The Return of the Latter Rain

Arise and Shine for Thy Light Has Come

After Ellen White's Sunday morning talk at the Kansas campmeeting in May of 1889, a break finally came. Many bore testimony of the great blessings they received and of their newfound experience. That same afternoon, Ellen White attended a meeting where, "after Brother Jones had spoken upon faith, there were many [more] free testimonies borne. As many as six and eight were on their feet at a time, and they seemed like starved sheep who were feeding upon meat in due season." Writing of the events of the day to her children, Ellen White expressed her joy and innermost desire: "I pray that this good work may go on and that Zion may arise, because her light has come and the glory of the Lord has risen upon her. Let the individual members of the church humble themselves before God, and accept the message which will bring healing to her bruises and wounds." [1*] Ellen White recognized that the Lord had visited His people with the very light that would heal them and enable them to arise and shine forth to the world around them.

The response to the message sent through Jones and Waggoner was varied. While many of the people were receiving a great blessing and a new religious experience that they had never known before, others saw the message as dangerous heresy. What is interesting to note, however, is that not all agreed on what heresy it was that Jones and Waggoner were supposedly teaching. Ellen White was joyful because she recognized the message they were presenting as a complete message of both law and the gospel combined, which had powerful results. [2*] But of those who opposed the message, some went away thinking Jones and Waggoner did away with the law in favor of an antinomianism or cheap grace, while others felt that they were undermining the gospel, teaching some kind of perfectionism. [3*]

Opposition from Both Sides

Both G. I. Butler and Uriah Smith felt Jones was belittling the law and wrote rebuttals to his campmeetings sermons in the Review. In the May 14 issue of the Review, Butler wrote on Romans chapter 7 and 8, and titled his article; "The Righteousness of the Law Fulfilled By Us." In contrast to Jones' sermons, where he described one aspect of sin as missing the mark, Butler emphasized that the moral law was given "to show what God regards as right, everything which violates its sacred principles is wrong,-is sin. … 'Sin is the transgression of the law.' 1 John 3:4." Toward the end of his article Butler summarized his concerns:

If there is any one thing in which the third angel's message is designed to correct the teachings of this age more than another, it is upon this very point,- the necessity of obedience to the law of God. "Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus." Rev. 14:12. … There is a sentiment prevailing almost everywhere, and it comes in most pleasing guises, and is made to sound most plausible, that it is not necessary to obey these commandments, or that they cannot be obeyed in this world. An easy way of religion is taught. "Only believe in Christ, and you are all right." The heart is not examined; the conscience is dormant; there is little sense of the guilt of sin, little thoroughness in studying the demands of God's law, little self-examination, little abhorrence of sin. Jesus does it all. It is one of the most dangerous heresies in the world. …

Multitudes are calling themselves Christians today, claiming Christ has done the work for them, who know nothing of his pardoning love, because they have never felt the sinfulness of sin, and make no thorough work of repentance. The work is wholly superficial. So these hide under the shadow of Christ, as they suppose, while really carrying their sins along with them. Thus they make Christ a minister of sin. …

It will be a sad day for us as a people, if we ever discard the light God has given us relative to our duty to keep, in spirit and in letter, the moral law of God. [4*]

Butler wrote eloquently defending the law against the apparent attacks of Jones, while at the same time he himself was disregarding counsel from the Lord's servant, Ellen White. Smith's rebuttal came in a June 11 article titled, "Our Righteousness." Uriah Smith was more abrasive than Butler, suggesting that the current teaching-by inference that of Jones and Waggoner-was leading down the same path as the "bitter opposers of our cause," who were doing away with the law. He even made a thrust toward Ellen White, stating that anyone "acquainted with Bro. White can imagine about how long it would take him to demolish such an objection":

Some of our correspondents are beginning to drop remarks leaning very suspiciously toward the view that any attempt on our part to keep the commandments, is simply an attempt to make ourselves better, which we can never do; that it is an attempt to be righteous, which is simply to cover ourselves with filthy rags. … Just how much they intend to express, we are unable to determine; but it seems to us that they are unconsciously turning their steps toward a position held by a class of bitter opposers of our cause and work, and who draw largely on this line of thought for their material. …

Perfect obedience to it [the law] will develop perfect righteousness, and that is the only way any one can attain to righteousness. … Christ comes in and closes up the gulf between us and God by providing a sacrifice to cancel past sin … [and] to bring us back into harmony with the law. … Here is where our Methodist friend made a mistake … not perceiving that the whole object of Christ's work for us is to bring us back to the law, that its righteousness may be fulfilled in us by our obedience to it. …

[W]e are not to rest on the stool of do-nothing, as a mass of inertia in the hands of the Redeemer. …

But it is asked, if a man undertakes to keep the law in his own strength and work out his own righteousness, can he do it? Is he not clothing himself with filthy rags? To what class of people such a query would apply, we do not know. We do know, however, that there is not a Seventh-day Adventist in the land who has not been taught better than to suppose that in his own strength he could keep the commandments. … We doubt if even the Pharisees rested their self-righteousness on the perfection of their personal obedience to the ten commandments. …

There is a righteousness we must have, in order to see the kingdom of heaven, which is called "our righteousness;" and this righteousness comes from being in harmony with the law of God. … And "our righteousness" cannot in this case be filthy rags. [5*]

Others, besides Butler and Smith, felt the same way about the Ottawa, Kansas meetings. However, before we look at more complaints, we need to take a close look at what was most likely the sermon that brought so much criticism. On Friday, May 17, 1889, Jones finished his series on righteousness by faith in a sermon titled, "Keeping the Commandments." Because so much has been made of Jones' comments, both in 1889 and today, we will include his sermon in its entirety as printed in the Topeka Daily Capital: [6*]

2 Corinthians 5:17. We have seen how we are brought into Christ and how this says if any man is brought into Christ he is a new creature. Gal. 6:15; 5:6, nothing avails but this and faith that works by love of God, being made a new creature by faith. Romans 5:1, 2, 5; 1 John 5:3-then keeping the commandments comes in after we are new creatures, so then we must be made good, be made righteous, before we can do good or do righteousness; 1 Corinthians 7:19- that is the aim set before us in Christ Jesus. Ephesians 2:8-10. We are created unto good works; made new creatures in him, his righteousness counting for our unrighteousness. The good works God's creatures are created in Christ to do are the good works we could not do before. So a new creature will aim constantly to keep the commandments.

James 2:1, 9. We do not have the faith of Christ with the transgression of the law. Christ did not come to set us free for that, because if we turn from a single point of the law our faith will not avail. But our intent is accepted and ignorant sins are forgiven, yet willful refusal to accept points of truth presented will cause us to lose all the righteousness we ever had. This explains the fast growing evil in the popular churches of today. Years ago the churches were religious-even when the third angel's message started they were accepted of God but when they refused to comply with the requirements of the message, then they lost all the righteousness they had and have had to invent all manner of means by which to keep the congregations together, by entertainments. This is the philosophy of the degeneration of the churches.

James 2:14. No more does faith profit unless it is kept alive by these works. God has provided, Num. 18, let us show our faith by our works. Faith is the anchor that holds the craft in the right place to work and the storms beat us nearer home. Verses 21, 23. Abraham was counted righteous when he believed and without works, the other righteousness came in twenty-five years after, so he was not counted righteous by works, that scripture was spoken when he believed and more than twenty-five years after James says the scripture was fulfilled. If he had refused to offer Isaac, his former righteousness would have disappeared, so the obedience of his faith completed his righteousness that he had by faith. Then our keeping of the commandments is not to become righteous, but because we are righteous. Romans 8:26 shows that we can not even pray aright, but the spirit does it for us, so our prayers are acceptable only through the intercession of Christ and the merits of his blood.

Rev. 8:3, 4. Here is the intercession in the sanctuary making intercession for us and God looks upon Christ, his wounds and his sacrifice and accepts them. Christ was perfect before he came to earth, and his absence makes our prayers acceptable, God imputing his prayer for us to us. How is his righteousness imputed to us? Are our acts righteous as far as they go and is his righteousness applied to finish out the work? No. Christ's righteousness starts at the beginning and makes the action what it ought to be.

Romans 1:16. Is not our faith greater than when we came here? Do we not see more of his righteousness than we did? How is it we have more faith and see more of his righteousness? Why our faith has grown. So it is day by day. We came daily for greater supply of faith. And we finally have so much of Christ's divine nature in us that we can draw the bow strongly enough to hit the mark, and then we will be keeping the commandments of God. Then is it not Christ's work from the beginning and all his divine power? Where, then, do our works come in? Nowhere. Why then do we strive so hard to keep the commandments, if it avails not? It is only by faith in Christ that we can say we are Christians. It is only through being one with him that we can be Christians, and only through Christ within us that we keep the commandments-it being all by faith in Christ that we do and say these things.

When the day comes that we actually keep the commandments of God, we will never die, because keeping the commandments is righteousness, and righteousness and life are inseparable-so, "Here are they that keep the commandments of God and faith of Jesus," and what is the result? These people are translated. Life, then, and keeping the commandments go together. If we die now, Christ's righteousness will be imputed to us and we will be raised, but those who live to the end are made sinless before he comes, having so much of Christ's being in them that they "hit the mark" every time, and stand blameless without an intercessor, because Christ leaves the sanctuary sometime before he comes to earth.

Now some say, "I will live better; I will try to build myself up into that place where God can accept me." If a child tries to do something to build up himself that you may think more of him, and falls, you say it was selfishness and pride, and serves him right; but if a child tries to do something simply to please you, even though bunglingly done, you commend him and praise him. So with us, if we strive to please our God, no matter how bunglingly we do it, he is so glad to put Christ's righteousness upon us and all heaven rejoices over it. How often a child tries to help mother and she lets it go on, although mother has to do it all over again-yet she delights in the effort of the child to please her. Now like as a father pitieth his children so the Lord pitieth them that fear him.

So then we can say with David: "I delight to do thy law, oh, my God." Why? Because the love of God was shed abroad in his heart. Now let me read a few texts about pleasing God: Hebrews 11:6. The aim of faith is to please God, because he is so good. Romans 8:8. Again 2 Cor. 5:14. The love of Christ draws us and we get that love through faith. But can we love God if we cannot keep the commandments of God? No. We can do neither until we become new creatures. 1 John 3:21-22. Now let us read Col. 1:9-10. We should be able to walk pleasingly before him. 1 Thess. 4:1. This then is the root and motive in keeping the commandments-to please God, and not to make ourselves righteous. God makes and keeps us righteous and then we keep the commandment to please God who has done so much for us. As then it is the power of Christ through which we keep the commandments now, and it will be his power through which we shall live forever in the new earth. His name to us is what? Jeremiah says it is "the Lord our Righteousness." Jer. 23:5-6. [7*]

General Conference secretary Dan Jones, who often opposed Jones and Waggoner, wrote to O. A. Olsen the following Spring complaining that he had to meet with "badly discouraged" ministers in the Kansas conference. "They had got the impression that there were new views coming out that unsettled the old positions we have held, and they were not certain that the new positions were correct. … [They] had got the idea some way that the doctrine of justification by faith practically did away with the law." [8*]

While some of the brethren felt that the law was being done away with by Jones' and Waggoner's teaching on justification by faith, others felt that "exaggerated ideas" on the subject were being taught in regard to overcoming sin. Dan Jones reported to O. A. Olsen, in regard to the same meetings, that some ministers were "under a cloud and going into discouragement. This arose from exaggerated ideas they had received of what our brethren taught on the subject of justification by faith; they had got the idea that the position is now taken that we should stand in a position where we do not sin, that all sin should be put away entirely, and that if we are not in that position we are not converted, etc." [9] The fact that both Jones and Waggoner were teaching that Christ had come to this earth, taking upon His sinless nature our sinful nature, and overcoming sin in our flesh that we might overcome as well, was to some very upsetting. But how did Ellen White see these two responses to their message? Did she suggest that Jones and Waggoner were causing confusion by doing away with the law or teaching perfectionism? [10*]

Ellen White's Response

While Uriah Smith, G. I. Butler, Dan Jones and others were blaming Jones and Waggoner for teaching two opposite extremes in regard to justification by faith, Ellen White, who had been personally present at the campmeetings, saw the real cause for the confusion. She pointedly told Uriah Smith some time later, that "the many and confused ideas in regard to Christ's righteousness and justification by faith are the result of the position you have taken toward the man and the message sent of God." [11] In a talk given a few months after the 1889 campmeetings, Ellen White stated that "the danger has been presented to me again and again of entertaining, as a people, false ideas of justification by faith. I have been shown for years that Satan would work in a special manner to confuse the mind on this point." She didn't blame this on Jones and Waggoner, however, but on those who had presented largely on the law of God, "almost destitute of the knowledge of Jesus Christ and His relation to the law as was the offering of Cain. … Many have been kept from the faith because of the mixed, confused ideas of salvation, because the ministers have worked in a wrong manner to reach hearts." [12]

But Ellen White also gave warning to those who felt the present message was calling for too high a standard and that it was not possible for Christ to have taken upon himself man's fallen nature:

The trials of the children of Israel, and their attitude just before the first coming of Christ, have been presented before me again and again to illustrate the position of the people of God in their experience before the second coming of Christ. How the enemy sought every occasion to take control of the minds of the Jews, and to-day he is seeking to blind the minds of God's servants, that they may not be able to discern precious truth. …

Christ came to the world to meet these false accusations, and to reveal the Father. We cannot conceive of the humiliation He endured in taking our nature upon himself. …

The Jews had been looking for the advent of the Messiah, but they had thought He must come in all the glory that will attend his second appearing. Because He did not come with all the majesty of a king, they utterly refused Him. But it was not simply because He did not come in splendor that they refused Him. It was because He was the embodiment of purity, and they were impure. … Such a character in the midst of degradation and evil, was out of harmony with their desires, and He was abused and despised. …

Letters have been coming to me, affirming that Christ could not have had the same nature as man, for if he had, he would have fallen under similar temptations. If he did not have man's nature, he could not be our example. If he was not a partaker of our nature, he could not have been tempted as man has been. [13*]

Two years later Ellen White would repeat these same thoughts. Christ did not have an advantage over mankind when it comes to facing temptation. But grace and power is given to all who receive Him, as He is by faith:

We need not place the obedience of Christ by itself as something for which He was particularly adapted, by His particular divine nature, for He stood before God as man's representative and tempted as man's substitute and surety. If Christ had a special power which it is not the privilege of man to have, Satan would have made capital of this matter. The work of Christ was to take from the claims of Satan his control of man, and he could do this only in the way that He came-a man, tempted as a man, rendering the obedience of a man. …

Bear in mind that Christ's overcoming and obedience is that of a true human being. In our conclusions, we make many mistakes because of our erroneous views of the human nature of our Lord. When we give, to His human nature, a power that it is not possible for man to have in his conflicts with Satan, we destroy the completeness of His humanity. His imputed grace and power He gives to all who receive Him by faith. The obedience of Christ to His Father was the same obedience that is required of man. [14]

Williamsport, Pennsylvania

With some difficulty because of recent flooding, Ellen White and A. T. Jones traveled from Kansas to Pennsylvania for a campmeeting held June 5-11, 1889. E. J. Waggoner joined them from California to help with the meetings which were "eagerly welcomed" by the people. [15*] The Minneapolis spirit of unbelief had come into the Kansas meetings, but at Williamsport, the people "did not seem to possess a spirit of unbelief and resistance to the message the Lord had sent them." Ellen White described the positive results of the meetings a few months later in a Review article:

Our meetings were well attended, and in the early morning meeting, so many were desirous of bearing testimony, that it was difficult to close the meeting at the appointed time. … The Lord has worked for his people, and they have received the light with joy as meat in due season. Their souls have craved spiritual food, and they have been supplied. …

[A]s the precious message of present truth was spoken to the people by Brn. Jones and Waggoner, the people saw new beauty in the third angel's message, and they were greatly encouraged. They testified to the fact they had never before attended meetings where they had received so much instruction and such precious light. … They felt that they now understood better how to win souls to Christ. …

In every meeting which we attend, we find many who do not understand the simplicity of faith. … They need to have Christ set forth before them. They need to have courage and hope and faith presented to them. They ask for bread, and shall they receive a stone? Shall the youth in our ranks say, "No man careth for my soul"? Shall we not give light to the souls that are groping in darkness? [16]

In the same Review article, Ellen White addressed more specifically the present truth message that Jones and Waggoner were sharing. It was the third angel's message, the grand message of justification by faith, proclaimed with the law of God. It was the message of the Lord our righteousness:

There are grand truths, long hidden under the rubbish of error, that are to be revealed to the people. The doctrine of justification by faith has been lost sight of by many who have professed to believe the third angel's message. The Holiness people have gone to great extremes on this point. With great zeal they have taught, "Only believe in Christ, and be saved; but away with the law of God." This is not the teaching of the word of God. There is no foundation for such a faith. This is not precious gems of truth that God has given to his people for this time. This doctrine misleads honest souls. …

God has raised up men to meet the necessity of this time who will cry aloud and spare not, who will lift up their voice like a trumpet, and show my people their transgressions and the house of Jacob their sins. Their work is not only to proclaim the law, but to preach the truth for this time, the Lord our righteousness. [17*]

The message that Jones and Waggoner were presenting placed the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus in their proper framework, and wonderful were the results. Ellen White made it clear that the doctrine of justification by faith had been lost sight of in the Adventist church, as leaders and members depended on a mere legalistic form of religion. The third angel's message that Adventism was to proclaim to the world was not a message of salvation by works. Neither was it the liberal perversion of the reformation doctrine of justification by faith which the holiness preachers taught. The Adventist message was the third angel's message in verity-the law and the gospel combined-which went beyond the message the Reformers taught. It was the message of righteousness by faith built on the foundation of the Reformation, but taught in the context of the final judgement and the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary. [18*]

In the 1888 edition of The Great Controversy, Ellen White wrote about the Reformation and "the great doctrine of justification by faith, so clearly taught by Luther." [19*] But she also stated in the same book, that "the Reformation did not, as many suppose, end with Luther. It is to be continued to the close of this world's history. Luther had a great work to do in reflecting to others the light which God had permitted to shine upon him; yet he did not receive all the light which was to be given to the world. From that time to this, new light has been continually shining upon the Scriptures, and new truths have been constantly unfolding." [20*] There was a "present truth in the days of Luther,-a truth at that time of special importance," but, Ellen White exclaimed, "there is a present truth for the church today." [21*]

In Ellen White's article about the Williamsport campmeeting, she described the great blessings received by those who accepted the present truth messages on righteousness by faith, and then turned her attention to those who were still wavering over whether to accept the message. She warned those in Battle Creek, who themselves were sinning against great light, that it was time for them to choose between Baal and the Lord:

The Spirit of God is now withdrawing from the people of the earth. …

The terrible destruction of life and property at Johnstown and Williamsport … call for most serious reflection. … But we are not to think … [they] were more deserving of punishment than are other cities. … There are those who are living under the very shadow of our institutions, who are sinning against greater light than were the people of Johnstown … and they will more certainly fall under the wrath of God's retributive judgments. …

The curse of Meroz will be upon those who do not now come up to the help of the Lord against the mighty. Well may the question be asked in the spirit of Elijah. "How long halt ye between two opinions? If the Lord be God, follow him; but if Baal, then follow him."

All heaven is interested in the work that is going on upon the earth. But there are those who see no necessity for a special work at this time. While God is working to arouse the people, they seek to turn aside the message of warning, reproof, and entreaty. Their influence tends to quiet the fears of the people, and to prevent them from awaking to the solemnity of this time. … If they do not change their course … the same reward will be apportioned to them as to those who are at enmity and in open rebellion against God. [22]

Ellen White wrote to H. W. Miller, a minister from the Michigan conference, just prior to the Williamsport campmeeting, stating that "some of our leading brethren" have "intercepted themselves between the light and the people." She told Miller that she "had repeatedly presented before [him] and others that there would come a shaking time." In view of the continued rejection of the outpouring of the Spirit of God, she could state unabashedly "we are now entering upon that time." [23*]

Rome, New York

From Williamsport the campmeeting speakers traveled to New York, where the Rome campmeeting ran from June 11 to 18. Ellen White felt "anxious that the grace of Christ should come upon our brethren." Her hopes were not disappointed: "The Lord sent them special messages of mercy and encouragement." Once again she recognized the message for what it was:

The Lord would have his church arise and shine; for the brightness of the light of God has shone upon his people in the message of present truth. If all will heed the precious words given them from the Great Teacher through his delegated servants, there will be an awakening throughout our ranks, and spiritual vigor will be imparted to the church. We should all desire to know the truth as it is in Jesus. …

I felt anxious that the light of heaven might shine upon the people of God in this Conference, that they might zealously repent of their sins. … We felt thankful to our Heavenly Father that his message of hope and courage and faith could come before our brethren and sisters in New York, and we deeply regretted that there were not many others present to share the important instruction that was given. …

As the servants of the Lord brought forth things new and old from the treasure house of his word, hope came to the hearts of these old soldiers in the truth. They knew that the message was what they needed, and felt that it came from God. …

There is great need that Christ should be preached as the only hope and salvation. When the doctrine of justification by faith was presented at the Rome meeting, it came to many as water comes to the thirsty traveler. The thought that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us, not because of any merit on our part, but as a free gift from God, seemed a precious thought. The enemy of man and God is not willing that this truth should be clearly presented; for he knows that if the people receive it fully, his power will be broken. If he can control minds so that doubt and unbelief and darkness shall compose the experience of those who claim to be the children of God, he can overcome them with temptation. [24]

The very message that was shining upon them was the "glory of the Lord" spoken of in Isaiah 60:1; truths both "new and old." If accepted, it would bring an "awakening throughout" the church. Satan did not want this message "clearly presented," for he knew that if the "people receive it fully, his power will be broken." Thus he set out to "control minds" with "doubt and unbelief" that he might "overcome them with temptation." [25] The most effective way he could do this was through those in leadership positions.

During the campmeeting in Rome, Ellen White responded to Smith's June 11 Review article, writing him a personal letter. She had been awakened in the night and saw the case of Smith as most discouraging:

I saw you walked upon the path that almost imperceptibly diverged from the right way. A noble personage stood beside me and said, "Uriah Smith is not on the brink of a precipice but he is in the path that will shortly bring him to the brink and if he is not warned now it will soon be too late. He can now retrace his steps. He is walking like a blind man into the prepared net of the enemy but he feels no danger because light is becoming darkness to him and darkness light. …"

This morning I have read your article in [the] Review. Now there was no call whatever for you to write as you did. You place Elder Jones in a false position just as Elder Morrison and Nicola and yourself and others placed him in at Minneapolis. [26*]

Christ and the Law

Church members at the Rome campmeeting, where both Jones and Waggoner were preaching, read Uriah Smith's June 11 article in the Review. On the last day of the meetings, Ellen White took opportunity to set things straight. In her sermon "Christ and the Law," she explained how Christ revealed to the Jewish people, "old light in new settings" in regard to the law. But the "moment He does that, there arises a resistance against that light. … It was not as they had taught it. … [T]heir thoughts were that He did not make the law as prominent as they had done. … They saw trees as men walking." Ellen White then drew a comparison, asking her listeners how they would respond to heaven's light?

What is God going to do for His people--leave them with no new light? "Ye are," says He, "the light of the world." Then we are to get more light from the throne of God, and have an increase of light. Now, we do not tell you in the message that has been given to you here and in other places that it is a grand new light, but it is the old light brought up and placed in new settings. … [27*]

Just prior to the coming of the Son of man, there is and has been for years a determination on the part of the enemy to cast his hellish shadow right between man and his Saviour. And why? So that he shall not distinguish that it is a whole Saviour, a complete sacrifice that has been made for him. Then he tells them that they are not to keep the law, for in keeping that law man would be united with the divine power, and Satan would be defeated. … Notwithstanding man was encompassed with the infirmities of humanity he might become a partaker of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. Now here is the redemption. [28*]

If you could see what Christ is, one that can save to the uttermost all that come unto God by Him, then you would have that faith that works. But must works come first? No, it is faith first. And how? The cross of Christ is lifted up between heaven and earth. …

"Then," says one, "you cannot be accepted unless you repent." Well, who leads us to repentance? Who is drawing us? … Christ is drawing us. Angels of God are in this world, at work upon human minds, and the man is drawn to the One who uplifts him, and the One who uplifts Him draws him to repentance. It is no work of his own; there is nothing that he can do that is of any value at all except to believe. …

This is the victory--even your faith, feelings, and good works? Is that it? No; "This is the victory … even your faith". … We are not following cunningly devised fables, no indeed; but we have been revealing Christ our righteousness. [29]

Ellen White told her hearers that a "self-sufficiency" had been coming in among them. She read the message to the Laodicean church, stating that it was "applicable to us." She then defined the remedies for the Laodicean condition as that found in the very message that God had been pleased to send them:

Now what is the difficulty? "Tried in the fire." Christ had such love for us that He could go through all that trying of the crucifixion, and come off conqueror. And the white raiment, what is that? Christ's righteousness. "Anoint thine eyes with eyesalve"--spiritual discernment, that you may discern between true righteousness and self-righteousness. Now here is the work. The heavenly merchantman is passing up and down before you saying: "Buy of Me. Here are heavenly goods; buy of Me." "Will you do it? It is 'Me' you are to buy of." There is no other source in heaven from which we may receive liberty and life but through Jesus Christ our righteousness.

Then He says, "Be zealous therefore, and repent." That message is to us. We want the brethren and sisters in this conference to take hold of this message, and see the light that has been brought to us in new settings.

God has opened to us our strength, and we need to know something about it and be prepared for the time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation. But here is our strength, Christ our righteousness. [30]

As Ellen White came to the end of her talk, she responded to Smith's article in the Review. She described him in the same condition as that of the Jews. She defended Jones and Waggoner, and her husband, against Smith's misrepresentations. She made it clear that she was in full support of the message being given and that it was not contrary to what she had "been trying to present" before their minds. Speaking to the congregation in no uncertain terms, she identified the message for what it was; their "light" had come:

Brethren, do not let any of you be thrown off the track. "Well," you say, "What does Brother Smith's piece in the Review mean?" He doesn't know what he is talking about; he sees trees as men walking. … [H]e takes those [texts] that have been placed in false settings and he binds them in a bundle as though we were discarding the claims of God's law, when it is no such thing. It is impossible for us to exalt the law of Jehovah unless we take hold of the righteousness of Jesus Christ.

My husband understood this matter of the law, and we have talked night after night until neither of us would sleep. And it is the very principles the people are striving for. They want to know that Christ accepts them as soon as they come to Him. …

I have had the question asked, "What do you think of this light that these men are presenting?" Why, I have been presenting it to you for the last 45 years-the matchless charms of Christ. [31*] This is what I have been trying to present before your minds. When Brother Waggoner brought out these ideas in Minneapolis, it was the first clear teaching on this subject from any human lips I had heard, excepting the conversations between myself and my husband. I have said to myself, It is because God has presented it to me in vision that I see it so clearly, and they cannot see it because they have never had it presented to them as I have. And when another presented it, every fiber of my heart said, Amen. …

I ask you in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth to arise and shine, for thy light has come. … Now, you have had light here, and what are you going to do about it? … How I long to see the tidal wave pouring over the people! And I know it can be, for God gave us all heaven in one gift, and every one of us can accept the light, every ray of it, and then we can be the light of the world. [32]

Smith's response was anything but repentance. He wrote a second article in the Review entitled "Our Righteousness Again." He stated that his first article seemed "to have been misapprehended by some," and he wrote again "in hope of making it so plain that none can misunderstand it." His stance, however, didn't change. He was concerned that "in exalting the faith side of this question, which is all right in itself, … many have come to think that the [law] is obsolete and the other [obedience] of no consequence." [33]

Looking Back

Several weeks later Ellen White wrote of the campmeeting at Rome. She encouraged those who had "received" light to let it "shine in the various churches of which they" were members, for if they neglect to communicate the light, they would "be left in darkness." She warned those who were criticizing the message that had "divine credentials" that Satan was not only trying to make void the law of God, he was also seeking to trample on the "faith of Christ as our righteousness." If the "present message," which brought with it divine power, was not valued, "false theories" would take minds captive and Christ and His righteousness would be "dropped out of the experience" and Satan would "overcome [them] with his temptations":

The present message-justification by faith-is a message from God; it bears the divine credentials, for its fruit is unto holiness. Some who greatly need the precious truth that was presented before them, we fear did not receive its benefit … they have suffered great loss. …

It is perilous to the soul to hesitate, question, and criticize divine light. Satan will present his temptations until the light will appear as darkness, and many will reject the very truth that would have proved the saving of their souls. Those who walk in its rays will find it growing brighter and brighter unto the perfect day. …

It has been necessary to exalt the great standard of righteousness, but in doing this, many have neglected to preach the faith of Jesus. If we would have the spirit and power of the third angel's message, we must present the law and the gospel together, for they go hand in hand. As a power from beneath is stirring up the children of disobedience to make void the law of God, and to trample upon the faith of Christ as our righteousness, a power from above is moving upon the hearts of those who are loyal to exalt the law, and to lift up Jesus as a complete Saviour. Unless divine power is brought into the experience of the people of God, false theories and erroneous ideas will take minds captive, Christ and his righteousness will be dropped out of the experience of many, and their faith will be without power or life. … [I]f they do not zealously repent, they will be among those who are represented by the Laodiceans, who will be spewed out of the mouth of God. …

Our present position is interesting and perilous. The danger of refusing light from heaven should make us watchful unto prayer, lest we should any of us have an evil heart of unbelief. When the Lamb of God was crucified on Calvary, the death knell of Satan was sounded; and if the enemy of truth and righteousness can obliterate from the mind the thought that it is necessary to depend upon the righteousness of Christ for salvation, he will do it. If Satan can succeed in leading man to place value upon his own works as works of merit and righteousness, he knows that he can overcome him by his temptations, and make him his victim and prey. [34]

Message Silenced?

After the Rome campmeeting Ellen White returned to Battle Creek "worn and exhausted." She had to "refrain from speaking for a time" until her health improved. [35] It was during this time that she wrote "Experience following the 1888 Minneapolis Conference." She summarized the events following the General Conference, including some of the revival meetings that took place in the early spring, and sadly, the opposition that still remained strong. Using language from Isaiah 58, she described the interest of the universe in seeing "how many faithful servants are bearing the sins of the people on their hearts and afflicting their souls; how many are colaborers with Jesus Christ to become repairers of the breach … and restorers of the paths." It was not just the Sabbath that needed restoration, but the "path of faith and righteousness." [36]

In late June, Ellen White traveled to Wexford, Michigan, for another campmeeting held June 25 through July 2. Once again the "Spirit of the Lord was manifestly at work," but many refused to be benefited by it. On July 23, Ellen White sent a forty-one page letter to "Elders Madison and Howard Miller," both ministers in the Michigan conference. She rebuked them and others for not recognizing the movings of the Spirit, and for being "ever ready to question and cavil." Some had an "unfortunate experience … at Minneapolis." Others, in their present condition, would be "a hindrance in any meeting or counsel" just like the unfaithful spies, who had "no trouble in seeing and presenting obstacles that appeared insurmountable in the way of the advancement of the people of God." She told them that "the Lord has committed to us a message full of interest, that is as far reaching in its influence as eternity. We have tidings to give to the people which should bring joy to their souls." She told them that it was not for them "to choose the channel through which the light shall come. The Lord desires to heal the wounds of His sheep and lambs, through the heavenly balm of the truth that Christ is our righteousness." Their actions were similar to that of the Jews; they were rejecting Christ "in the person of his messengers." Yet they were "less excusable than were the Jews; for we have before us their example":

It is a grievous sin in the sight of God for men to place themselves between the people and the message that he would have come to them (as some of our brethren have been doing). There are some who like the Jews, are doing their utmost to make the message of God of none effect. Let these doubting, questioning ones either receive the light of the truth for this time, or let them stand out of the way, that others may have an opportunity of receiving the truth. …

Those who live just prior to the second appearing of Christ, may expect a large measure of His Holy Spirit; but if they do not watch and pray, they will go over the same ground of refusing the message of mercy, as the Jews did in the time of Christ (If God has ever spoken by me, some of our leading men are going over the same ground). If they turn away from the light, they will fail to meet the high and holy claims of God, they will fail to fulfill the sacred responsibility that he has entrusted to them.

The character and prospects of the people of God are similar to those of the Jews, who could not enter in because of unbelief. Self-sufficiency, self- importance, and spiritual pride separate them from God. [37*]

Ellen White recognized that the brethren were following in the footsteps of the Jews. Many were looking "to their leaders" and asking: "'If this message that Brother A. T. Jones has been giving to the church is the truth, why is it that Brother Smith and Brother Butler have not received it?'" A "similar guilt" to that which was incurred by the Jews was upon those leading brethren who were despising the message and messengers, and yet, Ellen White stated: "Their unbelief is no reason for others to do the same." Coming to the close of her letter to Madison and Miller, Ellen White gave a final caution and plea:

There are many who have heard the message for this time and have seen its results, and they cannot but acknowledge that the work is good, but from fear that some will take extreme positions, and that fanaticism may arise in our ranks, they have permitted their imagination to create many obstacles to hinder the advance of the work, and they have presented these difficulties to others, expatiating on the dangers of accepting the doctrine. They have sought to counteract the influence of the message of truth. Suppose they should succeed in these efforts, what would be the result? The message to arouse a lukewarm church should cease, and the testimony exalting the righteousness of Christ would be silenced. …

The character, the motives and purposes of the workmen whom God has sent, have been, and will continue to be, misrepresented. …

The end is right upon us; and is it reasonable to think that there is no message to make ready a people to stand in the day of God's preparation? … Is the third angel's message to go out in darkness, or to lighten the whole earth with its glory? Is the light of God's Spirit to be quenched, and the church to be left as destitute of the grace of Christ as the hills of Gilboa were of dew and rain? [38]

Ellen White, and Jones and Waggoner, all attended several more campmeetings before the 1889 General Conference in late October, and the results were the same. Many people found a new experience as they heard the message presented, but many of the leading brethren, although claiming to believe in the message presented, continued to fight against what they perceived were flaws in the message and the messengers. Some years later, A. T. Jones summarized the events of the summer of 1889:

Then when camp meeting time came we all three visited the camp meetings with the message of righteousness by faith and religious liberty: sometimes all three of us being in the same meeting. This turned the tide with the people, and apparently with most of the leading men. But this latter was only apparent: it was never real, for all the time in the General Conference Committee and amongst others there was a secret antagonism always carried on." [39*]

Were Jones' observations correct? We will look into his claims in the chapters ahead.

Notes:

1. Ellen G. White to Children, Letter 14, May 12, 1889; in 1888 Materials, p. 325. "Arise, because her light has come and the glory of the Lord has risen upon her ..." is a quote from Isaiah 60. The SDA Bible Commentary describes these verses as the "symbol of the divine presence," the very presence of Jesus, that will "be proclaimed with such power that the whole earth will be ablaze with the light of truth (Rev. 18:1)" (vol. 4, p. 313, "Isaiah 60:1"). Thus, these verses are seen as connected with the fourth angel of Revelation 18 that will lighten the earth with its glory during the loud cry and latter rain. Ellen White's statement in her letter written at the Kansas meetings is the first of many statements she made applying Isaiah 60:1 (present tense) to the church of her day, who were hearing the most precious message sent from heaven: "Those who wait for the Bridegroom's coming are to say to the people, 'Behold your God.' The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love. ... 'Arise, Shine; for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord is risen upon thee.' Isa. 60:1. To those who go out to meet the Bridegroom is this message given" (Christ's Object Lessons, pp. 415, 420).


2. In Ellen White's well-known statement--"The Lord in His great mercy sent a most precious message to His people through Elders Waggoner and Jones"--she describes the message as "the law and the gospel, binding up the two in a perfect whole" (Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 91, 94). She knew that "the law and the gospel, blended, will convict of sin" and "in no discourse are they to be divorced." Why? "The one is the complement of the other. The law without faith in the gospel of Christ cannot save the transgressor of law. The gospel without the law is inefficient and powerless. ... The two blended--the gospel of Christ and the law of God-- produce the love and faith unfeigned" (1888 Materials, pp. 892, 783). Ellen White witnessed this "love and faith unfeigned" among those who accepted the message presented at the summer meetings.


3. Jesus received a similar response. According to the conservative Pharisees, Jesus was far too liberal for their liking, as He didn't have enough respect for the law. But according to the liberal Sadducees, Jesus was far too conservative because He gave no excuse for sin, however small. Although the Pharisees and Sadducees hated one another, they did have one thing in common: they hated Jesus even more, hated the message He proclaimed, and united in His crucifixion.


4. G. I. Butler, "The Righteousness of the Law Fulfilled by Us," Review and Herald, May 14, 1889, pp. 313-314. George Knight suggests that "G. I. Butler ... also attacked Jones's teachings at Ottawa, Kansas, and other places" in this Review article (From 1888 to Apostasy, p. 55). Although Butler was technically correct on many points in his article, Ellen White saw him as one working "in a wrong manner to reach hearts" (see endnote 12). Both Jones and Waggoner denied the Augustinian concept of Original Sin, but they wrote about different aspects of the sin problem besides the biblical definition found in John 3:4 (see: A. Leroy Moore, Theology in Crisis, p. 294; Clinton Wahlen, "Selected Aspects of Ellet J. Waggoner's Eschatology," pp. 10, 115).


5. Uriah Smith, "Our Righteousness," Review and Herald, June 11, 1889, p. 376.


6. Between May 5and 20, Jones presented three series of lectures at the Ottawa, Kansas campmeeting, giving 14 lectures on religious liberty, 13 on church government, and 5 on justification by faith. Jones then left with his wife and headed to the Williamsport campmeeting (The Topeka Daily Capital, May 22, 1889). This final sermon was attributed to W. C. White in the Daily Capital. George Knight suggests that "it is clearly ATJ's sermon. It is his style and it is part of the series of sermons that he presented on righteousness by faith" (1888 to Apostasy, p. 263, fn 20). Nevertheless, there are several other facts to consider. A notice in the Review stated that "arrangements will be made with newspapers during each [lecture] for a fair report," and that "the General Conference has assigned a competent [stenographic] reporter especially for this work" (Review and Herald, April 9, 1889, p 240). Bert Haloviak reveals, however, that there was a "class offered on shorthand reporting" during the campmeeting, and "'nearly all carried tablets, pencils and full notes of all class exercises and reports of sermons and lectures' were thus taken. It was obvious that through this means that the Capital was able to report full transcriptions of the major meetings" ("From Righteousness to Holy Flesh: Judgement at Minneapolis," chap. 9, p. 14). O. A Olsen did fill in for Jones earlier in the week because of "Elder Jones needing rest" (Daily Capital, May 17, 1889). It is possible that W. C. White could have done the same. It seems improbable that the two men could be mixed up, but whether W. C. White or A. T. Jones gave this sermon, the outcome is still the same. Jones likely gave the sermon so we will address the issues as if he did.


7. A. T. Jones, "Keeping the Commandments," May, 20, 1889, The Topeka Daily Capital, May 20, 1889; in "The 1889 Camp Meeting Sermons" (St. Maries, Id.: LMN Publ. International, n.d.), pp. 30-31. Again, this is Jones' sermon in its entirety, as it appeared in the Topeka Daily Capital. It should be clear that transcription represents only a summary of his sermon, and not a word for word replication. There is no way to tell how much the stenographers transcribing affected the meaning of Jones' sermon, while at the same time they were learning their trade (see endnote 6). Thus it would behoove us not to try and build an entire case for or against Jones' theology based on comments he made in this one sermon.


8. Dan T. Jones to O. A. Olsen, April 27, 1890, archives of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. Ellen G. White to Madison and Miller, Letter 4, July 23, 1889; in 1888 Materials, p. 388. George Knight sides with Smith, Butler, Dan Jones and others, stating the following about A. T. Jones' sermon: "His use of language certainly left him open to such misinterpretation. After all, he had remarked at the 1889 Kansas meetings: 'Where ... do our works come in? Nowhere.' He interspersed such statements throughout his sermons" (1888 to Apostasy, p. 55, verbatim quote). Knight summarizes by declaring that "Adventists misunderstood [Jones] on the relation of the law to salvation" because "he was an extremist who had never mastered the Christian virtue of temperance" (Ibid., p. 55). But is the reader able to understand the true intent of Jones' words as quoted by Knight, when only a partial sentence is quoted with ellipses added in? It is clear, when read in context, that Jones was referring to the merit of our works: "Where then do our works come in? Nowhere." The word "then" being removed by Knight would refer the reader back to Jones' previous clarifying statements. Only a few sentences later Jones clarifies again by stating that it is "only through Christ within us that we keep the commandments." I would also challenge any reader to find where Jones "interspersed such statements throughout his sermons," as has been suggested. Those who condemned Jones in his day were "ever ready to question and cavil" and to condemn for a word. The same is true today. Jones' sermon stands on its own merit, but let us consider briefly four points: 1. These sermons were taken down in shorthand by several "reporters," many of which were learning the trade. This left room for human error and personal biases, as the transcribed sermon was very likely a composite from several novice reporters (see endnote 6). It is also obvious from the choppiness of the transcribed sermons that they were not taken down word for word; only the main thoughts were recorded. Many who were finding fault with Jones most likely read his sermons as reported in the Daily Capital, and were not present to hear him speak. This would include Uriah Smith. How easy it was to pick out a word here or there to condemn? 2. As will be noted later, many of the accusations that were being made by Smith, Butler, Dan Jones and others turned out to be false (see endnote 26). But the old adage is true: "A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on" (Winston Churchill). Some of the same lies started in Jones' day are still circulated today. 3. The challenge for both Jones and Waggoner when dealing with the legalism that was prevalent in the church at the time was to present the faith of Jesus aspect of the gospel without overstatements. If they were not perfect in this matter or if people took their statements to an extreme, it should not discredit the wonderful work they were doing. James White wrote of a similar challenge Ellen White faced in dealing with health reform: "She makes strong appeals to the people, which a few feel deeply ... and go to extremes. Then to save the cause from ruin ... she is obliged to come out with reproofs for extremists ... but the influence of both the extremes and the reproofs are terrible. ... Here is the difficulty: What she may say to caution the prompt, zealous, incautious ones, is taken by the tardy as an excuse to remain too far behind" ("The Spirit of Prophecy and Health Reform," Review and Herald, March 17, 1868). W. C. White recognized the same problem: "I should infer that what mother writes intended to move the latter [indifferent group] from their dullness and indifference, is taken by the former [extremist group] and used as a club to belabor their brethren; and that what is written to the former class to save them from extreme and inconsiderate positions is taken by the latter class as an excuse for their self-confidence and indifference" (W. C. White to A. O. Tait, Sept. 2, 1895). 4. There is no evidence that Ellen White ever censured Jones for his sermons delivered at Ottawa, Kansas. When she did counsel him later for extreme statements he had made, it was primarily from the standpoint of sparing him from those who were looking to hang him for a word, and the confusion that would result in distracting from the true message he was giving.


9. Dan T. Jones to O. A. Olsen, April 21, 1890, archives of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.


10. Some side today with those who felt that Jones and Waggoner were teaching perfectionism in 1889. Desmond Ford has been a prominent proponent of this idea: "From time to time, messages emphasizing Jesus have come to Seventhday Adventists. It happened in 1888 through Waggoner and Jones, though their views tended to perfectionism [endnote 1]. Waggoner and Jones did not understand righteousness by faith with the clarity of Luther or Calvin. ... Sadly, both Waggoner and Jones quickly lost their way, both morally and theologically" (For the Sake of the Gospel [2008], pp. 2, 219). Ford also recommends other resources that support his theological views: "The best book on Waggoner is by David P. McMahon and is entitled Ellet Joseph Waggoner: the Myth and the Man. ... I would also strongly recommend Woodrow W. Whidden's book Ellen White on Salvation. If this book were well known among us, our key heresies would die" (Ibid., p. 85). Robert Brinsmead had similar thoughts: "At special periods in our history the gospel has struggled to break through to the Adventist community. The year 1888 marked such a period. But even here we must keep a proper perspective. As McMahon's book, Ellet Joseph Waggoner: The Myth and the Man, has shown, Waggoner had light on justification for the Adventist community. But better material on justification by faith could be found among Protestant scholars of his day." (Judge by the Gospel: A Review of Adventism [1980], pp. 14-15). David McMahon doesn't mince words in his thoughts on Waggoner, and Jones: "But other statements made in 1886 [by Waggoner] lean toward perfectionism. ... How disappointing! Waggoner takes us to the very borders of the Promised Land and then turns us back into the old-covenant wilderness." "Unfortunately, between 1889 and 1891 Waggoner moved in this direction [pantheism] with his extreme view of sanctification. These views could have been avoided if he had preserved the distinction between righteousness by faith alone and sanctification." "Waggoner's theology between 1889 and 1891 was a theology of transition. Although not at first abandoning forensic justification, he moved to a concept of 'effective' justification. ... Along with the Roman Catholic concept of effective justification, Waggoner developed such supportive concepts as the sinful human nature of Christ, the mystical atonement, sanctification by faith alone, and the law as an exhaustive expression of God's righteousness. Both church history and the history of theology clearly demonstrate that these are pantheistic premises" (The Myth and the Man [1979], pp. 44-45, 112-115). One year after the Glacier View meetings with Desmond Ford, Bert Haloviak from the General Conference Archives, drafted his concepts on Jones' meetings at Ottawa, Kansas: "It is apparent that both Jones and Waggoner already in 1888 had aspects to their message that would later develop into full-scale fanaticism and apostasy. While the ingredients of this twist are evidenced in Jones' first [Ottawa] sermon on righteousness (as well as Waggoner's), it became even more apparent by his concluding sermons. ... While both Jones and Waggoner stressed righteousness as a free gift, they seemed to consider that gift as an infused righteousness and seemed to believe that this infused righteousness was necessary to sustain God's people through the time of trouble and the future period when they believed Christ would no longer mediate for His people in the heavenly sanctuary." "'Keeping the commandments,' Jones asserted, 'comes in after we are new creatures, so then we must be made good, be made righteous, before we can do good or do righteousness.' ... Jones seems to be saying: our faith responds to God's love and motivates us to desire to keep his law; He accepts our desire and infuses His righteousness. ... This theology would grow ... and would be confronted by Ellen White a decade and a half later during the Living Temple crisis" ("Ellen White and A. T. Jones at Ottawa, 1889: Diverging Paths from Minneapolis," [unpublished manuscript, 1981], pp. 15-16, 20-22). But Jones and Waggoner never used the word "infused," other than speaking of the Catholic church's aberrant doctrine. When Jones and Waggoner used the word "imputed" and "accounted," Haloviak states they really meant "infused" (Ibid., p. 18). After quoting from one of Ellen White's glowing endorsements made at Ottawa, Haloviak postulates: "It seems clear that Mrs. White is reacting to Jones' stress upon righteousness as an unmerited gift, rather than that part of his theology that would later be mislabeled righteousness by faith by those espousing holy flesh or Living Temple sentiments" (Ibid., p. 17). Woodrow Whidden received inspiration from Haloviak's manuscript in writing his biography on Waggoner. It seems that almost from page one, seeds are planted seeking to lead the reader to the same conclusions stated above: "Was Waggoner here [in 1888] confusing the work of justification with that of sanctification? These questions will most certainly be one of the key themes that will occupy us in our ongoing survey of Waggoner's theological developments. ... Quite obviously for Waggoner the justified sinner is 'made righteous and just'. ... but that such a declaration also somehow 'make' the believer righteousness [sic] has a bit of an odd ring to it. ... Was he conflating justification and sanctification ... ?" [Webster's definition of "conflating" is: "The combining of two variant texts into a new one."]. Whidden continues: "What often makes him hard to grasp is the way that he used the language of justification (imputation or being accounted as righteous) to effectively encompass a lot of what we normally ascribe to the work of sanctification. And thus it is often tough to tease out Waggoner's meaning." "Undoubtedly, the most significant and portentous theological trend of the early post-Minneapolis period ... was on Waggoner's early 1889 emphasis on the indwelling Christ. ... [I]t would become the source for almost all of the errant theological and practical paths that Waggoner would tread for the balance of his life" (E. J. Waggoner, pp. 85, 6971, 199, 210). George Knight draws from the same authors declaring that Jones' "expressions on Christian holiness misled others" and his teachings "became a major root for the spread of sinless perfectionism among Seventh-day Adventists. ... There is, for example, a fairly direct line from Jones in the post-Minneapolis period to the holy flesh movement in Indiana in 1900. ... [M]any of its holy flesh ideas were extensions of his teachings on righteousness by faith. ... beginning at least as early as 1889 ..." (From 1888 to Apostasy, pp. 56-57). Jeff Reich suggests that "Mr Haloviak of the SDA archives in Washington helped Dr. Knight with some of his research. In fact, the whole idea of Jones teaching holy flesh from 18[89] onward seems to be almost lifted out of some of Haloviak's unpublished documents" (From 1888 to apostasy: A Critique, [St. Maries, ID: LMN, 1988], p.10, see also pp. 4-6). There is one major problem with the above scenario presented by all these modern writers: Where in the writings of Ellen White--who was an eyewitness at the Ottawa, Kansas, campmeeting--do we find support for such accusations? Do these accusations line up with Ellen White's assessment, or with the assessment of those who were fighting against the message over 120 years ago? Do we have better perception of what took place there in Kansas than what God gave to Ellen White? How can the results of the 1889 campmeetings be used today as proof that the 1888 message was accepted, while at the same time they are used as proof that the message had a fatal flaw which led to cheap grace on the one hand, and to holy flesh fanaticism and pantheism on the other?


11. Ellen G. White to Uriah Smith, Letter 24, Sept. 19, 1892; in 1888 Materials, p. 1053, emphasis supplied.


12. Ellen G. White Manuscript 36, "Danger of False Ideas of Justification by Faith," n.d. 1890; in 1888 Materials, pp. 810-811.


13. Ellen G. White, "How to Meet a Controverted Point of Doctrine," Morning Talk, Jan. 18, 1890, Review and Herald, Feb. 18, 1890; in 1888 Materials, p. 533. For more on this topic see Chapter 11.


14. Ellen G. White Manuscript 1, Nov. 15, 1892; in Manuscript Releases, pp. 340-341.


15. Waggoner had just come from California where he was serving as senior editor of the Signs of the Times. On April 17, 1889, Waggoner received a "cable dispatch" that his father, J. H. Waggoner, had died in Basel, Switzerland, where he was editor of the French edition of the Signs of the Times (Signs of the Times, Apr. 22, 1889, p. 256). Only a few weeks later, on May 20, his nine-month-old boy, Ernest Eugene, died from whooping cough. Waggoner had left "only a few days before ... on his journey East to fill important engagements, and so will never have the pleasure of beholding the face of his loved one again in this life" ("Obituary," Signs of the Times, June 3, 1889, p. 334). Waggoner's return East was for the purpose of visiting his mother, who had just returned from Europe, participating in some of the Eastern campmeetings, and completing a "course of study in Hebrew" at Chatauqua, which he had "been pursuing for several years" (Signs of the Times, May 27, 1889, p. 320). His wife and children back in California, who had already lost so much, were fearful he had been lost in the Johnstown and Williamsport flood until they finally received his letter "all soiled and inkblurred from the water" (Pearl Waggoner Howard, "Biographical Sketch and Background," p. 4; in Document File 236, E. G. White Research Center, Andrews University, Berrien Springs, MI, p. 4). It was amidst these disheartening events that Waggoner continued to share the good news of the gospel to those within and without the church, many of whom had no idea of the costs to him.


16. Ellen G. White, "Camp-Meeting at Williamsport, PA.," Review and Herald, Aug. 13, 1889, pp. 513-514.


17. Ellen G. White, "Camp-Meeting at Williamsport, PA.," Review and Herald, Aug. 13, 1889, pp. 513-514.


18. George Knight refers to Ellen White's Williamsport article several times to try to prove the message that Jones and Waggoner presented was a mix of Adventist distinctive doctrines with the teaching of the holiness preachers: "The genius of [Jones' and Waggoner's] 1888 message was that they had combined the two halves of Revelation 14:12. They not only taught the commandments of God but they preached the doctrine of faith that the holiness preachers had proclaimed. Thus, from Ellen White's perspective, the importance of the 1888 message was not some special Adventist doctrine of justification by faith developed by Jones and Waggoner. Rather, it was the reuniting of Adventism with basic Christian beliefs on salvation. ... [J]ustification by faith (an evangelical belief that Adventists have not been able to improve upon)." Knight continues: "Thus Waggoner and Mrs. White were in harmony on the fact that the doctrine of justification by faith he set forth, far from being some new understanding of justification, was the belief in justification neglected by Adventists but quite in harmony with the teaching of Paul, Luther, Wesley and the nineteenth-century holiness preachers. ... The two men had brought together the great truths of Adventism centering on the commandments of God and the great truth of evangelical Christianity centering on salvation by faith in Jesus. ..." A few pages later, Knight states: "In essence, Mrs. White was claiming that Seventh-day Adventists at last had a complete understanding of the third angel's message. ... That is, they had united those aspects of Adventist theology that were distinctively Adventist to the great theme of justification by faith that, as Ellen White put it, was being taught by the holiness preachers (RH, Aug. 13, 1889). The result was that Adventists since 1888 had finally been in a position to present the third angel's message in all of its fullness and balance" (A User-Friendly Guide to the 1888 Message, pp.108, 110, 113, emphasis original). But did Ellen White mean what Knight has claimed? She clarifies her statement often quoted by Knight, stating: "The Holiness people have gone to great extremes on this point. With great zeal they have taught, 'Only believe in Christ, and be saved; but away with the law of God.' This is not the teaching of the word of God. There is no foundation for such a faith. This is not precious gems of truth that God has given to his people for this time. This doctrine misleads honest souls" ("Camp-Meeting at Williamsport, PA.," Review and Herald, Aug. 13, 1889, pp. 513-514). Knight also seeks to substantiate his position--that Jones and Waggoner's message was in part the teachings of the holiness preachers--by quoting from E. J. Waggoner himself, where he stated in 1887 in his book The Gospel in Galatians (p. 70), that his teachings were simply "'a step nearer the faith of the great Reformers from the days of Paul to the days of Luther and Wesley" (A User-Friendly Guide to the 1888 Message, p. 110). But Waggoner was defending himself against G. I. Butler's charges that his much "vaunted doctrine of justification by faith" was contrary to scripture and doing away with Adventist doctrines of the law in favor of the liberal holiness movement doctrines. Waggoner's very next sentence reads: "It would be a step closer to the heart of the Third Angel's Message'" (The Gospel in Galatians, p. 70). The third angel's message, which Seventh-day Adventists have been called to preach to the world, is not and never has been, a combination of Adventist legalism (as was being taught by Butler and Smith) combined with the false view of justification by faith that the evangelical holiness preachers were teaching. The third angel's message was sent directly from the heavenly sanctuary where Christ's work is taking place, not from the holiness preachers who had rejected the first and second angel's messages in 1844 (see Ellen G. White, Early Writings, pp. 55-6, 237, 254). This is not to say that the message that Adventists are to take to the world has no connection to the message of the Reformers: their message is in fact built on that foundation, but it is a message that God intends will shine forth in its fullest glory, free from long standing erroneous beliefs. Kenneth H. Wood clearly stated this thought: "In our opinion the 1888 message was distinctive, and included far more than Luther's gospel of 'justification by faith.' It had a strong eschatological emphasis. It was designed to prepare a people for translation at the second coming of Christ. It called attention to the heavenly sanctuary. It emphasized the humanity of Christ, and declared Jesus to be not only our Saviour but our Example--One who lived the life of faith and showed us how to live that same kind of life" ("Editor's Viewpoint," Review and Herald, Nov. 18. 1976, p. 2). Herbert E. Douglass agrees: "[Ellen White's] messages clearly demonstrated that this 'most precious message' was not a mere recovery of a sixteenth-century emphasis, nor a borrowing of a nineteenth-century Methodist accent, such as represented by Hannah Whitall Smith's The Christian's Secret of a Happy Life" (Messenger of the Lord, p. 197). Clinton Wahlen supports this view: "While EJW accepted the fundamental principles of the Reformation, including justification by faith and the Bible as the final authority for Christians, he viewed 'the Third Angel's Message' (which of course, included his own teachings) as an advance beyond the days of the Reformation" ("What Did E. J. Waggoner Say at Minneapolis?" Adventist Heritage, Winter 1988, p. 36). Strangely enough, the same author who claims Jones' and Waggoner's message endorsed by Ellen White was only the combination of Adventist law keeping with the "doctrine of faith" of the holiness preachers, also claims that their 1888 message led people directly into the "holy flesh movement." It is claimed that many of the "holy flesh ideas were extensions of [Jones'] teaching on righteousness by faith ... he had preached at least as early as 1889" at the Kansas meetings (George R. Knight, From 1888 to Apostasy, p. 57). One might rightly ask why Ellen White spoke in favor of Jones' preaching at the Kansas meetings, and against those who were rejecting it, instead of warning the people that it would lead to the holy flesh movement. Not all Adventists authors, however, see the most precious message that way.


19. Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, 1888 ed., p. 253. Ellen White later described Luther as one of the Reformers whose work laid the foundation of God's temple. Yet, she never wrote that his work represented the entire building: "The enemy of righteousness left nothing undone in his effort to stop the work committed to the Lord's builders. ... Workers were raised up who ably defended the faith once delivered to the saints. ... Like the apostles, many of them fell at their post, but the building of the temple went steadily forward. ... The Waldenses, John Wycliffe, Huss and Jerome, Martin Luther and Zwingli, Cranmer, Latimer, and Knox, the Huguenots, John and Charles Wesley, and a host of others brought to the foundation material that will endure throughout eternity. And in later years those who have so nobly endeavored to promote the circulation of God's word, and those who by their service in heathen lands have prepared the way for the proclamation of the last great message--these also have helped to rear the structure. Through the ages that have passed since the days of the apostles, the building of God's temple has never ceased. We may look back through the centuries and see the living stones of which it is composed gleaming like jets of light through the darkness of error and superstition. Throughout eternity these precious jewels will shine with increasing luster, testifying to the power of the truth of God" (Acts of the Apostles, p. 598-599).


20. Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, 1888 ed., pp. 148-149. Ellen White also quoted the Puritan Pilgrim, John Robinson, in his assessment of the church of his day: "'I cannot sufficiently bewail the condition of the reformed churches, who are come to a period in religion, and will go no farther than the instruments of their reformation. The Lutherans cannot be drawn to go any farther than what Luther saw, and the Calvinists, you see, stick fast where they were left by that great man of God, who yet saw not all things. This is a misery much to be lamented; for though they were burning and shining lights in their time, yet they penetrated not into the whole counsel of God, but were they now living, would be as willing to embrace further light as that which they first received'" (Ibid., pp. 291-292). As wonderful as was the work done by Luther and Calvin, even their understanding of the foundational doctrine of justification by faith was affected by their misunderstanding of Original Sin and the will of man: "Unfortunately, Luther followed Augustine rather than Paul in his teaching of predestination, freedom of the will, and kindred doctrines. ... The middle of the sixteenth century found, therefore, two dominant Protestant schools of thought in Europe--Lutheranism and Calvinism. Both were serving to emancipate thousands from the bondage of mediaeval Catholicism, and both were defending valiantly certain scriptural doctrines. Both systems, however, possessed glaring weaknesses. ... Within Protestant ranks there arose those who were unwilling to go all the way with the two major reformers. Even Melanchthon, Luther's close friend and co-laborer, held to freedom of will, and avoided Luther's extremes regarding good works. ... In these principles can be seen, not only Wesley's insistence on justification by faith alone as taught by Luther, but another teaching with which neither Luther nor Calvin would have agreed; this is Wesley's cardinal doctrine of freedom of choice" (Norval F. Pease, "Justification and Righteousness by Faith in the Seventh-day Adventist Church Before 1900," pp. 17, 19, 22, 26). Thus, the most precious message that the Lord sent through Jones and Waggoner, although built on the foundation laid by the Reformers, was to rise above all the papal errors that had come into the church during the dark ages.


21. Ibid., p. 143. Over 50 times the word "present truth" is used in the 1888 Materials collection, many times in reference to the message God was sending through Jones and Waggoner: "That which God gives His servants to speak today would not perhaps have been present truth twenty years ago, but it is God's message for this time" (p. 133). "God will ever give them to know He has given these men [A. T. Jones and E. J. Waggoner] a work to do, and a message to bear which is present truth for this time. They knew that wherever this message comes its fruits are good" (p. 228). "I have felt pained at heart to read letters from you that evidences that you are filled with doubts and unbelief still in the very message that I know to be present truth for the people of God for this time" (p. 274). See also pp. 120, 174, 267, 286, 365, 387, 429, 436, 502, 518, 917, 1710, 1796.


22. Ellen G. White, "Camp-Meeting at Williamsport, PA.," Review and Herald, Aug. 13, 1889, pp. 513-514.


23. Ellen G. White to H. Miller, Letter 5, June 2, 1889; in 1888 Materials, p. 331. Years before, Ellen White wrote this about the shaking: "I asked the meaning of the shaking I had seen. I was shown that it would be caused by the straight testimony called forth by the counsel of the True Witness to the Laodiceans. It will have its effect upon the heart of the receiver of the testimony, and it will lead him to exalt the standard and pour forth the straight truth. This straight testimony, some will not bear. They will rise up against it, and this will cause a shaking among God's people. ... My attention was then turned to the company I had seen before mightily shaken. ... I heard those clothed with the armor speak forth the truth in great power. ... I asked what had made this great change. An angel answered, 'It is the latter rain. The refreshing from the presence of the Lord. The loud cry of the Third Angel'" (Review and Herald, Dec. 31, 1857; in Testimonies, vol. 1, pp. 182-183). In 1892, Ellen White told Uriah Smith plainly: "The message which the messengers have been proclaiming is the message to the Laodicean church. ... The message given us by A. T. Jones, and E. J. Waggoner is the message of God to the Laodicean church, and woe be unto anyone who professes to believe the truth and yet does not reflect to others the God-given rays" (1888 Materials, pp. 1051, 1052).


24. Ellen G. White, "Camp-Meeting at Rome, N. Y." Review and Herald, Sept. 3, 1889, pp. 545-546.


25. Ibid.


26. Ellen G. White to Uriah Smith, Letter 55, June 14, 1889; in 1888 Materials, p. 336. Unfortunately the rest of this letter is not extant. Ellen White wrote Smith a second letter in September, showing what power a man in leadership can have over the people: "Again the matter has been presented to me in the night season. I was shown that you have been setting yourself in opposition to the Spirit and work of God. ... Light and truth which I know to be thus, you declare to be darkness and error. ... You have had the privilege of accepting the light, which has been light and precious truth and meat in due season to the hungry, starving flock of God; but you would not acknowledge it as light, as truth, as food. If you could prevent it from coming to the people of God you would do so. ... You are passing over the very same ground as the rejectors of Jesus Christ passed over. ... Poor deluded souls will be led to think that because Elder Smith does not accept the light and the message which has come to his people, light which is the very message for this time, that it must be error and delusion" (Ellen G. White to Uriah Smith, Letter 87, Sept. 1889; in 1888 Materials, pp. 437-438). Ellen White wrote to Smith again in early 1890, but that letter is not extant. Smith responded on Feb. 17, 1890. Going all the way back to the Minneapolis Conference, he explained his view of the whole situation. He felt that Jones' and Waggoner's views were "contrary to the Scriptures" and "contrary to what [Ellen White] had previously seen." Smith claimed that the views they brought to the conference "nearly ruined" it. He claimed that "we could all agree to" Waggoner's discourses on righteousness by faith, but they paved the way for his erroneous view on the law in Galatians. Smith claimed that Jones was making rash statements; such as, "'I have got the truth and you will have to come to the same position in the end.'" Smith had also been told that Jones and Waggoner were supporting strange new interpretations on Revelation contrary to what Adventists had "long taught," which did away with the 1260 year prophecy. He was also upset that "because I ventured a word of caution on some of these points [in the Review], I am held up in public as one who is shooting in the dark, and does not know what he is opposing" (Uriah Smith to Ellen G. White, Feb. 17, 1890; in Manuscripts and Memories, p. 152-157). After receiving Smith's letter, Ellen White wrote to Jones the same day. She told him she had started a letter to him before in regard to his making statements that might "confuse minds," and then "a capital is made out of it." She told him of the letter she had just received from Smith with the statements he claimed Jones had made (Ellen G. White to A. T. Jones, Letter 55, Feb. 17, 1890; unpublished, remainder of letter is not extant). On March 7, Jones responded to Ellen White in a letter (see 1888 Materials, p. 592), and the next morning, March 8, Ellen White wrote back to Smith. Why? Because that very morning the Lord had revealed to her the influence that he was having on other people: "You have refused my testimonies ... you labored to make them of none effect as did Korah, Dathan and Abiram. ... 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 G. White to Uriah Smith, Letter 59, in 1888 Materials, p. 599). A few days later, in a meeting with many of the brethren, Jones and Waggoner were able to share their side of the story (Ellen G. White to W. C. White, Letter 83, March 13, 1890; in 1888 Materials, p. 627). Here it was shown that Smith had falsely accused Jones of making rash statements. Ellen White confronted Smith on this a short time later: "You responded to my letter of appeal by writing me a letter accusing Elder Jones of tearing up the pillars of our faith. Was this truth? The meetings of the ministers held in the office when these matters were investigated revealed that you accused him wrongfully" (Ellen G. White to Uriah Smith, Letter 73, Nov. 25, 1890; in 1888 Materials, p. 734, emphasis supplied).


27. Some have suggested, based on a few Ellen White statements, that what Jones and Waggoner were presenting was not new light; that we really have nothing to gain from looking into the message they brought to the church long ago. Ellen White did say, "I call it not new light" (1888 Materials, p. 140); "This was no new light" (p. 211); "The Lord has shown me the light which shines upon our people is no new light" (p. 463); and "a message which is not a new truth, but the very same that Paul taught, that Christ himself taught" (p. 432). George Knight quotes these statements and suggests that "the only way one can claim that the 1888 perspective on righteousness by faith is somehow unique to Adventism is to deny totally the plain words of ... Ellen White" (A User-Friendly Guide to the 1888 Message, pp. 85-86). But is this what Ellen White meant when she made her statements? Did she make other clarifying statements? A summary look through the Ellen G. White 1888 Materials will give us an idea. First, we need to understand that Ellen White made these above mentioned statements in the context of answering those whom, like in the days of Christ's first advent, opposed the message as something strange and new. She was trying to impress the brethren's minds that this was not some new truth absent from the Word of God, nor that which was replacing the foundational doctrines of the church. But she did see something very special about Jones' and Waggoner's message, if we will only let her speak. She clarifies her statement--"a message which is not new truth, but the very same message that Paul taught, that Christ Himself taught"--a few paragraphs later by stating: "but the truth will be continually unfolding, expanding, and developing, for it is Divine, like its Author" (1888 Materials, pp. 432, 434, emphasis supplied). At Minneapolis she answered the question, "'Do you think that the Lord has any new and increased light for us as a people?' I answered, 'Most assuredly. I do not only think so, I but can speak understandingly'"(p. 219). She felt it was "only reasonable that we should expect something of the revealings of greater light to the people" (p. 279). Jones and Waggoner "presented precious light" (p. 309), things "new and old ... from ... God's word" (p. 386), "precious gems of truth in new settings" (p. 518). She asked; has God "not additional truth to reveal to His people?" Her answer was yes, "the ministers of God should be able to bring forth from the treasure house of His Word things new and old" (p. 510). Would God leave His people "with no new light?" Her answer was no, "we are to get more light from the throne of God, and have an increase of light" (p. 341). She stated resolutely: "Do not think that you have caught all the rays of light, and that there is no increased illumination to come to our world" (p. 674). But, she would add, "light must come through the agents whom God shall choose" (p. 507). "Increased light will shine upon all the grand truths of prophecy, and they will be seen in freshness and brilliancy because the bright beams of the Sun of Righteousness will illuminate the whole" (p. 514). She reminded her listeners that they had a part to play: "The truth is advancing truth and we must walk in increasing light" (p. 547). Those who "maintain their consecration, they will see increased light, and the light will continue to grow brighter and brighter unto the perfect day" (p. 671). "God will give additional light, and old truths will be recovered, and replaced in the frame-work of truth" (p. 765). It was "Jesus Christ who had the power of rescuing the truths from the rubbish, and again giving them to the world with more than their original freshness and power" (p. 525). And "when Christ in His work of redemption is seen to be the great central truth of the system of truth, a new light is shed upon all the events of the past and the future. They are seen in a new relation, and possess a new and deeper significance" (p. 807). Ellen White also had a warning to give: "The great error with churches in all ages has been to reach a certain point in their understanding of bible truth and there stop. ... [They] say, 'We have all-sufficient light. We need not more.' ... God's people in these last days are not to choose darkness rather than light. They are to look for light, to expect light. The light will continue to shine from the Word of God. ... in brighter and still brighter rays, and reveal more and more distinctly the truth as it is in Jesus" (pp. 826-827). "[T]hose who are half-hearted ... pride themselves on their great caution in receiving 'new light,' as they term it. But their failure to receive the light is caused by their spiritual blindness" (p. 1077). Well might Ellen White ask: "What plans have you that new light may be infused through the ranks of God's people?" (p. 534). So today we are to believe the promise: "Great truths that have lain unheeded and unseen since the day of Pentecost, are to shine from God's word in their native purity" (FE 473). In William Miller's dream, described in Early Writings, pp. 81-83, we find much of the imagery that Ellen White was using throughout this time period to describe the treasures that God was revealing, the new framework in which they were being presented, and the rubbish of selfish resistance that needed to be swept aside.


28. Satan seeks to cast his shadow over two central truths of Jesus' sacrifice for the salvation of all men: First, that Christ was a whole Saviour, made like unto His brethren. Second, that His sacrifice was complete; thus He is able to keep you from falling. These truths refute the two great errors that take in almost the whole world-- those who would be saved by their merits, and those who would be saved in their sins. See endnote 34.


29. Ellen G. White Manuscript 5, "Christ and the Law," Sermon, June 19, 1889; in 1888 Materials, pp. 341-345.


30. Ibid., pp. 346-347.


31. Some have used this Ellen White statement to try to prove that everything the Lord sent through Jones and Waggoner was already found in the writings of Ellen White--even before 1888--and therefore, all we really need is Ellen White's books (George R. Knight, A User-Friendly Guide to the 1888 Message, pp. 68-9, 108). Norval Pease, responding to the query as to why the writings of Waggoner and Jones themselves should not be republished, stated: "It is not an overstatement to say that there is nothing said by Waggoner and Jones but that [Ellen White] said better" (The Faith That Saves [1969], p. 53). But, as Clinton Wahlen points out: "Pease seemed to hint at another reason" Jones' and Waggoner's writings haven't been republished, "namely, that it might tarnish the evangelical image church leaders had sought so diligently to cultivate during the past two decades [1950s and 1960s]. 'Adventism, rightly understood,' he said, 'is evangelical to the core'" ("Selected Aspects of Ellet J. Waggoner's Eschatology," p. xxiii). Of course another point of the argument by Knight, Pease, and many others, is to marginalize the significance of the message sent through Jones and Waggoner. Yes, it is true that Ellen White wrote during the Minneapolis Conference: "This was not new light to me for it had come to me from higher authority for the last forty-four years, and I have presented it to our people by pen and voice in the testimonies of His Spirit. ... Has not this subject been presented in the testimonies again and again?" (1888 Materials, pp. 212, 217). But these statements were made to defend against the accusation that she had changed or that she had been influenced by Jones and Waggoner and was supporting new heresy. Somehow, the brethren saw a difference in the message of Jones and Waggoner and the one she had been giving for 45 years. Only a few days prior, she stated distinctly: "I would have humility of mind, and be willing to be instructed as a child. The Lord has been pleased to give me great light, yet I know that He leads other minds, and opens to them the mysteries of His Word, and I want to receive every ray of light that God shall send me, though it should come through the humblest of His servants" (Ibid., p. 163). It was the message she "had been trying to present" for 45 years, and Waggoner was the first to clearly present it publicly--to which "every fiber of [her] heart said Amen" (Ibid., pp. 348, 349). It is interesting to note that many who see little importance in Jones' and Waggoner's message inexplicably refer to all of the books Ellen White wrote after Minneapolis as proof the message was accepted (Norval Pease, op. cit., p. 46; George Knight, A User-Friendly Guide to the 1888 Message, pp. 68-9; L. E. Froom, Movement of Destiny, p. 444). We would not question Ellen White's prophetic calling or the authority given her by God in doctrinal matters. Nor would we deny the fact that those who read Ellen White's inspired books will be greatly blessed. If the truths and counsel there presented are accepted by faith and acted upon, they will lead the reader into a saving relationship with Christ and into the kingdom. But we also would not deny what Ellen White herself said: "The Lord has raised up Brother Jones and Brother Waggoner to proclaim a message to the world to prepare a people to stand in the day of God." And of that message she said: "God has sent men to bring us the truth that we should not have had unless God had sent somebody to bring it to us. God has let me have a light of what His Spirit is, and therefore I accept it, and I no more dare to lift my hand against these persons, because it would be against Jesus Christ, who is to be recognized in His messengers" (1888 Materials, pp. 1814, 608, emphasis supplied). Whatever truth the Lord sent through Jones and Waggoner was only building on the foundation already laid, but heaven still identified their message with the beginning of the loud cry and latter rain.


32. Ellen G. White Manuscript 5, "Christ and the Law," Sermon, June 19, 1889; in 1888 Materials, pp. 348-349.


33. Uriah Smith, "Our Righteousness Again," Review and Herald, July 2, 1889.


34. Ellen G. White, "Camp-Meeting at Rome, N. Y." Review and Herald, Sept. 3, 1889, pp. 545-546. Ellen White emphasized the fact that when Satan can lead man to look to his own merits he has no power over temptation: "Nearly every false religion has been based on the same principle--that man can depend upon his own efforts for salvation" (PP 73). "The principle that man can save himself by his own works, lay at the foundation of every heathen religion; it had now become the principle of the Jewish religion. Satan had implanted this principle. Wherever it is held, men have no barrier against sin" (The Desire of Ages, p. 35). "The papacy is well adapted to meet the wants of ... two classes of mankind, embracing nearly the whole world-- those who would be saved by their merits, and those who would be saved in their sins. Here is the secret of its power" (The Great Controversy, p. 572).


35. Ellen G. White Manuscript 25, "Resume of Travels and Labors," n.d. 1889; in A. L. White, The Lonely Years, p. 418.


36. Ellen G. White Manuscript 30, June 1889; in 1888 Materials, p. 363.


37. Ellen G. White to Madison and Miller, Letter 4, July 23, 1889; in 1888 Materials, pp. 388, 391, 392, 406-407. If it is true that "the prospects of the people of God are similar to those of the Jews, who could not enter in because of unbelief," then is it possible that we are wandering in the wilderness of this world of sin because we have rebelled against God and followed in the footsteps of "unfaithful spies"?


38. Ibid., pp. 417-419, 421-423.


39. A. T. Jones to C. E. Holmes, May 12, 1921; in Manuscripts and Memories, p. 329. In response to this statement by A. T. Jones, George Knight suggests: "Of course, how much of that antagonism concerned righteousness by faith and how much involved other issues, such as the law in Galatians and Jones's personality, is impossible to determine. ... [Jones] lacked an experiential application of his own teachings" (A User-Friendly Guide to the 1888 Message, pp. 149, 150).