The expression remnant church does not appear in the Bible. However, the concept of a church, symbolically represented as a "woman," that is associated with "the remnant," does appear in Scripture (see Revelation 12:17). The expression remnant church also appears explicitly some seventy times on the E. G. White CD-ROM. We believe the Seventh- day Adventist Church is the "remnant church" of Bible prophecy. This does not mean that Seventh-day Adventists are the only genuine Christians. Today, God's people are scattered about in all of the various denominations. Jesus recognized this in principle even during His time on earth. He said, "Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd" (John 10:16).
The "remnant church," is the seventh or last church brought to view in the prophecies of the book of Revelation. No eighth church is mentioned. Therefore, we conclude that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the end-time church, and it will respond to the counsel of the True Witness. She will repent and be finally victorious before Jesus comes. The message to Laodicea is believed to be addressed to the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and implicit in the call to "repent" is the thought that the church is imperfect. One might, however, be surprised to learn the extent to which some, even among the leadership of the church, have erred. However, the Spirit of Prophecy repeatedly refers to the period of time immediately following the 1888 General Conference session as a time of very grievous error. In studying church history as described in the Spirit of Prophecy, we find that over and over again, the servant of the Lord speaks of the unpardonable sin in connection with Seventh-day Adventist Church history. She speaks of it specifically in connection with the persistent resistance which was manifested against "a most precious message"[1] which came to "us" at that time.
Now, I tell you, God will not be trifled with. God is a jealous God, and when He manifests His power as He has manifested it, it is very nigh unto the sin of the Holy Ghost to disbelieve it. The revealings of God's power have not had any effect to move and to stir persons from their position of doubting and unbelief. God help us that we may remove ourselves out of the snares of the devil! If ever a people needed to be removed, it is those that took their position in Minneapolis at that time on the wrong side.[2]
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.[3]
That one can find stronger words of solemn warning in all the writings of Ellen White, than those relating to the resistance manifested against the "most precious message,"[4] is doubtful. Not only do they reveal the danger of committing the unpardonable sin, they also reveal that there were "some" who committed that sin. Some went "too far to return and to repent."[5] The "stand" taken at Minneapolis "proved their ruin."[6]
What was the essence of the message which came to us in 1888 at Minneapolis? Why was opposition to it such a serious matter? We find a strong hint as to why this was so serious a matter in the following inspired statements:
The message of the gospel of His grace was to be given to the church in clear and distinct lines, that the world should no longer say that Seventh-day Adventists talk the law, the law, but do not teach or believe Christ.[7]
I have no smooth message to bear to those who have been so long as false guideposts, pointing the wrong way. If you reject Christ's delegated messengers you reject Christ. Neglect this great salvation, kept before you for years, despise this glorious offer of justification through the blood of Christ and sanctification through the cleansing power of the Holy Spirit, and there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation.[8]
The message which began to be proclaimed at the 1888 General Conference session was "the gospel ... in clear and distinct lines."[9] To believe the gospel means to believe in Christ. In the 1888 era Seventh-day Adventists were so preoccupied with the objective of defending the law and the Sabbath that "Many had lost sight of Jesus."[10] Thus, the message was sent to bring us back to Jesus, that the "world" might know we "believe Christ." Therefore, to reject the message after receiving knowledge of its content inevitably involves a rejection of Christ. The Spirit of Prophecy tells us that Christ was rejected in the person of His messengers.[11] Thus, we conclude that what was really at stake during the controversies of the 1888 era was the "sin against the Holy Ghost."[12] In rejecting "the message of the gospel," some were committing the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost.
No one need look upon the sin against the Holy Ghost as something mysterious and indefinable. The sin against the Holy Ghost is the sin of persistent refusal to respond to the invitation to repent. If you refuse to believe in Jesus Christ as your personal Saviour, you love darkness rather than light, you love the atmosphere that surrounded the first great apostate. You choose this atmosphere rather than the atmosphere that surrounds the Father and the Son, and God allows you to have your choice.[13]
Here, we see the nature of the unpardonable sin again clearly presented. We see here not a momentary lapse--and not the mistake of one minute or one hour or one day. Rather, we see a conscious, persistent, and unrelenting unbelief of the message of Christ presented in the power of the Holy Spirit. In Ellen White's words, some "stood for years"[14] in this attitude, before it was "too late."[15] Did Christ die for this sin--the sin of unrelenting unbelief?
Did Jesus Die for This?
As has been demonstrated in Parts One and Two, the Scriptures teach that Jesus died for everyone and for every sin, except for the sin against the Holy Spirit, which is the final choice to reject Christ. This means that if an individual ultimately and finally refuses to believe in Jesus Christ as his Savior and Lord, he/she will then be condemned a second time for unbelief and deliberate rebellion. Jesus did not make atonement for the second condemnation. Sinners will pay the penalty for it themselves in the lake of fire.
If Jesus had died for this sin, then no one could be lost, and sin would be immortalized. Legal condemnation must precede the execution of the penalty. We were all justified unto life at the cross, but those who are finally lost will lose that justified status and come under condemnation before they are destroyed in the lake of fire. The first condemnation[16] was reversed at the cross, but the second condemnation cannot be reversed; therefore, it results in eternal death.
That being said, we want to discover if there is clear evidence in the Spirit of Prophecy supporting the thought that there is a sin for which Jesus did not die. This concept is described in Hebrews 10:26-29. We discussed this description in chapter 10.
Interesting to observe is that Ellen White quotes the same text in one of her solemn warnings to the brethren who were in danger of committing the unpardonable sin by deliberately rejecting the message of justification by faith.
I have no smooth message to bear to those who have been so long as false guideposts, pointing the wrong way. If you reject Christ's delegated messengers, you reject Christ. Neglect this great salvation, kept before you for years, despise this glorious offer of justification through the blood of Christ and sanctification through the cleansing power of the Holy Spirit, and there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation.[17]
The fact that the servant of the Lord has cited this text in the midst of a warning concerning the sin against the Holy Ghost does not prove that she believes the text means what we may say it means. For evidence that Ellen White believed that there is a sin for which Jesus did not die, we must discover more explicit statements in her writings.
"No Sacrifice"
The sons of Aaron, Nadab, and Abihu had been instructed concerning the temple services. They knew that all of the offerings made in the sanctuary were to be consumed by the fire which was "ever burning" (Leviticus 6:13). Nevertheless, the book of Leviticus records their sad departure from the explicit command of God.
And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, and offered strange fire before the LORD, which he commanded them not. And there went out fire from the LORD, and devoured them, and they died before the LORD (Leviticus 10:1, 2).
On the surface, this is a startling, perhaps even perplexing story. The punishment does not appear to f?it the offence. Why did God take such sudden and drastic measures in punishing these two young men? The Spirit of Prophecy illuminates the problem.
And Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, took either of them his censer, and put fire therein, and put incense thereon, then offered strange fire before the Lord, which he commanded them not. What could have come upon the sons of Aaron, that they should thus transgress the requirement of God? The sacred fire which God Himself had kindled and preserved was at their hand. Direction had been given concerning it, and God had said: The fire upon the altar shall be burning in it; it shall not be put out: and the priest shall burn wood on it every morning, and lay the burnt-offering in order upon it; and he shall burn thereon the fat of the peace-offerings. The fire shall ever be burning upon the altar; it shall never go out.[18]
This "ever burning" fire, which "God Himself had kindled," was the only fire allowed for use in the temple. When the sacrifices were consumed by this sacred fire, the symbolic process typified the fact that Christ would not die because of what men would do to Him, nor would His life be taken by Satan. He would be consumed by the "fire" which comes from "God Himself." In pagan sacrificial rituals man kindles the fire and consumes the sacrifice in order to appease an angry god. In God's system He Himself provides the sacrifice and consumes it with His holy wrath against sin. Ellen White describes what happened at the cross:
He [Christ] was bearing the penalty of transgression for a sinful world. This proceeded not from Satan nor from man. It is best described in the words of the prophet, "Awake, O sword, against my Shepherd, and against the Man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts." Christ was realizing His Father's frown. He was now suffering under divine justice.[19]
The "penalty of transgression" proceeded from the Father. It came not from "Satan nor from man." Neither Satan nor man had any part in our redemption--that was entirely of God. Here, then, is another essential element of the gospel. In this light we can see that when Nadab and Abihu offered "strange fire" before the Lord, they were doing much more than using the wrong fire. They were in fact rejecting and perverting the gospel. They were committing the unpardonable sin, and that is why the punishment was so sudden and drastic. Nevertheless, there is still more concrete evidence in the Spirit of Prophecy on this question. Did Jesus die for the unpardonable sin?
The Spirit of Prophecy comments on the transgressions of Eli's sons provides a direct and explicit answer to our question.
The transgressions of Eli's sons were so daring, so insulting to a holy God, that no sacrifice could atone for such willful transgression. These sinful priests profaned the sacrifices which typified the Son of God. And by their blasphemous conduct they were trampling upon the blood of the atonement, from which was derived the virtue of all sacrifices.[20]
Here the neglect of Eli is brought plainly before every father and mother in the land ... . Both the parent who permitted the wickedness and the children who practiced it were guilty before God, and He would accept no sacrifice or offering for their transgression.[21]
The Spirit of Prophecy explicitly declares that sins were committed, for which "no sacrifice could atone."[22] In the first quotation regarding Eli and his sons Ellen White declares that what was involved here is "blasphemy." She then alluded to the same passage in Hebrews chapter 10, with the words, "trampling upon the blood of the covenant." Therefore, we draw the following conclusions:
- Hebrews 10:26-29 is a description of the unpardonable sin.
- The unpardonable sin is the sin for which no sacrifice can be accepted.
- Jesus' sacrifice is not applicable to the unpardonable sin.
- Because there is no sacrifice for the unpardonable sin, that sin cannot be forgiven in this life or the life to come.
- All sins have already been atoned for and judicially pardoned except the sin of blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
- Therefore, the death of the unbeliever does not involve double jeopardy.
- Unbelievers will suffer the penalty of eternal death for the sin for which Jesus did not die.
Notes: