The Hermeneutics Project

Progress has been made with volume one of our Hermeneutics Series. This volume deals with issues of biblical interpretation and is a must for all serious students of Scripture. It will be published in 2004. It consists of seventeen chapters written by different Adventist scholars. Prior to being accepted for publication the articles were presented to the Biblical Research Institute Committee (BRICOM). George Reid, the former director of BRI, is the editor of the first volume. We have also started work on the second volume of our Hermeneutic Series. The second volume will be more of a practical nature dealing with passages in Scripture which are difficult to understand. The methodology developed in volume one will be used to interpret these texts.

The Ecclesiology Project

The mission of the church is dependent on its theology. Aside from hermeneutics, ecclesiology is a crucial issue for the Adventist Church. We feel that a fresh and extensive study of the doctrine of the church must be undertaken. As the Adventist Church reaches out to more and more non-Christian communities and religions, it is important to resolve what the church is all about and which role Adventists have to play. In other words, what is the nature and mission of the church? Too often we have modeled ourselves along the lines of other Christian denominations. What we need is a true Adventist understanding of God’s church. Therefore, we have started to think about this issue, and have asked scholars to write papers on specific topics. In what form these papers are to be published has not yet been decided.

Current Trends in Adventism: Theological Influences within the Adventist Church

In our last newsletter we began to discuss current trends in Adventism. By way of introduction we noticed different philosophies and world views which exert an influence on the Adventist Church. These are external forces that tend to shape us. But challenges do not just arise outside of the church, they also come from within the community of believers. We now turn to theological developments within the church. We will not go into details but just briefly mention the issues.

1. Divergent Adventist Theologies of a More Liberal Nature

A number of the divergent theological views rest on presuppositions of a somewhat more liberal nature. They may be proposed by authors who tend to follow at least certain aspects of the historical-critical method, and who use psychology and sociology in the evaluation of the biblical data. When Scripture and science seem to clash, a number of these Adventists follow science rather than Scripture.

1. God. The so-called “open view of God” also called “free-will theism” or “process theology” advocates a bipolar nature of God. God’s experience of this world is open and not closed. God’s knowledge is limited to the present and the past. There is not much room for God’s foreknowledge.

2. Scripture. Some Adventists have begun to advocate different views on how to understand divine revelation and inspiration. In some of these cases the human element of Scripture is stressed to such an extent that the divine becomes secondary. Contradictions and discrepancies are seen in many places in Scripture, and it is claimed that they should not be harmonized. Some scholars strongly emphasize the so-called culture-conditioned nature of Scripture, which claims that large parts of the Bible are not directly relevant today and must therefore be reinterpreted.

3. Creation. Although the Adventist Church accepts the creation account as a literal and historical account, believes in 24-hour creation days and a short chronology, opinions of church members range from espousing outright evolution, to a literalistic understanding of Gen 1, and various other theories found between these positions.

4. Salvation. Traditionally conservative churches, including the Adventist Church, have accepted the biblical testimony that Jesus as the only sinless human being died for sinners and that his death was a substitutionary death. However, the idea of a substitutionary sacrifice of Christ is rejected by some Adventists and replaced by the so-called moral influence theory.

5. Eschatology. Several suggestions have been made to reinterpret our understanding of the end time. Some believe that God’s judgment is incompatible with his love. Others claim that our understanding of prophecy as it relates to Roman Catholicism is wrong.

6. Ecclesiology. In the present context of ecumenism the biblical remnant concept as well as our traditional interpretation of Babylon are considered by some to be detrimental to our mission. Some advocate that these teachings be changed.

7. Other Doctrines. Other doctrines which are questioned include the sanctuary doctrine, which sometimes is falsely put in opposition to justification by faith, the role of Ellen G. White, the law and the Sabbath, and stewardship and Christian lifestyle. New forms of the foot washing have been suggested such as anointing others with oil or showing humility in ways other than washing someone’s feet. Some would like to end the Lord’s Supper with a prayer dance.

2. Divergent Adventist Theologies Proposed by Conservative Adventists

Some Adventists who do take Scripture seriously nevertheless introduce divergent views.

1. God. A number of Adventists in different parts of the world are dissatisfied with the doctrine of the trinity. Their views also affect the doctrine of the Holy Spirit who is then seen only as an impersonal power which comes forth from God.

2. Salvation. Some groups of believers also seem to have problems with the substitutionary atonement and opt for universal legal justification which means that every human being was saved when Jesus died on the cross. According to this view, we do not need to accept salvation, we can only reject it.

3. Eschatology. When it comes to the interpretation of Daniel and Revelation many strange views are proposed. Church members and pastors do not hesitate to put these opinions in print or distribute them on CDs. Some interpret the time prophecies in Daniel 12:5-13 literally and apply them to the immediate future. In Revelation we find a special interest in the trumpets, in Rev 17, and in the number 666. Frequently, the symbol of Babylon as well as Rev 8-11 are interpreted in a futuristic manner.

4. Other Doctrines. Other doctrines being questioned by some conservative Adventists include the sanctuary and lifestyle issues such as marriage and divorce.

In our upcoming newsletters we will respond to these challenges.

Ellen G. White Encyclopedia

The following article by Gerhard Pfandl responds to one of the challenges the church has to face in regard to Ellen G. White. A somewhat modified version of this article will appear in the upcoming Ellen G. White Encyclopedia. This tome will be dealing with the writings and the theology of Ellen G. White as well as with the historical context and important characters of her times. BRI scholars and many others have contributed to this volume. It is edited by Jerry Moon and Denis Fortin of Andrews University and published by the Review and Herald Publishing Association. The goal is to have it ready for the next General Conference session in St. Louis, Missouri in 2005.

The Authority of the Ellen G. White Writings

The Bible makes it clear that the true source and seat of authority is in God. (Ps 83:18). As Creator and Lord of all nature and history, God has the right to exercise authority over mankind (Isa 45:22, 23). In Old Testament times God delegated his authority to certain people called prophets (1 Sam 3:20; 9:9) with whom he communicated through visions and dreams (Num 12:6). They were God’s spokespersons to the people (Ezek 24: 21), just as Aaron was the spokesperson for Moses (Ex 4: 16). In the New Testament, Jesus delegated his authority to his disciples and the New Testament prophets. Paul, therefore, could say in 1 Thess 2:13 “you received the Word of God which you heard from us . . . not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, as the Word of God.” The prophetic word has authority because God gives it his authority. Moses knew that he was authorized to speak on God’s behalf, Isaiah knew it, Paul and Peter knew it (2 Cor 10:8), and the people of God accepted them as his messengers.

I. The Authority of Non-canonical Prophets

In Scripture we find canonical prophets like Moses and Jeremiah, whose writings became part of the biblical canon, and non-canonical prophets like Nathan, Ahijah, and Iddo (2 Chron 9:29) whose books, though inspired, did not become part of the biblical canon. Why God selected some books and not others we do not know. Obviously, he knew what mankind would need to understand the plan of salvation. However, what the non-canonical prophets said or wrote was just as authoritative and binding for the people of their time as were the books of Moses and Isaiah (2 Sam 12:7-15). The authority of a prophetic book lies in its inspiration not in the book’s place in the canon. But since John the Revelator’s time the canon has been closed, and no other inspired books can be added to it.

If archaeologists would find the book of Nathan today it would not be added to the canon but would remain an inspired book outside of the canon. And whatever theological statements were to be found in it would remain inspired and authoritative statements outside of the canon. The canon is simply the collection of books which under God’s guidance was put together as the rule of faith and practice for God’s people by which everything else has to be measured. It contains everything a person needs to know to be saved.

The apostle Paul wrote a number of inspired letters which were lost, e.g., his letter to the Laodiceans (Col 4:16), or his first letter to the Corinthians (1 Cor 5:9). If these letters were found today, they would not become part of the canon, but would remain inspired letters outside of the canon.

II. The Writings of Ellen White

Scripture is God’s message for all time and all people. It is the measuring rod, the yard stick, against which everything else has to be measured. It is the supreme guideline for every Christian. The writings of Ellen White on the other hand are God’s messages for a particular people – His remnant church, at a particular time in history – the end time. Her writings are not a new or additional standard of doctrine, but a help for the church in the time of the end. Hence her writings have a different purpose from Scripture, they are “the lesser light to lead to the greater light” (CM 125).

In 1982, the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists issued a statement of affirmations and denials in regard to the Ellen G. White writings (Ministry, August 1982). One of the affirmations said, “We believe that Ellen White was inspired by the Holy Spirit and that her writings, the product of that inspiration, are applicable and authoritative especially to Seventh-day Adventists.” The denials made clear that while the quality or degree of inspiration in the writings of Ellen White is no different from that of Scripture, Seventh-day Adventists “do not believe that the writings of Ellen White are an addition to the canon of Sacred Scripture.”

It was concluded, therefore, that “a correct understanding of the inspiration and authority of the writings of Ellen White will avoid two extremes: (1) regarding these writings as functioning on a canonical level identical with Scripture, or (2) considering them as ordinary Christian literature.”

III. The Authority of the E. G. White Writings

Seventh-day Adventists reject the idea that there are degrees of inspiration. They believe that Ellen White was a messenger of God and that she was inspired like the Old and New Testament prophets. Now, if Ellen White was as inspired as the Old and New Testament prophets, what authority do her writings have? The answer can only be: They have the same authority the writings of the non-canonical prophets had for their time.

Ellen White left her readers in no doubt about the source of her writings. There were only two possibilities, “God is either teaching His church, reproving their wrongs, and strengthening their faith, or He is not. This work is of God, or it is not. God does nothing in partnership with Satan. My work . . . bears the stamp of God, or the stamp of the enemy. There is no halfway work in the matter. The Testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil” (5 T 671). In a letter to the church in Battle Creek she wrote, “”I do not write one article in the paper, expressing merely my own ideas. They are what God has opened before me in vision—the precious rays of light shining from the throne. (1 SM 27).

Because the source of what she wrote was divine, her words have authority. To those who refused to accept her writings as having divine authority she said, “When I send you a testimony of warning and reproof, many of you declare it to be merely the opinion of Sister White. You have thereby insulted the Spirit of God. You know how the Lord has manifested Himself through the Spirit of prophecy [a metonym for the writings of Ellen White]” (1 SM 27).

At the same time she emphasized her submission to the Bible, which she called “the greater light” (CM 125). “We are to receive God’s word as supreme authority”(6T 402), she wrote, and “The Holy Scriptures are to be accepted as an authoritative, infallible revelation of His will. They are the standard of character, the revealer of doctrines, and the test of experience” (GC vii). Therefore, she said, “the testimonies of Sister White should not be carried to the front. God’s Word is the unerring standard Let all prove their positions from the Scriptures and substantiate every point they claim as truth from the revealed Word of God” (Ev 256). At a meeting held in the Battle Creek College library on the eve of the General Conference of 1901 she told the leaders, “Lay Sister White right to one side. Don’t . . . ever quote my words again as long as you live, until you can obey the Bible” (SpM 167).

Yet, for her, this did not negate the manifestation of the prophetic gift in her ministry. “The fact that God has revealed His will to men through His word, has not rendered needless the continued presence and guiding of the Holy Spirit. On the contrary, the Spirit was promised by our Saviour, to open the word to His servants, to illuminate and apply its teachings” (GC vii).

IV. Acknowledgment by the Church

From the beginning, the Seventh-day Adventist Church has recognized the tremendous value and the authority of the writings of Ellen White. As early as 1855 the leadership of the Advent Movement publically stated that they regarded the writings of Ellen White as coming from God. Therefore, “we must acknowledge ourselves under obligation to abide by their teachings, and be corrected by their admonitions” (RH Dec. 4, 1855). Ever since then, General Conferences in session have from time to time issued statements expressing confidence in the writings of Ellen White “as the teaching of the Spirit of God” (RH, Feb. 14, 1871).

In 1980, the General Conference in session in Dallas, Texas, voted the adoption of the 27 Fundamental Beliefs. Belief number 17 deals with the gift of prophecy as manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. It reads in part as follows: “As the Lord’s messenger, her writings are a continuing and authoritative source of truth which provide for the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction.” Though nearly a century has elapsed since Ellen White laid down her pen, her inspired and therefore authoritative writings continue to be a guiding and unifying factor in the rapidly growing Seventh-day Adventist Church.