The two authors of 1888 Re-examined and the author of Movement of Destiny agree that “decisive Spirit of Prophecy testimony . . . constitutes the determining factor” in arriving at the truth of this matter as stated on page 358. Therefore what must be settled is the inclusion or exclusion of “decisive Spirit of Prophecy testimony” that is vital and relevant. By leaving out certain key testimony it becomes impossible to understand correctly the meaning of post- 1888 Seventh-day Adventist history. By so doing, we are unprepared to face the critical and perilous future.
The Church will insist on seeing and must see that “decisive Spirit of Prophecy testimony.” The call to denominational repentance stands or falls on whether or not “the leadership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church . . . following the crisis of 1888” in heart truly accepted what Ellen G. White described as “the beginning of the Loud Cry.” See Movement of Destiny, page 444. If they did truly accept it, then it becomes obvious that the Lord is responsible for the delay in finishing His work, and the present authors owe the Church an apology and retraction. If they did not truly accept it, then the Church is responsible for the delay in finishing the gospel commission, and we in this generation have something very definite to do to make matters right before we can seriously expect Heaven to pour out the Holy Spirit again.