SDA For Me Blog

Response to new assault of evolution

Sun, 05 Sep 2010 07:01:00 GMT

Is Stephen Hawking’s theory of something out of nothing based on science or supposition?

He relates “the tale of how the primordial universe of hydrogen, helium and a little bit of lithium evolved to a universe harboring at least one world with intelligent life like us.”

Let’s use some of that intelligence to evaluate Hawking’s belief that primordial nothingness managed to evolve into material somethingness. Also to ponder: what is it about the nothingness of a “little bit of lithium” that differentiates it from the nothingness of helium and the nothingness of hydrogen?

One need not be a scientist to conclude that three nameable chemical elements, each distinguishable from the other, can’t qualify as mere nothingness.

Another inconvenient question lurks in Hawking’s primordial universe with its threefold nothingness: What action or condition triggered and then coordinated the interaction of those chemical elements? Hawking points to the laws of gravity and quantum theory—but their existence only adds to his difficulties: What (or who) designed these laws to exist in a universe of nothingness?

To resolve skepticism that our exquisitely calibrated, inhabited world is the product of happenstance, Hawking would persuade us about a “multiverse” of parallel universes. The multiverse notion is not merely speculation on steroids, it is demonstrably impossible mathematically—when computing the timeframe (used by scientists themselves) required for random selection to meander its way through the process of materializing Hawking’s imagined multiverse (or even the observable universe, for that matter).

The impossibilities of Hawking’s multiverse evolving from nothingness are compounded by the miracle of DNA—not only its complexity but the fact that it comes frontloaded with coded genetic information. Complex coding, by definition, comes not by undirected happenstance but by intelligent design. How could one argue otherwise from science rather than supposition?

All told, Hawking’s theory of cosmology cannot be demonstrated by the scientific method—nor be explained by logic, which has as a foundational principle: ex nihilo nihil fit: “out of nothing, nothing comes.” So nothing can logically prevent a librarian from classifying Hawking’s “tale of many chapters” as science fiction.

Martin Weber, DMin

When God's Artifacts Become Idols

Fri, 04 Jun 2010 03:21:00 GMT

Young King Hezekiah “trusted in the Lord God of Israel, so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor who were before him” (2 Kings 18:5). What was so different about Hezekiah? Godly kings before him had cleansed the temple of pagan worship relics. What Hezekiah did that nobody before him had dared to do is to tear down and destroy Moses’ bronze serpent, which had become an idol for God’s people.

Imagine the gall of a 25-year-old, new on the scene, to take away and destroy a centuries-old memorial of the beloved leader of the Exodus. The godly elders no doubt demanded: “What do you think you are doing, young man! God gave us that artifact!”

Hezekiah protested: “It has become a distraction from worshiping God. Worse, became an idol worshiped in place of God. It lost its purpose—the devil co-opted and corrupted it. It had to be destroyed for true worship to be restored.”

“Sorry, Hezekiah,” his pious opponents may have retorted. “We could support you when you destroyed the high places and idolatrous images, but this is different. Moses built that according to God’s blueprint. It’s a divine symbol of salvation—‘Look and live,’ remember? God used it miraculously! Who do you think you are, young man, destroying that sacred symbol of salvation from God through our beloved founder! Do you think you are better than Moses? Do you think you are better than God?”

“That artifact was just a symbol of the unseen God whom we are supposed to be worshiping,” Hezekiah tried to explain. “Yes, God established it and worked through it. But then the devil took it over. It had to go.”

And so it went, much to the disappointment and fury of Judah—not only the evil ones who were worshiping it but the good people who were enabling them by preserving their object of idolatry.

Meanwhile, Hezekiah “kept [God’s] commandments, which the Lord had commanded Moses” (verse 6). He knew the difference between obedience and false worship. He had divine discernment about what to keep and what to get rid of. So Hezekiah wasn’t the enemy of Moses. Ironically, he was the only one who truly honored their founder by sustaining his example of obedience rather than corrupting his heritage through religious idolatry.

But it wasn’t easy for young Hezekiah. The only reason he survived was that “he held fast to the Lord” (verse 6), clinging tenaciously in the face of opposition not only from the evil people but from the religious establishment that thought itself honoring God but in reality was sustaining an idolatrous system. It may have been in those tumultuous early days of Hezekiah’s ministry that his only support came directly from God. Indeed, “the Lord was with him; he prospered wherever he went” (verse 7).

Thought question: What holy artifacts may have become idols for Adventists today?

I asked that of one lady and she replied: “I don’t there is any such idolatry in the Adventist system.”

But let not the church of Laodicea so flatter itself. Can even our God-established institutions themselves become an object of idolatry? If so, how can we preserve what is genuine while cleansing it from what is not?

What about our understanding of Ellen G. White? God obviously led us with her prophetic gift, and that blessing remains in our day. But have idolatrous traditions also developed over the years? I’m thinking specifically of the proclivity of some Adventists who refuse to accept anything the Bible teaches unless it harmonizes with what Ellen White already wrote about that text or topic—thus effectively giving her authority over the Word of God. I’m afraid that those who have succumbed to such extremist and cultic thinking have made Ellen White their idol. They urgently challenge fellow Adventists—do you believe in the Spirit of prophecy?

First, let’s be clear that the Spirit of prophecy is the Holy Spirit who inspired the prophet—not the prophet herself or her writings.

Let’s also emphatically clarify that Ellen White was not God’s message! She was His messenger. There is a huge difference. And that difference is the distinction between inspiration and idolatry.

Finally, let’s make Jesus Christ is the object of our faith, not any human messenger.

I urge my fellow Seventh-day Adventists to do a searching and fearless theological inventory and then take careful but decisive action, like Hezekiah did, to ensure that no gift from God ever becomes a focus of faith or an object of adoration.

The Pharisees of Christ’s day turned God’s messenger into their message, and in so doing rejected God’s grace and truth. Let us beware of doing the same today.

Martin Weber will be editor of the daily newsletter for global delegates at the upcoming SDA General Conference Session in Atlanta.

"He saved others . . ."

Sun, 04 Apr 2010 16:30:00 GMT

“He saved others”

Millions of Christians around the world are worshiping their Lord in a special way this weekend. The world with its Easter bunnies thinks we are strange. Stupid, in fact—how could the death of a poor carpenter 2,000 years ago give joy and purpose to our lives today, and then secure heaven for us with God in eternity?

To the world, the nicest thing to be said about Christ on the cross is this: He was a very good man having a very bad day. But we who believe in Jesus understand what was happening on Good Friday: “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself, not counting our trespasses against us” (2 Cor. 5:19).

Like many of you, this weekend I’m reading again the Gospel account of our Lord’s death and resurrection. Each time something new seems to pop into focus, doesn’t it? This morning I’m captured by the irony of something Christ’s mocking enemies said in Luke 23:35 as He hung on the cross:

“And the people stood by, watching, but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, ‘He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!’”

“He saved others?” You betcha—He sure did! He saved me!

Overwhelmed at the delightful irony of that reality, I started laughing and crying at the same time. This was a little too intense for my cat, who had been resting on my lap. She jumped off and took refuge on top of the couch. And from that safe vantage point she stared at me as if I’m crazy today.

That’s OK, cat. Paul says we are fools for Christ’s sake. And the foolishness of God is wiser than man’s wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man’s strength.

Glory to the name of our Lord Jesus Christ!

Guess what happened (when a Christian blogger visited an SDA Church) . . .

Thu, 11 Mar 2010 22:36:00 GMT

A Christian author/filmmaker/blogger from North Carolina dropped in on a Seventh-day Adventist church one Sabbath and came away with some interesting impressions. Here is Christopher Knight’s report about what he experienced:

“Along the course of my travels I have visited many a place of worship: from every flavor of Baptist church to (accidentally) walking into a sanctuary of snake handlers. And everything in between from Catholic to Mormon, to a Jewish synagogue once upon a time. As a professional journalist I was even once sent to report on a gathering of pagan worshipers.

“But it's been all too rare that I've taken the opportunity to meet in fellowship with other Christians and not as a detached observer but as one who comes also seeking after our Lord and Savior. So it is that a few days ago, I was invited to attend a Sabbath worship service at a Seventh-day Adventist congregation.

“Up 'til now, my knowledge of Seventh-day Adventism has been unusually cursory: I understood that Adventists worship on Saturday instead of Sunday. That was basically it, other than I've long known that Adventists discourage the use of alcohol and tobacco (how I came to know that is a whole 'nother story). But over the course of two days I came to learn and understand a great deal more about those of my fellow servants known as Seventh-day Adventists.’

Blogger Knight continues:

“Indeed, I found that the Adventist perspective of the Sabbath to be exceptionally sincere and... perhaps "refreshing" is the most appropriate word? . . . I have to say that in that regard, my own heart came to feel considerable kinship with my Adventist brethren.”

Curious? You can read Knight’s whole blog by clicking here.

Martin

22 Days with Jesus

Fri, 12 Feb 2010 05:28:00 GMT

How would you like to spend the next 22 mornings with Jesus, meeting with Him in an unexpected place? I’m thinking about Psalm 119, the longest chapter in the Bible with 176 verses. Recall how Jesus said that all Scripture testifies of Him (John 5:39)—and He was referring specifically of the Old Testament. After all, He is the Word of God (John 1 and 1 John 1), so we should be able to find Him even in Psalm 119.

A few years ago I decided to look for Him there—and wow! Read the following and see for yourself.

Notice that each of the 176 verses in Psalm 119 is bundled into sections of eight verses. So if you read one section for the next 22 mornings, you’ll cover the entire Psalm—and receive an amazing revelation of Jesus.

See for yourself. Here it is: Psalm 119 in light of the New Covenant:

1 Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk with Jesus.
2 Blessed are those who have Jesus, and who seek Him with their whole heart.
3 They also refrain from iniquity, they walk in His ways.
4 You have commanded us to trust diligently in Jesus.
5 O that my ways were directed to trust in Jesus!
6 Then will I not be ashamed, when I have respect for Jesus.
7 I will praise You with uprightness of heart, when I will have learned about Jesus.
8 I will trust in Jesus; O forsake me not completely.

9 How shall a young man cleanse his way? By taking heed to Jesus.
10 With my whole heart I have sought You; O let me not wander from Jesus.
11 Jesus I have hid in my heart that I might not sin against You.
12 Blessed are You, O Lord, teach me about Jesus.
13 With my lips I have declared Jesus.
14 I have rejoiced in the way of Jesus, as much as in all riches.
15 I will meditate in Jesus and have respect for Your ways.
16 I will delight myself in Jesus, I will not forget Him.

17 Deal bountifully with Your servant, that I may live and trust in Jesus.
18 Open my eyes that I may see wonderful things in Jesus.
19 I am a stranger in the earth, hide not Jesus from me.
20 My soul breaks for the longing that it has for Jesus at all times.
21 You have rebuked the proud who are cursed, those who stray from Jesus.
22 Remove from me reproach and contempt, for I have followed Jesus.
23 Princes also sat and spoke against me, but Your servant did meditate in Jesus.
24 Jesus is my delight and my counselor.

25 My soul is dragging in the dust. Give me life through Jesus.
26 I have spoken of my ways and You heard me; teach me about Jesus.
27 Make me understand the way of Jesus, so I will talk of His wonderful works.
28 My soul melts for heaviness; strengthen me through Jesus.
29 Remove from me the way of lying, and grant me Jesus in Your grace.
30 I have chosen the way of truth; Jesus I have set before me.
31 I have stayed with Jesus, O Lord, put me not to shame.
32 I will run the way of Jesus, when You will enlarge my heart.

33 Teach me, O Lord, the way of Jesus, and I will keep it to the end.
34 Give me understanding and I will trust in Jesus, yes, I will follow Him with my whole heart.
35 Make me travel in the path of Jesus, for in that do I delight.
36 Direct my heart to Jesus, and not to covetousness.
37 Turn away my eyes from beholding vanity, and give me life in Jesus.
38 Establish Jesus to Your servant, who is devoted to Your fear.
39 Turn away my reproach which I fear, for Jesus is good.
40 Behold, I have longed after Jesus, give me life in Your righteousness.

41 Let Your mercies come also to me, O Lord, even Your salvation through Jesus.
42 So will I be able to answer him who reproaches me, for I have Jesus.
43 And take not the word of truth completely out of my mouth, for I hope in Jesus.
44 So I will trust in Jesus continually for ever and ever.
45 And I will walk at liberty, for I seek Jesus.
46 I will speak of Jesus before kings, and will not be ashamed.
47 I will lift up my hands to Jesus, whom I have loved.
48 My hands will I lift up to Your Son, whom I have loved, and I will meditate in Jesus.

49 Remember Jesus when You think about me; upon Him You have caused me to hope.
50 This is my comfort in my affliction: Jesus has given me life.
51 The proud have ridiculed me greatly, yet I have not strayed from Jesus.
52 For a long time now I have remembered Jesus, O Lord, and have comforted myself.
53 Horror has taken hold upon me because of the wicked who forsake Jesus.
54 Jesus has been my song in the house of my pilgrimage.
55 I have remembered You, O Lord, in the night, and have trusted in Jesus.
56 This I had, because I trust in Jesus.

57 You are my portion, O Lord, I have said I would trust in Jesus.
58 I beg for Your favor with my whole heart, be merciful to me through Jesus.
59 I thought on my ways and I turned my feet to Jesus.
60 I made haste and delayed not to follow Jesus.
61 Wicked people have robbed me, but I have not forgotten Jesus.
62 At midnight I will rise to give thanks to You because of Jesus.
63 I keep company with all those who respect You, and those who trust in Jesus.
64 The earth, O Lord, is full of Your mercy; teach me about Jesus.

65 You have dealt well with Your servant, O Lord, through Jesus.
66 Teach me good judgment and knowledge, for I have believed in Jesus.
67 Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I follow Jesus.
68 You are good, and You do good; teach me about Jesus.
69 The proud have forged a lie against me, but I will trust in Jesus with my whole heart.
70 Their heart is as fat as grease, but I delight in Jesus.
71 It is good for me that I have been afflicted, that I might learn about Jesus.
72 Jesus is better for me than thousands of gold and silver.

73 Your hands have made me and fashioned me, give me understanding that I may learn about Jesus.
74 Those who respect You will be glad when they see me, for I have hoped in Jesus.
75 I know, O Lord, that Jesus is right, and that You in faithfulness have afflicted me.
76 I pray You, let Your merciful kindness comfort me through Jesus.
77 Let Your tender mercies come to me that I may live, for Jesus is my delight.
78 Let the proud be ashamed, for they wronged me without a cause ‑‑ but I will meditate in Jesus.
79 Let those who respect You turn to me, and those who have known Jesus.
80 Let my heart be secure in Jesus so I will not be ashamed.

81 My soul faints for Your salvation, but I hope in Jesus.
82 My eyes are growing weary for Jesus, saying, When will You comfort me?
83 I am become like a bottle in the smoke, yet I do not forget Jesus.
84 How many days are left to Your servant? When will You execute judgment on those who persecute me?
85 The proud have dug pits for me, those who do not follow Jesus.
86 Jesus is faithful; they persecute me wrongfully ‑‑ help me!
87 They had almost eaten me alive, but I did not forsake Jesus.
88 Give me life through Your lovingkindness, so I will trust in Jesus.

89 For ever, O Lord, Jesus is established in heaven.
90 Your faithfulness lasts for all generations; You have established the earth, and it abides.
91 They continue this day through Your sovereignty, for all are Your servants.
92 Unless Jesus had been my delight, I would have perished in my affliction.
93 I will never forget Jesus, for with Him You have given me life.
94 I am Yours, save me; for I have sought Jesus.
95 The wicked have waited for me to destroy me, but I will think about Jesus.
96 I have seen the end of all perfection, but Your mercy is exceedingly great.

97 O how I love Jesus! He is my meditation all the day.
98 Through Jesus You have made me wiser than my enemies, for He is ever with me.
99 I have more understanding than all my teachers, for Jesus is my meditation.
100 I understand more than the ancients, because I trust in Jesus.
101 I have refrained my feet from every evil way, that I might have Jesus.
102 I have not departed from Jesus, for You have instructed me.
103 How sweet is Jesus to my taste! Even sweeter than honey to my mouth!
104 Through Jesus I get understanding, therefore I hate every false way.

105 Jesus is a lamp for my feet and a light for my path.
106 I have determined and I will follow through with it, that I will trust in Jesus.
107 I am afflicted very much; give me life, O Lord, through Jesus.
108 Accept, I beg You, the freewill offerings of my mouth, O Lord, and teach me about Jesus.
109 My soul is continually in my hand, yet I do not forget Jesus.
110 The wicked have laid a snare for me, yet I have not strayed from Jesus.
111 Jesus I have taken as my heritage for ever, for He is the rejoicing of my heart.
112 I have inclined my heart to follow Jesus always, even to the end.

113 I hate vain thoughts, but Jesus do I love.
114 You are my hiding place and my shield; I hope in Jesus.
115 Depart from me, you evildoers, for I will follow Jesus.
116 Uphold me through Jesus that I may live, and let me not be ashamed of my hope.
117 Hold me up and I will be safe, and I will have respect for Jesus continually.
118 You have trampled upon everyone who strays from Jesus, for their deceit is falsehood.
119 You put away all the wicked of the earth like dross, therefore I love Jesus.
120 My flesh trembles for fear of You, and I am afraid of Your word.

121 I have done what is right and just; leave me not to my oppressors.
122 Guarantee the well‑being of Your servant; let not the proud oppress me.
123 My eyes fail for Your salvation, and for the word of Your righteousness.
124 Deal with Your servant through Your mercy, and teach me about Jesus.
125 I am Your servant; give me understanding, that I may know Jesus.
126 It is time for You to work, Lord, for they have disregarded Jesus.
127 Therefore I love Jesus above gold, yes, above fine gold.
128 Therefore I consider Jesus to be right in everything, and I hate every false way.

129 Jesus is wonderful, therefore my soul trusts in Him.
130 The entrance of Jesus gives light, He gives understanding to the simple.
131 I opened my mouth and panted, for I longed for Jesus.
132 Look upon me and be merciful to me, as You have done to those who love Jesus.
133 Establish my steps in Jesus, and let not any sin have dominion over me.
134 Deliver me from the oppression of man; so will I trust in Jesus.
135 Make Your face shine upon Your servant, and teach me about Jesus.
136 Rivers of waters run down my eyes, because they do not trust in Jesus.

137 You are righteous, O Lord, and Jesus is upright.
138 Jesus is righteous and very faithful.
139 My zeal has consumed me, because my enemies have forgotten Jesus.
140 Jesus is very pure, therefore Your servant loves Him.
141 I am small and despised, yet I do not forget Jesus.
142 Your righteousness is an everlasting righteousness, and Jesus is the truth.
143 Trouble and anguish have taken hold on me, yet Jesus is my delight.
144 The righteousness of Jesus is everlasting; give me understanding and I will live.

145 I cried with my whole heart; hear me, O Lord, I will trust in Jesus.
146 I cried to You; save me, and I will follow Jesus.
147 I arose before the dawning of the morning and cried, I hoped in Jesus.
148 My eyes are awake during the night watches, that I might meditate in Jesus.
149 Hear my voice through Your lovingkindness, O Lord; give me life through Jesus.
150 Those who do wickedness are nearby; they are far from Jesus.
151 You are near, O Lord, and Jesus is truth.
152 Concerning Jesus, I have known of old that You have established Him for ever.

153 Consider my affliction and deliver me, for I do not forget Jesus.
154 Plead my cause and deliver me, give me life through Jesus.
155 Salvation is far from the wicked, for they do not seek Jesus.
156 Great are Your tender mercies, O Lord, give me life through Jesus.
157 Many are my persecutors and my enemies, yet I refuse to turn away from Jesus.
158 I saw the transgressors and felt sad, because they refused to follow Jesus.
159 Consider how I love Jesus; give me life, O Lord, through Your lovingkindness.
160 Jesus is true from the beginning, and He endures for ever.

161 Princes have persecuted me for no reason, but my heart stands in awe of Jesus.
162 I rejoice in Jesus as one who finds great wealth.
163 I hate and despise lying, but I love Jesus.
164 Seven times a day I praise You because of Jesus.
165 Great peace have they who love Jesus, and nothing will offend them.
166 Lord, I have hoped for Your salvation, and I have kept my trust in Jesus.
167 My soul has trusted in Jesus, and I love Him exceedingly.
168 I have followed Jesus, for all my ways are before You.

169 Let my cry come near before You, O Lord; give me understanding through Jesus.
170 Let my supplication come before You; deliver me through Jesus.
171 My lips will utter praise when You have taught me about Jesus.
172 My tongue will speak of Jesus, for He is righteousness.
173 Let Your hand help me, for I have chosen Jesus.
174 I have longed for Your salvation, O Lord, and Jesus is my delight.
175 Let my soul live and it will praise You, and let Jesus help me.
176 I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek Your servant, for I do not forget Jesus.

Noted Evangelical Scholar Teaches the Cleansing of Heaven’s Sanctuary

Sat, 09 Jan 2010 15:08:00 GMT

It’s thrilling when trusted Evangelical scholars vindicate the various aspects of Seventh-day Adventist doctrine. For example, the seventh-day Sabbath is gaining increasing respect. So is our understanding of hell—annihilationism, supported by such theological luminaries as John Stott, author of The Cross of Christ. At the Baptist seminary where I recently completed my doctorate, my major professor was a conditionalist, believing as we do that death is unconscious sleep. The SDA view of Christ’s second coming as post-tribulation and pre-millennial is gaining ground, and our health message is increasingly respected by fellow Christians and even secular society.

Only Seventh-day Adventists package all these truths together into an integrated whole—that is our uniqueness—but it is so good to see our various doctrines affirmed individually.

Even our doctrine of heaven’s sanctuary, so ridiculed by many, is winning some affirmation from unexpected places. The core of the controversy is the cleansing of that heavenly sanctuary, which is not only denied but derided by ex-Adventists such as Dale Ratzlaff of Life Assurance Ministries.

Last night I was exploring the new version of Logos Bible Software, preparing a product review of their Platinum package for the March issue of Outlook magazine. I typed one of my favorite Scripture themes, “Christus Victor,” into the command box, and one of the hits took me right into Hebrews 9 and the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.

Notice this from D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, an eminent British Evangelical scholar. Referring to Hebrews 9:23, he says: “We are taught here quite clearly that it was necessary that the heavenly place itself should be purified.” That’s in his 1996 book, God the Father, God the Son, published by Crossway Books. He continues: “And thus, it seems to me, we arrive at a kind of understanding of what is meant here by the necessity to purify even the heavenly tabernacle itself.”

Amazing! This is very much of what Adventists have been saying all these years. Here is the extended quotation from Dr. Lloyd-Jones:

“I wonder whether you have ever realised that our Lord, by doing His work upon the cross, has even effected a change in heaven? Let me give you my authority. We read in Hebrews 9:23, ‘It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.’ God called Moses up to the Mount and there He gave him instructions about the building of the tabernacle, about the measurements, and how he was to furnish it and exactly what he was to do. And, as the author of Hebrews reminds us, when God had shown Moses everything, He gave him these words of instruction: ‘See … that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount’ (Heb. 8:5). So Moses went down and carried out the instructions. And, as the epistle to the Hebrews reminds us, everything that Moses made had to be purified and it was purified by taking the blood of calves and of goats and water and scarlet wool and hyssop, by sprinkling the book of the law and the people and the various vessels of the ministry and everything in connection with the tabernacle.

“Now this is the author’s argument: ‘It was therefore necessary,’ he says, ‘that the patterns’—in other words, these earthly things; the tabernacle in the wilderness was not ‘the things in the heavens’, it was only something made on the pattern of those things—‘the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these’—the blood of bulls and of goats, water, and so on—‘but the heavenly things themselves [must be purified] with better sacrifices than these.’ And then he goes on, ‘For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us’ (Heb. 9:23–4).

“So his argument can be put like this: the patterns were purified by blood of bulls and goats but that is not good enough to purify the thing itself, the heavenly tabernacle; this must be purified by something better. And it has been purified by something better. It has been purified by the blood of the Son of God Himself. He offered His own blood. I do beg of you to read again this ninth chapter of Hebrews, indeed, read chapter 8 as well! Go further and read the entire epistle in order that you may grasp this argument. It is a most glorious statement and one of the most mysterious statements in the whole of the Bible. We are taught here quite clearly that it was necessary that the heavenly place itself should be purified and that it has been purified by the blood of Jesus Christ Himself.

“Now the question is: What does this mean? Let me be quite frank and answer that there is a sense in which no one can be too dogmatic about the answer to that question. But it seems to me we must say this: in some mysterious way there is a tabernacle in the heavenly places. There are statements about our Lord entering into that heavenly tabernacle, that holiest of all. I do not pretend to understand it but the statements are made and therefore we must believe that what was made on earth was made on the pattern of that which is in heaven.

“And, further, we can say this: Satan fell from heaven. Our Lord says, ‘I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven’ (Luke 10:18). Satan, as we saw when we were considering the biblical teaching concerning him, was undoubtedly the brightest of the angels in the presence of God, and when he fell, when he rose up with pride and rebelled against God, he did so in the heavens itself. And thus, it seems to me, we arrive at a kind of understanding of what is meant here by the necessity to purify even the heavenly tabernacle itself. In a way that we cannot understand, and that seems to be inscrutable, evil has affected heaven itself. This vile, this foul thing that first caused the fall of Satan, and then caused the fall of man has, if one may use such language, introduced a kind of impurity even into heaven—into the heavenly tabernacle, at any rate. And according to this teaching, as I understand it, it was necessary for our Lord to purify and to purge the heavenly tabernacle of that taint, and the statement here is to the effect that He has done so.

“This, I think, helps us to understand various statements which we find in Scripture, such as Colossians 1:20 where we read, ‘And having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth or things in heaven.’ Through Christ God is going to reconcile all things unto Himself in heaven as well as on earth. I am not suggesting that that is the only explanation but I am suggesting that that is a part of the explanation. And so we are confronted by this truly amazing and remarkable statement, that our Lord, as it were, had to take His own blood, even into heaven itself to get rid of this taint, this foul smear that was left by the fall of Satan. And so, ultimately, heaven, to use the language of the author of Hebrews, is purified entirely; and all evil and all its effects everywhere in heaven as well as upon earth have been removed.^”[i]

So there we have it: an amazing affirmation of a much-disputed element of vintage Adventist doctrine—the cleaning of heaven’s sanctuary. Dr. Lloyd-Jones doesn’t get into the prophecies of Daniel, from which SDAs derive the year 1844 as the beginning date for this cleansing. In humility, Lloyd-Jones admits that he doesn’t know what this cleansing is all about—just the fact that it had to happen. He speculates that the heavenly sanctuary became defiled by Lucifer’s sin of rebellion. This is correct in a broad sense, of course, since all defilement originated with Lucifer. But he doesn’t consult the biblical sanctuary system to see specifically how defilement is transferred to the sanctuary.

Indeed, Lloyd-Jones takes note that Moses’ sanctuary on earth was patterned after the heavenly sanctuary; he just doesn’t follow through on that connection—specifically, that the sanctuary is defiled when we sin, finally to be cleansed by virtue of Christ’s once-for-all-time sacrifice on the cross.

Meanwhile, of course, “there is no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus,” (Romans 8:1), since we are “accepted in the Beloved” (Ephesians 1:6). Even as the heavenly judgment proceeds with its audit of salvation history, all who entrust themselves to Jesus may find refuge within the inner temple (Hebrews 6:19) and come confidently to God’s throne of grace (4:16). There we may rejoice “in full assurance of hope until the very end” (6:11), since “by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified” (10:14).

After the celestial pre-Advent judgment, during which the sins of believers are blotted out, the devil will bear responsibility for his role in defiling us. God will baptize him in the lake of fire, “prepared for the devil and his angels” (Matthew 25:41). Satan had given birth to sin as Lucifer before being cast into the earth, where he seduced the human race. Thus it is appropriate that God will eventually hold him responsible for the whole business of sin.

So the devil will be the final sin-bearer, in the sense that he must bear responsibility for the entire enterprise of evil. After God’s triumphal verdict in the pre-Advent judgment, all record of evildoing is cleansed from heaven’s sanctuary by authority of Christ’s sacrificial blood. The blame for sin is placed upon its originator and salesman. Satan will be banished as a goat into the wilderness, ultimately to be destroyed in hell with his entourage of rebels. God and His vindicated people will share eternity together on the earth made new.

To summarize: one by one, the various elements of Seventh-day Adventist doctrine are being affirmed by respected biblical scholarship—even the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary. The unique theological contribution of our denomination is that we are the only faith community who connects all the dots into a complete picture, so the world can see the truth as it is in Jesus for earth’s last days.

[i] D. M. Lloyd-Jones, God the Father, God the Son (Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 1996), 346-48.

This website featured in both "Adventist Review" and "Adventist World" magazines

Fri, 08 Jan 2010 17:43:00 GMT

We are happy that our world church featured sdaforme.com in the December 10 Adventist Review, after also being promoted in November’s Adventist World magazine on the president’s page (p. 13). Mid-America Union President Roscoe J. Howard III wrote a guest editorial promoting our website.

Elder Howard says, “What I most like about the Web site is its positive spirit. Weber and the McConnells counter the attacks against Adventist truth without counterattacking those who oppose us [the SDA church]. They offer gracious responses, taking to heart the apostle Paul’s counsel in 2 Timothy 2:25: ‘Gently instruct those who oppose the truth. Perhaps God will change those people’s hearts, and they will learn the truth.’”

I hope so. That’s our goal, anyway. We want this website to be represent the loving Spirit of Jesus Christ, not a combative spirit of contention. Our warfare is against the devil’s attacks upon Adventist truth, not against people who oppose us. I am heartsick at the mean spirit of so much of theological discussion, and we will not permit this website to showcase hateful or insulting responses. That’s the main reason we are not posting comments anymore.

I understand the pain and frustration so many have felt after suffering legalism in an Adventist context, and my heart goes out to you. If you are ready to sit down with us and try to figure out where do you go from here, this website is available as a resource to help you on that journey.

Another reason I’m not taking comments on this website anymore is that life has gotten so busy for me. I am now assistant to the president of the Mid-America Union on top of my ongoing communication responsibilities. This involves extra travel and other new responsibilities. I’m adjunct teaching at Union College, and trying to keep Outlook magazine coming every month to the 63,000 members of the Mid-America Union. Added to that is my volunteer work with The Hope of Survivors for victims of clergy sexual abuse.

Given all this, I’m even way behind on answering e-mails and have no hope of catching up until after I’m done teaching my class this semester at Union College. My apologies.

There are many new things we want to post on this website, plus videos and other media materials. Meanwhile, please browse around what we have posted here. If you haven’t read the “Welcome . . . About this site” on the homepage, please do. It will give you an idea of what we are hoping to accomplish here.

May God be with you all as we enter this Thanksgiving season, with gratitude most of all for His mercy and truth in Jesus Christ.

Grace and peace,

Martin Weber, DMin, assistant to the president and communication director, Mid-America Union of SDA

Check out our Stories!

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:15:00 GMT

All around the Mid-America Union*, Seventh-day Adventists young and old are joyously connected with their communities in grace-based, selfless service for the Savior. As editor of Outlook magazine, Martin selected a few of the many featured every month, along with photos. To access them, click on the word "Stories" in the middle of the dark gray bar across the top. Select your story, and if you wish to enlarge a photo, double click on it.

BTW, as each new blogs (like this one) are posted, previous ones are moved to the main Blog page. To access them, click on the word "Blog" on the same dark gray bar. You'll see them listed in the middle column of the page. Many of these older blogs have fascinating comments of continuing interest added to them, like these:
   "5 Questions for Dale Ratzlaff"
   "Dale Ratzlaff responds to our questions"
   "Please forgive us--and don't forsake us"
   "True prophet = no errors?"

*The Mid-America Union stretches south from the Canadian border to the border with Oklahoma, and then west from the Mississippi River over the crest of the Rockies. Martin Weber is the communication director for this region.

Life Assurance Ministries--you amaze me!

Wed, 18 Nov 2009 23:20:00 GMT

You have much to say about the New Covenant, and we share your enthusiasm for its new life in the Spirit. What we can’t understand is why you feel the New Covenant does away with God’s Law—not as a method of salvation (which would be legalism) but as the test of fully devoted discipleship?

2 Corinthians 3 condemns not God’s Law itself but the futility of having it written on tables of stone, as in the Old Covenant. In the New Covenant, that same Law is “written on the fleshly tables of the heart” (verse 3). It’s not the message that is different but the place where it is written—tables of the heart instead of tables of stone.

If you disagree with that, please tell us which of the Ten Commandments that God’s Spirit of grace won’t write on your heart? The one that forbids disrespecting parents (5^th)? Murdering (6^th)? Adultery (7^th)? Stealing (8^th)? Lying (9^th)? How about coveting (10^th)? Of course not. Then what about putting false gods before the real God (1^st), debasing His image (2^nd) or taking His name in vain (3^rd)? Certainly not. You’re good with all of those commandments. So where is the problem?

I wonder if it’s that Sabbath commandment, which just won’t go away. So do you throw away the whole Law of God just to get rid of one inconvenient truth? What a pity, since it’s the Sabbath commandment that keeps us from being legalists when honoring the other nine. The Sabbath means rest, remember? Resting in Christ’s finished works? How can you possibly have a problem with that?

My friends at Life Assurance want me to give them evidence that the 10 Commandments are written in the heart under the New Covenant. I think we just I just did! If I didn’t, please do tell me which one of the 10 you don’t want anymore? Only the one that specifically calls us to rest in Christ.

This seems so strange, I can't understand it. You fulfill the other nine commandments while resting in Jesus, while you reject the one commandment that calls us to rest in Christ’s finished works of Creation and Salvation. What kind of sense does this make?

And it gets even worse when our friends at Life Assurance Ministries deny the clear statement of Romans 8:4 that “the righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in us.” It doesn’t say that the righteousness of the Spirit is written in our hearts; it says that the Spirit writes the righteousness of the Law in our hearts.

Of course this doesn’t happen in a legalistic way by trying to be good enough before God. It only happens when we rest in Christ, which empowers us to live in the Spirit. So that’s how God’s Law is written in our hearts—by His Spirit, who leads us to Gospel rest (which is what the seventh-day Sabbath is all about!).

Dale Ratzlaff speaks of Christ’s two great commandments of Jesus: to love the Lord with all our hearts and our neighbors as ourselves. Fine. Now which of God’s 10 Commandments do Christ’s two commandments overthrow? Please tell us.

Actually, we already have Christ’s own explanation: “On these two commandments depend all the law and the prophets” (Matthew 22:40). The Message Bible puts it this ways; “These two commands are pegs; everything in God’s Law and the Prophets hangs from them.” So there we have it: Christ’s two commandments support God’s Law instead of negating it.

The apostle Paul puts it this way: “Do we then make void the Law through faith?” Yes, according to Life Assurance Ministries. But the Bible says, “God forbid, we establish the Law” (Romans 3:31). Which brings us back to 1 Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”

Dale Ratzlaff responds to our questions . . .

Sat, 22 Aug 2009 07:07:00 GMT

We welcome his interaction here about the Sabbath. (The following is also posted as an exchange of comments under the blog “5 Questions for Dale Ratzlaff.”)

Dale Ratzlaff to Martin Weber:

There is no command to keep the Sabbath in the N.T. All the meetings in the book of Acts are in a Jewish setting. There is no instruction on how to keep the Sabbath in letters written to young Gentile churches. Sabbath breaking is never listed in any lists of NT sins. When the Sabbath in mentioned in the epistles, it is either in a negative or unimportant context. The O.T. prophets confront the gentile nations for worshiping idols, blaspheming the name of God, ruthless killing, injustice and immorality, but never for breaking the Sabbath. The Jews considered the Sabbath to be a ritual law. The Jews insisted that a Gentile staying with a Jew was to keep the Sabbath. However, if the Gentile kept the Sabbath on his own he was to be put to death. Jesus, according to John 5 broke the Sabbath and from his defense of his other Sabbath incidents it seems clear that He understood the Sabbath to be a ritual law. The entrance sign to the Old Covenant was circumcision. The continuing sign the Old Covenant was Sabbath. “Remember the Sabbath” The entrance sign to the New Covenant is baptism The continuing sign in the New Covenant is the Lord’s Supper. “Do this in remembrance of Me”

Martin Weber responds:

Dear Dale, thanks for engaging us in dialogue. I appreciate this opportunity to have a Christian discussion and am glad to respond to your statements.

Since the Sabbath day itself was deeply entrenched during Christ’s ministry, there was no need for Him to re-command it. The issue in the Gospels was not whether to keep the Sabbath but how to keep it—and Jesus gave plenty of attention to that. If Christ intended to do away with the Sabbath, He surely wasted a lot of energy defending it. And then to top it off, He proclaimed Himself “Lord of the Sabbath” (Matthew 12:8).

As for the rest of the NT, we find nothing negative about the weekly Sabbath—it’s the non-weekly ceremonial sabbaths that are done away with in Colossians 2. Remember, the Mosaic ceremonial laws had monthly and yearly sabbaths beyond the weekly Sabbath of the Ten Commandments (see Leviticus 23:38, for example). Ceremonial laws, such as the monthly and yearly Sabbaths, are obviously what’s under discussion in verses 17 and 18: “So let no one judge you in food or in drink, or regarding a festival or a new moon or sabbaths, which are a shadow of things to come, but the substance is of Christ.” By contrast, the weekly Sabbath of Creation and Calvary is not a temporary shadow pointing forward. It is an eternal memorial calling us to “remember,” pointing back to Christ’s historic accomplishments.

Romans 14 also refers to ceremonial Sabbaths. The continued keeping of them was optional according to one’s own convictions. Note that once again the context in that chapter is Jewish ceremonial laws, not anything in the Ten Commandments.

Throughout the church-planting narrative of the book of Acts, Sabbath-keeping is obviously a fact of life in the early church—and never negatively mentioned. If Paul had done away with the seventh-day Sabbath, there would have been a firestorm of controversy—as we do find regarding circumcision and food laws.

To summarize: It is simply not credible to imagine that something as fundamental and entrenched as the Sabbath could be abolished without controversy in the NT, particularly when we see so much discussion about other things Jewish—even in the predominantly Gentile churches. For more on this, please check our FAQ in the “Sabbath” section under our “Issues” tab, answering: “Why doesn’t the NT explicitly teach the Sabbath?” (Hint—it does!)

Moving on with your critique, Dale. You consider the Sabbath a Jewish ritual. Well, everything in Jewish culture was ritualized, including eternal moral principles such as marital fidelity—and the eternal worship principle of the Sabbath. Let’s remember that the Sabbath is not rooted in rituals and ceremonies but as the grand memorial of Creation. It was “made for man” (Mark 2:27,28)—not for Jewish ritual. The Greek word there for “man” is anthropos, which you know means “people”—not just Jews.

As for the Gentile nations of the OT not being confronted for breaking the Sabbath—first things first! Pagans first had to turn from their idols to worship the true Creator. Then they could begin keeping the Sabbath, as Gentile converts indeed were invited to do in Isaiah 56 (verses 6, 7).

I can hardly believe, Dale, that you would accuse Jesus of breaking the Sabbath in John 5. This would turn our Savior into a sinner! Yes, He did ignore the Jewish rituals about the Sabbath, and everything else. But if our Lord had broken His Father’s commandment, He could not have challenged His enemies: “Which of you convicts me of sin?” (John 8:46). He kept the Sabbath in His life and even in His death, as along with His disciples He “rested on the Sabbath according to the commandment” (Luke 23:56—evidently the Sabbath was still a commandment when Luke wrote his Gospel, decades later). Only after Jesus honored the Sabbath by resting on that day from His finished work on the cross did He rise from the dead.

Dale, you teach that the Sabbath is done away, and now Jesus Himself is your Sabbath—as if He said: “The Sabbath used to be a day, but now it’s Me.” No, Jesus declared Himself to be Lord of the day, not the day itself. (Let’s maintain the distinction between the Creator and His creation, lest we set the stage for pantheism.) The Sabbath is like baptism in the New Covenant: an expression of identification with Christ for our salvation. Whereas baptism is a once-in-a-lifetime expression of our solidarity with Christ, the Sabbath is a weekly expression of the same faith.

Jesus is not our baptism, and He is not our Sabbath. Both baptism and the Sabbath are symbols of Christ’s rest. It helps to remember that the word “Sabbath” does not mean “works” but “rest”— literally “cessation” from our works. And isn’t that what the Gospel is all about?

Dale, you teach that the New Covenant does away with the Ten Commandments, including the Sabbath. But the NT teaches that what God wrote on the tables of stone in the Old Covenant is now written on our hearts. Hebrews 10:16 says: “This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, declares the Lord: I will put my laws on their hearts, and write them on their minds.” These are not just spiritual principles (as you say), but God’s actual commandments.

Does this obedience amount to legalism? Not when motivated by loving gratitude rather than appeasement.

We are not saved by keeping the law, but the life of faith will make us faithful. Believers become fully devoted disciples, being drawn into harmony with God’s Ten Commandments so that the “righteousness of the law will be fulfilled in us” (Romans 8:3-4). Whereas ceremonial laws are done away with in the NT, God’s eternal law remains to test the genuineness of our faith. And so we read in 1 Corinthians 7:19: “Circumcision is nothing and uncircumcision is nothing, but keeping the commandments of God is what matters.”

Keeping the commandments matters to God, Dale. Does it matter to you?

Forgive us—and please don’t forsake us!

Sat, 15 Aug 2009 04:47:00 GMT

I’m writing this with a heavy heart, reaching out to my brothers and sisters who suffer insensitivity and arrogance when asking sincere questions concerning Seventh-day Adventist doctrine. If this is your situation, I am so sorry. Please forgive us.

Perhaps you have asked questions that were quietly troubling you about the Sabbath, the judgment, or Ellen White. Although confiding your doctrinal doubts in all sincerity, perhaps you were brushed off, patronized, rebuked or even denounced. Frustrated in getting answers to vital questions, you may have become disappointed and eventually embittered. At that point you felt betrayed and filled with pain and confusion, leaving you wondering whether the time has come to abandon your beloved Adventist heritage.

Before you do that—and even if you have already taken that step—please let me share with you, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, information that I think can be helpful to you.

I acknowledge there is a problem. Just yesterday someone approached me after church seeking help with a friend who had left the Adventist Church under the above circumstances. She had grown up SDA, attended our schools and remained a faithful member. Her crisis began when she read something in the Bible that seemed to directly contradict Ellen G. White. It was something too important to ignore. So she approached her godly mother, who insisted that nothing Ellen White ever wrote contradicted the Bible, and thus her daughter must be mistaken. This elderly saint was unable to explain just how her daughter was mistaken, nor was she interested in searching out the truth. Instead, she admonished her daughter for “harboring doubts about the Spirit of Prophecy” and urged her to drop them. When her daughter said she really needed to get the truth clarified in her mind, the mother lectured her, scolded her, slandered her motives and ultimately denounced her as a doubter of the faith—in danger of being lost.

I believe that this daughter is the victim of spiritual abuse, unintended yet devastating. If you have suffered this yourself from Seventh-day Adventist friends or family, I plead with you again: Please forgive us, for we didn’t know what we were doing. We were only trying to help you by warning you. Don’t forsake us—at least not yet. Give us a chance to answer your questions; that’s what this website is all about.

I know firsthand of what I speak, having suffered spiritual abuse myself from well-intentioned fellow Seventh-day Adventists. I’ve survived it by God’s grace and now have committed myself to do my part in remedying it.

Here’s my story, if I may share it with you. Back in 1979, I was a young evangelist filled with zeal for the message and mission of the Seventh-day Adventist Church (as I am no less today). I proclaimed from town to town the message of truth as it is in Jesus. I told people that if they belonged to a church that violated Scriptural fundamental beliefs, than please consider joining the Seventh-day Adventist Church, because everything we believe is found in the Bible—and the Bible alone.

I meant that with all of my heart, and scores who attended my meetings responded to my challenge. They left their longtime spiritual heritage to join the Adventist family of believers. Life was great, and I had a fruitful and fulfilling ministry.

Then suddenly I found myself in a great spiritual crisis, facing the same challenge I had brought to others. It happened after some young pastors for whom I was to hold meetings came to me with questions about fundamental SDA beliefs. Specifically they wondered about the investigative judgment and whether it really began in 1844. They asked if it was even appropriate for believers in Jesus to have their salvation threatened—or at least called into question—by being subjected to the scrutiny of judgment.

I opened my Bible with these guys and found that I didn’t have the answers they needed. So I did what everyone who gives Bible studies is supposed to do—promise to look for Bible answers and get back to them. I went to the conference president asking his help in finding answers. He didn’t care to open his Bible with me. Instead, he said: “We already know from the Spirit of Prophecy that the judgment began in 1844. God said it, I believe it, and that settles it for me—and for you. Our job is to go out and preach the SDA message.”

“That’s exactly what I’ve been doing,” I responded. “But these guys have sincere questions, and they are wanting our help. They just want some Bible answers from us.”

The conference president told me that if I really wanted Bible answers, I could get them from Ellen White’s reliable interpretations of Scripture. He urged me to put my faith in her prophetic revelations instead of trusting my own private interpretation.

I told him I had already searched diligently in Ellen White’s writings for the Bible answers, but that these guys were raising questions for which she wasn’t offering any help. The president said they were on dangerous ground and I shouldn’t venture out there with them. He even forbade me from studying the Bible with them.

I asked him: “You’ve assigned me the responsibility of holding meetings with them in their churches, so isn’t it my job to help them? How can I refuse their request to study the Bible? Besides,” I added, “I need to have these questions answered for my own peace of mind. Can you help me?”

The president responded with another dire warning about doubting Seventh-day Adventist truth and the inspiration of Ellen White. He then phoned the Ellen G. White Estate in Washington, DC and set up an appointment for me to visit them and get straightened out.

I willingly went, hoping to find Bible answers. Instead I got platitudes and further admonitions. I went home without the answers I so desperately needed to continue living the life and sharing the message of a Bible-based Christian Seventh-day Adventist.

Meanwhile, some people at conference headquarters started questioning my motives and the state of my heart. They couldn't understand why I needed to see something in the Bible for myself in order to believe it. They thought I was putting my own private interpretation above the wisdom of our current SDA leaders and the pioneers of our past. They didn’t seem to realize that I had no reason to make theological trouble for myself, just when my ministry was beginning to take off. Newly ordained, at 28 I was the conference evangelist, assistant ministerial director and a member of the conference executive committee. It was politically smart for me to keep any questions to myself, especially with two toddlers to feed and a little house in the country to pay for. Causing trouble for my career in ministry was the last thing I wanted to do.

Actually, it was the next-to-last thing I was willing to do. The last thing I could dare to do was to betray my conscience by playing politics instead of searching for truth. Yet things weren’t looking good for me, especially when people my wife counseled with got her alarmed about my spiritual quest—to the point that she was ready to end our marriage if I didn’t stop questioning Adventist truth.

Both of us were victims of first-degree spiritual abuse. A dysfunctional and toxic situation was threatening my ministry, my marriage, and worst of all, my spiritual commitment to submit my faith to God alone through the Bible and the Bible only.

I found myself sinking amid the crisis of my life. Almost panicked now myself, I arranged as a last resort to spend the winter studying at the Andrews University seminary extension in Hinsdale, Illinois. It was a soul-winning institute operated by Mark Finley, an evangelist I respected. I thought that Mark would be willing to take my questions seriously and study with me.

God bless him, he was! He sat down with me and, over our open Bibles, answered my basic questions.

Mark Finley’s explanation of the SDA doctrine of judgment was profoundly deep yet astonishingly simple. The root problem was that we were imposing our Western understanding of judgment upon that biblical doctrine. To the ancient Hebrews, judgment meant first of all vindication, not condemnation. The name “Daniel,” for example, means “God is my judge”—my vindicator and deliverer. In the book of Judges, you don’t see a bunch of condemners going around; the judges were deliverers of God’s people. To apply this reality to the pre-Advent judgment: God is vindicating His people in heaven’s sanctuary, delivering them from the devil’s accusations. He finds all the evidence He needs to justify us in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, our Savior and High Priest.

That key insight was the tipping point for me. I realized that the core Adventist teaching of the judgment was not inherently legalistic at all. Western presuppositions imposed upon Scripture had caused an unnecessary doctrinal dilemma. I was delighted to discover that Ellen White herself began picking up this theme of vindication in heaven’s pre-Advent judgment in her later writings. (Consider the chapter “Joshua and the Angel” in Prophets and Kings, the last-completed book in her “Conflict of the Ages” series.) But it was because of the Bible and the Bible alone that I chose to remain a Seventh-day Adventist.

Mark Finley, by the way, is now a vice president of the SDA world church—which I believe reflects a positive trend in the leadership of our denomination.

Now, to finish out my story: Once I realized the Gospel-based truth about the judgment—based on the Bible alone—everything else started falling into place. It took about a year to get all my questions answered. I recorded my new insights in the book Some Call It Heresy, officially published by the church. In it I explain my 1979 Gethsemane experience, and the exciting discoveries back then that led me out of confusion and continue to inspire me as a Seventh-day Adventist. The more I delve into the Scriptures, the more thankful I am to be an Adventist. My ongoing learning adventure is chronicled in many other books officially published by the church, most recently in this year’s God Was There: True Stories of a Police Chaplain.

So that’s my story. I think it’s fair to say that I can relate to whatever anyone reading this may be struggling with in your own doctrinal frustrations. I also can assure you that Bible answers about Adventist beliefs are there for you—in fact, right here on this website. I’ve condensed and compiled for you what I’ve written since 1980 about God’s mercy and truth expressed in Seventh-day Adventist fundamental beliefs.

Before giving up on Adventism, then, please entertain the possibility that God may have led you to this website. Give me a chance to explain how SDA fundamental beliefs are soundly Biblical. As God is my witness, everything I believe is based upon the Bible, not the writings of Ellen White. And nothing I believe is motivated by or derived from law—everything is based upon grace.

Consider the seventh-day Sabbath. It’s not some Jewish ritual, as Dale Ratzlaff insists, but rather our weekly expression of resting in the finished work of Jesus Christ. That’s what the word “Sabbath” means—“rest,” literally “cessation.” We cease from trusting in our own works to find rest in the accomplishments of Jesus Christ. Jesus proclaimed Himself “Lord of the Sabbath,” so it doesn’t matter to me what Dale Ratzlaff says about the seventh day.

Dale says that it’s impossible to be a Seventh-day Adventist without being tainted by legalism. I have found that not to be true. For three decades now, I have rejoiced in Gospel freedom while serving in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Rather than being suppressed, my Gospel testimony has been published in more than 20 books (some of them “ghost-written” for Adventist leaders). In 1983 I was invited to join the staff at the Voice of Prophecy radio broadcast, later to be a scriptwriter and assistant to George Vandeman, founder of the It Is Written telecast.

While at the Adventist Media Center I wrote Adventist Hot Potatoes, after which denominational leaders invited me to join the Ministerial Association of the world church and be an associate editor of Ministry magazine. I also was made a member of the General Conference Executive Committee, the world church’s governing body. Currently I’m editor of Outlook, a church magazine serving 62,000 members in the Mid-America Union, where I also am communication director.

Based on my experience and those of so many others I know personally, I don’t see how Dale Ratzlaff can say there’s no room in Adventism for those who stand up for the Gospel and base all beliefs on the Bible alone. I don’t deny the ongoing problem of “old school” legalism, which remains a powerful—but fading—force in the church. My plea is that you stand with all of us in the Seventh-day Adventist Church who treasure God’s mercy and truth, and help us make a difference for the Gospel.

Please don’t follow Dale Ratzlaff out of the frying pan into the fire—literally. He actually teaches a fire of eternal torment for unbelievers. Do you want to subject your children and grandchildren to such horrific doctrine in Sunday school, about a God of “love” who torments lost people for eternity? Isn’t that a type of spiritual abuse all its own?

Please stay with the Adventist Church and help us make a difference. Every SDA doctrine fits a Gospel context and comes from the Bible alone. Hold me accountable on that. I invite you to challenge me publicly by responding to this blog, or you can connect with me privately via e-mail: martin@midamericaoutlook.org.

5 Questions for Dale Ratzlaff

Fri, 17 Jul 2009 12:45:00 GMT

#1 If Christians in the NT kept Sunday, why is there no “buzz” about this in the book of Acts?
Paul and fellow apostles are accused of all kinds of anti-Jewish actions and teachings, but never once are they accused of doing away with the Sabbath.

#2 If eternal torment is God’s punishment for sinners, and Jesus received that punishment on the cross, why is He not still suffering today?
John 3:16 says people without Christ will “perish”—not have eternal life in hell. According to 1 John 5:12, only those in Christ have eternal life—to spend anywhere, in heaven or in hell!

#3 Why do you condemn Adventism today for the mistaken things their pioneers did and taught, while letting the Protestant pioneers off the hook?
Luther taught horribly hateful things against the Jews that historians believe set the stage for the German Holocaust. The leading Reformers in Geneva killed Dr. Michael Servetus by burning him alive at the stake for heresy 27 October 1553—no Adventist leader has ever come close to doing that! Many Protestants murdered Anabaptists for their opposition to infant baptism. They also were co-participants in the infamous Thirty Years’ War of religion; SDA have engaged in religious disagreements, but nothing like that! Give us a break!

#4 If you believe that Jesus is your Sabbath so now you don’t have to keep the day holy, what do you say to somebody who says: “Jesus is my baptism—so now I don’t have to be baptized”?
Both are signs of entering Christ’s rest—click on the Sabbath tab to see more on this.

#5 How can you say that Adventist leaders are required to believe that Ellen G. White is an infallible authority over Scripture—or be quiet about it to save their careers?
People like Martin Weber have been teaching and write publicly and emphatically otherwise for nearly 30 years, getting their books published by the church and holding positions of denominational responsibility. Click on the Ellen White tab to see a sample of what Martin has been writing in official church publications since 1983.

True prophet = no errors?

Sun, 09 Aug 2009 00:29:00 GMT

Is it true that genuine prophets never suffer from theological error? Jesus didn’t think so. Exhibit A is John the Baptist.

That desert prophet who announced the coming Messiah suffered from serious theological error. When people asked him how to be saved, he put them on a works trip. The apostle Paul even had to rebaptize converts confused by his misunderstanding of the Gospel. Yes, John did announce: “Behold the Lamb of God,” but he obviously didn’t realize what he was talking about. When Jesus fulfilled that role, John questioned whether He was indeed the true Messiah. Yet despite John’s theological error and confusion, Jesus endorsed him as among the greatest of the prophets.

How can these things be?
Remember that John the Baptist was not an author of Scripture; he was a non-canonical prophet called by God to lead a movement and prepare people for the coming of the Lord. John’s prophetic messages matured with the capacity of the people to move along with him. As he grew theologically, he let go of various errors held in common with the people he was leading.

How do we know that John, despite error, was a true prophet? Because he was always moving in the right direction. This is the proof of the Holy Spirit’s inspiration, according to Jesus: “When He, the Spirit of truth has come; He will guide you into all truth” (John 16:13).

So it was with Ellen White. She too led a movement to prepare people for the coming of the Lord. She too had a prophetic calling—of a non-canonical nature. Her work was not to write Scripture but to help people. She too shared misconceptions of truth in common with the people she served, but she was always growing out of error into truth. This is the proof of the genuineness of her calling.

Let me share with you something that I wrote back in 1983 for my first book published by the church, Some Call It Heresy. In this excerpt, I frankly discuss the theological issues of Ellen White. Keep this in mind when somebody tells you that the church has not been honest about Ellen White’s theological journey. The following is the first of many such things I’ve written about Ellen White that the church has published these past three decades.

Here it is now:

Remember John the Baptist? "A prophet? Yes," Jesus informs us, "more than a prophet. . . . There has not arisen anyone greater than John the Baptist" (Mat. 11:9 11). Yet John grew in interpreting his own message. At first he expected a different kind of Messiah than Christ turned out to be, one to "thoroughly clear His threshing floor, and . . . gather His wheat into the barn, but . . . burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire" (Mat. 3:12). However, instead of cleansing society of its evildoers, Christ allowed tares to ripen with wheat until a future harvest at His coming.

The prophet was wrong. Christ performed the opposite of his expectations until the prophet even doubted that Jesus was indeed the Savior: "Are You the Expected One, or shall we look for someone else?" (Mat. 11:3). In addition to misunderstanding the nature of the Messiah's mission the prophet also suffered strains of legalism: "John did not understand the nature of Christ's kingdom," Ellen White notes. Naturally his teaching was deficient, so "the disciples of John had not a clear understanding of Christ's work . . . and even hoped to be justified by the works of the law." When his audience asked what to do about their sins, the prophet gave them work to do "share your tunics, be content with your wages and quit robbing taxpayers" (Luke 3:11 14). John preached repentance, but nothing was said about salvation by grace. Paul had to rebaptize some of his converts because of the prophet's immature theology (Acts 19:1 5).

Did the prophet's imperfect doctrine disqualify him from being a true messenger? Jesus did not think so. John admirably fulfilled his purpose by preparing the people, identifying Jesus as the Messiah and baptizing Him. Then why did God permit John to preach immature theology along with truth?

The prophet had to teach on the kindergarten level. God's people were not ready for the full message, so He gave them a prophet who could meet them on their own level and lead them where they finally could appreciate the gospel. God never intended for John to preach with the same insight that Paul would later on. The people were not ready for the lofty gospel of the apostle. There were many things even Jesus wanted to say but could not, because the people were not able to comprehend and accept (see John 16:12). God called a prophet that shared many misconceptions with the people, so they could relate to his teaching.

Likewise with Ellen White. She did not always enjoy a mature understanding of truth. In fact, according to Robert Olson of the White Estate she "did not at first understand the meaning of the 'open door' in her February, 1845, vision." She had previously mistaken her December, 1844, vision: "That seventeen year old Ellen should misinterpret one of her visions should elicit no surprise when one remembers that . . . at one time the apostle Peter mistakenly believed in a shut door." Olson continues: “The 1846 and 1847 printings of Ellen White's first vision included the sentence in the box above ["It was just as impossible for them to get on the path again and go to the City, as all the wicked world which God had rejected."]. The 1851 printing of the same vision omitted the sentence. Why was it omitted? Ellen White no doubt realized that the passage had been misunderstood by some of her readers, as well as by herself.”

Elder Olson's frankness is refreshing. It has been an agonizing struggle for Adventists to acknowledge the reality of Ellen White's need to grow. But why? If we see immaturity and growth in the greatest of biblical prophets, can we not accept them in our own? Just think. What if God had given the message of 1888 to us in 1844? We would have choked! It was hard enough to swallow forty four years later. In the ministry of His servant Ellen White, God met us down in the dumps after the Great Disappointment, brought us hope and led us into the green pastures of our wonderful message. Since Ellen White was indeed a true prophet we should expect to see a pattern of growth in her writings to correspond with the growing capacity for maturity in our movement.

Another clear example of doctrinal growth is Ellen White's understanding of the Holy Spirit. "Before 1896, the Spirit of God is never spoken of as a 'Person' in the writings of Sister White; after that date, 'He' is several times so referred to." Now think it through. Either the Holy Spirit changed from an influence to a person in the year 1896 or Ellen White reversed an incorrect doctrinal position. You know the answer.

That our prophet also needed growth in her understanding of God's character is obvious from her Appea to Youth, published in 1864: “God loves honest hearted, truthful children, but cannot love those who are dishonest. . . The Lord loves those little children who try to do right, and He has promised that they shall be in His kingdom. But wicked children God does not love . . . When you feel tempted to speak impatient, remember the Lord sees you, and will not love you if you do wrong.”

Now compare the above with the following, written twenty eight years later (after 1888): "Do not teach your children that God does not love them when they do wrong; teach them that he loves them so that it grieves his tender Spirit to see them in transgression."

Here we have two different concepts of God's love. Does it matter which way we our children feel about God? What encouraged the prodigal son to come home?

Have you noticed that Ellen White is always moving in the right direction? What else would we expect from a true prophet? She also grew in her understanding of prophecy. Back in the first edition of The Great Controversy she wrote that "Babylon" "cannot refer to the Romish Church, for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries." But in her 1911 revision she inserted a significant word: Babylon "cannot refer to the Roman Church alone, for that church has been in a fallen condition for many centuries."

The pastor did not rob the bank. The pastor did not rob the bank alone. Do you see the difference?

Many Adventists invoke the doctrinal authority of Ellen White in order to escape the bother of Bible study: "Sister White taught the investigative judgment and that settles it for me!"

Sounds good. But can this be a pious excuse to escape wrestling with difficult Bible passages? Was the gift of prophecy given to make us lazy? "Many have become lazy and criminally neglectful in regard to the searching of the Scriptures, and they are as destitute of the Spirit of God as of the knowledge of His word."

As a pastor I have observed that some of Ellen White's most vocal defenders are almost ignorant of what she really taught. When questioned it becomes apparent that they not only neglect their Bibles they have not studied her books in years. Like the Pharisees with Moses, they defend their prophet in name only and with the bad Samaritan woman at the well, worship what they do not know (John 5:22). They are much more familiar with TV Guide or the sports section of the daily paper. Hypocrites love to hide behind a mirage of denominational patriotism. But God is not deceived or mocked.

Radio preachers want audiences to "pray for us and please support this ministry." They always mention prayer before the money, but everyone knows which is really important to them. It just sounds better to put prayer first. Even so, many sincere Adventists speak of "studying the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy." The Bible is always mentioned first, but the bottom line is usually Ellen White. Most times we are not conscious of making Ellen White our final authority over Scripture. But when an apparent conflict appears between the Bible and the prophet, we seem to prefer the word of the prophet even while claiming the Bible only as our rule of faith. How do we manage this? Through circular reasoning:

"Why do I believe in Ellen White? Because everything she says agrees with the Bible. So everything in the Bible can be tested by her writings. I rely upon her interpretation of Scripture. This means that in principle I accept 'the Bible and the Bible only,' since everything she says agrees with the Bible."

Catholics use similar reasoning: "Why do I believe whatever the pope says? Because everything he says agrees with the Bible. So everything in the Bible can be tested by the teachings of the pope [including Sunday worship]. I rely upon his interpretation of Scripture. This means that in principle I accept 'the Bible and the Bible only,' since everything the pope says agrees with the Bible."

You see the problem. Anything that defines Scripture replaces it as the final authority. The fundamental issue of the Protestant Reformation was that the Bible must be its own interpreter. It was not that the pope was a bad interpreter of Scripture and now we must find a better umpire. The Bible itself is its own final word. It contains the entire system of truth. Ellen White repeatedly declared that "the Bible is to be presented as the word of the infinite God, as the end of all controversy and the foundation of all truth.”