Calvary at Sinai

Chapter 13

Ellen White Endorses the Covenant

The controversy over the two covenants was not resolved by the church at the 1890 ministers' institute. It continued to be an issue of contention in the years to come. But Ellen White did make a public announcement during the institute as to where divine authority rested. The Scriptures were the basis for doctrine and practice. The Bible would have to resolve the matter.

There were a few, one being Elder J. O. Corliss, who studied the Bible and came into agreement on the law and the two covenants with E. J. Waggoner. Evidently, D. T. Bourdeau was another, since he presented a lecture with Waggoner in support of the better view.

Ellen White saw the issue over the law in Galatians as a minor matter. It certainly was not a "landmark" pioneer doctrine of the church. This was the reason why she could not understand why it had caused such an "incomprehensible tug of war" at Minneapolis. But on the issue of the covenants, she was about to break her silence.

Ever since the Minneapolis Conference, Ellen White had been encouraging Bible study on this matter. Neither E. J. Waggoner nor Uriah Smith's word was to be taken for truth. She herself tried to stay out of the controversy by not taking a position on the law in Galatians or the two covenants.

Now the time had come. Light was sent from above. On Thursday, March 6, 1890, Ellen White was given insight as to what Heaven thought about the two covenants. She wrote a letter to Elder Smith that following Sabbath, March 8.

Night before last I was shown that evidences in regard to the covenants were clear and convincing. Yourself, Brother Dan Jones, Brother Porter and others are spending your investigative powers for naught to produce a position on the covenants to vary from the position that Brother Waggoner has presented. Had you received the true light which shineth, you would not have imitated or gone over the same manner of interpretation and misconstruing the Scriptures as did the Jews. What made them so zealous? Why did they hang on the words of Christ? Why did spies follow Him to mark his words that they could repeat and misinterpret and twist in a way to mean that which their own unsanctified minds would make them to mean. In this way, they deceived the people. They made false issues. They handled those things that they could make a means of clouding and misleading minds. The covenant question is a clear question and would be received by every candid, unprejudiced mind, but I was brought where the Lord gave me an insight into this matter. You have turned from plain light because you were afraid that the law question in Galatians would have to be accepted. As to the law in Galatians, I have no burden and never have.

This was a strong endorsement by Ellen White regarding the two covenants as presented by E. J. Waggoner. Evidently the Lord observed the great disunity in the leadership of the church. He wanted to draw them together in the truth as it is in Jesus-if they would just walk in the light as presented from Scripture.

A particularly poignant illustration which Ellen White drew from Scripture with regard to her endorsement of Waggoner's covenant theology was the comparison between the Jews of Christ's day and the present church leadership. She said they had confused ideas which baffled the people.

We observe that in the context of the covenants, the Jews believed the Sinaitic covenant to be God's unqualified election of the Hebrew people. Therefore, they rejected Christ when He claimed to be the Mediator of God's covenant.

Likewise, Elder Smith had presented a view of the old covenant which represented Israel as God's elect people by means of the covenant with Abraham. The matter of the heart's condition and faith toward Christ was secondary to God's election. There was a predestinarian flavor to his views of the old covenant. By presenting his confusing views holding that the new covenant and was but the continuation of the old covenant, Elder Smith was acting just as the Jews did in Christ's day, who hung on all His words and misrepresented Him to the people. Ellen White said: "You have strengthened the hands and minds of such men as Larson, Porter, Dan Jones, Eldridge and Morrison and Nicola and a vast number through them. All quote you, and the enemy of righteousness looks on pleased."

Ellen White warned Elder Smith:

If you turn from one ray of light fearing it will necessitate an acceptance of positions you do not wish to receive, that light becomes to you darkness, that if you were in error, you would honestly assert it to be truth.

Of course, Elder Smith feared that if he gave in on the point of the distinction between the two covenants, then he would have to concede the issue of the moral law in Galatians 3.

Elder Smith had just written to Ellen White on February 17, 1890, about this very concern. He could read the handwriting on the wall as to which direction she was moving, and it disturbed him greatly. He had such cognitive dissonance that it was causing him to question the Testimonies. If one domino fell in his whole theory, then they all would go down. Elder Smith had written to Ellen White about Waggoner's-

. . . position on Galatians, which I deem as erroneous. . . . He [E. J. Waggoner] took his position on Galatians, the same which you had condemned in his father [J. H. Waggoner].

The significance which he placed on this issue was made plain when he said to her in no uncertain terms:

As it looks to me, next to the death of Brother [James] White, the greatest calamity that ever befell our cause was when Dr. Waggoner put his articles on the book of Galatians through the Signs. I supposed the question of the law in Galatians was settled away back in 1856. . . . I was surprised at the articles, because they seemed to me then, and still seem to me, to contradict so directly what you wrote to J. H. Waggoner. . . .

Smith was adamantly opposed to Waggoner's views on the distinction between the two covenants because of his position on the ceremonial law in Galatians 3.

Now on Sunday, March 9, 1890, the day after she had sent her endorsement of the covenant question to Elder Smith, Ellen White confided to her son W. C. White:

I have no brakes to put on now. I stand in perfect freedom, calling light, light, and darkness, darkness. I told them yesterday that the position of the covenants I believed as presented in my volume 1 [Patriarchs and Prophets]. If that was Dr. Waggoner's position then he had the truth.

The leadership of the church along with Ellen White had met on Sabbath, March 8, in the afternoon at the Review office chapel. On Monday she again wrote to her son: o her son:

I am much pleased to learn that Professor Prescott is giving the same lessons in his class to the students that Brother Waggoner has been giving. He is presenting the covenants . . . . Since I made the statement last Sabbath that the view of the covenants as it had been taught by Brother Waggoner was truth, it seems that great relief has come to many minds.

On Sunday, March 9, Ellen White reported what happened at that Sabbath afternoon meeting:

There was a large number present. Elders Olsen and Waggoner led the meeting. The blessing of God came upon me, and all knew that the Spirit and power of God were upon me, and many were greatly blessed. I spoke with earnestness and decision. . . .

She directed their attention to her statement in Volume 1 (Patriarchs and Prophets, "The Law and the Covenants") on the covenants and declared it to be in harmony with Dr. Waggoner. This was a crucial public meeting because her endorsement of Waggoner's view of the covenants had been by letter to Uriah Smith, W. C. White and Mary White. Now she made the "light" known in a public service. public service.

Ellen White got up to speak that Sabbath afternoon in the office chapel. She told them exactly where she stood in the present conflict. She referred to the revelation that had been given her on Thursday night, March 6, and said:

. . . the light that came to me night before last laid it all open again before me, just the influence that was at work, and just where it would lead. . . . You are just going over the very same ground that they went over in the days of Christ. You have had their experience; but God deliver us. . . . You have stood right in the way of God. The earth is to be lighted with His glory, and if you stand where you stand to-day, you might just as quick say that the Spirit of God was the spirit of the devil. . . .

. . . Do not hang on to Brother Smith. In the name of God,

I tell you, he is not in the light. He has not been in the light since he was at Minneapolis. . . .

. . . Let the truth of God come into your hearts; open the door. Now I tell you here before God, that the covenant question, as it has been presented, is the truth.

Ellen White connected the truth of the distinction of the two covenants as presented by E. J. Waggoner as being light from the Holy Spirit.

This was the same light of the everlasting gospel that would lighten the earth with His glory (Revelation 18:1). To reject the truth of the covenants was to reject the Spirit of God and call Him the devil. This was the same kind of dealings which the Jews practiced with the truth Christ presented.

Crediting Elder Smith's view of the covenants was to run in the channels of darkness. His view of the covenants had been reviewed many times. By now there should have been a clear distinction between what was truth and error. There was no question where Ellen White stood on the covenants. She was with E. J. Waggoner. The everlasting covenant was the light of justification by faith. It was the light to be shared with the world. With its reception would come the Holy Spirit's blessing to finish the work.

Early in 1890, Ellen White had been working on an expansion of Volume I of The Spirit of Prophecy. When she received divine confirmation on March 6, 1890, of Waggoner's position on the two covenants, she incorporated it into her revised edition entitled Patriarchs and Prophets. This was completely new material. It was one of the best statements on the relationship between the covenants and righteousness by faith. Patriarchs and Prophets was published August 26, 1890. Ellen White said:

The covenant of grace was first made with man in Eden. . . . This same covenant was renewed to Abraham. . . . This promise pointed to Christ. So Abraham understood it (see Galatians 3:8, 16), and he trusted in Christ for the forgiveness of sins. It was this faith that was accounted unto him for righteousness. The covenant with Abraham also maintained the authority of God's law. . . .

The law of God was the basis of this covenant, which was simply an arrangement for bringing men again into harmony with the divine will, placing them where they could obey God's law.

Another compact-called in Scripture the "old" covenant-was formed between God and Israel at Sinai, and was then ratified by the blood of a sacrifice. The Abrahamic covenant was ratified by the blood of Christ, . . . .

Ellen White distinguished between the two covenants as to when and how they were ratified. She did not confuse them as had Elder Porter. Then she affirmed the validity of the new covenant for Old Testament times. Old Testament times.

That the new covenant was valid in the days of Abraham is evident from the fact that it was then confirmed both by the promise and by the oath of God-the "two immutable things, in which it was impossible for God to lie." Hebrews 6:18.

Ellen White continued her observations regarding the covenants:

But if the Abrahamic covenant contained the promise of redemption, why was another covenant formed at Sinai? In their bondage the people had to a great extent lost the knowledge of God and of the principles of the Abrahamic covenant. In delivering them from Egypt, God sought to reveal to them His power and His mercy, that they might be led to love and trust Him. He brought them down to the Red Sea-where, pursued by the Egyptians, escape seemed impossible-that they might realize their utter helplessness, their need of divine aid; and then He wrought deliverance for them. Thus they were filled with love and gratitude to God and with confidence in His power to help them. He had bound them to Himself as their deliverer from temporal bondage. . . .

Living in the midst of idolatry and corruption, they had no true conception of the holiness of God, of the exceeding sinfulness of their own hearts, their utter inability, in themselves, to render obedience to God's law, and their need of a Saviour. All this they must be taught. . . .

. . . The people did not realize the sinfulness of their own hearts, and that without Christ it was impossible for them to keep God's law; and they readily entered into covenant with God. Feeling that they were able to establish their own righteousness, they declared, "All that the Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Exodus 24:7. . . . Only a few weeks passed before they broke their covenant with God, and bowed down to worship a graven image. They could not hope for the favor of God through a covenant which they had broken; and now, seeing their sinfulness and their need of pardon, they were brought to feel their need of the Saviour revealed in the Abrahamic covenant and shadowed forth in the sacrificial offerings. Now by faith and love they were bound to God as their deliverer from the bondage of sin. Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant.

The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: . . . The "new covenant" was established upon "better promises"-the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law.

Here she picked up the theme of Waggoner that there was no "hope for the favor of God" in their broken covenant. Their sinfulness became pronounced. They felt "their need of pardon." They were brought to the Saviour of the Abrahamic covenant. Now instead of coming with their promises, they were bound to God by genuine "faith and love." They had a new appreciation for His deliverance from "bondage" to sin.

Reflected in her statements were the exact terms which Waggoner had used to describe the relationships between the old and the new covenants. If the Holy Spirit ever endorsed a concept more clearly, it was the everlasting covenant of the 1888 message.

Ellen White emphasized Waggoner's point that the old covenant was legalism. The new covenant promise alone provided pardon from sin and divine aid. The Patriarchs and Prophets statement was one of the most beautiful and succinct comments on the glad tidings of the everlasting covenant ever written aside from Scripture.

As those with the light of the covenants had opportunity in various venues, they opened up the truth to the people. It was received by some in the field.

We can briefly summarize the significant events of the ministers' Bible institute.

On Sabbath, March 8, 1890, Ellen White gave a testimony to the leadership of the church. She had received a night vision, March 6, confirming that Elder Waggoner had the light on the covenant issue. She also confirmed this by letters written to Uriah Smith and W. C. White.

Even though Dan Jones was not present March 8, when Ellen White made her public endorsement of the covenant views of E. J. Waggoner, it was surely public knowledge. Upon his return to Battle Creek he must have been informed of what she said. Despite her endorsement, Dan Jones wrote:

It seemed for awhile that Sister White would come out and endorse Dr. Waggoner's position on the covenant question fully, and it was a great perplexity to me to know how to look upon the matter; for it seemed clear to my mind that his positions were not all correct. But . . . the matter of doctrine was not the important point in the issue at all. Sister White and Dr. Waggoner said they did not care what we believed on the law in Galatians or on the covenants. . . .

Dan Jones assumed that neither Ellen White nor E. J. Waggoner thought the law or covenants were crucial issues.

However, the evidence indicates that E. J. Waggoner never relinquished his position on the moral law in Galatians 3 or the distinction between the old and the new covenants. As for Ellen White, she endorsed his view of the covenants, but did not saying anything about the law issue as yet.

Another false assumption under which Dan Jones was operating was that Waggoner had conceded a key point of his teaching. Jones wrote that Waggoner had ". . . given up the position that in the old covenant the promises were all on the part of the people, and none on the part of God." There was no evidence that Waggoner gave up this position.

Dan Jones sounded relieved when he wrote to J. H. Morrison:

I understood that there was considerable importance attached to the points of doctrine involved in the questions of the law in Galatians and the two covenants.

So if there was no real doctrinal issue involved, where did the conflict lie?

In his own mind Dan Jones had figured out the real problem. He wrote to R. M. Kilgore:

It is the spirit alone that has been manifested to which she objected, and to which Eld. Waggoner takes exception. Both Sister White and Dr. Waggoner stated that the doctrinal points were not the points at issue. So that removes the real point that was in my mind all the time.

He had rationalized that doctrine was unimportant. In this way he could create some semblance of order in his conflicted mind.

But his hopeful rationalizations had not really brought him any peace because he said: ". . . The ministers' school is almost over. The investigation on the covenant question closed up with no better satisfaction than before it begun [sic.]." Poor Dan Jones! Once the Spirit of truth had been shut out, it became easier for him to walk in the light of his own kindling. The truth became too confusing for him. him.

On Sunday, March 16, another meeting was held in the office chapel. Some of the leading brethren assembled. Ellen White reported what happened. She wrote to her son W. C. White:

Brother Dan Jones then spoke. He stated that he had been tempted to give up the testimonies; but if he did this, he knew he should yield everything, for we had regarded the testimonies as interwoven with the third angel's message; and he spoke of terrible scenes of temptations. I really pitied the man.

This must have been a sad scene for her to witness. Ellen White spoke of the stubborn resistance on the part of some leaders to the message of God.

Sunday morning, although weary and almost discouraged, I ventured into the meeting. . . . I kept before them what they had done to make of none effect that which the Lord was trying to do and why. The law in Galatians was their only plea.

"Why," I asked, "is your interpretation of the law in Galatians more dear to you, and you more zealous to maintain your ideas on this point, than to acknowledge the workings of the Spirit of God? You have been weighing every precious heaven- sent testimony by your own scales as you interpreted the law in Galatians." Nothing could come to you in regard to the truth and the power of God unless it should bear your imprint, the precious ideas you had idolized on the law of Galatians.

These testimonies of the Spirit of God, the fruits of the Spirit of God, have no weight unless they are stamped with your ideas of the law in Galatians. I am afraid of you and I am afraid of your interpretation of any scripture which has revealed itself in such an unchristlike spirit as you have manifested and has cost me so much unnecessary labor. If you are such very cautious men and so very critical lest you shall receive something not in accordance with the Scriptures, I want your minds to look on these things in the true light. Let your caution be exercised in the line of fear lest you are committing the sin against the Holy Ghost. Have your critical minds taken this view of the subject? I say if your views on the law in Galatians, and the fruits, are of the character I have seen in Minneapolis and ever since up to this time, my prayer is that I may be as far from your understanding and interpretation of the Scriptures as it is possible for me to be. I am afraid of any application of Scripture that needs such a spirit and bears such fruit as you have manifested. One thing is certain, I shall never come into harmony with such a spirit as long as God gives me my reason. . . . .

Now brethren, I have nothing to say, no burden in regard to the law in Galatians. This matter looks to me of minor consequence in comparison with the spirit you have brought into your faith. It is exactly of the same piece that was manifested by the Jews in reference to the work and mission of Jesus Christ. The most convincing testimony that we can bear to others that we have the truth is the spirit which attends the advocacy of that truth. If it sanctifies the heart of the receiver, if it makes him gentle, kind, forbearing, true and Christlike, then he will give some evidence of the fact that he has the genuine truth. But if he acts as did the Jews when their opinions and ideas were crossed, then we certainly cannot receive such testimony, for it does not produce the fruits of righteousness. Their own interpretations of Scripture were not correct, yet the Jews would receive no evidence from the revelation of the Spirit of God, but would, when their ideas were contradicted, even murder the Son of God.

It was clear that error brought with it a spirit of persecution. Truth was evidenced by the Spirit of God manifested in the life. Ellen White had the gift of discernment. She wanted nothing to do with human interpretations of the Bible which bore such an attitude that if given free reign would "murder the Son of God."

The Holy Spirit was leading them into further truth in regard to the distinction of the two covenants and righteousness by faith, but they were resisting the light. They were afraid, that if they believed the two covenants as taught by Waggoner, they would have to give up their cherished notions about the ceremonial law in Galatians 3.

It was clear up to this point that Ellen White had not come out with a position on the law in Galatians 3. She had taken a public position on the distinction between the two covenants, endorsing Waggoner's view. The brethren were holding to their cherished interpretations of the law ceremonial in Galatians 3. They would not so much as budge on the covenants issue for fear of what they would have to do on the law issue, and they had become mean-spirited toward the Lord's messengers over the matter.

In this context, Ellen White said: "The law in Galatians is not a vital question and never has been." She made it clear what she was rejecting. "I am forced, by the attitude my brethren have taken and the spirit evidenced, to say, God deliver me from your ideas of the law in Galatians. . . ."

She was moving away from their position on the ceremonial law. She discerned the tragic results of what it was doing to the church. The Holy Spirit and truth were being rejected. She sensed "their view" could not be right.

By failing to cherish the Spirit of Christ, by taking wrong positions in the controversy over the law in Galatians-a question that many have not fully understood before taking a wrong position-the church has sustained a sad loss.

On February 27, 1891, Ellen White was now firmly stating that the position on the ceremonial law in Galatians was wrong. Ellen White was quite forceful on Sabbath, March 8, when she endorsed the covenants as presented by Waggoner.

Now I tell you here before God, that the covenant question, as it has been presented, is the truth. It is the light. In clear lines it has been laid before me. And those that have been resisting the light, I ask you whether they have been working for God, or for the devil. . . . I told Brother Dan Jones, I will not tell you my opinion; my faith. Dig in the Bible.

She did not tell Dan Jones her opinion. She endorsed light that came from the Bible on the two covenants. In addition, she was very concerned about the harsh spirit being displayed. She connected it with their erroneous views of the law and the covenants.

These testimonies of the Spirit of God, the fruits of the Spirit of God, have no weight unless they are stamped with your ideas of the law in Galatians. I am afraid of you and I am afraid of your interpretation of any scripture which has revealed itself in such an unchristlike spirit as you have manifested and has cost me so much unnecessary labor. . . . I say if your views on the law in Galatians, and the fruits, are of the character I have seen in Minneapolis and ever since up to this time, my prayer is that I may be as far from your understanding and interpretation of the Scriptures as it is possible for me to be. I am afraid of any application of Scripture that needs such a spirit and bears such fruit as you have manifested. One thing is certain, I shall never come into harmony with such a spirit as long as God gives me my reason.

She connected their doctrines as being the source of their spirit. False teachings required a harsh, dictatorial spirit to enforce them because they could not be demonstrated from the Scriptures. To discount truth for the sake of experience was a false dilemma. Both were absolutely essential in order to produce a Christ- like outcome.

Four years later (June 1, 1894), Ellen White said of both Butler and Smith, that they had "taken their own course" when it came to the light from God.

The Lord's work needed every jot and tittle of experience that he had given Eld. Butler and Eld. Smith; but they have taken their own course in some things irrespective of the light God has given.

This more than confirmed the value of the confessions offered to the church by Elders Butler and Smith. However sincere they were in their apologies, they continued to oppose the message and messengers.

They never supported the key concepts of the distinction between the two covenants, as endorsed by Ellen White. A. G. Daniells wrote to W. C. White about this fact years later (1902).

Not only the older men who were at work when Brother Butler, Brother Morrison, and others fought this battle, but some of the younger fellows who are coming on, have imbibed these old heresies from the men in the field, who are still unconverted to this new light.

And so the resistance to the light on righteousness by faith and its relation to the two covenants continued for decades.

E. J. Waggoner's concept of the two covenants was inclusive of two scriptural models. First, the first or old covenant ratified by animal sacrifice was made with the ancient Israelite nation, having as its foundation the promise of the people, "all that the Lord hath spoken we will do" (Exodus 19:8). To this covenant God graciously attached superadditions; namely, the Levitical priesthood, the tabernacle, the ten commandments written on stone, the law of sacrifices and feasts, in order that it might teach Israel regarding their need of God's gracious promise found alone in His everlasting covenant.

Second, Waggoner taught the equally biblical model of the old and the new covenants as two distinct heart experiences particularly derived from Galatians 3. The old covenant heart experience was the self-sufficient promise of the people to obey; whereas, the new covenant or everlasting covenant heart experience was faith-affirming, "Amen," founded upon the unilateral promise of God.

Although written three years after the ministers' institute Waggoner's article entitled "The Day of Rest" expressed these two heart experiences calling them two different experiential dispensations:

. . . The "Christian dispensation" began for man as soon, at least, as the fall. There are indeed, two dispensations, a dispensation of sin and death, and a dispensation of righteousness and life, but these two dispensations have run parallel from the fall. God deals with men as individuals, and not as nations, nor according to the century in which they live. No matter what the period of the world's history, a man can at any time pass from the old dispensation into the new.

The old covenant and the new covenant were two parallel experiences that ran down through the corridors of time: both in the chronological old dispensation and the new dispensation.

Waggoner wrote: "The law and the Gospel were united at Sinai, as everywhere else. The glory of Calvary was shining at Sinai, as clearly as it shines now." Calvary at Sinai expressed the unity of the gospel and law revealed to ancient Israel. Sinai was the gospel and the law combined in Christ. Christ in the law, and the law in Christ.

The two dispensations were two parallel tracks that had run alongside each other ever since the Fall. "The old dispensation is self, but the new dispensation is Christ." The dispensations were two different principles at work in human hearts. They were conditions of the heart. How beautiful and simple was God's everlasting covenant.