CHRIS BADENHORST
Often former Adventists are asked why they don’t just “leave Adventism alone”. Everyone is free to believe whatever he or she wants to believe, they say, but no one has the right to criticize that which they don’t believe. To which we reply, because Adventism claims to be called of God to proclaim its unique 1844 message to Christendom and the world, it thereby opens its message to criticism from other Christians and non-Christians. After I left Adventism I read enough of other world religions to come to some definite conclusions concerning this matter of religion.
World Religions
Firstly, I will make the following comments with world religions in mind. In my investigations I found that all world beliefs concerning God are divided into two main categories: 1) The first category is based upon man’s inquiry into God and his explanation of God. 2) The second is based upon God’s revelation of Himself to man. Thus we have rationalization about God versus revelation by God.
Rationalization
In this worldview, man is at the center investigating God so as to understand and explain Him. We may call this paradigm “man-centered inquiry”, which has resulted in different concepts about God based on man’s speculations about Him. These in turn have resulted in all the different religions in the world. It has been said that “religion” constitutes man’s efforts to understand and explain God. These speculations of man about God, however, are like an ant’s attempt to understand a human being by speculating about him! It cannot be done. It is even more impossible for finite man to try and comprehend the infinite God by speculating about Him. Yet for thousands of years all kinds of people, particularly sages and philosophers, have done a lot of thinking and speculating about God—yielding nothing more than different theories about God. These theories, however, cannot constitute a firm foundation upon which to base life’s decisions for the simple reason they all differ one from the other. So, unless God makes Himself known to man, man’s efforts to understand and explain God are all futile.
Revelation
In this paradigm God is at the center making Himself known to man. We may call this phenomenon “God-centered revelation”. Whereas man’s speculations about God are but human theories and therefore unreliable, God’s self-revelation to man alone is trustworthy. Classic Christianity falls into the category of revelation because it is based on God’s revelation of Himself to man—a revelation given to His chosen prophets and apostles and recorded by them in the Bible. Christianity, therefore, claims that God has acted to make His mind and will known and that this revelation has authority over human lives. “Know” is therefore a New Testament keyword, and “We know” is a recurring New Testament phrase. So, according to the New Testament writers, Christians know God—His attributes, His work, His will and His ways, because they have received revelation from Him concerning these divine aspects which are recorded in the Bible. Christianity is therefore a revelation-based faith and as such is fundamentally different from all other world religions.
Furthermore, according to the New Testament writers, God has ultimately and finally acted and spoken through what Jesus did and said (Heb. 1:1-3). He has made known to His chosen apostles the secret of His eternal plan “which he purposed in Christ” (Eph. 1:9-11; Rom. 16:25-26; 1Cor. 2:6-11). These apostles in turn proclaimed this divine revelation “not in words taught…by human wisdom but in words taught by the Spirit” (1 Cor. 2:13). Christians receive this revelation from the writings of the apostles as “the word of God” (1 Thes. 2:13), “the trustworthy message” (Tit. 1:9), “sound doctrine” (Tit. 2:1), “the truth” (2 Tim. 4:4; 2 Thes. 2:10, 12, 13). Thus have they gained sure, certain, and trustworthy knowledge of God’s mind. They, in turn, proclaim this revelation to the world in obedience to the Great Commission given them by the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:19, 20). On the other hand, the non-Christian religions can at best only offer man their different speculations about God and some moral rules to live by for the benefit of society.
The Claims of Jesus
This brings us to the unique and explicit claims of the historic Jesus. Because He was the true Creator-God in human form, He made claims concerning His person and His mission that no other founder of a religious system ever did—not Mohammed, not Confucius, not Buddha, not Hare Krishna—except Ellen Gould White, the founder and prophetess of Seventh-day Adventism! We will consider her claim later. What were these claims of Jesus? He claimed to be the bread of life, the light of the world, the giver of eternal life, the forgiver of sins, the Judge of the world, Lord and God! By these claims Jesus has put Himself in a category altogether distinct from all other religious founders. Because of His claims, Jesus has always been the proverbial fly in the ointment to the adherents of other religions and is more so today than ever before. The “offense” of Jesus has resulted in the persecution of His followers by the adherents of these religions from the very beginning. But committed Christians not only proclaim the uniqueness of Jesus as the only true God and Savior, they also refuse to compromise their proclamation for the sake of peaceful co-existence with the adherents of the other world religions.
Concerning the claims of Jesus, C. S. Lewis said: “A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic—on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg—or else He would be the Devil of Hell. You must make a choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.” (From Mere Christianity).
Conclusion
Thus we conclude that Jesus of Nazareth and the Bible that testifies of Him are the two indispensable pillars of the Christian faith. When you take these away, God becomes an insurmountable problem. Hebrews 1:1 states: “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways”. These “speakings” constitute the Old Testament. “But in these last days he (God) has spoken to us by his Son” (Heb. 1:2). “Son” in this text refers to Jesus of Nazareth; it excludes Mohammed, Buddha, Confucius, Hare Krishna, and all other modern prophets or messiahs including Joseph Smith, Charles Taze Russell, Mary Eddy Baker, and Ellen Gould White.
So, according to Hebrews 1:1, 2, those who heard Jesus speak, heard God Himself speak. These words of God incarnate have been recorded for humanity by some of His chosen apostles in the four Gospels which constitute part of the New Testament. These are the words committed Christians proclaim to the world, including the adherents of its different religions.
E. G. White
But what did E. G. White claim for herself? In a statement alluding to Hebrews 1:1, 2 she states: “In ancient times, God spoke to men by the mouth of prophets and apostles. In these days, He speaks to them by the testimonies of His Spirit…The Lord has seen fit to give me a view of the needs and errors of His people” (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, p. 661). By “the testimonies of His Spirit” Mrs. White refers to her own prophetic ministry. This is clear from the context.
This Scripture declares that God has in these last days spoken to us by His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. Mrs. White, however, declares that (since 1844) she has been chosen for this task of speaking for God. The enormity of this claim is staggering; the results far reaching!
To grasp the enormity of her claim we need to look at Hebrews 1:1, 2 again. It states: “In the past God spoke to our forefathers through the prophets at many times and in various ways, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son…” This Scripture declares that God has in these last days spoken to us by His Son the Lord Jesus Christ. Mrs. White, however, declares that (since 1844) she has been chosen for this task of speaking for God. The enormity of this claim is staggering; the results far reaching!
This claim of Ellen White’s is the demonic trap in which Adventists are ensnared. Her foundational authority underlying their worldview is the reason they can’t see the clear light of the Gospel shining from the Scriptures. Paul states: “If our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing. The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Cor 4:3, 4). Because Adventists have been taught to read the Scriptures with understandings derived from E. G. white’s interpretations, they cannot see the glorious gospel. As I was told while still an Adventist, to read the Bible without the insights gleaned from E. G. White is to expose oneself to demonic deception. Even those younger Adventists who are not so steeped in White’s writings are still taught to read Scripture with an “inside interpretation” derived from Ellen White—even though they are not told their theology derives from her. This is deception!
The Bible
Over the years I have come to see the Bible as not merely “infallible”—reliable for primary doctrine yet containing error—but as “inerrant”. I accept the Bible as containing the ultimate revelation of God, His will, and His purpose. In its pages I have come to know Jehovah—the true God. It is therefore the absolute authority for creed and conduct to me. As such it gives me consistency in what to believe and how to live. As a result I observe God-taught standards and restraints in my living and in my relationships with others. I also implicitly trust God’s promises as given in the Bible. Furthermore, in the clear light of Bible certainties, I live out my days free from uncertainty, doubt, fear and despair. The person who reads his Bible, therefore, knows what God did, what He does, and what He will do as well as what He commands and what He promises. Where else can we go to learn God’s will and purposes? Which other world religion has this much to offer its adherents?
Furthermore, the Bible needs no external commentary except the Holy Spirit to clarify its meaning (1 Jn 2:27). No “lesser light” (EGW) can add anything except confusion to our understanding of God’s clear revelation of Himself in His word. In my own experience I have found that where the Bible is proclaimed as God’s inerrant revelation of truth and where it is accepted as authoritative, believers are fully committed to God, they grow spiritually, and their faith is lived with power. Where the Bible is not so proclaimed, or where it is qualified by interpretations from extra-biblical sources, faith withers and eventually dies.
Thus can we say that Jesus the God-man, His authoritative word—the Bible, and His committed followers—Christians made alive and sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13-14; 2:1-7) constitute a trilogy that is fundamentally distinct from all other religious founders, their religious writings, and followers. All the religions in the world can be grouped together without effecting a radical difference. Not so with Christianity. Only Christianity, unfettered by modern prophets or authoritative extra-biblical commentaries, promulgates a filial relationship with Jehovah God. All other religions only offer man their theories about God and a set of rules to define so-called “holy” living.
To be sure, there are many religions with their moral codes and attractive lifestyles in the world, but there is only one true God and Savior —Jesus Christ the Lord (Acts 4:12; 1 Jn. 4:14). There is only one final word from God revealing Himself to humanity—the Lord Jesus (Heb. 1:2). And all this has been recorded for humanity in the Bible—the one and only written revelation of God and of His will.
Adventism
Having commented in general about religion, I will now do so in particular with Adventism in mind. Because the Bible clearly states that its testimony concerning the Lord Jesus is all we need as God’s revelation to us, I can only conclude that all other prophetic voices and belief systems must be false. For this reason I cannot remain silent on the subject of Adventism. My loved ones within Adventism must have the opportunity to see how their worldview is shaped, not by the Bible but by the rationalization (as opposed to revelation) of their religion based on an extra-biblical “continuing and authoritative source of truth”—Ellen White (Fundamental Belief #18, Seventh-day Adventists Believe, 2nd ed., Pacific Press Publishing Assn., 2005, p. 247).
For example, here are two indisputable facts concerning Adventism’s foundational and cardinal doctrine—its unique 1844 sanctuary message (The Great Controversy, p. 409): 1) It cannot be substantiated from the Bible alone but only from the writings of EGW. 2) It is not compatible with the New Testament gospel but very much opposed to it.
Regarding the first point, we need to be on our guard when Adventist ministers say they only preach from the Bible. In reality they do preach from the Bible—but only as interpreted by Ellen White. She is the inspired interpreter of God’s Word for the people (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5, p. 661). Adventists do not trust the Holy Spirit alone to teach individuals what the Bible means. They believe God has given EGW the correct meaning and that she in turn has passed it on to her followers.
The explanation for this assumption is the same as that given by Roman Catholicism: the Bible is difficult to understand. One needs but look at the Babylonian confusion in Christendom with its many different denominations that are all based on the same Bible! Adventism, however, has the answer for that confusion: God explained the Bible to E. G. White. Without her the Adventist Church would be part of that confusion. Because of her prophetic ministry, however, Adventists, as God’s true Remnant, alone understand the Bible correctly.
Without Mrs. White Adventists cannot prove that Daniel 8:14 means 2300 full days, that these evening-morning sacrifices equal years, that the word to restore and build Jerusalem was the decree of a Persian king, that the 490 years are cut off from the 2300 period, that Daniel 8:14 has anything to do with cleansing the sanctuary from the sins of God’s people or an investigative judgment.
Without Mrs. White Adventists cannot prove that Daniel 8:14 means 2300 full days, that these evening-morning sacrifices equal years, that the word to restore and build Jerusalem was the decree of a Persian king, that the 490 years are cut off from the 2300 period, that Daniel 8:14 has anything to do with cleansing the sanctuary from the sins of God’s people or an investigative judgment. There is no biblical proof for the significance of the year 1844 or for the work that traditional Adventism claims happened on October 22, 1844. To therefore determine the date 1844 and the theology associated with it, Adventism must engage in a lengthy chain of reasoning which again and again makes unproved assumptions and leaps across great chasms of nonexistent evidence. All this is so complicated that not one Adventist in a thousand could begin to give a rational biblical explanation for it. Most are content to believe it on the strength of Mrs. White’s assertions.
We emphasize again that Adventism’s cardinal doctrine can only be proved by an extra-biblical authority—that of E. G. White. Many honest Adventist scholars have admitted this fact. Yet, despite this fact, Adventists expect ordinary Christians from other denominations and the unchurched to believe and accept their 1844 doctrine which they cannot prove for themselves from the Bible! Because of this confusion, Adventism has now published its own unique paraphrase of the Bible, The Clear Word, in which its unique 1844 doctrine is “explained” and made clear!
Regarding the second point above, Adventism’s 1844 theology is fundamentally different from the New Testament gospel and therefore is not compatible with it. When one reads the early documents by the pioneers of Seventh-day Adventism, it is clear they did not grasp the New Testament Gospel and its implications. For example, they clearly stated that Christ did not make the atonement on the cross. A statement by Uriah Smith is typical: “Christ did not make the atonement when he shed his blood upon the cross. Let this fact be fixed forever in the mind” (The Sanctuary and the Twenty-Three Hundred Days of Daniel VIII, 14, p. 276). They were just as bold in saying that Christ makes the atonement in heaven and that this is an ongoing ministry that began on October 22, 1844 (The Great Controversy, p. 420-422).
On the other hand, when one examines the New Testament statements about the gospel, they clearly indicate a historical event that is done and finished. For example, Christ’s last words on the cross triumphantly announced, “It is finished” (Jn 19:30). This record states that He has made atonement for sin (Rom 3:25; 1 Jn 2:2; Heb. 1:3b), destroyed death (2 Tim 1:10) and defeated the devil (Heb 2:14). It also states that He has been raised from the dead and has taken His place as Lord of all at God’s right hand (Matt 28:18; Acts 2:34-36; Rom 8:34). It further states that man’s lost dominion has been restored in this one Man who reigns over all principalities and powers (1 Cor 15:25; Eph 1:20-22; 1 Pet 3:22).
The gospel therefore proclaims Christ’s death and resurrection for our salvation. This good news is clear and certain. There is nothing obscure about the Christ event. Jesus of Nazareth was God’s Son. He lived a sinless life, died on the cross for us, and rose from the dead to represent us at God’s right hand. The man who believes this in his heart is forgiven, is given the Holy Spirit by whom he is born again and adopted into God’s family (Acts 10:45; Rom 10:17; Gal 3:1-3). Thus is he saved to eternal life.
But what can be said about the 1844 “event”? It rests on one solitary Old Testament text of Scripture—Daniel 8:14. There is no New Testament confirmation of either the date 1844 or the “new” phase of Christ’s work that was supposed to have begun on this date. In Adventism the simplicity and clarity of the New Testament Gospel concerning Jesus and His finished work of redemption is concealed in a fog of the vaguest kind of reasoning. Furthermore, the whole idea of Christ beginning His redemptive ministry in heaven on October 22, 1844, by means of the “final” atonement is inimical to the New Testament affirmation of a once for all final atonement by Christ on the cross and once for all committed to the saints.
Is it any wonder that in 160 years, Adventists have never been able to convince a single recognized evangelical Bible scholar that their unique interpretation of Daniel 8:14 is worthy of a second thought? This doctrine is an elaborate apocalyptic conundrum and exegetical monstrosity to which Adventism clings because it is the denomination’s only unique doctrine. It alone justifies the existence of Adventism as an organization with a “special” message and mission. This is why I say that Adventism’s 1844 theology is fundamentally different from the New Testament Gospel and therefore incompatible with it.
For these reasons I must “contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all handed down to the saints” (Jude:3). It is a matter of life and death. †
Chris Badenhorst is a retired civil engineering technician who still works part time on one of South Africa’s oil refineries in the city of Durban on the east coast. He is married with three step-children and one grandchild. His wife is also a former Adventist who shares his enthusiasm for the gospel of God’s grace. Although they are not members of a particular denomination, they attend a local Baptist church for worship and fellowship.
- I missed out on cheeseburgers, but I found the feast! - October 31, 2024
- Biblical Inspiration and Ellen G. White - October 24, 2024
- You Must Count the Cost - October 17, 2024