonement at the cross. True Christ-followers are not awaiting judgment or “final atonement”. They have “crossed over from death to life” (John 5-24), are seated with Christ in heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6), and are eternally secure (John 10:27-30).
The “vindication of God” version of the Investigative Judgment is equally flawed. Like the authentic doctrine, it has no sound Biblical basis. While it does not overtly stress incomplete atonement or the uncertainty of passing God’s inspection, it diminishes God’s sovereignty and veils the cross. It suggests the greatest universal issue is the trustworthiness of God, not the destruction of sin and the exaltation of the Lord Jesus. It denies the power and authority of Jesus’ blood to repair the universe and presents God as having to win by persuasion the right to rule. It further obscures God’s holiness and justice by denying His wrath against evil and His authority to destroy sinners who have refused to submit to Him and to accept the righteousness of Christ.
The Investigative Judgment is not only a clumsy effort to save face when a faulty prophecy failed; it has also become a doctrine that denies the sovereign rule of the Lord Jesus and the glory that is His because He is the Lamb slain from the creation of the world (Revelation 13:8). Instead of exalting the Creator’s glory above all, this doctrine elevates the creatures’ importance, suggesting we can demand answers from a God who had no beginning and who spoke the universe into existence.
This doctrine obscures the glory and majesty of Jesus from an entire denomination. As long as one lives in the shadow of the Investigative Judgment, however one interprets it, that person cannot experience the unspeakable joy of security in Christ. He cannot experience Him as the exalted Lord who is worthy of our praise and worship because He bore our sins, died our death, and finished His atonement at the cross. He cannot experience the wonder of Jesus being all he needs and filling his heart with God’s glory.
A person living in the shadow of the Investigative Judgment cannot experience these things because it hides the real Jesus and His finished work.
In spite of its difficulties, however, the doctrine persists. No matter how pastors, theologians, or teachers reinterpret it, the Investigative Judgment remains the church’s only unique doctrine, and it underlies all of Adventist theology. Even those who attempt to force it to conform more closely to Evangelical theology know they cannot let it go. The Investigative Judgment must remain if Adventism is to remain. General Conference president Jan Paulsen’s words leave no room for doubt: “The historic sanctuary message, based on Scripture and supported by the writings of Ellen White, continues to be held to unequivocally…Let no one think that there has been a change of position in regard to this.”
Yet the Biblical truth remains: in Jesus our judgment is past. In Jesus our eternity is certain. In Jesus our hearts rest.
Because Jesus was obedient unto death, every knee will bow before Him; every tongue will confess that He is Lord to the glory of God the Father (Philippians 2:10-11).
“Worthy is the Lamb, who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and strength and honor and glory and praise! To him who sits on the throne and to the Lamb be praise and honor and glory and power, for ever and ever!” (Revelation 5: 12, 13)
Amen. †
- May 4–10, 2024 - May 2, 2024
- We Got Mail - May 2, 2024
- April 27–May 3, 2024 - April 25, 2024