The Adventist/Protestant Dilemma

MYLES CHRISTIAN | Host, Answering Adventism

What is the Law/Gospel Distinction?

It has been the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s appeal since their inception that they stand on the shoulders of the Protestant Reformers. This claim has often been used to try and bolster their legitimacy by seeking to add some sort of theological street credit to their movement, claiming to use the same hermeneutical principles of biblical interpretation that the Reformers used. By borrowing ideas and words from the covenant theology model of biblical interpretation, Adventists have built inroads into evangelical circles, masquerading as just another Protestant denomination.

Yet this Adventist posing as Protestant belies the fact that they have warped the heart of Reformation teaching: the law-gospel distinction.

Oftentimes it is believed that the law-gospel distinction is a distinctly Lutheran belief. And to that I can give a hearty amen—sort of. That’s because this idea was at the heart of the Protestant Reformation universally. Whether it was Luther in Germany, Calvin and Knox in France and Geneva, or Thomas Cranmer in England—the law-gospel distinction was a universally understood benchmark for the proper understanding and handling of God’s Word. Writing about this distinction in his Systematic Theology, Dutch theologian Louis Berkhof succinctly explains what exactly this doctrine is:

“The Churches of the Reformation from the very beginning distinguished between the law and the gospel as the two parts of the Word of God as a means of grace. This distinction was not understood to be identical with that between the Old and the New Testament, but was regarded as a distinction that applies to both Testaments. There is law and gospel in the Old Testament, and there is law and gospel in the New. The law comprises everything in Scripture which is a revelation of God’s will in the form of command or prohibition, while the gospel embraces everything, whether it be in the Old Testament or in the New, that pertains to the work of reconciliation and that proclaims the seeking and redeeming love of God in Christ Jesus.”—Louis Berkhof, Systematic Theology, 4th edn. 1941, pg. 612.

In other words, the law-gospel distinction says that in both Old and New Testaments a statement is either of law or of gospel. Anything pertaining to a command or prohibition, therefore, is a statement of law, and anything pertaining to mercy, grace, forgiveness, reconciliation, and so forth is a statement of gospel. Thus, the law says “Do”, and the gospel says “Done”.

The category into which a statement fits informs how the statement is to be applied and understood. As Martin Luther so nicely put it:

“Hence, whoever knows well this art of distinguishing between Law and Gospel, him place at the head and call him a doctor of Holy Scripture.”—Dr. Martin Luthers Sämmtliche Schriften, St. Louis ed. (St. Louis: Concordia Publishing House, N.D.), vol. 9, col. 802.

A similar thing was said by John Calvin’s successor, Theodore Beza, who wrote:

“We divide this Word into two principal parts or kinds: the one is called the ‘Law,’ the other the ‘Gospel.’ For all the rest can be gathered under the one or other of these two headings…Ignorance of this distinction between Law and Gospel is one of the principal sources of the abuses which corrupted and still corrupt Christianity.”—Theodore Beza, The Christian Faith, 1558.

A failure to recognize this law-gospel distinction down through history has led to numerous distortions of the pure, unadulterated gospel of Jesus Christ. When statements of law are taken to be gospel one is left with…well, no gospel at all.

The Adventist Appeal

As can be seen in his 2009 paper titled Justification By Faith: An Adventist Understanding, Adventist theologian and former Andrews seminary professor Peter M. van Bemmelen writes:

“Adventists have always perceived themselves as heirs of the great truths recovered and proclaimed by the Protestant Reformers.”

We also see in the Seventh-day Adventists Believe fundamental beliefs book that they seek to pay lip service to the law-gospel distinction where they write:

“Salvation is a gift that comes by grace through faith, not by works of the law (Eph. 2:8).

“No deed of the law, no effort however commendable, and no good works—whether they be many or few, sacrificial or not—can in any way justify the sinner (Titus 3:5, Rom. 3:20). Throughout scripture, there is a perfect harmony between the law and the gospel, each upholding the other.”—Seventh-day Adventists Believe, pg. 278.

So that settles it, right? The Seventh-day Adventist Church is an heir to the Reformation and the great truths recovered therein.In fact, they plainly state that salvation is a gift by grace through faith, not through the law, which means they must be a staunchly Protestant body, right?

Wrong.

In true Adventist fashion, this statement is classic Adventist double-speak. Only when one peels back the layers of their lingo to see how things are being defined does one realize what’s actually being said. In order to accurately examine the meaning underlying statements such as the quote above, we appeal to Adventism’s highest interpretive authority: the movement’s own prophetess—Ellen G. White. In her numerous statements we find the key to unlocking the Adventist code hidden within its “official” and “unofficial” declarations.

Testing the Claim

In the September 27, 1881, issue of the Seventh-day Adventist official publication The Review & Herald, Ellen White said the following:

“God has given man a complete rule of life in his law. Obeyed, he shall live by it, through the merits of Christ. Transgressed, it has power to condemn. The law sends men to Christ, and Christ points them back to the law.”—Review and Herald, September 27, 1881.

This statement flies in the face of the law-gospel distinction. In true Ellen White fashion, she makes a seemingly sound statement immediately followed by a poisonous one. It is true that the law points a person to Jesus, but then she adds that Jesus then turns you right back around and sends you back to the law. Consistent with Adventist teaching, Jesus is seen here as a conduit or a gateway for one to be able to do something one couldn’t previously do. 

In other words, He isn’t primarily our substitute and Savior; rather, He is our “enabler”. In this case, EGW says that Christ now gives us the ability to try and keep the law and eventually do so perfectly with His help.

This same thing is seen in the same paper in 1901 where she said:

“God will test all, even as He tested Adam and Eve, to see whether they will be obedient. Our loyalty or disloyalty will decide our destiny. Since the fall of Adam, men in every age have excused themselves for sinning, charging God with their sin, saying that they could not keep His commandments. This is the insinuation Satan cast at God in heaven. But the plea, “I cannot keep the commandments,” need never be presented to God; for before Him stands the Saviour, the marks of the crucifixion upon His body, a living witness that the law can be kept. It is not that men cannot keep the law, but that they will not.”—The Review & Herald, May 28, 1901.

Here we see the connection that this idea has to the fictional great controversy worldview. Ellen White taught that Jesus came to vindicate the law of God, to silence Satan, and to prove that fallen man can keep the law with Jesus’s help—and these obedient sinners, too, help to silence Satan and to vindicate God from Satan’s accusations.

The two statements quoted above, which were made 20 years apart from one another—1881 and 1901—show us that Ellen and the great controversy worldview teach that the law first sends one to Christ who bears the marks of the crucifixion. These marks then communicate to a person that the law cannot be changed, and perfect obedience to the law is what is required in order to be fitted for heaven. Thus, in the great controversy scenario, by coming to Jesus in faith, He will then point each person back to the law with a newly acquired ability to keep the law. A person is then on the pathway to eternal life, conditional upon one’s attaining of perfect obedience to the law.

In another quotation from The Review and Herald dated 1889 we read:

“And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.” Gen. 5:24. It is only a short journey to the heavenly hills, brethren, if we walk with God. In John 15:10, Jesus tells us he kept his Father’s commandments. He did not say, “I am trying to keep” them, but he says, “I have kept” them. So it is not enough that we try to keep the commandments. We must keep them. The character of the saints is not established by their failures to keep the commands of God, but by their success in doing so. Those who simply try to keep the commandments, are moral cripples; they do not walk with God; they simply hobble along after him.”—Review & Herald, December 10, 1889.

This teaching is an absolute travesty that clearly evidences a lack of understanding the law-gospel distinction. And it’s this inability to recognize such that has resulted in the Adventist Church’s embracing of a false gospel.

Again, in an article from 1884, we read something in a similar vein:

“‘To him that overcometh will I grant to sit with me in my throne, even as I also overcame, and am set down with my Father in his throne.’ These are the words of our Substitute and Surety, the divine Head of the Church, himself the mightiest of conquerors. He points his disciples to his own life, to the tests he bore, to his self-denials and struggles and sufferings, and marks out the path of obedience for their feet through ridicule, contempt, scorn, mockery, rejection, and shameful death. Suffering and humiliation he bore in order to prove obedient to the law of God, to magnify the law and make it honorable; and he lays down the conditions that must be met by those who would inherit eternal life. Victory can come alone through faith and obedience, through following in his footsteps. The work of overcoming is not confined to the martyrs. We, too, are to engage in the conflict in these days of subtle temptation to worldliness, to self-confidence, pride, covetousness, and immorality; and to the overcomers will be given a crown of life and glory.”—The Review and Herald, August 28, 1894, par. 10.

Here we see Revelation 3:21—a statement of law—made into a statement of gospel. This verse is not talking about what one must do to inherit eternal life. Yet The Review & Herald makes this about what one must do in order to be found worthy of eternal life and fitted for heaven. This persistent teaching also gives us a glimpse into the Seventh-day Adventist Church’s false view of justification which more closely resembles that of the Medieval church—something else that had gone off the rails which the Reformers sought to reform in light of Scripture.

This statement above shows us the intermingling of justification and sanctification in Adventist theology. According to this historic and persistent Adventist teaching, if one doesn’t attain to a totally sinless condition on this side of heaven, that person isn’t going to inherit eternal life.

One of the clearest examples showing that the Adventist organization doesn’t understand or teach the law-gospel distinction is found in Ellen White’s comments regarding the Rich Young Ruler:

“And behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted Him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto Him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering, said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbor as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right; this do, and thou shalt live.” [Luke 10:25-28.] Here it is plainly stated that the condition of gaining eternal life is obedience to the commandments of God.”—Letters & Manuscripts, Vol. 12, Manuscript 41, par. 27, 1897.

But what Mrs. White failed to recognize is that Jesus was not explaining to this man how to be made right with God. The plainest evidence of this is that Jesus mentions nothing to him about faith. Yet Scripture is clear that without faith, no one can be saved (Ephesians 2:8-9; Hebrews 11:6). Something else was going on in this interaction.

The response Jesus gives points out the man’s weak spot. He tells him that if he wants to be truly perfect, then he must sell all of his possessions and give the money to the poor so that he can have treasure in Heaven (Matthew 19:21). We are then told the man heard these words and walked away sad because he had a large amount of wealth (Matthew 19:22). 

Instead of obeying Christ, the man turned and walked away from eternal life—which is knowing God (John 17:3).

Jesus was not explaining to the man that He would be saved by keeping the commandments, but He was explaining to the man how high the standard is—perfectly loving God with all his heart, and perfectly loving his neighbor as he loved himself. In other words, only through perfection can one truly escape sin’s penalty. 

After the man claimed he had reached that standard of perfect love and obedience, Jesus showed him that he had not. In fact, the man was not good; he was not willing to give up what he loved the most in order to honor God. He didn’t measure up to the standard of God’s holiness. 

The man’s response showed he wasn’t actually loving God and loving his neighbor with all his heart; he loved himself and his things. The Law simply did what it was designed to do: it demonstrated to the man that he wasn’t as perfect as he thought he was.

This account was not a “prescription” in which Jesus gave a universal lesson that all people must give up their wealth and give it to the poor in order to be saved. Nor was he teaching that law-keeping is the formula that will make one right before God. We know this to be true because Jesus doesn’t even mention faith. 

Rather, He was simply using the man’s own circumstances and love of money to show him (and us) how high God’s standard is: perfect, selfless love. The man fell short (like we all do) and was in need of the Savior who was there standing before him, but the man was not willing to give up his “right” to keep what he loved the most in order to trust the only One who could save him. 

Jesus’s statement about loving God and neighbor perfectly with heart, mind, soul, and strength was a statement of law, not gospel. Yet Ellen White took this statement of law and understood it to be a statement of gospel—what one must do to be made right with God and to have the forgiveness of one’s sins.

Another one of Ellen White’s clearest statements showing that she did not know the biblical gospel is found in Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 4 where Ellen writes:

“Man, who has defaced the image of God in his soul by a corrupt life, cannot, by mere human effort, effect a radical change in himself. He must accept the provisions of the gospel; he must be reconciled to God through obedience to His law and faith in Jesus Christ. His life from thenceforth must be governed by a new principle. Through repentance, faith, and good works he may perfect a righteous character, and claim, through the merits of Christ, the privileges of the sons of God.”—Testimonies for the Church, Vol. IV, pg. 294 (4T 294.2).

Reconciliation is the fruit of the gospel, not of the law. Only the gospel can bring about reconciliation—not faith plus one’s obedience in any capacity. Obedience to God is something that flows from already being made right with Him, not something that, alongside one’s faith, jointly reconciles one to God.

The law can only bring death to a sinner because it makes no provisions for do-overs. Once it is violated one single time, its penalty is death. This is why the gospel is such good news: one came whom the law could not condemn, one who never violated its precepts in thought, word, deed, or motive. The name of this perfect one is Jesus Christ, and he procured an eternal redemption for those who believe, not because of anything they do, but because of what He did for them. They are credited with His perfect righteousness and with His death, burial, and resurrection (Phil. 3:9–11), and it is as though they meet the perfect demands of God by virtue of being seen as righteous in Christ.

In order for the law to condemn the believer who is in Christ, it would have to be able to condemn Christ. But it can’t. It holds no power over Him. This fact is why we can rejoice with the Apostle Paul who tells us in Galatians that Jesus Christ freed us from being under the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us (Galatians 3:13) and that there is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:1). This is why we can assuredly affirm that having been justified by faith and that we have peace with God (Romans 5:1).

The Whole of the Matter

The Seventh-day Adventist Church can claim and insist all they want that they are Protestants, heirs of the Reformation, upholding the law-gospel distinction. But the facts and practical application of their theology state otherwise. It is because ofAdventism’s failure to recognize this distinction that the Adventist Church preaches and teaches a false, cursed gospel that cannot save (Galatians 1:6-9) and why we need to be praying for and warning our Seventh-day Adventist friends and family to find refuge in the Savior—to rest in Him and His perfect and finished work at Calvary on behalf of sinners before it is too late. 

Today is the day of salvation. Come, taste and see the goodness of the true gospel and experience the true sabbath by entering into Christ by faith today (Hebrews 4:1-11). †

• Author
• Recent Posts

Myles Christian

Myles Christian is a former, 3rd generation Seventh-day Adventist who runs Answering Adventism—an educational resource that is equipping Christians to reach Seventh-day Adventists with the true Christ and His Gospel. He lives in Nashville, TN, with his wife, son, and their golden retriever, Sunny.

Latest posts by Myles Christian (see all)

• Adventism’s Catch–22: We Can’t Be Good Enough - November 21, 2024
• What the Current Division Within Adventism Teaches Us - September 26, 2024
• Adventism Can’t Solve the Real Problem - August 1, 2024