Enthusiastic preacher, editor of several journals,[2] and author of various works,[3] Alonzo T. Jones was one of the foremost spiritual leaders of the Adventist Church in the 1890s.
He was born on April 21, 1850, at Rockhill, Ohio. At the age of 20 he enlisted in the army for three years. From that experience he retained a spirit of discipline and a certain brusqueness in his relationships. While the majority of his comrades would seek amusement during their free time, Jones preferred reading works of history or Adventist publications, along with the Bible. He thus acquired much of the basic knowledge needed for his future work as a preacher and writer.
Freed from his military obligations, he requested baptism into the Adventist Church. He was then appointed to the West Coast as a preacher. In May 1885 he was employed as assistant editor for the journal Signs of the Times, a position which he held at the side of Ellet J. Waggoner until 1889.
Although quite different one from the other, these two men collaborated very closely in preaching the message of justification by faith. With Ellen White's support, they revolutionized the General Conference session of 1888 at Minneapolis. As result, for two years the General Conference Committee assigned Waggoner and Jones to teach this message in camp meetings, pastoral conventions, institutions, and churches throughout the country. Until she sailed for, Australia in December 1891, Ellen White often accompanied them in these campaigns. She considered their message as coming from God.
After Waggoner's departure for England in 1892, Jones was left to sustain the interest in the 1888 message. He accomplished this in masterly fashion, and with the full approval of the church leaders.
During the 1890s at each session of the General Conference a preferential position was reserved for him to present the various aspects of the "third angel's message," as the collection of his Bible popularly known.
Because of his interest in religious liberty, Jones had been chosen in 1889 to take charge over the journal American Sentinel. In 1897 he was asked to serve as a member of the General Conference Committee, and at the same time as editor in chief of the Review and Herald. Then, at the 1901 session of the General Conference he was appointed president of the California Conference, a position he held until 1903.
Jones was then invited to take charge of the Department of Religious Liberty at the General Conference level in Washington. He at first accepted the invitation, then declined, and went to Battle Creek to work in association with Dr. J. H. Kellogg, under whose influence he came into conflict with the General Conference. As a result he ceased denominational employment. Eventually, in light of a growing hostility to church leadership, he was disfellowshipped in 1909.
Before this separation, however, A. G. Daniells, president of the General Conference, attempted a reconciliation at the 1909 session. For some reason Jones rejected this overture. From then on, though a Sabbath-keeper who continued to adhere to most fundamental Adventist doctrines, he remained on the fringes of the church. Moreover, as his biographer George R. Knight remarks: "Despite his animosity toward the organized church, Jones seemed to long for Adventist companionship."[4] He died on May 12, 1923, at Battle Creek following a cerebral hemorrhage.
Is the Message of Jones Still Credible?
Because of his later separation from the church, some Adventists today seriously question the value or validity of Jones's message. Indeed, as a general rule, the message of one who does not remain steadfast in the faith to the end tends to lose all credibility.[5]
In Jones's case, however, his separation occurred primarily because of his conflict with the organization, not with the faith. George R. Knight writes: "Having studied his life for several years, I find it almost impossible to believe that the mighty Jones of the early 1890s could have shipwrecked his faith. On the other band, it seems almost impossible--given his pride, headstrong opinions, and extremism--for him to have done anything else. The key to his future lay in the message that was so close to his heart--to let the power of the Holy Spirit transform his life through faith. It was on that point that he failed. He had a correct theory of the truth, but he failed in its practice."[6]
Likewise, Ellen White stressed the difference between the message and the messenger. She had a good understanding of both. She had accepted the message as inspired from heaven. She did not hesitate to preach it herself. But because of the opposition which Jones and Waggoner had to face, she feared that they would be discouraged and eventually "overthrown by the temptations of the enemy." However, she cautions: "If they should be, this would not prove that they had had no message from God, or that the work that they had done was all a mistake."[7]
This testimony is all the more noteworthy, considering the circumstances which unfortunately later justified Ellen White's fears concerning the messengers. Indeed, she never doubted the origin of the basic message preached by Jones and Waggoner, though at times she corrected them on particular points.[8] Having read in Australia the 24 Bible studies presented by Jones at the 1893 session of the General Conference, Ellen White wrote: "We know that Brother Jones has given the message for this time--meat in due season for the starving flock of God. Those who do not allow prejudice to bar the heart against the heaven-sent message, cannot but feel the spirit and force of the truth."[9]
Jones also enjoyed the confidence of the leaders of the church, according to Arthur L. White: "Perhaps the true attitude of the church and its leaders towards Jones and Waggoner after the 1888 conference session is best reflected by the invitations extended to these two men to conduct Bible studies at the General Conference sessions held during the next ten years. It must be remembered that the General Conference Committee was responsible for planning General Conference sessions and choosing the speakers. The church organization had many able preachers. The choices made reveal the sentiments of church leaders." [10]
Just a glance at the impressive count of Bible studies presented by Waggoner and Jones at the various sessions of the General Conference from 1891 to 1899 will suffice to establish the level of trust they enjoyed: 17 by Waggoner in 1991; 24 by Jones in 1893; 26 by Jones in 1895; 19 by Waggoner and 11 by Jones in 1897; 3 by Waggoner and 7 by Jones in 1899. These men would never have been asked to present as they did, the various aspects of the third angel's message, if their discourse had not been in harmony with the beliefs of the church.
The Christology of Jones
Jones spoke profusely about Christ's human nature; first in numerous articles in the Review and Herald, of which he was chief editor;[11] later in the Bible studies presented at the General Conference sessions of 1893 and 1895, under the title "The third angel's message"; [12] and finally in a small book, The Consecrated Way to Christian Perfection,[13] published at the end of his ministry in 1905.
Within the scope of this study it is impossible to enter into all the details of the message expounded by Jones. It will suffice here to define the main points of his Christology. First, let us establish clearly that Jones always presented Christ as God. For him, "so entirely is His nature of the nature of God, that it is the very impress of the substance of God." "He is God." [14] Jones declared: "It is essential to know the first chapter of Hebrews, in order to know what is His nature revealed in the second chapter of Hebrews as man." [5]
In his 1893 presentations Jones confirmed Waggoner's teaching on justification by faith. He affirmed that "Jesus took part of the same flesh and blood that we."[16] And, in his tenth study he explained how God had woven in Christ "the robe of righteousness," available to clothe those who accept Him.
Jones declared: "That garment was woven in a human body--The human body The flesh of Christ-was the loom, was it not? That garment was woven in Jesus; in the same flesh that you and I have, for He took part of the same flesh and blood that we have. That flesh that is yours and mine, that Christ bore in this world--that was the loom in which God wove that garment for you and me to wear in the flesh, and He wants us to wear it now."[17]
The most complete and detailed presentations are those given by Jones at the 1895 General Conference session. Of the 26 studies, six are devoted to the doctrine of the Incarnation.[18] In the course of these presentations Jones remarked that the nature of Christ had been the object of profound study for "three or four years," but that God was leading them "further along" in the subject.[19] Jones believed he had new arguments capable of consolidating the teaching about the human nature of Christ.
The evidence suggests that after his arrival in England in 1892 Waggoner sent Jones the writings of Anglican bishop Edward Irving, well known for his Christology. It is quite clear that Jones had read Irving's works, and they had an influence on the arguments and expressions found in the 1895 presentations.[20]
Jones's understanding of the human nature of Jesus and its practical applications for Christian life can be summarized in four main concepts:
1. The Fallen Human Nature of Christ
Jones had not the least doubt that Christ took upon Himself humanity's fallen, or sinful, nature--"the likeness of sinful flesh." This type of expression occurs no fewer than 90 times in his 1895 presentations.[21]
Not content with affirming the truth of this message, Jones wanted to explain its logic. To this end he began to emphasize the common origin of Christ's human nature and that of all humans. To demonstrate his point, he cited Hebrews 2:11: "Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family." On the basis of this verse, Jones concluded that "in His human nature Christ came from the man from whom we all have come. ... One man is the source and head of all human nature. And the genealogy of Christ, as one of us, runs to Adam. ... All coming from one man according to the flesh, are all of one. This on the human side, Christ's nature is precisely our nature."[22]
"What flesh is it really?" Jones probed. "What kind of flesh alone is it that this world knows? Just such flesh as you and I have. This world does not know any other flesh of man, and has not known any other since the necessity of Christ's coming was created. Wherefore, as this world knows only such flesh as we have, as it is now, it is certainly true that when 'the Word was made flesh,' He was made just such flesh as ours is. It cannot be otherwise."[23]
Relying on the verses of Hebrews 2:14-18, Jones underlined the fact that Christ participated in the flesh and blood in the same manner that we participate in flesh and blood. "He took not on Him the nature of angels, but He took on Him the nature of Abraham. But the nature of Abraham and of the seed of Abraham is only human nature. ... 'Therefore in all things it behooved Him to be made like unto his brethren.' In how many things? All things. Then in His human nature there is not a particle of difference between Him and you."[24]
Jones inquires: "Don't you see that our salvation lies just there? Do you not see that it is right there where Christ comes to us? He came to us just where we are tempted, and was made like us just where we are tempted; and there is the point where we meet Him--the living Saviour against the power of temptation." [25]
2. Sin Condemned in the Flesh
When Jones came to consider the temptations to which Christ had been subjected, he referred to Hebrews 4:15: "One who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin."
Obviously, declared Jones, "He could not have been tempted in all points like as I am, if He were not in all points like as I am to start with. ... Christ was in the place, and He had the nature, of the whole human race. And in Him meet all the weaknesses of mankind, so that every man on the earth who can be tempted at all, finds in Jesus Christ power against all temptation. For every soul there is in Jesus Christ victory against all temptations, and relief from the power of it. That is the truth."[26]
In his fourteenth study, Jones returned to that which every man has inherited from Adam. "So all the tendencies to sin that are in the human race came from Adam. But Jesus Christ felt all these temptations; He was tempted upon all these points in the flesh which He derived from David, from Abraham, and from Adam. ... Thus in the flesh of Jesus Christ--not in Himself, but in His flesh--our flesh which He took in the human nature--there were just the Same tendencies to sin that are in you and me. ... And thus being in the likeness of sinful flesh, He condemned sin in the flesh."[27]
Therefore, says Jones, "all the tendencies to sin that are in human flesh were in His human flesh, and not one of them was ever allowed to appear; He conquered them all. And in Him we all have victory over them all."[28]
To clarify his explanation, Jones allows "a difference between a tendency to sin, and the open appearing of that sin in the actions."[29]
In submitting to the great law of heredity, Christ accepted to be tempted in all points like we are, but without yielding to the power of temptation that He carried in His flesh. Therefore, Jones declares, "He is a complete Saviour. He is a Saviour from sins committed, and the Conqueror of the tendencies to commit sins. In Him we have the victory."[30]
Jones stated that there would be no mystery if God were manifest in a flesh that was not subject to the power of sin. "But the wonder is that God can do that through and in sinful flesh. That is the mystery of God--God manifesting sinful flesh. In Jesus Christ as He was in sinful flesh, God has demonstrated before the universe that He can so take possession of sinful flesh as to manifest His own presence, His power, and His glory, instead of sin manifesting itself." [31]
3. The Nature of Adam: Before or After the Fall?
For Jones, this question should have never been raised. "A second Adam came, not as the first Adam was but as the first Adam had caused his descendants to be at the time in which He came. The second Adam came at the point in the degeneracy of the race to which the race had come from the first Adam."[32] "Jesus came here into Satan's territory, and took human nature at the point to which Satan himself had brought it." [33]
It is quite apparent that some of the delegates did not understand how it was possible for Jesus to have "sinful flesh" without having been a sinner. Hence, questions arose which Jones was compelled to answer. Immediately he was forced to address the doctrine of the immaculate conception. "The false idea that He is so holy that it would be entirely unbecoming in Him to come near to us, and be possessed of such a nature as we have--sinful, depraved, fallen human nature--has its source in the incarnation of that enmity that is against God, and that separates between man and God--the papacy."[34]
According to this doctrine, "therefore Mary must be born immaculate, perfect, sinless, and higher than the cherubim and seraphim; and then Christ must be so born of her as to take His human nature in absolute sinlessness from her. But that puts Him farther away from us than the cherubim and the seraphim are, and in a sinless nature. ... I need someone to help me who knows something about sinful nature; for that is the nature that I have; and such the Lord did take. He became one of us."[35]
Some delegates felt that Jones was going too far in saying that "Christ had the same passions as we have." They confronted him with a statement from Ellen White that "Christ is a brother in our infirmities, but not in the possession of the same passions." Jones answered by emphasizing the difference between the flesh of Jesus and His mind: "He was made in the likeness of sinful flesh; not in the likeness of sinful mind. Do not drag His mind into it. His flesh was our flesh; but the mind was 'the mind of Christ Jesus.' Therefore it is written: 'Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus.'[36]
At the beginning, in the Garden of Eden, Jones explained, Adam and Eve had the mind of Jesus Christ. By allowing themselves to be seduced, they became "slaves" of Satan's spirit, and we after them. Jesus came therefore to fight the battle on Adam's own ground, where he lost it. And by His victory "in Jesus Christ the mind of God is brought back once more to the sons of men; and Satan is conquered."[37] "Jesus Christ came in just such flesh as ours, but with a mind that held its integrity against every temptation, against every inducement to sin--a mind that never consented to sin--no, never in the least conceivable shadow of a thought."[38]
To support his argument, Jones cited a statement from an article in which Ellen White emphasizes the two natures of Jesus, human and divine, on the basis of Philippians 2:6, 7 and Hebrews 1:3.[39] Then Jones quoted from the manuscript for The Desire of Ages, then not yet in print and tentatively titled "Life of Christ": "In order to carry out the great work of redemption, the Redeemer must take the place of fallen man. ... In order to elevate fallen man, Christ must reach him where he stood. He assumed human nature, bearing the infirmities and degeneracy of the race. He humiliated Himself to the lowest depths of human woe, that He might sympathize with man and rescue him from the degradation into which sin had plunged him. ... Christ took humanity with all its liabilities. He took the nature of man with the possibility of yielding to temptation, and He relied upon divine power to keep Him."[40]
Jones concluded: "You see, we are on firm ground all the way, so that when it is said that He [Christ] took our flesh, but still was not a partaker of our passions, it is all straight, it is all correct; because His divine mind never consented to sin. And this mind is brought to us, by the Holy Spirit that is freely given unto us."41]
Some have felt that Jones had in effect admitted that Christ did not have passions like US."[42] Not at all. Jones did his very best to clarify the difference between hereditary tendencies to sin that are common to all of us, and guilty habits that we cultivate by yielding to temptation. Moreover, "The flesh of Jesus Christ was our flesh, and in it was all that is in our flesh--all the tendencies to sin that are in our flesh were in His flesh, drawing upon Him to get Him to consent to sin."[43] Likewise, Jesus carried in His flesh our passions by heredity, in power, but never in deed. This is why Jones was able to say without contradicting himself: "That does not mean that Christ had participated in our passions." He possessed our passions, but He had never participated in them. The whole problem of Christ's human nature lies in the understanding of this difference.[44]
4. Victory Possible Through Jesus Christ
Indeed, the victory of Jesus over sin in the flesh provides for Jones the demonstration that each of Christ's disciples can also conquer sin in the flesh. Ultimately, it was for this very purpose that God sent Jesus Christ: to condemn sin in the flesh "that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature, but according to the Spirit" (Rom. 8:2-4).
"In Jesus Christ as He was in sinful flesh, God has demonstrated before the universe that He can so take possession of sinful flesh as to manifest His own presence, His power, and His glory, instead of sin manifesting itself And all that the Son asks of any man, in order to accomplish this in him, is that the man will let the Lord have him as the Lord Jesus."[45]
As early as 1893 Jones had drawn this practical lesson from Christ's victory over sin: Just as God had woven the robe of righteousness in Christ's flesh, so "He [God] wants us to wear it now, as well as when the flesh is made immortal in the end. ... Christ is to be in us, just as God was in Him, and His character is to be in us, just as God was in Him, and His character is to be woven and transformed into us through these sufferings and temptations and trials which we meet. And God is the weaver, but not without us. It is the cooperation of the divine and the human--the mystery of God in you and me--the same mystery that was in the gospel, and that is the third angel's message."[46]
The same practical conclusion is drawn at the close of the seventeenth study in 1895. "According to His promise we are partakers of the divine nature."[47] And to the extent that we are dependent upon God, at any time, "the divine Spirit which was in Him [Jesus], and which is given to us, will restrain our natural self, our sinful self. ... That is our victory," and the manner in which God destroys enemy for us. "[48]
The writing and preaching of A. T. Jones clarified one of the greatest truths of the 1888 message: that Christians can live victorious lives "through Christ Jesus the law of the Spirit of life" (Rom. 8:2). It is true, according to Jones, that some are mistaken about the meaning of this freedom, and have strayed sometimes into a regrettable perfectionism, as if victory over sin could be absolutely obtained, and the power of sin eradicated from the flesh.
Jones alluded to this in an 1899 article regarding the "holy flesh" movement condemned at the 1901 General Conference session (more on this later). His article, entitled "Sinful Flesh," puts in perspective some of his statements on Christian perfection.
"There is a serious and very bothersome mistake, which is made by many persons. That mistake is made in thinking that when they are converted, their old sinful flesh is blotted out. In other words, they make the mistake of thinking that they are to be delivered from the flesh by having it taken away from them altogether. Then, when they find that this is not so, when they find that the same old flesh, with its inclinations, its besetments, and its enticements, is still there, they are not prepared for it, and so become discouraged, and are ready to think they never were converted at all."[49]
Jones goes on to explain that "conversion ... does not put new flesh upon the old spirit; but a new spirit within the old flesh. It does not propose to bring new flesh to the old mind; but a new mind to the old flesh. Deliverance and victory are not gained by having the human nature taken away; but by receiving the divine nature to subdue and have dominion over the human. ... The Scripture does not say, Be ye transformed by the renewing of your flesh; but it does say, Be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind (Rom. 12:2, KJV). We shall be translated by the renewing of our flesh; but we must be transformed by the renewing of our minds. "[50]
Finally in 1905 Pacific Press published The Consecrated Way to Christian Perfection. Based on the Epistle to the Hebrews, the book recalls the essentials of Jones's teaching on Christ's human nature and the character perfection that each Christian may attain "thanks to the ministry of Christ, our great high priest in the heavenly sanctuary. For "we have one who has been tempted in every way, just as we are--yet was without sin." "He is able to help those who are being tempted" (Heb. 4:15; 2:18).
Conclusion
As George R. Knight has written, "A. T. Jones was one of the most influential voices in Adventism."[51] Whatever his end might have been, his message has lost nothing of its value. His Christology in particular harmonizes perfectly with that of Ellen White and Waggoner.
Even if some of his expressions appear in terms rather to absolute, ultimately, when considered in the totality of his teaching, Jones said little that Ellen White had not previously taught on the subject.
At the close of his presentations in 1895, Ellen White wrote to the church at Battle Creek, in a letter dated May 1, 1895: "The Lord in His great mercy sent a most precious message to His people through Elders Waggoner and Jones. ... Therefore God gave to His servants a testimony that presented the truth as it is in Jesus, which is the third angel's message, in clear, distinct lines."[52]
Jones's message, considered as a whole, was at the time the best explanation of what came to be known as "the third angel's message"[53] which earned him a privileged status among the leaders of the church throughout the 1890s. If such had not been the case, they would never have invited Jones to speak so often as they did. This message was none other than that of justification by faith, whereby the divine-human nature of Jesus Christ provides the means of reconciliation with God."[54]
It is not without reason that Ellen White has so strongly called attention to the messages of Jones and Waggoner. It is important to bear in mind her warning: 'It is quite possible that Elders Jones or Waggoner may be overthrown by the temptation of the enemy; but if they should be, this would not prove that they had had no message from God, or that the work that they had done was all a mistake. But should this happen, how many would take this position, and enter into a fatal delusion because they are not under the control of the Spirit of God."[55]
Ellen White's fears, alas, were realized. Because the messengers failed, many today consider that their message was not of God, and seek to substitute for it a new message, which Ellen White described as a fatal delusion, because it was not based on the revelations of the Spirit of God. To emphasize further the certainty of this prediction, Ellen White repeats it: "I know that this is the very position many would take if either of these men were to fall." [56] Strangely enough, as we shall see, that is exactly what happened.
Notes: