What Does Adventism REALLY Teach About How You Are Saved? w/ iThinkBiblically

And we are live. Caleb, thank you for reaching out and thank you for being here. For those in the audience, yeah, for those in the audience that do not know who you are, who are you and what prompted you to start making videos warning Christians about Adventism? Yes. So, I’m just a standard evangelical Christian. Um, I would say I’m probably a reformed Armenian and uh just have a YouTube channel. Enjoy making videos. A lot of my stuff was on exposing cults and things like that and sorry, exposing false teachers in the kind of Pentecostal, charismatic church world.

And um then basically um I started doing videos on Catholics and uh different things like that and started looking into 7th day Adventism and I I wanted to actually genuinely um work out whether or not the 7th Day Adventist Church was a cult. Um many of us know uh you know Dr. Walton Martin in his book Kingdom of the Cults said, you know, that he didn’t think that they were a cult. Um I think he changed his mind closer towards his his death or something like that. Um but so so I want to work out, you know, are they really a cult? What do they believe? Do they believe a works gospel?

Um what exactly do they um teach? And so I started looking into them and making videos along the way. Um, and I had organized to do a video with um, an SDA uh, Fitz um, from Midnight Crime Media. Uh, and I organized that before I actually reached my conclusions. Um, but then in the process leading up to it, I reached the conclusion that I do think that they are a cult and started getting a bit more serious about the videos I put out on them. So, yeah, I think they’re a dangerous cult. I think that they are leading people to hell, a lot of people to hell. Um, I think some

People in there may be saved, but it’s just because they don’t fully understand or hold to um the specifics of what the SDA church teaches, but I I do think that they’re leading people to hell for sure with a workspace gospel and other things. Yeah, that’s a a good accurate assessment. I always tell people that as well. I never uh assume just because of somebody’s affiliation that therefore means they’re not a Christian. And you obviously have to ask people important questions and you’re going to find a lot of Seventh Day Adventists like you mentioned do not hold to the problematic

Aspects but those individuals still need warned about the organization that they are affiliated with and that this is what that organization teaches. Now you reached out to me before your recent discussion that you mentioned with uh the gentleman from Midnight Cry. You guys primarily focused on justification and sanctification, the relationship between those two categories. Yeah. Um, and you wanted to do a stream together to piece all this together in a more systematic way to help Christians see what’s practically being said by the system and if it is indeed what

Protestant and evangelical Christians are saying, which is what the SDA church wants people to think. So that is the thesis tonight. What does the Adventist system the system what does it really teach about how a person is made right with God? Is it the same as evangelicals/protestants? Because at the end of the day, that’s what we’re talking about when we’re talking about salvation, at least in this context. But before diving in, I want to remind you all that if you like what we’re doing here, you can become a channel member by clicking that little

Join button down below this video or by visiting our channel homepage where you’re going to find the same one in multiple places. You’ll gain access to a growing library of membersonly content, including membersonly live streams. It really is through the uh viewer support that we’re able to fulfill our mission to better equip the body of Christ to reach as many Seventh Day Adventists with the true Christ and his gospel. Big thank you to all of our members, which is exactly what tonight is about. Caleb, I’m going to be speaking as if I am talking to Christians and I’m going to

Assume that my audience tonight has a general understanding of basic evangelical and Protestant belief on how a person is made right with God. My focus will be on explaining for Christians where Adventism departs from that to hopefully help you all understand what the real differences are. There’s a lot of talking past one another, which I think you experienced just a little bit in your discussion. So, I’m going to systematically lay all this out with the source documentation. Caleb, along the way, I will stop, let you chime in, ask questions, etc. Sound

Good? Yeah. Do you want to just let everyone know your background just quickly so that the audience knows, you know, your expertise in this area? Yeah. So, I’m a former third generation 7th Adventist. My dad is an Adventist pastor. I was raised in uh the Adventist church, but also educated through uh the collegiate level, Sans High School. So, all of my education outside of high school was in Adventist schooling. Um I say all that just to say not uh any sort of appeal to authority, but just to kind of give people an understanding about why I got involved in uh 7th Adventist

Apologetics and started answering Adventism. Um I heard the gospel for the first time at 19. Um at least the first time that I could really remember. Um, and it was drastically different than what I had been raised to believe was the gospel. And so that planted a seed that God ended up giving increase to over time. And so I initially after that had a uh a lapse back to the Seventh Adventist Church because there was a lot of the well sort of things that we’re going to see tonight. A lot of the programming was still dormant in my mind that I need to begin working through.

And basically through the word of God washing my mind, it cleansed my mind of a lot of these errors. And so after that happened and I realized that 7th Adventism is a deception. I wanted to reach Seventh Adventist. But first, I didn’t really see anything out there doing that. For the most part, you mentioned they had received the Walter Pass or those sorts of things. Most people that I knew that were Christians said, “Oh, they’re basically evangelicals that are vegetarians and go to church on Saturday.” Right. Um that was basically as much and nobody has a

Nobody really has a problem with them going to church on on Saturday. you know, they make out as if we actually care, but we we couldn’t care less if they go to church on Saturday or Sunday. Like, it’s not an issue for us for evangelical Christians, right? And so that um sort of led me down the path to many years later starting answering Adventism as a means of um the the real problem that I pinpointed was the Christian church needed woken up needed equipped to be able to um reach these people because again at the end of the day half the battle if not more is

Actually educating Christians. Um it’s waking Christians up that no we need to be reaching these people. These are genuine people who are oftenimes simply misguided. they have been deceived by this satanic uh demonic doctrine um that masquerades as being biblical etc. And so that’s a little bit of it in a nutshell. Yeah. Cool. All right. I will try to be as succinct as possible, but doing this effectively folks will require a lot of reading. So it’s going to be a long presentation. So please bear with me. But with that said, let’s get into it. So part one we have to

Start with what is called Caleb the great controversy theme. So to really understand any component of seventh adventist theology you have to understand the great controversy theme. This is the unique worldview of the seventh adventist church. It informs all all aspects of their system. It comes with a very elaborate pre-earth origin story similar to Mormonism where God allegedly showed all of this to their prophetus Ellen G. White. It is this extra biblical pre-earth origin narrative that is then brought to the Bible to do the interpreting of the

Verses and the terminology. Now, I showed this source a lot on my platform. This is from Ministry Magazine. Ministry magazine is an official publishing arm of the 7th Adventist Church and it is their publication to clergy, pastors, theologians, etc. This article was written by a man by the name of Herbert Douglas. He has since passed away. But Dr. Douglas was arguably the most lauded and respected SDA theologian their movement has ever produced. A brilliant man. And I don’t say that sarcastically. I mean that high IQ thinker, which should show us that the system can even

Deceive the brightest of people. But Dr. Douglas wrote a six-page article in the December 2000 issue where he explains what the great controversy theme is. He begins the article by saying, quote, “Some may think of the great controversy between Christ and Satan, the fifth book in the conflict of the ages series. Others may think of Jeremiah’s announcement that the Lord has a controversy with the nations, a theme that HL Hastings in 1858 emphasized in his book, The Great Controversy Between God and Man, its origin, progress, and end. The GCT is more than an historical

Survey of the battle between Christ and Satan as traced through the events of secular and biblical history. More than an overview of the cosmic conflict as unfolded in certain biblical passages such as Revelation 12. More than an awareness of that struggle within our own lives. Close quote. So he starts by explaining that the great controversy is more than just the title of a book by Ellen White or the general idea of there being a Satan who is an adversary to God. So some of you may have heard or have seen the book Great Controversy by Ellen White, some of which I’ll be

Citing from tonight. But the great controversy theme is much more than just that book. He now explains why. Quote, for Seventh Day Adventists, the great controversy theme is the core concept that brings coherence to all biblical subjects, every philosophical or theological system builds on a central governing theme or paradigm. Its central theme becomes that systems core truth and determines all of that systems principles and policies. Stephven Hawking, the rem uh remarkable Cambridge physicist, wrote in his 1988 book, A Brief History of Time, that should

Scientists discover the long sought theory of everything to explain the varying mechanisms of the universe, we should know the mind of God. Seventh Day Adventists have been given that a perspective which provides a theory of everything. It introduces us to the mind of God. We didn’t discover it. It was given to us. We call it the great controversy theme. Close quote. So the great controversy theme is a worldview. It’s a paradigm. It is a lens through which all of life and existence is seen through. The claim being that this paradigm was uniquely given to the

SDA church by God. It was not discovered. It did not come from reading the Bible because as we will see, it’s supposedly necessary to have this paradigm in order to properly understand the Bible, which is what he’s getting at by saying that this paradigm brings coherence to all of the Bible. It’s the equivalent of the theological God particle, the theory of everything. He continues, quote, “How we understand this core theme directly affects how we grasp the intent of the biblical writers when they used words such as righteousness, salvation, gospel, etc. The GCT helps us

To work our way through centuries of theological confusion over the meaning of such realities as justification, sanctification, atonement, obedience, and works. Without the GCT, all would remain divided over such subjects as the importance of the Old Testament sanctuary service and the New Testament view of Christ as our high priest mediator, the meaning of faith and grace, the place of obedience in relation to legalism, why Jesus came the first time, why he came the way he did, and when he will return. Close quote. So this paradigm was uniquely given to

The SDA church and it directly affects how they understand the intent of the biblical writers when they used words such as righteousness, salvation and gospel. And even the word seems like the word justification there like you know what justification, salvation, faith, it seems as though these words are defined by the great controversy. And so when they use these words, they may mean one thing and we may mean another thing. And so we’re just speaking past each other and um it’s just difficult to comprehend. And that’s what I found. It’s very hard to to uh engage with them

Because you you seem like you’re speaking a different language. Well, and that’s the that’s you you hit it on the the head there. This is why on my platform I’m constantly talking about the importance of definitions, not just that you use the right Christian lingo. They use the same Christian vocabulary, but they have a different dictionary. It is insight into how this movement does indeed mean something different from everyone else when they say all these words, including gospel. Furthermore, though, this unique paradigm informs terms like you

Mentioned such as justification, sanctification, atonement, etc. All of which we’re going to look at tonight folks. But it also, and this is big folks, it also informs why Jesus came and why he came the way he did. This is where the rubber meets the road. This is a central fork in the road between Adventism and Christianity. And when you understand that, it’s much easier to pinpoint where Adventist theology seriously deviates. But Douglas continues, quote, “The Adventist esqueological framework sets us apart from every other denomination that speaks of the end of

The world because it is governed by the great controversy theme. The distinctly Adventist view is formed by a mutually supportive cluster of ideas including conditional immortality, 7th day sabotarianism, a premillennial historicist esquetology, acceptance of the gift of prophecy in the ministry of Ellen White, teachings about the priestly work of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary, and a prepared people by his grace. This mutually supportive cluster of ideas that marks Adventist esquetology exists today because the great controversy theme informs all

Areas of Adventist thought. When the controversy is over, the purpose of the gospel will be seen as the vindication of wis of the wisdom, power, and love of God. Close quote. M so notice he recognizes that the great controversy theme is what sets Adventism apart from everyone else because no one else is letting the great controversy worldview govern them with regards to how they are reading the Bible. And notice his phrase that he mentions there mutually supportive cluster that would be these pillars. Yeah. In order for their model and system to

Function they need all of these pillars to be true. It’s not just these pillars by the way. there’s other doctrinal aspects that are nestled underneath these pillars. Um specific doctrinal points that they also need to be true, but at the highbrow level, these are the the the the mutually supportive clusters. In order for their model and system to function, they need all these pillars to be true. That’s why they’re mutually supportive. They’re all interconnected, and if one of them is falsified, the whole thing falls down. We’re going to be looking at a number of

These, but you’ll see I’ve annotated under each what is meant by the inside baseball. For example, when they use phrases like Douglas just did, a prepared people, that’s oftentimes referring to their health message, but it’s also referring to sinless perfectionism, being fitted for heaven, something else we’re going to see tonight. But these seven pillars play a role in the Adventist model of how you can be made right with God. But notice the final thing. Yeah. That he said here, the final sentence, this is key. The whole central crux of all of

This, the great controversy worldview, the central hinge of it, is the vindication of God, which I will transition to explaining in a moment. But Caleb, any questions so far? Uh, no, no questions other than just pointing out that last phrase is what grabbed my attention. Um, that the purpose of the gospel is is not about saving lost sinners. Uh, you know, redeeming us, you know, forgiving us of all of our sins. It seems like the purpose of the gospel is to vindicate the wisdom, power, and love of God. And I I I don’t think that that’s correct personally, but yeah,

That’s well, you’re going to see what they mean by that here in a little bit because in the Adventist model, their God is on trial. So that’s what we’re going to transition into talking about now. Now, the key takeaway, folks, from all of that, the key takeaway from the great controversy theme is that it informs all areas of Adventist thought and theology, including the defining of terms, which is why definitions always have to be examined. Walter Martin himself failed to take his own advice when he talked with the Seventh Day Adventists, and he did not scale the

Language barrier. I learned that phrase from Walter Martin and then I was shocked when I read Kingdom of the Colts and realized um I know he put them in the appendix and he said he still doesn’t recommend them but he said he he wouldn’t classify them like he did the other groups but Walter Martin himself didn’t scale the language barrier. So to understand though what Herbert Douglas was referring to when he mentions the vindication of God’s love one then logically asks vindicated from what part two now we have to look at the great controversy narrative

In order to get that answer you have to know some of their pre-earth origin story which is branded as the great controversy between Christ and Satan to do though one must read Ellen White because that’s where it comes from. Along the way, I will also explain what the standard defense to all of this is so that Christians can anticipate those defenses and I will show you why they are flawed. But from the beginning here, chapter one of Spirit of Prophecy, volume one. Now, you need to understand the spirit of prophecy. You’ve done a video on that recently, Caleb. That is

Also the title of a four volume set of books by Ellen White, which went on to along with spiritual gifts. Those books went on to be what would make up the book Great Controversy. This was written before Great Controversy was actually compiled and published, if that makes sense. So, this is far earlier on, far uh by, you know, by decades. and then it was eventually compiled. But from the beginning, chapter one of the spirit of prophecy, spirit of prophecy can also be referring to the the whole of Ellen White’s writings. So, I just want to make sure people know when I’m using

Spirit of Prophecy here. This is the actual title of a specific volume book, but it can also be like we’ll see some later. It can also be referring to the entirety of Ellen White’s writings. So, from the beginning, very first, it starts on page 17, very first paragraph. Quote, “Satan in heaven before his rebellion was a high and exalted angel, next in honor to God’s dear son. His countenance, like those of the other angels, was mild and expressive of happiness. His forehead was high and broad, showing a powerful intellect. His form was perfect, his bearing noble and

Majestic. A special light beamed in his countenance and shone around him brighter and more beautiful than around the other angels. Yet Jesus, God’s dear son, had the preeminence over all the angelic host. He was one with the father before the angels were created. Satan was envious of g of Christ and gradually assumed command which devolved on Christ alone. Pause. Caleb, what does the word devolved mean? I don’t really even know what that word means. Devolved. It sounds like he’s trying to imply that he kind of took authority over Christ or I’m not sure what does that word even

Mean. Devolved means power that is delegated from a superior to an inferior which means Jesus had power devolved onto him by God the father and Lucifer became jealous that this wasn’t done to him. Right? Okay. So, Satan was next in honor to Jesus, she claims, but he became jealous of command that had devolved onto Christ alone, which she then goes on to explain in greater detail in the next paragraph. Quote, the great creator, talking about the father, assembled the heavenly host that he might in the presence of all the angels confer special honor upon his

Son. The son was seated on the throne with the father, and the heavenly throng of holy angels was gathered around them. The father then made known that it was ordained by himself that Christ his son should be equal with himself so that wherever was the presence of his son it was as his own presence. The word of the son was to be obeyed as readily as the word of the father. His son he had invested with authority to command the heavenly host. Especially was his son to work in union with himself in the anticipated creation of the earth and every living thing that

Should exist upon the earth. His son would carry out his will and his purposes, but would do nothing of himself alone. The father’s will would be fulfilled in him. Close quote. So the command that devolved onto Christ entailed God the father making it known that he had ordained that Christ his son should be equal with himself. If he said do something, it was to be obeyed as though the father had given the order. He was invested with authority he did not previously have. So it seems as sorry no sorry you keep going. Keep going. I was just going to say and all

Of this is before the creation of the earth. As you can see, this action was done in anticipation of the earth’s creation. It is a pre-earth origin story. She continues, quote, Satan was envious and jealous of Jesus Christ. Yet when all the angels bowed to Jesus to acknowledge his supremacy and high authority and rightful rule, Satan bowed with them, but his heart was filled with envy and hatred. Christ had been taken into the special counsel of God in regard to his plans. While Satan was unacquainted with them, he did not understand, neither was

He permitted to know the purposes of God. But Christ was acknowledged sovereign of heaven, his power and authority to be the same as that of God himself. Satan thought that he was himself a favorite in heaven among the angels. He had been highly exalted, but this did not call forth from him gratitude and praise to his creator. He aspired to the height of God himself. He gloried or he gloried in his loftiness. He knew that he was honored by the angels. He had a special mission to execute. He had been near the great creator and the ceaseless beams of glorious light and shrouding

The eternal God had shone especially upon him. Satan thought how angels had obeyed his command with pleasurable elacrity. Were not his garments light and beautiful? Why should Christ thus be honored before himself? Close quote. So all the angels rejoiced at this news of the ordination of Jesus to be equal with the father except Satan who was Lucifer at this time. He was envious of this and he started to question in his heart asking things like well why was Jesus brought into the councils of God and I wasn’t? I was close to the throne with all these the

Ceaseless beams of light falling on me. People listened to me. The angels listened to me. Why was this done to him? Why was he brought into the councils regarding the plan to create the earth? Why wasn’t I brought into these councils to to be able to create the earth with the father? Go ahead. It see it seems as though Jesus in in this you know great controversy theme uh isn’t viewed as eternally equal with the father. Um but but somehow he’s it’s almost like you know JW thing of a created being. I understand the 7th Day Adventist, you know, believe claimed the Trinity and

Things like that, but like it seems in this great controversy theme as though Jesus is somehow becoming like God, becoming equal with God and Satan’s being jealous of that. That that doesn’t sound like evangelical theology at all. Well, it’s not. And we’re going to get to and we’ll end up looking at again some of the defenses. They evolved on this. But the problem you’re going to see, and the reason I always quote from Spirit of Prophecy, is because they love to appeal to the later statements 40 years after this, where she’s evolved and changed on all sorts of stuff to try

And say, “Well, see, but look over here. Over here. Yeah, you have a problem. This is supposed to be shown to her in vision. You can’t annistically read back into a a development 50 years down the road back into this because at the time the pioneers and I I’ve gone into all this before. I don’t want to derail here because we have a lot to look at. But the pioneers of this movement folks were anti-trinitarian to the core. They they rejected the Trinity. They came out of things like the Christian Connection which was a semi-aran Aryan group. Um, none of them were really, well, a couple

Of them were, but most of them weren’t claiming that Christ was created, but that he had a beginning, but they were saying it was so far back in the past that you could basically call it eternal. But there was a point at which he came forth from the father. He has not eternally proceeded from the father. So the the the church fathers, for example, would always use the analogy of like if you think about the sun and the rays and the rays of light, you can’t have one without the other. Like yeah, if the source is present, the rays are present and the rays are substantively

The same thing as the source itself, but the rays are proceeding forth from that source. I think it was Augustine that said that. Correct. And and he was basically just reiterating things like Athanasius was saying, etc. Um they they’re the early pioneers of Adventism were not saying that. They were basically saying that he had some some far far far distant past point. He came forth and um at because of that you could basically say that he was eternal. But here she says Christ was acknowledged the sovereign of heaven with his power and authority to be the

Same as God himself. It devolved onto him. He was invested with it. He was made equal. This is the language that she’s using over and over to describe this. They all mean he didn’t possess this until a certain point after the creation of the angels in heaven, but before the creation of the earth. M and it’s not reading her uncharitably to simply acknowledge the wording that she herself is using. You know, I can’t stand when when Adventists will do this sort of like you have to have the Adventist magisterium to help you understand the infallible interpreter of

The infallible Bible. It sounds like you can’t you can’t understand the Bible without Ellen White, but you can’t understand Ellen White without coming to an Adventist to help you understand this third grade educated woman. Yeah. I just get I get so sick of that. It’s like, no, she’s saying the same thing over and over. And as well as as what the current belief amongst their movement was at at the time. Um, like I said, it was it was very anti-trinitarian. So, it’s completely consistent with what was going on, excuse me, at that time. But continuing into the next paragraph,

Quote, he talking about Satan left the immediate presence of the father dissatisfied and filled with envy against Jesus Christ. Concealing his real purposes, he assembled the angelic host. He introduced his subject which was himself as one agrieved. He related the preferences God had given Jesus to the neglect of himself. He told them that henceforth all the sweet liberty the angels had enjoyed was at an end. This is a key part to get. That’s why I have it bolded. For had not a ruler been appointed over them to whom they from henceforth must yield servi honor. He stated to them

That he had called them together to assure them that he would uh that he no longer would submit to this invasion of his rights and theirs. That never would he again bow down to Christ. That he would take the honor upon himself which should have been conferred upon him and would be the commander of all who would submit to follow him and obey his voice. There was contention among the angels. Satan and his sympathizers were striving to reform the government of God, meaning the ten commandments in their system. They were discontented and unhappy because they

Could not look into his uncarchable wisdom and ascertain his purposes in exalting his son Jesus and endowing him with such unlimited power and command. They rebelled against the authority of the son. So, pause again. So, Satan begins spreading rumors after this. The father calls all the angelic hosts together. He announces that it’s been ordained that the son is to be equal with himself and that his words are to be obeyed as readily as the fathers. And this was done in the soonant anticipated creation of the earth where Jesus was then brought into councils that no one

Else was in preparation for the creation of the earth. Satan along with all the other angels after hearing this bowed down but in his heart unlike theirs he had these seeds of sin basically. So then he called his own little session and told the angels I’m not going to bow down to him anymore. I’ll never serve him anymore. He’s trying to infringe on your freedom. You’re going to lose your freedoms now that this has happened. So he begins spreading these rumors to the angels saying that he felt slighted. Basically, he told them that now that Jesus had been endowed with unlimited

Power and command, he would infringe upon their liberty and they would um he would begin waring against God’s government. This is another way, like I said, of saying he allegedly began waring against the Ten Commandments. They teach that the Ten Commandments are the transcript of God’s character. So, to attack the Ten Commandments is essentially to attack God. Satan then wanted to overthrow the Ten Commandments and began saying that they aren’t fair, that they can’t be kept, and things like that. The reason this system correct and the reason that this is important is

Because this informs why the law plays such a vital role in the SDA model. Their whole concept around their movement being raised up by God to vindicate the law. This informs why they think perfect obedience to the Ten Commandments is necessary to be seen by God as safe to save and not put heaven in jeopardy again like Satan did. And it’s what Herbert Douglas meant when he said, “The great controversy theme informs all areas of Adventist thought and theology.” And notice again, Ellen says that Jesus was endowed with unlimited power and command, meaning he

Didn’t previously have it. Now, the objection, which is bizarre to me because it like, sorry to interrupt you, but it it seems as though they have not the same view as Mormons, but but a similar kind of idea that, you know, you’ve got Satan and Jesus were spirit brothers and uh Jesus plan was a better plan and and Jesus plan was chosen and Satan became jealous and you know, we have all these, you know, um heavenly conflict, you know, uh that then spills down onto the earth. with them. It’s like uh you know Jesus and Satan were you know kind of similar in position.

Satan thought he was competing with Jesus uh and Jesus was given this honor and this authority and this you know made equal with God etc. And so therefore Satan so it’s very similar to to the Mormons in many ways 100%. And the thing is is the Book of Mormon was published in 1830. It was well before the Millerite movement and well before Desire of Ages and and Ellen White is you know writing out her plethora of books um or rather her secretary is um but very clearly she was influenced by Paradise Lost as well as the Mormon pre-earth origin story because the

Amount of parallels goes far beyond that. But the objection since you brought that up now the objection to all of this from SDA scholarship is that it’s being misread. We’re not understanding things correctly here. that Ellen White was actually saying that God the Father simply made known something to the angels that’s always been the case. Yeah. Adventists will cite for example Patriarchs and Prophets page 38 where she said quote there had been no change in the position or authority of Christ. Lucifer’s envy and misrepresentation and his claims to

Equality with Christ had made necessary a statement of the true position of the son of God. But this had been the same from the beginning. Many of the angels were however blinded by Lucifer’s deception. Close quote. Folks, this is from 1890. This is decades after these statements in Spirit of Prophecy Volume 1, which like I said earlier, proves that she did not receive the stuff from God in vision because they contradict one another. And Adventists are on record admitting, and I’ve talked about all this I don’t know how many times, that her view

Developed over time. I’ve talked repeatedly about Ellen White’s evolution around Christology. It’s one of the key things that I point to when proving this wasn’t coming from God and that she’s a false prophet that pointed people to a false Christ because you can’t have it both ways. You can’t say both patriarchs and prophets and what was said in Spirit of Prophecy uh both came from God yet they don’t jive with one another. Yeah. Because the other ones make clear statements, you know, that he became like God, you know, it’s um and that he was subordinate, he was gradually given

Authority and so forth. It’s very different to what she’s saying here where he always had authority, you know, like there’s a there’s a contradiction between those two things. Well, brother, I’ll do you one better. You even have her saying stuff like this up into the 1880s. This is from 1882, which was a mere six years prior to the alleged corrections in 1888 and 1890. Quote, “God is the father of Christ. Christ is the son of God. To Christ has been given an exalted position. He has been made equal with the father. All the councils of God are open to his son. Close quote. To Christ

Has been given what? An exalted position. They they would come back and say, well, what about, you know, in Matthew 24 where he says, “All authority under heaven and earth has been given to me.” That’s not prior to the creation of the earth. Yeah. And that’s also as a man. That’s also as a man. Yeah. Yeah. And you have to understand that’s that’s talking you have to understand the hypothetic union and the incarnation in that. The problem here is timeline. You can’t anacronistically again read that back into this when this is referring uh to prior to the creation of the earth. But

This is 12 years after spirit of prophecy volume one was published given exalted position made equal. It isn’t those of us that are critically examining who are in the wrong. It is the modernists who have tried to handwave away the valid observation that very clearly she wasn’t saying God the father revealed something that was always the case. He was invested made equal given an exalted position authority devolved onto him. He was it conferred upon him etc. But understand Christian that’s the defense to this. They have to claim that Ellen White is

Ambiguous on this. And if you read her charitably, you’ll see that she always left room to understand her to be saying that Jesus has always been entirely equal with God the Father in every respect, which is anacronism. It’s trying to read back into her earlier writings a later development to then claim, well, she always affirmed this. But you can examine the sources for yourself and the language that she used like I showed and come to your own conclusions. But back to the central focus. What does God supposedly need vindicated from in their model?

These accusations from Satan about the Ten Commandments not being fair. This called into question God’s love. And now that uh there was a doubt amongst the angels and all the other heavenly beings because they believe there’s all these other beings on other worlds just like Mormonism. And all those beings on all these other worlds are keeping the Ten Commandments, the angels are keeping the Ten Commandments, etc. But now Satan had seown a bunch of seeds of doubt. So now this called into question God’s love. So God is on trial. She then goes on to explain that God the

Father held a council to deal with this rebellion on Satan’s part. What was he going to do to fix this? Basically, he couldn’t just blot Satan out of existence, she claimed, because that would prove that Satan’s accusations are true, causing the angels and all the other heavenly beings to think Satan was indeed correct. God’s a tyrant. Look, he said God’s a tyrant and then God in response to that just blotted him out. Oh no, we can’t trust God. That’s the sort of thinking. Meanwhile, the angels in heaven are looking at him saying, “Holy, holy, holy.” Yeah.

In reality. Yeah. But but the Adventist God’s hands were tied proverbly speaking. Yeah. His response was to let the great controversy that Satan started play out and through that he would vindicate the law, prove Satan is a liar and silence Satan’s accusations. This is the key and it’s uh you know in understanding this backstory and why this is necessary to understand how a person can be saved in this model. as we’ll see momentarily. You have to get this. That’s why I’m going into all this right now. We will get to justification, sanctification, all that stuff. There’s

Probably Adventists out there right now. They’re like, “This, they never talk about this.” Yeah, you’re going to see why this stuff matters. Okay. So, she goes on to explain that this rebellion by Satan worsened and eventually led to a war breaking out in heaven between Jesus and his angels versus Satan and his angels. The war began over the ten commandments. Satan basically saying the ten commandments need done away with. And the angels need no laws. They could govern themselves. Remember when I showed you the quote earlier about he’s going to infringe on our freedom. Um

This sort of like self-governance uh against God’s governance type thing. They lose right in his own eyes. They lose this war and then they’re banished from heaven. Okay. Which brings us to the creation of the earth. Now she obviously says more in between there. all these details about Yes. There’s there’s one part where she says Satan can an angel was passing by as he was like pouting off to the side. And they have art that shows this too. He’s like pouting off to the side and an angel was passing by. And so Satan stopped the angel and said, “Hey, could you get me

An interview with Jesus? I want to I want to repent.” And so he went to Jesus to repent. But Jesus, oh, he was heartbroken. He was sorrowful. the the the weak beggar adventist Jesus. He was so sad because he could see that Satan wasn’t serious. So, he couldn’t forgive him. So, Satan left angry and he couldn’t be forgiven because he wasn’t truly repentant. So, there’s those sorts of details in between there, but I’m not going to get into all those. They lose this war. They’re then banished from heaven, which brings us, like I said, to the creation of the earth. And we’ll

Explain for us why they teach Jesus came and what he came to do. Remember I mentioned earlier that’s where the rubber meets the road. Right after Satan and the fallen angels are banished. She writes, quote, “Angels in heaven mourned the fate of those who had been their companions in happiness and bliss. Their loss was felt in heaven, meaning the apostate angels. The father consulted Jesus in regard to at once carrying out their purpose to make man to inhabit the earth. He would place man upon probation to test his loyalty before he could be rendered eternally secure. If he endured

The test wherewith God saw fit to prove him, he should eventually be equal with the angels. He was to have the favor of God and he was to converse with angels and they with him. He did not see fit to place them beyond the power of disobedience. Close quote. So after the great controversy or this this war breaks out between God and Satan, after it’s underway, earth is then created and man is created and placed on probation. They would be given the law of God. And if they passed the that’s God’s government. If they passed the probationary period that they were on

And demonstrated that they could keep it and were fitted for heaven, this would prove Satan wrong in the controversy. God would be vindicated and man would be deemed safe to save and bring to heaven because he can follow the law. Make sense? Yeah. In the system. Yep. But Adam and Eve obviously fell, which is documented with all sorts of added details between pages uh 23 and 45. But page 45 is the start of chapter 3, which is titled the plan of salvation. And now we’re getting into some of the crossover regarding your discussion with Fitz. Okay. After Satan tempts Adam and Eve,

They fall. She writes, quote, “Sorrow filled heaven as it was realized that man was lost and the world that God created was to be filled with mortals doomed to misery, sickness, and death, and there was no way of escape for the offender. The whole family of Adam must die. I saw vision the lovely Jesus, and behold, an expression of sympathy and sorrow upon his countenance. Soon I saw him approach the exceeding bright light which enshrouded the father. Said my accompanying angel, he’s in close converse with his father. The anxiety of the angel seemed to be intense while

Jesus was communing with his father. Three times he was shut in by the glorious light about the father. And the third time he came from the father, his person could be seen. His countenance was calm, free from all perplexity and trouble and shown with benevolence and loveliness such as words cannot express. He then made known to the angelic host that a way of escape had been made for lost man. He told them that he’d been pleading with his father and had offered to give his life a ransom and take the sentence of death upon himself that through him

Man might find pardon. that through the merits of his blood and obedience to the law of God, they could have the favor of God and be brought into the beautiful garden and eat of the fruit of the tree of life. Close quote. So she says, “I saw.” Meaning all of this was allegedly shown to her in vision, which means the 7th Adventist Church 100% upholds and affirms it as being light from the throne room of God, giving them special insight into information not contained within the Bible. But this is supposed to be light shining onto the Bible to better help you understand what’s

Actually being said in the Bible. Sorrow filled heaven with when man fell, she claims, and she saw Jesus approached God the Father three times. And the third time his person could be seen, meaning his physical tangible body. That’s what the SDA church means by the term person, a physical tangible form. So prior to the incarnation, the Adventist Jesus and father have physical bodies. At the time of writing this, she and the movement did not believe that the Holy Spirit was even a distinct person. That changed decades later. But notice what she says.

The Adventist Jesus was doing. He was pleading with the Father over a plan for man’s salvation. God the Father had to allegedly be convinced of a plan that Jesus presented him with. And that plan was that he would condescend down to them, take the sentence of death upon himself, and that they could be pardoned through what, Caleb? Uh, through obedience to the law, again, which is the point that I brought up with Fritz, you know, and through the blood and merits of Christ. Yeah. So, it’s so faith works, faith in the merits of Jesus’s shed blood and obedience to

The law of God. That’s how they could be returned to God’s favor. This plan of salvation, she says, is ultimately about what Herbert Douglas or uh the plan of salvation that she says here. That’s ultimately um you know what Herbert Douglas said back in the final sentence of of that ministry magazine article. Douglas cites Ellen White’s patriarchs and prophets in his book, The Heartbeat of Adventism, the great controversy theme in the writings of Ellen G. White. That’s the title of the book. Notice this is under the heading in that book, the plan of redemption would vindicate

The character of God who had been so maliciously challenged. Quote, “But the plan of redemption had a yet broader and deeper purpose than the salvation of man. It was not for this alone that Christ came to the earth. It was not merely that the inhabitants of this little world might regard the law of God as it should be regarded, but it was to vindicate the character of God before the universe. To this result of his of his great sacrifice, its influence upon the intelligence in other world intelligences of other worlds as well as upon man. The Savior looked forward when

Just before his ex uh his crucifixion, he said, “Now is the judgment of this world. Now shall the prince of this world be cast out, and I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all unto me.” John 12:31-32. The act of Christ in dying for the salvation of man would not only make heaven accessible to men, but before all the universe, it would justify God and his son in their dealing with the rebellion of Satan. It would establish the perpetuity of the law of God and would reveal the nature and the result of sin. Close quote. So this is absolutely vital to understand. Douglas

Is citing from Ellen White here. For those that do not know, heart the heartbeat of Adventism is a book that he he did on the great controversy theme where he compiled together all of or not all but a large portion of Ellen White’s quotes on any given topic, which is why I read the heading and he lays out how this theme informs the overall system, the things that he mentioned there in in that paper. But this is vital to understand. This whole paradigm and belief centers around this pre-earth origin story of Satan accusing God of being unfair, a tyrant. His law is

Unfair. it needs changed, etc. And the plan of salvation that we just read is ultimately about God vindicating himself from these accusations. Yet, none of that’s found in the Bible. Yeah. It comes from Ellen White. It’s then brought to the Bible where things like Satan being called an accuser are then read into and this whole narrative is then Trojanhored into that statement. But you’re not going to find any of this elaborate narrative in the Bible. Yeah. Yeah. So, Caleb, are you seeing how the law has a central and vital role in their system and why understanding the

Pre-ear origin nar narrative is is necessary to understand what they’re actually saying about how you can be saved? Yeah. Yeah. Definitely. Yeah. Yeah. Salvation is you you basically you’re you’re given an opportunity to save yourself really. That’s that’s what it boils down to. Yeah. And of course, they’re not going to say it that way, but you’re given an opportunity to partner alongside Jesus in the great controversy against Satan and his angels to vindicate God before the universe. That’s really what salvation in their view is. It’s God being vindicated, the

Law being vindicated, exalted, and they’re supposed to be the depositories of God’s law in the last days and all this sort of stuff. M but remember that Herbert Douglas told us this narrative informs what they teach about why Jesus came and what he came to do. You now see what the plan of salvation is. Now notice what the Adventist Jesus came to do in their model. Further quote Christ left his position in the heavenly courts and came to this earth to live the life of human beings. This sacrifice he made in order to show that Satan’s charge against God is false. that it is

Possible for man to obey the laws of God’s kingdom. Close quote. So, perfectly in line with what we saw uh stated in Spirit of Prophecy Volume 1. Satan began accusing the law of God, which is a transcript of his character, which means Satan was attacking God himself as being something that he’s not. Therefore, this accusation needed to be silenced. Herbert Douglas told us the whole point of the great controversy playing out is God vindicating himself from Satan. Well, that’s why Jesus came. He came to prove that Satan’s accusation is false. That it’s possible for you to

Keep the law. Not try your best, but actually do so perfectly. That is required. Only perfect lawkeeping will vindicate God from Satan’s accusation, which is supposedly that the law can’t be kept perfectly. And Ellen White endorses this in 1901, which is 14 years before her death. Quote, “God will test all, even as he tested Adam and Eve to see whether they will be obedient. our loyalty or our disloyalty will decide our destiny. Since the fall of Adam, men in every age have excused themselves for sinning, charging God with their sin, saying that they could

Not keep his commandments. This is the insinuation Satan cast at God in heaven. But the plea, I cannot keep the commandments, need never be presented to God. For before him stands the Savior, the marks of the crucifixion upon his body, a living witness that the law can be kept. It’s not that men cannot keep the law, but that they will not. Close quote. So, the marks of the crucifixion are supposed to show you the sinner, that the law is unalterable, and that Jesus had to pay the great price for breaking that law to show this and demonstrate the love of God. This

Silenced Satan’s accusations, and it proved that the law can be kept. It isn’t a matter that of you know that that they cannot but that they will not. We will see more of this when we look at sinless perfectionism. So can I just ask you a quick question? Um so do they see Jesus as having like because obviously evangelical Christians they have a variety of views about the nature of man sinful man after the fall. Um some people believe in total depravity. Some believe in like a propensity to sin like we’ve got this sinful nature which Yeah. um you know causes us to desire sin etc.

Do they view Jesus as having some kind of sinfulness in his nature when he was here on earth or do they deny original sin like the the nature of man? We’re going to get to that. Okay, we’re going to get to that. Um they the Ellen White and the pioneers taught that Jesus has a sinful nature but that he didn’t sin. And this gets into how the great controversy theme again defines everything. So in their model they it doesn’t cause friction or at least when they say it apparently it doesn’t. It doesn’t cause friction in their mind for them to say Jesus had a sinful nature

But he never sinned. Right. Right. They uh they they think that he basically came crazy. Crazy. They basically think he came 4,000 years down the road of degradation on humanity from Adam and Eve and he took on that same hardware of 4,000 years of degradation. The problem is is they did not actually understand what it means when Jesus is the second Adam. That he’s a new man. He’s not in the fallen parogeny of Adam. Um that their their model does not understand that. But to better understand why Jesus came in their model, it was not only to vindicate the law of God and silence

Satan. Notice what else. And this plays a direct role in their understanding of sanctification. Quote, “So deep was the Lord’s interest in the beings he had created, so great his love for the world, that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. Christ came to bring moral power to man to elevate, enoble, and strengthen him, enabling him to be a partaker of the of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust. He proved to the inhabitants of the unfallen worlds and

The human beings that the law can be kept. While possessing the nature of man, he obeyed the law of God, vindicating God’s justice and demanding that it be obeyed. In the judgment, his life will be an un uh unanswerable argument in favor of God’s law. Close quote. So the Adventist Jesus also came, they teach, to empower fallen man and elevate him to be able to partake of the divine nature and overcome sin as as perfectly as Jesus did. Jesus took on an identical nature to us which proved that a fallen person can do what he did. So that’s what I was telling you. He took

On a sinful nature, but he never sinned. They’ll claim. I don’t want to rabbit trail off like I said uh into their view of fallen sinful nature but that’s essentially what they’re what they’re saying. Yeah. And it also is insight into how they don’t properly diagnose and understand sin either. Yeah. But nevertheless, the adventist Jesus came to demonstrate and model for you what it takes to get into heaven. You come to him, he will empower you to begin keeping the law which his wounds point you to. In conjunction with this in mind, character and personality, a book that I

If I think the gentleman you talked to, he referenced this in your guys’s discussion. Not this exact quote, but this book. Yeah. Quote, he talking about Jesus came to demonstrate the fact that humanity allied by living faith to divinity can keep all the commandments of God. He came to make plain the immutable character of the law and to declare that disobedience and transgression can never be rewarded with eternal life. He came as a man to humanity that humanity might touch humanity while divinity laid hold upon the throne of God. Close quote. Perfectly in line with everything else

That I’ve showed. Jesus came to make plain that the law cannot change contrary to the accusation of Satan and any sort of disobedience to it cannot be rewarded with eternal life. Caleb, does Paul describe eternal life as a reward or a gift? No. No. It’s a gift. It’s an undeserved unmmerited gift. It’s not something that we uh earn or merit. Otherwise, it becomes works. It becomes wages. As Paul specifically says that in in Romans, you know, he says if it’s of works, then uh you know, it’s no longer by grace, you know. So, yeah, it’s it’s definitely contrary to the to the

Teaching of scripture, right? A reward is something that one receives for their efforts. Yeah. It’s not it’s not a gift. That’s not the same thing. But now notice Ellen White in the church’s paper, The Review and Herald, in 1881. Quote, “God has given man a complete rule of life in his law. Obeyed, he shall live by it through the merits of Christ. Transgressed, it has the power to condemn. The law sends men to Christ, and Christ points them back to the law.” Close quote. Yeah. So, the law points you to Jesus, the one who kept the law perfectly. But the wounds that he bears

From the cross are actually to show you that the law is unalterable. Satan’s a liar, and it must be kept in order to find pardon and obtain God’s favor. So, you’re pointed to Jesus by the law. He then points you back to the law with this newfound power to begin keeping it. Like we saw in that last quote, despite Paul telling us that the law can no longer condemn the believer in Romans 8, in this model, the law can still condemn you because they don’t understand union with Christ and how if the law could condemn the believer, it would have to be able to condemn Jesus because I’m

Hidden in him. Adventist theology proper does not accept this. And I’ll show some SDA scholarship on this a little bit later, but a few more reasons why they claim the Adventist Jesus incarnated. You have to understand all of these to actually fully understand what’s being said in the model about how you can be made right with God in harmony with what she has already said regarding man being able to keep the law. Quote, “Death entered the world because of transgression, but Christ gave his life that man should have another trial. He did not die on the cross to abolish

The law of God, but to secure for man a second probation.” M he did not die to make sin an immortal attribute, but died to secure the right to destroy him that had the power of death, that is the devil. He suffered the full penalty of a broken law for the whole world. This he did not that men might continue in transgression, but that they might return to their loyalty and keep God’s commandments and his law as the apple of their eye. Close quote. So, if you recall, she said in Spirit of Prophecy Volume 1, as well as uh Review and Herald, that Adam and Eve were created

On probation. Well, another reason the Adventist Jesus came is to give mankind a second probation. Just like how Adam and Eve could have been rendered secure if they had kept God’s law perfectly, so to you can also be rendered secure if you keep the commandments perfectly. That’s what a second probation was given for. The only valid understanding this model has for the law’s use is to be a barometer for how you can be made right with God. If you reject that error, most Adventists are going to dogpile and claim you’re now an Antonyomian, which is a false dichotomy. The problem with

The SDA view of the law is their unlawful use of it. They see it as a standard that one must perfectly attain to in order to be saved when that’s never it never has been and never will be the law’s proper use. Signs of the Times, another one of the church’s uh publications, we read, quote, Ellen White, there will be no second probation to which to prepare for eternity. It is in this life that we are to put on the robe of Christ’s righteousness. This is our only opportunity to form characters for the home which Christ has made ready for those who obey his commandments. Close

Quote. Putting on the robe of righteousness in this model is another way of saying attaining sinless perfectionism. And it ties right into their concept of the model man, which I’m about to explain. But the second probation that Jesus secured for mankind has the express purpose of giving you the time to develop a perfectly righteous character identical to Jesus’s. It’s very different to our concept of the righteousness of Christ. You know, like correct when we look at we see the cross as our sin being imputed to Christ and his righteousness being imputed to

Us. You know, Christ never actually became sinful in the sense that he lived a sinful life. It’s just that our sins were imputed to him. And uh with us likewise, in contrast to that, it’s not that we have to live a perfect life to be clothed in Christ’s righteousness. It’s rather that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to us in the same way that our sin was imputed to Jesus on the cross. So their view is just totally different here. Their view is that you have to actually uh live out a perfect righteous life in order to be clothed in the righteousness of Christ. And that’s

Just, you know, completely wrong. And we’re going to look at that further because they’re going to try and tell you, “No, no, no.” And we, you and I have talked about this. They’re going to try and tell you, “No, no, no. We believe in the imputed righteousness of Christ. We believe in imputation.” We’ll look at that in a little bit. Yeah, but with regards to model man in the desire of ages, a book she claimed is barricaded by a thus sayeth the Lord, she writes, quote, of the bitterness that falls to the lot of humanity. There was no part which Christ did not taste. There were those

Who tried to cast contempt upon him because of his birth, and even in his childhood, he had to meet their scornful looks and evil whisperings. If he had responded by an impatient word or look, if he had conceded to his brothers by even one wrong act, he would have failed of being a perfect example. Thus, he would have failed of carrying out the plan for our redemption. Had he even admitted that there could be an excuse for sin, Satan would have triumphed and the world would have been lost. This is why the tempter worked to make his life as trying as possible that

He might be led to sin. Close quote. So, this statement says a lot when one understands the backdrop that I’ve laid out. There’s a lot more going on here if you understand the pre-earth origin story. The Adventist Jesus was the model man, the great example. He came to show you that the law can be kept. If he had sinned, he would have failed at carrying out the plan of salvation, which we looked at earlier. Satan would have triumphed in the great controversy. His accusations would have been proven true. And that’s supposedly why Satan worked so hard at tempting Jesus. It wasn’t

That Jesus was fulfilling all righteousness for you in your place as your representative before God the Father, but that he was securing for man another chance at lawkeeping. He being the model example to show you that it can be done when you rely wholly on God. This was all to silence Satan in the great controversy and his pre-earth accusations about the law of God not being fair. So, Caleb, are you seeing also how general truths are weaved in with these extra biblical details and ideas? Yeah. Because it’s true that Satan tempted Jesus. It’s true that had

Jesus sinned, he would have we would be in big trouble. Yeah. But the why behind this is what the SDA church distorts by inserting a reason that’s informed by their pre-earth origin narrative. Yeah. Yeah. So, the key takeaways from what I’ve laid out thus far, the plan of salvation in Adventist theology involves Jesus presenting a plan to God the Father that the Father eventually accepted. This plan involved man being able to be saved through faith in the merits of Jesus’s blood and obedience to the law. And two, the Adventist Jesus incarnated to silence

Satan’s accusations that the law can’t be kept and needs to be changed. Adventist Jesus proved this to be false and shows you uh shows you such by his wounds that he bears from the cross. If you come to him by faith, he’ll empower you to do just like he did, keep the law perfectly. This then vindicates God and the law, silences Satan, and demonstrates that you’re fit for heaven, and that you can be trusted to not let sin enter again. But you have to get to the sinlessly perfect state before probation closes. Okay. There must be a lot of pressure on 7th Adventist if they

If they’re teaching this in the church. There must be a lot of pressure on them to keep the law perfectly because uh you know I’m sure that they have the same temptations to sin as as any of us, right? I mean that they struggle with the flesh uh the same as us. That’s why we have to take the gospel to these people, my friend. that that’s why because we walk with and just this week, just this past week, I’m not going to name the people obviously, but just this past week, we had two people reach out. That’s the exact thing that they were talking to me about. They heard the

Gospel from this platform. They finally made the decision to leave Adventism and they said for the first time they feel like they actually have peace with God. Yeah. Because they said, “Adventism never gave me peace.” Yeah. There’s no Because it can’t. It can’t. And I know that they want Yeah. Yeah. And I know that the modernists, the neo-adventists, want to try and say, “No, it’s changed. We’ve repented. It’s” No, it it hasn’t changed, folks. There’s just more inconsistency with one crowd. But now the final part where we get into the real meat of the matter, part three,

Justification, sanctification, and righteousness. We’ll look at sanctification after we start with justification. and righteousness will kind of be interrinkled in with uh both of those areas. But I had to lay out all of this up to this point for the Christian that’s unfamiliar with all of this to really understand the language and the way it’s being used within the Adventist model. There is a two-tier system of justification. initial justification and what their scholars, as we’re going to see, refer to as escatological justification. One only receives escatological

Justification or final justification if they’re fitted for heaven and have been sanctified to a sinlessly perfect state identical to that of Jesus. Notice what former SDA professor and theologian Peter Vanbean writes in a paper he wrote titled Justification by Faith and Adventist understanding. Quote, “Adventists have always perceived themselves as heirs of the great truths recovered and proclaimed by the Protestant reformers.” As stated in the concluding report of another bilateral dialogue, Adventists have a high appreciation for the Reformation. They see themselves as

Heirs of Luther and other reformers especially in their adherence to the great principles of solos scriptor solatia solid solo Christo. This places Adventists in harmony with the traditional evangelical understanding of justification by faith and also with the petristic tradition. For according to Thomas uh Odin the major reformers appeals to solos scriptora solaria and solid are found abundantly in the petristic interpreters of scripture. close quote. So they try and claim that the Adventist understanding of justification is the same as evangelicals. But what did

Herbert Douglas tell us about the word justification, Caleb? Though it has to be interpreted in light of the great controversy theme. Bingo. The term is informed and defined by the GCT, something evangelicals do not have or believe. And this was uniquely given to the SDA church. But this is the same thing that the gentleman from Midnight Cry tried to put forth in your discussion with him. That Adventists really just believe the same thing you do. So don’t call them cultic. Now in this paper, Dr. Vanbean tries citing Ellen White in Signs of the Times

From 1890 to say she clearly said we’re only justified by faith alone. Notice she writes, this is what Peter Vanbean cites in his paper, the blood of Christ was shed to atone for sin and to cleanse the sinner. and we must take hold of the merits of Christ’s blood and believe that we have life through his name. Let not the fallacies of Satan deceive you. You’re justified by faith alone. But faith in Christ does not absolve you from obligation to keep God’s unchangeable law, which is as sacred as his throne. Faith is essential, but genuine faith will enable its possessor

To bring forth the fruits of the spirit. Sin is the transgression of the law, and no man can be saved in sin. The sinner must repent toward God and become obedient to God’s law through faith in Christ. Faith is the hand that lays hold on omnipotence. When we do those things that are lawful and right through the grace of Christ, we’re keeping God’s commandments and to such God has pledged his word that he will do great things. Close quote. So Herbert Douglas also cites this in the heartbeat of Adventism when he’s giving Ellen White’s definition of

Faith. But in light of what we looked at earlier, this isn’t saying what Protestants and evangelicals mean when we say faith alone. This oftentimes gets caricatured by Roman Catholicism, for example, who thinks solid means true believers won’t have any good works. It’s like easy easy belieism when actually solid was being said in the context of a two-tiered idea of justification, initial and final justification. Yet, this is actually what Ellen White is putting forth, and it’s what the gentleman you talked to put forth in your discussion. Every time he talked

About sanctification being attached to justification, he was either knowingly or unknowingly propping up the SDA church’s medieval idea of justification. What she’s saying here is in line with all the other things I’ve shown. You come to Jesus by faith in the merits of his blood that he’s able to cleanse you. You have to trust and believe that he can cleanse you. And what did she say was the only way to obtain God’s favor? Through keeping the law. Yeah, that’s right. Through keeping the law. You come to Jesus by faith. He now empowers you to keep the law. And you must do so as

Perfectly as he did or you’re not going to be saved. Because being saved is tied to God being vindicated from Satan’s accusations that the law can’t be kept perfectly. His accusation is not they can’t keep the law to the best of their ability. The accusation is they can’t keep the law. And we’re going to get into this further when we get into sanctification. So, it isn’t just that obedience is a fruit of already being a friend of God, entirely reconciled to him, but it’s actually how one obtains God’s favor. Lawkeeping plays a part in how you’re

Made right with God. It’s not just the fruit of someone who’s already been made right with God already. This is the problem. It’s not obedience. That’s not the problem. It’s what they claim the role of obedience is. Yeah. And the Bible’s like distinctly clear that we’re justified before God. We’re made right with God. We have peace with God uh through faith apart from works. Yep. So, so that justification and that peace with God and that reconciliation with God, the harmony we have with God uh comes by faith uh completely separate from works. Works follow. Obviously, we

We agree works follow. Um true faith produces works. Um but, you know, we’re not justified and made right and at peace with God by our works. You know, it’s by faith apart from works. Yeah. Right. They’ve misclassified what obedience the role that it plays. Yeah. But Dr. Van Bemlan only cited this quote up to where she says faith alone and then he inserts an ellipses trying to make it seem like, see, she says faith alone. But definitions every time, folks. I beat this drum constantly. Yeah. Now, the standard response you’re going to get from an Adventist on this,

Dr. Vanbean gives quote while Adventists believe that Christians are called to the obedience that comes from faith Romans 1:5 and that we are created in Christ Jesus to do good works which God prepared in advance for us to do. Ephesians 2:10. They strenuously reject any suggestion that such obedience and good works are in some sense meritorious. Close quote. Like your buddy Fritz essentially did in your conversation. He kept saying it’s all Jesus. It’s Jesus that does the works through me, not me. It’s all him. Remember him saying that? Yeah. He was essentially getting at the

Idea that they claim one’s works aren’t meritorious. Therefore, it can’t be works based. But yes, it is because solusto or Christ alone, soloto in conjunction with solid is referring to nothing being added to what Jesus has already done. And faith is simply the instrumental means that God uses to apply what Christ has done to the believer. Yeah, that’s what faith is. Christ lived the perfect life. He lived the perfect life uh for us and he paid the penalty for all of our sins. And all of that is um imputed to us through faith apart from works. Correct. And

Works that follow have nothing to do with our justification and our right standing before God. nothing to do different category. You’ve moved to a new step at that point. Yeah, you you justification’s over. It’s not initial justification. Well, and you’re going to see uh some more here. But solto along with solides is referring to nothing being added to what Jesus has already done. Faith is like I said the instrumental means that God uses to apply what Christ has done to the believer. Dr. Van Bemlin is trying to say they agree with evangelicals and

Protestants because they don’t believe works have merit. That still doesn’t get their system off the hook from being worksbased. Ellen White in Sons and Daughters, which holds more authority than Fritz and Dr. Vanbean, pay very close attention here. Quote, “Will man take hold of divine power and with determination and perseverance resists Satan as Christ has given him example in his conflict with the foe in the wilderness of temptation? God cannot save man against his will from the power of Satan’s artififices. Man must work with his human power aided

By the divine power of Christ to resist and to conquer at any cost to himself. In short, man must overcome as Christ overcame. And then through the victory that is his privilege to gain by all the powerful uh by the all powerful name of Jesus, he may become an heir of God and joint heir with Jesus Christ. This could not be the case if Christ alone did all the overcoming. Man must do his part. He must be victor on his own account through the strength and grace that Christ gives him. Man must be a co-worker with Christ in the labor of overcoming and then he will be partaker

With Christ in his glory. Close quote. So yes, they claim works aren’t meritorious, but they still claim that you must come alongside Jesus and begin co-laboring with him in your effort to totally overcome sin. This will then ultimately bring you peace with God. Only then will you be a partaker with Christ and be glorified. It’s man’s power aided by Christ, not solely Christ. And it also specifically says here uh that it’s after you’ve uh you know conquered and um overcome as Christ overcame that you may become an heir of God and a joint heir with Christ. Uh but

The Bible is very clear that we are children of God through faith. uh we are not children. To those that received him, he gave the right to become the children of God. And many verses talk about us uh being uh the children of God through faith. Um I can I can pull up a few, but I mean I don’t want to interrupt your presentation. Well, and and the main reason I bring this up is because your the guy you talked to kept trying to say, “It’s all Christ. It’s only Christ doing it through me.” No, sorry, friend. That he may believe that. He may individually

Believe that, but this carries more authority than he does. And this is consistent with the system. You have to co- lababor with Christ. It’s not just synergism. You know, we’re getting into like synergism on steroids here. Yeah. And don’t mishar me, folks. I’m not saying that believers don’t war with sin, but not to be made right with God. That’s the key. Yeah. Adventists will hear this and jump, you know, to thinking that I’m saying Christians shouldn’t seek to live a holy life, etc. Nothing could be further from the truth. But my efforts to live a holy life play

Zero part in my reconciliation to God. Zero. That is based on the person and work of Christ alone. Yeah. Again, Herbert Douglas citing Ellen White and the SDA Bible commentary in the heartbeat of Adventism in his chapter titled What God Intends to Achieve with His Plan for Our Salvation. Quote, “Genuine faith always works by love. When you look to Calvary, it’s not to quiet your soul in the non-performance of duty, not to compose yourself to sleep, but to create faith in Jesus. Faith that will work. Purify the soul from the slime of selfishness. When we

Lay hold of Christ by faith, our work has just begun. Every man has corrupt and sinful habits that must be overcome by vigorous warfare. Every soul is required to fight the fight of faith. Close quote. Now, I cite this not only to say that I disagree that um you know that I I I disagree that that true born again regenerate children of God, you know, they do indeed produce fruit. I’m not disagreeing with that. But like we saw in Spirit of Prophecy volume one, what was the plan of salvation that Jesus pleaded with the father to accept? uh the idea that man would be given a

Second chance uh a second opportunity to keep the law that through faith in the merits of Christ’s sacrifice and obedience to the law, man could receive the favor of God. That’s not the purpose of fruit. This is the false message about how you can be made right with God. When when when he told you know the guest you had told you in your discussion that Adventist theology teaches it’s all Christ who simply does everything through you. Again, this is not true. What does he say that’s bolded? When we lay hold of Christ by faith, our work has just begun.

No, it’s not that Jesus just did it all and he’s just do I know why they do that. They like to try and sound pious and oh, it’s all Christc centered. It’s all G. They think that that makes Adventism just sound so Christc centered and but no, it’s it’s you’re essentially saying Christ is not enough that you have to do a bunch of things on top of and supplement what Jesus has already done. Again and again, she claimed that you must do your part alongside God because again, he’s citing Ellen White here and so is the SDA Bible commentary. And we’re going to see a little bit more

Later when we talk about their view of sanctification. But the idea that this system teaches that it’s all Jesus and nothing of yourself is simply not true. Adventists can huff and puff all they want, but it doesn’t change the facts. A person’s made right with God by faith in Christ, plus their own efforts empowered by Christ, and it’s only those who attain to a certain level of perfection that are seen to be fit for heaven. Like I said and showed earlier, you come to the Adventist Jesus by faith, he’ll empower you to do something you otherwise couldn’t. That’s why he’s

Necessary. That’s what they mean when they say, “No, it’s all of grace.” Had Jesus not given man a second probation, the opportunity to escape condemnation wouldn’t be possible. So it’s all of grace. Solatratia. Except that’s not what Soligatia is referring to. Yeah. Nevertheless, you must do your part alongside Jesus. He’ll give you the grace to overcome as perfectly as he did and get you to a point where you vindicate the law, which vindicates God and silences Satan. You are a co-orker with Christ in this work. It isn’t all of Jesus and none of me.

Like I said, he may per that guy you talked to, he may personally think that, but Ellen White holds more authority than him when it comes to speaking for official SDA teaching. Back to Spirit of Prophecy Volume 1 shortly after where we left off earlier. Quote, through Christ, a door of hope was opened that man, notwithstanding his great sin, should not be under the absolute control of Satan. Faith in the merits of the Son of God would so elevate man that he could resist the devices of Satan. Probation would be granted him in which through a life of repentance and faith

In the atonement of the son of God, he might be redeemed from his transgression of the father’s law and thus be elevated to a position where his efforts to keep his law could be accepted. Close quote. So Christ opened the door for salvation to be possible. It’s all of grace. But faith in Christ’s merits would elevate a person to be able to resist Satan. and a second probation will be granted him. It’s like we looked at earlier and we’re going to look at more later. And thus through a life of repentance and faith, one can be redeemed from the uh you know from

Violating the father’s law be elevated to a place where their efforts to keep the law can thus be ex be accepted. Now remember this quote for later when we look at how they define atonement. Okay, remember this quote for when we get to how they define atonement. But before we look at that at one last quote from Dr. Van Belellin on justification, notice what Ellen White says on this. This is from her book Faith and Works. Quote, “While God can be just and yet justify the sinner through the merits of Christ, no man can cover his soul with the garments of

Christ’s righteousness while practicing known sins or neglecting known duties. God requires the entire surrender of the heart before justification can take place. And in order for man to retain justification, there must be continual obedience through active living faith that works by love and purifies the soul. Close quote. Yeah. So you have to keep your justification by works. So once your heart is entirely surrendered to God, you then become initially justified. And in order to retain that justification, your obedience will determine if you are

Esqueologically justified. Two tiers. Yeah, it really does undermine the gospel. It completely undermines it. And it and it brings man back under the law. Back under the curse of the law. And Jesus said, sorry, it says in Galatians that uh we’ve been freed from the curse of the law because Christ became a curse for us. You know, the curse of the law is the idea that, you know, you if you sin, you’re under God’s condemnation. You know, you sin, you’re under God’s condemnation. And it seems as though in Ellen White’s system, we’re still under the curse of the law. You don’t keep the

Law perfectly, well, you’re condemned. And like everyone else who tries to make these same arguments, like Roman Catholics, etc., of course, their favorite argument is James 2, bro, which James is talking about on the horizontal. It’s not talking about the vertical. You’re doing word association fallacy there basically to try and say that well the word justification’s used so therefore it has to be talking about the the legal declaration before God when no it isn’t if you read James 1:1 it’s he’s writing to the dispersion the diaspora of Jews and he’s basically

Giving hallmarks on how you humans can recognize if somebody claims to be a Christian and in chapter two he contrasts two types of faith verse 14 being the key it’s still the faith that does the justifying but there’s a dead faith and a living faith. So they try to obviously use James 2. Now here’s another verse that they oftentimes try to use which again Peter Vanbean here is going to use word association fallacy. When I say two-tiered system of justification and esqueological justification that’s what Dr. Vanbe’s talking about in this paper here. He

Writes, quote, “If our justification is through grace alone by faith alone, does the obedience of faith have anything to do with our salvation? Or to phrase the question differently, do our thoughts, words, and actions play a role in determining our eternal destiny?” These are crucial questions which are closely related to the issue of the final judgment. Scripture has much to say about that judgment, not least in the teachings of our Lord as recorded in the Gospels. said Jesus, I tell you that men will have to give account on the day of judgment for every

Careless word they have spoken. For by your words you will be acquitted, the RSV in the New King James say justified and by your words you will be condemned. Matthew 12:36 and 7. Here our Lord talks about justification and condemnation, the judicial declarations of innocence and guilt in the context of the day of judgment. Obviously there is an esqueological aspect of justification. Adventists believe on the basis of scripture that the day of judgment is a very comprehensive concept and much Adventist literature has been published on the subject. Close quote. So you are

Initially justified in this model when you come to the Adventist Jesus. All of your past sins up to that point are cleansed. In order to retain that justification, you must progress in sanctification to a point of total sinlessness. It is those people who are fit for heaven. Those that achieve this will be esqueologically justified. And this is supposed to be what Jesus meant in Matthew 12. Except no. Jesus’s point there is basically what he himself said in Luke 6:45. Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaks. The heart is essentially made known by the words

That one speaks. So Jesus was saying that on judgment day, the fruit of one’s life will have been made manifest as to whether or not they were genuinely born again. Not that there’s going to be another application of justification at that point based on if you achieved being fit for heaven after having already been initially justified prior. Again, that’s word association fallacy. He’s just he’s reading into the word which some translations will say justified or condemned. And he’s reading into that that that must mean that there’s this second layer or second

Level of justification based on obedience. But that’s not what Jesus is saying. Now the thesis for tonight was answering whether what Adventism teaches on this is the same as Protestants. Fritz tried to you know insisting to you Caleb that it is. But what Dr. Vanbean puts forth here is the same understanding found in the Roman Catholic catechism paragraphs 2017 through 2020. Quote the grace of the Holy Spirit confers upon us the righteousness of God uniting us by faith and baptism to the passion and resurrection of Christ. The spirit makes us sharers in his life. Like

Conversion, justification has two aspects. Moved by grace, man turns toward God and away from sin and so accepts forgiveness and righteousness from on high. Justification includes the remission of sins, sanctification, and the renewal of the inner man. Justification has been merited for us by the passion of Christ. It’s granted us through baptism. It confirms us to the righteous or it conforms us to the righteousness of God who justifies us. It has for its goal the glory of God and of Christ and the gift of eternal life. It is the most excellent work of God’s

Mercy. Close quote. So again, Caleb, in your discussion with Fritz, you witnessed how he he tied justification in with sanctification. not simply the belief that both things happen in the Christian life, but that justification includes sanctification. So they’re basic basically a part of the uh you know the of Babylon, you know, well they have they have a medieval sotiology. They have a a sotiology that is more akin to the medieval scholastics, Aquinas, etc. the Catholics, this idea of they’ll say the imparted righteousness, which we’re going to look at here in a little bit,

The imparted righteousness of Christ. There’s the imputed righteousness and the imparted righteousness. And the imparted righteousness in their system is fundamentally, now there’s nuance and and differences because Roman Catholicism doesn’t have a great controversy worldview, but there’s there’s nuances and differences, but generally speaking, they’re saying the same thing when they talk about the infusion of righteousness. I love Augustine. He’s on the shelf behind me. Um, he’s one of my favorite theologians, but he’s not infallible. I don’t agree

With Augustine on a number of things. I don’t agree with a number of the medieval fathers, even though I like a lot of them, on a number of things. This is one of those areas. They had had an understanding of the infusion of righteousness such that you are essentially ontologically made righteous. there there’s actually something that takes place and then this gets into eucharistic theology and all sorts of things but the point being the the adventist idea of the imparted righteousness of Christ that’s more akin to this model as well as their two-tiered understanding of

Justification. Yeah. It’s crazy that you know they they look at the Catholic Church with such you know contempt, but their gospel is the same as the Roman Catholic Church’s false gospel. like they are literally a part of, you know, the Babylonian captivity, you know, like it’s crazy. It’s crazy. I I would go out on a limb to say I think Rome is closer to the truth than they are. Um because again, the great controversy worldview just totally distorts stuff. Like I would agree with paragraph 217. Now, I wouldn’t agree with how they define grace, for example. Um there’s going to

Be some some differences when we get peel back the layers on the stuff here. But my point with with this is that um we’re not taking umbrage with the idea that both neither were the reformers that sanctification will happen in the Christian life. That’s not the argument. That’s not what so Soliday was about. Is justification single tier or two-tier. Yeah. As you see in the catechism here, it has two aspects and it includes justification and sanctification. And this informs how the Roman system breaks down their theology. It also informs how the SDA church breaks down their

Theology. But the SDA view is more akin to the Roman view, not the Protestant view. And yes, like I said, there are differences. I’m not saying it’s a 100% identical. My point is is that they don’t affirm the Protestant view on this. They teach justification has two tiers just like Rome. And like you said, for a for a movement that claims to be so anti-Roman Catholic and is constantly railing against Roman Catholicism, they once again find themselves on the Roman side of the reformation because they also abhore monergism, which is another central aspect of the reformation.

But furthermore, back in Ellen White’s book, Faith and Works, notice again, Caleb, quote, “If any man sin, we have an advocate with the father, Jesus Christ the righteous.” 1 John 2:1. But God has not given his son uh to a life of suffering and uh ignominy and a shameful death to release man from obedience to the divine law. So great is the deceptive power of Satan that many have been led to regard the atonement of Christ as of no real value. Christ died because there was no other hope for the transgressor. He might try to keep God’s law in the future, but the debt which he

Had incurred in the past remained and the law must condemn him to death. Christ came to pay the debt for the sinner which it was impossible for him to pay for himself. Thus, through the atoning sacrifice of Christ, sinful man was granted another trial. Close quote. So notice, one’s lawkeeping couldn’t be seen as having any sort of value apart from Christ paying the penalty for violating the law, which is death. But through the sacrifice of Christ, a second trial was granted to people, aka what we’ve talked about, a second probation. And 1 John 2:1 is supposed to

Support this idea allegedly. But that isn’t why Jesus came. He didn’t come to grant man a second probation at trying to keep the law. And I agree that obedience to God is a part of the Christian life. Again, I I I’m not against that in the slightest. I’m actually reading JC Ri’s holiness currently. Yeah, but this is an issue that stems out of their twisting of covenant theology by filtering it through the great controversy paradigm. I don’t want to derail us into that, but that’s the fundamental issue here. I’m reformed, so I affirm classical covenant

Theology. They took classical covenant theology and twisted it. We would agree, and I’d use the word, sure, probation. Fundamentally, sure. I could bicker over nuance and stuff like that, but sure, Adam and Eve were on probation. The problem is is they draw out what would be called the covenant of works which was instituted with Adam and Eve. And they draw that out beyond its rightful bounds. Because yes, sure, Adam and Eve were on a trial, but the second Adam came not to be a demonstration for every other human being that you’re also on a trial like Adam and Eve were. Like

You’re all a second Adam. No, that that the covenant of grace was immediately instituted after the covenant of works with Adam and Eve. And the covenant of grace has been extended throughout all of redemptive history since Genesis 3:5. Adam and Eve were on trial. Yes, we’re not on trial. Jesus came as the second Adam to free us from the condemnation that we were under. It was over after Adam. It’s over. You’re condemned in him. You’re part of his fallen prerogyny. Romans 5. You’ve inherited what Adam essentially earned you. But now you have the ability to come to

Christ and be seen as righteous in him. Be brought underneath the second Adam as your new representative and receive all of the benefits that he procured for you, which is the complete forgiveness of sins, the resurrection, glorification, eternity with God, friend of God, peace with God, etc. All of that stuff comes to you by virtue of faith alone. Yeah. That’s what we’re getting. Like it’s kind of like when you look at the punishment for for sin and the corruption of mankind after Adam, you know, like every woman has pain in childbirth. That that was a punishment

That God gave to every woman and every man has to work by the sweat of his brow. That was a punishment given to every man. Even though I didn’t person I wasn’t personally in the Garden of Eden, I didn’t personally partake of the fruit. You know, nevertheless, his sin is imputed to me. Um, and in the same way, Christ’s righteousness is imputed to me when I believe by faith. It’s not about me actually doing anything. It’s about me having faith in Christ. It’s about me being in the second Adam. That’s what saves us. It’s not uh it’s not our works. Well, see, and they don’t

Understand the law gospel distinction. I I mean, for a group that wants to claim to be heirs of the reformation. I I mean, seriously, it’s like monarchism and law gospel distinction are like the center of the reformation. I mean the these are foundational things and when you don’t understand the law gospel distinction that’s when you start making these issues and errors because law says do gospel says done. Yeah that’s right. So in in I’m in a classically Protestant church for example and the Protestant understanding of the actual church polity the way it’s supposed to to to

Work out. It’s not you show up and there’s a rock band for 20 minutes and you hear some feel-good ear tickling thing and then um get your coffee and hang out and then leave. Yeah. The Protestant understanding of what the church was supposed to entail, which this has always been the case. It just became a little bit muddled during the medieval period was that you have to have word and sacrament. The the two go hand in hand. Sacrament overtook the the proclamation of the word. when you you start to get into the like the Latin mass for example, it’s like, well, I

Know Roman Catholics oftentimes, a lot of my Roman Catholic friends, they they love, isn’t the Latin mass beautiful? It’s like, yeah, but you you can’t hear or understand anything that’s being said. How is that benefiting to you? Yeah. Um, so you have things like that where it’s like the the the word is not being brought to the people in their own native tongue. Um, and so the the correction of word and sacrament ministry was about the word is basically the gospel for your ears and your heart for you to hear it and to believe it by faith. You need both law and gospel.

There’s law and gospel in both the old and the new testaments. It’s not just the ten commandments. It’s any sort of command or prohibition in scripture that basically makes you feel horrible. Yeah. Like you commandments say nothing about beastiality. They say nothing about homosexuality or incest, but all of that stuff would fall under the category of law. Any sort of do this and you’ll live, do that and you’ll die. Sermons should have both law and gospel because the law points you to Jesus where you find the gospel. That’s right. So, you should feel the the weight of your your

Sin when whatever passage a pastor is preaching, my pastor, for example, um they’re preaching through the book of Acts right now. There’s lots of law and gospel in the book of Acts. There’s all sorts of commands to do this, do this, do this, and you’re not. There’s things they’ve brought out of the text today. They brought out of the text like, “How are you measuring up to what was presented here?” Oh, well, I’m not. I I’m trying, but I know deep down that I’m not. But then the gospel comes in. Well, but Jesus did. Jesus is enough. Ah, and I believe that and I repent. and

We do corporate confession of sin where we all confess our our sins corporately before God recognizing that we’re sinners. We then hear the assurance of pardon. These come from the word of God. So we reiterate them, the pastor says them, we reiterate them back to him. Um we receive an assurance of pardon. Then we approach the Lord at his table to receive him by faith, which is essentially the gospel now to our senses. We or or our taste um etc. Um there’s a variety of ways that a number of reformers and even early church fathers put it, but um that’s basically

What it is. The the the sacrament is essentially signing and sealing to us what we just heard preached from the word. And when we believe that word by faith, we come and receive Christ and his benefits in the supper or in baptism. Um whichever one. But my point with all of that is that the Adventist church has no concept and understanding of word and sacrament ministry as well as law gospel distinction. Because if they did understand word and sacrament ministry, they would understand why the investigative judgment completely foils and why the Lord’s supper completely

Decimates that teaching amongst a mountain of other things. But just to reiterate for people, I know we kind of sidetracked a little bit there. I love talking law gospel and word sacrament, but just to reiterate, the claim is that Jesus secured a second probation for humanity. When you come to the Adventist Jesus by faith, you receive initial justification. All of your past sins are forgiven. But moving forward now, you have to co-labor alongside Jesus to retain that justification where Jesus will slowly impart his divine merits to you, empowering you to more and more keep the

Law. Eventually, this will no longer need to happen because you’ll be sanctified enough that you keep the law perfectly. Thus, what the law demands can be fulfilled in you. This then vindicates God, silences Satan, and you’re deemed safe to save and be trusted in heaven. Remember, this all centers around this pre-earth origin story. Now, Fritz took umbrage with a quote that you read from testimonies for the church volume 4, which reads as follows. I cite this all the time. Quote, “Man who has defaced the image of God in his soul by a corrupt life cannot by mere

Human effort affect a radical change in himself. He must accept the provisions of the gospel. He must be reconciled to God through obedience to his law and faith in Jesus Christ. His life from then forth must be governed by a new principle. Through repentance, faith, and good works, he may perfect a righteous character and claim through the merits of Christ the privileges of the sons of God.” Close quote. After all that we’ve looked at this evening, your usage of this quote has been entirely vindicated because it fits like glove with what I’ve laid out. Man has to

Accept the provisions of the gospel, which is that you can come to Jesus, be empowered to keep the law, perfectly replicate the perfect character of Jesus, and through that claim the privilege of being a child of God through faith and obedience to the law, you can be reconciled. I mean, it’s pretty clear. It’s it’s it’s talking about reconciliation to God. And not just that, but it’s like they want to do this sort of like he kind of did where it’s like, well, the context, you know, folks, go read this chapter. Yeah. It just how many paragraphs do you want us to read? It

Doesn’t change anything. It’s very clear. This is completely consistent with what we read in Spirit of Prophecy Volume 1, chapter 3, titled the plan of salvation. Yeah, it’s completely consistent. You can be brought into the favor of God through the faith and the merits of Christ’s sacrifice. and obedience to the law. That’s the consistent teaching across the board. The Adventist has a visceral response when you take objection with this to think. So, you’re saying people can just live lawless? No. Obviously, that’s not what we’re saying. Yeah. No, we’re

Simply saying that obedience is not a justification retention device. Yeah. Fritz took objection with you pointing to this and essentially went on to describe what I showed you about their errant conclusion on the relationship between sanctification and justification. But he appealed to their fundamental beliefs on this to try and support that their usage is or that your usage is out of harmony with their fundamental beliefs. Now, I want to listen to a portion of the discussion before then examining the fundamental beliefs more fully to show you what I’ve

Presented thus far is not only perfectly in line with the fundamental beliefs, but the organization uses Ellen White herself to interpret the fundamental beliefs. Okay. So, about a fivem minute clip here from your discussion, then we’ll come back. Okay. So, this is the this is the 10th fundamental belief. It says, “In infinite love and mercy, God made Christ, who knew no sin, to be sin for us, sin for us, so that in him we might be made the righteousness of God. Led by the Holy Spirit, we sense our need, acknowledge our sinfulness, repent of our transgressions, and exercise faith

In Jesus as Savior and Lord, substitute an example. This saving faith comes through the divine power of the word and is the gift of God’s grace.” Okay. So it’s highlighting here essentially justification and that is it is saving faith that comes through divine power and that it is a gift of God’s grace through Christ we are justified and adopted as sons and daughters and delivered from the lordship of sin. So, so in essence, when we when we as Adventists, and I believe this is the biblical uh the correct biblical teaching is that when we experience true

Justification immediately, we’re also going to we can experience deliver from the lordship of sin, which mean God Yeah. Go right ahead. So, so are you saying that um that people will be sinless, perfect without without sin? No. So there is a there is a there is a sanctification process that has to take place, right? So for example, when John when John the Baptist is preaching, uh when he when he preaches, he he preaches and says, “Repent for the kingdom of heaven is is at hand.” And then he says, “Bring forth works meat for repentance.” So there there is there is always a

Connection in scripture with true repentance and true justification with godly works following that. So yeah, like I agree with that, right? That like that statement there. I mean, I’d have to just quickly go through the first bits there, but I I agree with that statement, but that’s not what Ellen White is saying. You know, Ellen White is talking about being reconciled to God, right? So let me uh let me let me share another verse. Let me share another verse here. Um go to Colossians chapter 1 verse 21. If you want to go to Colossians chapter 1 verse

21. All right. Let me just find it here. Let me just put it on the screen.

Yep. Right. So um this is Colossians chapter 1 verse 21. Now when we when we think of the word reconciliation, so what I believe Ellen White is talking about here, reconciliation is a two-way street. Okay? So the sinner must be reconciled to Christ and the Christ and Christ must be rec is reconciled. So there it’s a it’s a two-way street. So in in other words, we’re reconciled to Christ through faith apart from works though. Right. Right. And exactly right where once we once we accept Christ once we are justified, we are reconciled. But we too we too have something that we need

To do, right? Which is faith will faith that works. Faith that works. Faith that works. Yeah. Of course. Faith that works, right? Workketh through love. Yeah. Right. So this is this is Colossians chapter 1 21. It says, “And you who were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works.” Right? So if we if we go back and think about the separation that took place in the Garden of Eden, Christ did not separate himself from Adam and Eve. They sinned and as a result they hid. So it was their sin that separated them from God. And now they became

Afraid of him. Now the he also removed them from the garden. Um he said the punishment would be death. Um and so yeah. Yeah. So in I’m talking about that that initial alienation where they ate that fruit and God comes into the garden. They’re hiding from him. So their sins, you know, it talks about our sins removing us from God. So their sins now, they were now hiding from God and God had to come and seek them out. So there was an alienation that took place and it’s that same alien. It’s the same alienation that we have in our minds by our wicked works. So that’s what it’s

Talking about here in Colossians 1 21. It goes on to say, “Yet now hath he reconciled.” Okay. So now this this reconciliation is is not just the reconciliation of him justifying us and forgiving us for our past sins. as he’s reconciling us, he’s giving us victory over the wicked works that separated us from him. And so that that process that process of reconciliation also involves us surrendering our surrendering our lives to Christ. Christ is living in us. He’s living out his works in us. And and as that is going on, as that process is going on, we are we are now reconciled

To God. And that process continues as God is giving us more and more victory and those wicked works are just falling off as we’re in this process of sanctification. All right. Now, Caleb, immediately after this, you pointed out how the biblical text says we have been reconciled through the death of Christ and that obedience to God is in a different category. Our obedience isn’t a part of what reconciles us. It is a fruit of already being reconciled. Yeah, Fritz struggled to understand this because he has a great controversy world view. But Caleb, in light of what I showed you

Before this, do you hear what he said here differently than when he initially said it? Yeah. So, he he sees us as um needing to be reconciled to God by keeping the law in order to vindicate the character of God. The whole point is that, you know, uh Satan’s been accusing uh God saying his law can’t be kept. the ten commandments need to be changed in their system and that um you know the proof of that is man falling but then Jesus was sent to prove that God’s law could be kept and we’re all given this second chance to be reconciled to God through faith plus works yep and notice

He said you’re justified and forgiven for all your past sins and then you’re reconciled which is a process over time and that is the retention of your justification through sanctification. This is a two-tiered model of justification. They don’t understand that justification and sanctification are two distinct separate things. And they think that when you say that, you’re saying, “Well, then you think a person can be justified and not sanctified.” Yeah. No, I didn’t say that. That’s not what I’m saying. What I’m saying is is there’s not a later justification based on sanctification.

But see, Caleb, they’re not monists. I’m grateful that you’re not a Calvinist because you don’t have to deal with the the lowhanging fruit argument from them that they’ll just easily handwave stuff away as like like you mentioned earlier the the full imputation of Christ’s righteousness. You were basically to use you were using layman’s terms but to use technical terms you were essentially putting forth that a person is imputed with the active and passive obedience of Jesus Christ. Yeah. His perfect passive and active obedience is credited to your

Account such that when God the Father sees me right now, this very moment, it’s like he’s seeing Jesus Christ. Yeah. It’s like he’s seeing his own son’s record. They call that Calvinism. They just handwave that away and say Calvinism. I bring that up all the time. I’m like, so I’m grateful that you’re not a Calvinist because here we are completely in agreeance on this fundamental foundational Bible theology 101 area despite you’re a monarchist though. So if you can’t accept that that Christ righteousness is imputed to us by faith and faith apart

From works, then on what basis can you accept that c that our sins were imputed to Christ on the cross? You if you get rid of one, you get rid of the other. Well, and this is why this is why it’s going to be important for us to get into atonement, which we’re going to be getting into momentarily. But what he said here was a perfect example of how the great controversy paradigm is brought to the biblical text and it’s read into it. Yeah. Because what he described isn’t at all what Paul is describing in Colossians 1. And if he were and if he were to try and prove

Such by doing more than proof texting, this would have been made clear. He said, “Adventists see justification and sanctification as tied together.” Right? They have a medieval view of sotiology in this area. You’re initially justified by grace through faith and given a clean slate for all your sins up to that point. You then are empowered to now begin keeping the law on the path to final justification. What Dr. Van Bean called esqueological justification. Sanctification in their model is a justification retention device like Ellen White said earlier. So obedience

Is what retains your justification. Only those who experience perfect sanctification to total sinlessness will end up being esqueologically justified. Meaning it’s only those people that will be savable because those will be the people who vindicated God in the great controversy by showing that Satan is a liar and the law can be kept. But he also cited their fundamental belief number 10, the Christian experience. And he did so to try and prove that the SDA church doesn’t teach that good works play any sort of role in reconciling you to God. He was trying to show you um

That you were mis you know misunderstanding the Ellen White quote. Well, notice what they write in the exposition of their own fundamental beliefs. So this is from their fundamental beliefs book which is a book where they cite Ellen White hundreds of times to explain what the fundamental beliefs themselves are saying. So SDAs cannot hide behind the whole they you know they they love this argument of it’s only the fundamental beliefs. The only thing you can criticize are the fundamental beliefs. That’s the only thing that matters. The general wording of the

Fundamental belief. Well, then why does your church have an exposition of those fundamental beliefs where they use her to explain what the belief is teaching? Why do they even have an exposition of the beliefs period if it’s just the wording of the fundamental belief itself is enough? No. They have an entire book where they’re expounding upon what it means and they use her to explain it hundreds of times. This is under the heading the ground of our acceptance with God from the chapter that he cited or the fundamental belief he cited. This is the chapter for that belief. Quote,

Neither good character traits nor faultless behavior is the ground of our acceptance with God. Saving righteousness comes from the one righteous man, Jesus, and is conveyed to us by the Holy Spirit, aka imparted. We can contribute nothing to Christ’s gift of righteousness. We can only receive it. No one other than Christ is righteous. Independent human righteousness is only filthy rags. Even what we do in response to Christ’s saving love cannot from the basis of our or cannot form the basis of our acceptance with God. That acceptance is identified with the work of Christ. In

Bringing Christ to us, the Holy Spirit brings that acceptance. Close quote. So what did we see earlier about their teaching on imputation versus impartation? That’s what they’re essentially getting at here. They claim they don’t teach a worksbased salvation because they claim man doesn’t have any merit in the process. Only Jesus does. They don’t see it as a worksbased salvation that like I showed earlier, you come to Jesus and he empowers you to co-labor with him. That somehow isn’t work salvation even though it’s your co-laboring alongside Jesus

That retains your justification. Yes. But they continue. Is our acceptance based on Christ’s justifying righteousness or his sanctifying righteousness or both? John Calvin pointed out that Christ cannot be divided into parts. So the two things justification and sanctification which we perceive to be united together in him are inseparable. Christ’s ministry has to be seen in its totality. This makes it paramount to avoid speculation about these two terms by trying to define minutely the fine points of distinction between justification and sanctification. Why try to be more

Minute than is inspiration on the vital question of righteousness by faith? Close quote. Aka one of the central contentions of the Reformation wasn’t necessary because this is exactly what they were arguing with Rome. the finer specifics of this stuff. Luther going so far as to say in the bondage of the will that this is the pillar upon which the church stands or falls. They’re trying they’re uh they’re tying justification and sanctification together in the same way that that I showed the Roman Catholic catechism does and the same way that he did in your

Guys’s discussion. And the fact that they try and cite John Calvin to support this is absolutely shameful. as someone who has read a lot of John Calvin, but they cite him as if he was saying the same thing they are. Like how Dr. Van Bemlin told us they agree with the reformers on this. Yeah. Here we see them again trying to appeal to them to saddle up with the SDA church’s great controversy novelties and try and Trojan horse in their novel beliefs. You know, they’re trying to saddle the reformers with this sort of stuff to essentially add theological street cred to their own

Movement. Folks, Calvin believed in the perseverance of the saints. Not to be confused with once saved, always saved. And this matters in this context, in this discussion, because the reason Calvin was saying what he did about justification and sanctification being tied is basically he was saying all true justified people will end up being sanctified because God is the author and finisher of a person’s faith and salvation. One will naturally lead to the other because Calvin was a monarchist. Yeah, but the Adventist church rejects both monism and the

Perseverance of the saints, which means that Calvin didn’t mean the same thing as them. He simply meant that those whom God has regenerated as the first cause, he will then begin sanctifying them because God’s the author and finisher of the person’s entire salvation. But that but not the justification has two tiers with an esqueological justification that will come based on if you’re sanctified enough and found worthy. It’s compatible with Calvin’s view to see how the true believer that’s justified will indeed be sanctified. But that sanctification does not retain a

Person’s justification. That’s right. For Calvin, it would be it would have been, you know, um that sanctification simply evidences that a person’s truly justified and they’ll remain justified because God doesn’t fail in saving a person. They’re eternally secure because God can’t fail. It’s strictly on God. his Calvin believed and as I do I I you you’re you said you’re a monist so you I think you believe this as well but um at least in Calvin’s case Calvin believed that God can’t fail in saving a person not that God made something a possibility and now the opportunity is

There for you to meet the conditions of salvation but that God I would say a little bit differently to that but yeah but he’s essentially saying that God essentially does cannot fail in the salvation of a person and salvation includes calling, predestining, electing, justifying, sanctifying, glorifying, etc. Calvin’s view was that God does all of that perfectly. It’s not you co-laboring alongside him. It’s not that man doesn’t do anything and man has no part to play. This is getting a little off track here, but essentially he’s saying God is eternally sec or or a

Person’s eternally secure because God can’t fail. The SDA model cannot say the same because their God has done all he can do. Now you need to partner with him in the great controversy. Get empowered in that war over the law to begin keeping it and work hard to get to a condition in which you keep the law perfectly or you won’t be saved and receive esqueological justification. Because what did Ellen White tell us earlier? Man must do his part in overcoming. Yeah. Not at all what John Calvin believed the scriptures taught. He taught Christ overcame entirely and

In the place of his people as the second Adam. His perfect life is a substitute for them before God the father and they are seen as totally righteous at the point of justification. Furthermore, he also believed in positional versus experiential sanctification. Caleb, do you know the difference between the two? Uh positional justification is that we’re we’re declared righteous. I mean, I’ve said it a thousand times already, haven’t I? We’re declared righteous um and uh by faith apart from works. We have a legal standing before God. Um and um what was the other one you said?

Experiential sanction. Experiential. That’s the work of the Holy Spirit that’s done in us. U through God’s grace as we live out the Christian life. Um we don’t, you know, instantly become sinless. uh but through the process of sanctification we become more and more conformed into the image of Christ. Uh but that that sanctification is not meritorious for salvation. Yes. Positional versus sanct uh experiential sanctification. Positionally before God, we’re already entirely sanctified. Yeah. Our standing before God is secure because Christ stands in our place. But

Experientially, we’re not fully sanctified over the course of our life. the old man is slowly put to death and the new man shines forth. But again, not to retain justification before God and not that you’ll achieve glorification before the erection uh the the resurrection. He did not agree with the impartation of righteousness that Adventism teaches. In fact, I’ve shown this on my channel before. There’s an Adventist scholar by the name of Roy Ga. He had an article that he wrote in a a ministry magazine where he tried to argue that the avenous view of justification is the same as

Early Martin Luther and John Calvin. Well, I showed in John Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, which he tried to cite from that Calvin wrote against Andreas Oander, who was a Lutheran at the time of the day, who himself was advocating for something very similar to the SDA belief, and Calvin rebukes him in the in the institutes. But Roy Gaines cites a part of John Calvin’s Institutes where Calvin is steelmanning OC Andrews position and then Roy Gaines cites that as though that’s what John Calvin’s position was. But no, he pulled it clearly shows he

Didn’t read what he was pulling from. He either inherited this from somebody else or he quote mined and didn’t realize he quoted from where John Calvin is citing somebody else and their position before he then decimates that position. He’s writing against the exact thing that the Adventist is trying to advocate for. So yeah, nevertheless, notice this same chapter. Quote, “Some incorrectly believe that the ultimate perfection that glorification will bring is already available to humans. But Paul wrote near the end of his life, “Not that I’ve already attained or am

Already perfected, but I press on that I may lay hold of that for which Christ Jesus has laid hold of me. Brethren, I do not count myself to have apprehended. But one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the price of the up upward call of God in Christ Jesus.” Sanctification is a lifelong process. Perfection now is ours only in Christ. But the ultimate all comprehensive transformation of our lives into the image of God will take place at the second advent. Close quote. Now what’s

Funny about this is that their prophetist who they literally cite in the next paragraph had this to say about probation and what it’s for. Back to sons and daughters. quote, “We’re not to settle down expecting that a change of character will come to us by some miraculous work when Jesus shall appear in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” No, my young friends, we’re judgment bound, and probation is granted to us here in this life for what? In order that we may form characters for the future immortal life. Close quote. So, she contradicts the

Current fundamental beliefs book. He claimed that when Jesus returns at the second advent, no change in character will take place. That’s what your probation now is for. For you to develop a character that’s necessary for the future immortal life, aka you have to be fit for heaven. Totally sinless. The fundamental beliefs book said that some people believe incorrectly on this, but the people they’re referring to are Adventists within their own ranks who got this from Ellen White and the pioneers. the issue that it’s all the issue is is that it’s all supposedly inspired and

Coming from God. Yet, she talks out of both sides of her mouth so both parties can appeal to her. And then they just go back and forth arguing. Well, here’s what she meant. No, here’s what she meant. Well, no, she contradicts herself. She didn’t even know what she believed. She’s constantly learning, constantly changing, constantly growing, etc. Yet, it’s all supposedly from God. Because the quote from the fundamental beliefs book also said the ultimate transformation back into the image of God will take place at the second advent. Well, Ellen White said in the great

Controversy that being made in God’s image was speaking of both our character and our physical form. But hold up. In sons and daughters, she claimed that no change in character take takes place at the second coming. That’s what probation now is for. It’s for you to get back into the perfect image of God. develop a perfect character before probation closes when the investigative judgment ends. And this is part of what vindicates God’s character from Satan’s accusations. So which one is it? A change of character will come at the second advent or no change in character

At the second advent. Can’t have it both ways. According quote that where it says there’s no change. quote, “We’re not to settle down expecting that a change of character will come to us by some miraculous work when Jesus shall appear in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” That’s what probation is granted for. Now, so she’s clearly denying there in that statement. Just go back to it. She’s clearly denying here. She’s saying, “Don’t think that, you know, you’re going to have this change of character uh by some miraculous work when Jesus

Returns.” uh rather uh he says she says no my young friends you know we’re judgment bound and probation is granted now to us in this life in order that we may form character and it’s within this um you know lifetime that we have to prepare to face that judgment you’re not going to get a miraculous change on judgment day it’s going to you’re going to have to do that now in order to the only thing that changes the only thing that changes at the at the second coming in the classical model is you get a new body made out of new particles because they don’t believe resurrection the way

That Christians do. You get a new body made of new particles that basically won’t decay, but your character is locked in. When you die, your character is locked in for eternity. So, probation is now for you to develop a perfect character. Well, what does she say in great controversy? Being made in the likeness and image of God is having the same character. Yeah. So, you see what I’m saying? Yeah. Yet they told us back in the fundamental beliefs book, some incorrectly believe that the ultimate perfection that glorification will bring is already available to

Humans. Oh, you mean you’re prophetus? Yeah. Yeah, that’s right. So they’re they’re actually condemning. So and that’s what I mean like some some people don’t believe what Ellen White taught. Exactly. And that becomes a problem because she’s part of the fundamental beliefs. She’s part of one of the pillars that I showed earlier and she’s one of the mutually supportive clusters that keep all the stuff intact. Yeah. You remove one of those pillars, there’s no longer mutually supportive clusters. They fall apart. You have to have the whole thing. So, I did that for a while.

That’s the thing. When I went Adventist light, I call it where I’m like, “Oh, well, I just don’t believe Ellen White. I never read Ellen White.” You know, I I grew up in like a real milktoast evangelical SDA type household. Um, it wasn’t this like super staunch conservative Adventism. Um, and so I I I was like, well, you know, you can be an Adventist and not believe Ellen. But when I started to study this stuff systematically, man, I’m just a systematic thinker. Um, you know, I want to know am I thinking things that contradict one another? Am I believing things that if I

Believe this over here, does that cause me problems over here type thing. And that’s how theology is. It’s a system. Yeah. And so she’s a part of the system. You can’t just pull her out and then be like, well, but see, that’s what they’ve tried to do, you know, whether they’re it’s hard to keep up with two million words, the woman and her secretaries and the people she stole from and etc. It’s like, you know, two million words is a lot of words to to sift through. But as you can see, they put this in the book because modernity has shifted on this

And now they they say, well, you know, we’re all gonna struggle with sin our whole life, you know. Oh, right. So, it’s not about vindicating God then. Yeah. Yeah, that this is supposed to be the central component of your whole paradigm. This is supposed to be the theological God particle. This is supposed to be the antidote to theological division that you guys are distinct from Babylon. You guys are united in ways that everyone else is all confused and divided, but we have the theological God particle. Yet here they are. Exactly. Yet here they are

Contradicting their own prophetus that eight chapters later in this book they tell us the purpose of her being given one of them out of like six reasons they give is she supposed to correct division and disunityity. Yet you have Adventists that will appeal to this that still affirm and say no we have to we can we can have total victory. And even Fritz was bringing that up in the discussion. He used all the buzzwords, a prepared people. Um, oh, I don’t think he he brought that up, but he did say a total victory. We can have total victory. We heard that in the

Over known known sins. Exactly. So, they just they sometimes I wonder like do they deny certain thing like do they have like do they lower the bar a bit, you know? Exactly. Of course. Well, yeah. And and like you heard it’s like, well, it’s only known sins. Okay. Well, then why did the uh the law require them to have entire ceremonies and um sin offerings for unintentional and sins and ignorance? Yeah. And then that guy who touched the ark uh to stabilize it and he was struck dead and you know, you’ve got the people of Israel and they attacked the city of

Ai that the whole community lost the battle and people died because um one of them, you know, had uh uh taken something from Babylon that he shouldn’t have and the whole community suffered because of it. You got all sorts of all sorts of things, you know. Yeah. Well, yeah. And they lower the bar basically. And that’s what you find very quickly in Adventist theology. The bar is very low for sin. It’s like the reason they think that they can do it is because they have this very truncated view of sin. But according to their application of Philippians 3 12-14, which they cite

There, they basically admit that Ellen White contradicts the Bible in Sons and Daughters because they said people who think glorification can occur before the second coming are wrong according to Paul. Yeah. Furthermore, Whoops. The fundamental beliefs uh the fundamental beliefs book also contradicts their own church paper from uh 1889 which was informed by statements that Ellen White made. And I could show you a whole boatload of statements. This is just one example. Quote, “And Enoch walked with God and he was not for God took him.” Genesis 5:24, “It’s only a

Short city to the heavenly hills, brethren, if we walk with God.” In John 15:10, Jesus tells us he kept his father’s commandments. He did not say I’m trying to keep them. But he says I have kept them. Remember the model man, the great example. So it is not enough that we try to keep the commandments. We must keep them. The character of the saints is not established by their failures to keep the commandments of God, but by their success in doing so. Those who simply try to keep the commandments are moral cripples. They do not walk with God. They simply hobble

Along after him. Close quote. That was p that was published when Ellen White was still alive. If you’re not keeping the law perfectly, you’re not actually following God. You’re only hobbling along after him as a moral Seventh Day Adventists are supposed to be characterized by their total victory and perfect lawkeeping, not trying their best. Jesus was the model man. He was the perfect example. You have to overcome as perfectly as he did. Again, this statement is actually in harmony with the great controversy theme and God needing to vindicate his

Character from Satan’s accusations. The modern fundamental belief book is not. And we were told by Herbert Douglas that the great controversy theme is supposed to bring coherence to all biblical subjects resulting in total theological unity, not contradictions and double speak. So they are in quite the bind on this subject and they have been for a long time now. brother, before transitioning to the last section, thoughts, comments, anything that you want to add? No, I think it’s pretty clear that um they’ve got some contradict internal contradictions and um they believe that

We have to keep that they’ve got these two tiers of justification um initial justification and esqueological justification. Um we have to uh perform perfect a character in this life. Um, it seems like Ellen White was clearly a false prophet who taught a worksbased gospel. So, yeah. Yep. And it’s not that, you know, Adventists are going to tell you, Caleb, they’re going to say, “Well, the Adventist church has changed. I just had an Adventist.” And I love this guy, man. He comments on our videos all the time. He’s a pastor in the SDA church. He’s one of these neoadventists

Um that that want you to believe. Well, we’ve repented from those errors. We’ve changed. And they’ll appeal to things like the fundamental beliefs book. The problem, folks. The problem, Ellen White contradicts herself because she she changed and developed over time, which Adventist scholars recognize. But the problem is she claimed both periods came from God. Yeah. That’s the problem. You kind of filter her as someone who gave inspired writings and then Yeah. reject what she said. Yeah. But then Caleb, you get into their issue of how they define inspired.

Okay. They don’t believe the same thing we do. And and so that’s a whole discussion for another day. But see, it’s this endless cyclical cycle because it the great controversy paradigm really does inform everything in their worldview. Now, I mean, I don’t know why they don’t just chuck all that stuff out and just uh go by the scriptures, you know, you won’t have because then they would lose their identity. The thing is is their movement has this unique identity and it has from the beginning. So the Adventists that try to these neoadventists, the modern the modernists

Who try and do this whole like we’ve changed, you know, things are different, bro. We understand imputation now. We’re gospel- centered. We’re gospel adventists. What those people don’t understand is that again, when you remove one of the pillars, the whole thing collapses. The whole selling point for being a Seventh Day Adventist is supposed to be that they’re God’s end times remnant people. M they’re identified as the ones keeping the commandments of God and they have the faith of Jesus which they mean is aka we have the apostolic faith rediscovered essentially. And so if they

Just give the stuff up and say ah well okay she was wrong there’s no selling point to become an SDA anymore. We’re not they’re Babylon. They’re no different than we are on their own definition of Babylon. They they become just another they become no different than everybody else. Yeah. And I I pray that happens. That’d be lovely. This whole idea of we have this special knowledge and special insight that no one else has. That plays into people’s ego and pride and really just people’s natural inclination to want to feel like they’re a part of something bigger than themselves. Um and

Then Adventism kind of takes that a step further by saying, “But we’re special special out of all of that.” So that’s really why they they can’t just nyx it because if they do the people at the higher echelons, the theologians, they know they know that if they were to do this, the whole thing topples down. It falls over. And I show a quote all the time on my platform from he was a a general conference president, which is basically like the highest position you can get in their organization. Um GI Butler, where he states that the the the message of

Adventism and Ellen White’s visions are a package deal. if if if one goes, the other goes with it. And he says that people can’t the Adventists that can’t see this are so blind that they don’t understand this. He was dealing with a I believe that quote was from 1883. And he was dealing with the fact that there was a lot of schism at the time between Adventists who were at a fork in the road of how should we view Ellen White, which then eventually led to 1888 and the 1919 Bible Conference, which was um two key significant areas in 7th Day Adventist history. But the point being

That that’s essentially why because if you do that, Caleb, they lose their whole identity and they’re in an identity crisis. Now, I’ll explain their understanding of sanctification and righteousness a little more. Then we’ll wrap things up with the investigative judgment, which you guys briefly talked about. Yeah. But notice this is from their church paper, Ellen White review and Herald, June 4, 1895. quote, “Righteousness within is testified by to by righteousness without. He who is righteous within is not hard-hearted and unsympathetic, but day by day he grows into the image of

Christ.” Remember what we talked about that earlier. Going on from strength to strength. He who is being sanctified by the truth will be self-controlled and will follow in the footsteps of Christ until grace is lost in glory. The righteousness by which we are justified is imputed. The righteousness by which we are sanctified is imparted. The first is our title to heaven. The second is our fitness for heaven. Close quote. So here you see another one of the SDA’s favorite quotes to try and explain their view of justification and sanctification. And you’ll see that she

States that you are imputed with righteousness but then also imparted. Yeah. The imputation of Christ’s righteousness in their model refers to that initial justification. You get a clean slate. Yeah. Here is proof of an example of this. Desire of Ages. Remember folks, this is one of the books. Selected messages book three, page 122, paragraph 2. Ellen White said, “This book is barricaded by a thus saith the Lord.” Quote, “The law requires righteousness, a righteous life, a perfect character, and this man has not to give. He cannot meet the claims of

God’s holy law, but Christ coming to the earth as man lived a holy life and developed a perfect character. These he offers as a free gift to all who will receive him. His life stands for the life of men. Thus they have remission of sins that are passed through the forbearance of God. More than this, Christ imbuss men with the attributes of God. He builds up the human character after the similitude of the divine character, a godly fabric of spiritual strength and beauty. Thus, the very righteousness of of the law is fulfilled in the believer in Christ. God

Can be just and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Romans 3:6. Close quote. This is the righteous robe that she mentioned earlier in the review in Herald. God being the just and the justifier in Romans is supposed to mean that Jesus developed a perfectly righteous character in his life as the great example. He then gives of himself freely to all that will receive him. And those that come to him by faith in the merits of his sacrifice, they receive remission for their sins that are passed. That’s initial justification. the title to heaven but you’re not

Reconciled yet. So they like so what they basically believe when because when we use the word justification we like as evangelical Christians we say okay somebody is declared legally righteous before God before the judgment throne of God we’re declared legally righteous and that justification uh is uh received through faith and that that will stand us into eternity that there’s nothing else we don’t need a second justification or anything like that this initial justification is the only justification we need. But for them, when you say we’re justified

By faith before the throne of God in heaven, etc., you can use all that language, but they’re still looking at it like, “Oh, yes, but this is initial justification so that you can then perfect a righteous character and stand before God on the final day of judgment by your own merits.” This is how they’re viewing it. And and I think that’s the big distinction where Fritz and I were or Fitz, sorry, Fitz and I were speaking past each other because I’m like, I don’t understand. We’re justified by faith. He’s like, yes, we’re justified by faith. I’m like, well, why do we need

To these works, you know? Well, because you need to stand before God on your own merits on judgment day. Faith in their view is just this initial right standing before God so that you can then have a second chance to perfect a righteous character. Yeah. And I’m going to get into they’re gonna take major umbrage with you saying your own merits. And I’ll show you what they mean in their model, but it it doesn’t get them off the hook. Even though they do this whole like, well, it’s not our merits. I’ll show you I’ll show you I’ll show you how fundamentally you’re still

Saying the same thing. Yeah. Even though you’re not saying that, of course, that in the model it’s Jesus’s merits allegedly. Basically, Caleb, but don’t they also say that you stand before God without a mediator on the final judgement? Yeah. And so that’s that again that plays into the model. That’s why you have to get to a totally sinless condition like Jesus because we’re going to look at what Ellen White called the courtroom scene. Jesus is going to cease being a mediator and Satan’s going to be there accusing you. You’re not going to physically be there, but you’ll be there

By way of your record in the books. Yeah. So when your book gets open during the courtroom scene, Satan’s going to be accusing you. And Jesus will have ceased being a mediator and he will move to being an advocate. But he’ll only be able to successfully advocate for people who have no sins left on the book because those who do, Satan will be able to say, “See, they weren’t able to do it.” And Jesus won’t lawfully be able to advocate for them. Now, we will get to that. I don’t want to get ahead of myself, but they’re going to take major umbrage with you saying anything about

It’s not our merits. It’s not our merits. But I’ll save that for when we get to there. M even even if you take that argument where they say um where um it’s Christ it’s not not I that do it but Christ in me even if you take that that’s still irrelevant because justification has nothing to do with any works whether it’s Christ working it in you or not that justification by faith which is the only justification we need through into eternity that justification comes to us by faith apart from works yes so just to reiterate for so people Understand the Adventist Jesus gives of

Himself freely to all that will receive him. Those that come to him by faith in the merits of his sacrifice, they receive remission for their sins that are passed. That’s the initial justification, the title to heaven. But you’re not reconciled yet. He then begins building up your character after his because the law requires a perfect righteousness, not simply trying your best. M and since Jesus developed a a perfect character as a man, he now has the ability to impart those righteous merits to you, eventually getting you to a position where you have a character as

Perfect as his. That’s what I’m saying about them taking umbrage with you, saying it’s their own merits. They’re going to say, “No, no, no. If you get to a perfect state of lawkeeping, it’s Jesus’s merits in you. They’ve been imparted to you such that now you have the power to keep the law perfectly, but it’s still Jesus’s merits. See the slipperiness? Yeah. Yeah. And when someone accomplishes this with Jesus’s help, the very requirements of the law are then fulfilled in you, the believer. Thus, you’re finally fitted for heaven. Yeah. This is to say that in

Their model, you could receive initial justification, but not final justification. You could have the title to heaven but not the fitness which would So on judgment day your final judge justification before God is not based on faith alone it’s by faith plus works. Yeah. And and they have you know people like Dennis PBY. He’s one of these old school sort of SDA classicalists if you will. Um he always talks about he likes to use the language of well it’s not it’s not salvation by works. It’s just that you have to meet the conditions of salvation. There are

Conditions that you have to meet. Yeah. And then again, if you take umbrage with this, it’s like, oh, well, that’s because you’re a Calvinist. Well, we’re not I’m not Yeah. So, it’s like, well, no, that excuse only works, unfortunately, because I am. But, um, it only works on people who who happen to be, but even then, it’s like, well, no, this is just like standard evangelicalism. Yeah. You know, like this has nothing to do with my own systematic theology. Yeah. Yeah, but this is to say that like I said in their model, you could have an initial

Justification but not final justification. You could have the title for heaven but not the fitness, which really means the title for heaven is really useless unless you get the fitness for heaven. And they’ll say this isn’t works based because the merits, like I said, are ultimately coming from Jesus. Now, notice what the late SDA theologian Norman Gully says about the SDA church’s theory of atonement. quote, “Rightly used, the word substitutionary in no way conotes that Christ took our place in living a perfect life so that we do not need to be fitted for heaven.

It need not conote this any more than it conotes that he ascended into heaven in our place.” The word substitutionary properly employed applies solely to Christ taking our place at the cross, doing for us what we could never do for ourselves, that is perish in the second death. Revelation 26, and still live for eternity. In paying the price for our sins, he alone could be our substitute. This is the most glorious good news, the wondrous exchange. Close quote. Now, Caleb, you’ve mentioned the great exchange a number of times tonight. 2 Corinthians 5, he who knew no sin became

Sin so that we might become the righteousness of God. Norman Gully, which was a he was a systematic theologian, folks, a professor, a lauded theologian within the Adventist world, a qualified source to explain this. He disagrees with you saying that. That’s not the exchange that took place. The only exchange that took place was that he took the penalty that you should receive. That’s it. Yeah. But it it does say the problem with that argument is that it says he who knew no sin became sin for us. So our sinfulness was imputed to Christ so that the

Righteousness of Christ so that we might become the righteousness of Christ. That’s the opposite of that which is Christ’s righteousness being imputed unto us. If you get rid of one, you have to get rid of the other. If you get rid of the imputed righteousness of Christ, well then you can’t have Jesus on the cross dying for our sins. You can’t have Jesus becoming sin for us. You You’ve got to accept both of these imputations for the system to work. They’re going to basically say, “Well, Christ becoming sin for us is him paying the penalty for it.” Like he paid the penalty for our

Sins, which is exactly what Gully puts forth here. But when the SDA church talks of substitutionary atonement, they do not mean penal substitution. And this is important to grasp as Gully points out by substitute they mean that the believer is credited with uh they do not mean sorry excuse me they do not mean that the believer is credited with the passive and active obedience of Christ. His life Jesus’s does not stand in your place in that way. He only paid the penalty for sin which is death. Not both. You still have to be as perfect as Jesus was and be fitted for heaven. You must

Experience total sanctification such that you prove you’re safe to let into heaven vindicating God in the law etc. So I guess Norman Gully is also out of sync with the fundamental beliefs book too. When they talk about righteousness they fundamentally mean something different than we do because as Herbert Douglas told us the GCT informs how they define that term. quote, “When it is the heart to obey God, when efforts are put forth to this end, Jesus accepts this disposition and effort as man’s best service, and he makes up for the deficiency with his own

Divine merit.” Close quote. So, this is how the fitness for heaven starts. They don’t claim that it’s an instantaneous immediate victory over every single sin. Fitz made sure to bring this up in your discussion. It does not however negate that the model itself does indeed teach you must achieve total sinlessness in order to be fit for heaven. It could be oh sorry it could be visually represented like this. You come to the adventist Jesus truly repentant. The very first bar he forgives all your past sins and you receive a clean slate. You’re now on the

Pathway to ultimately being reconciled to God, but you aren’t yet. You now have a newfound desire to keep the law because the law is going to be written on your heart according to Jeremiah 31 in the new covenant. So when you put forth your best efforts to keep the law, Jesus makes up where you fall short. Thus, the demands of the law are being fulfilled in you through Christ. But as you go along, less and less of that impartation should be taking place because you’re becoming holier and holier. Eventually, you should get to a place where this is no longer needing to

Happen. You’re keeping the law perfectly, vindicating God from Satan and demonstrating that all to all the watching intelligences of both Earth and other worlds that God’s law is fair, it can be kept, etc. Thus, you’re now fit for heaven. you meet the conditions to enter. And one such proof of this is in great controversy, and I could show you far more. But notice, as if we haven’t seen enough already. Quote, “Now, while our great high priest is making the atonement for us, that’s referring to the investigative judgment, like we’re going to see in a moment, we should seek

To become perfect in Christ.” Okay, what’s that? Not even by a thought could our savior be brought to yield to the power of temptation. Satan finds in human hearts some point where he can gain a foothold, some sinful desire is cherished, by means of which his temptations assert their power. But Christ declared of himself, “The prince of this world cometh and hath nothing in me.” John 14:30. Satan could find nothing in the son of God that would enable him to gain the victory. He had kept his father’s commandments and there was no sin in him that Satan could use to his advantage.

This is the condition in which those must be found who shall stand in the time of trouble. Close quote. Look at my chart. The time of trouble begins when the close of probation starts. So notice that in light of her statement. If you want to make it through the coming time of trouble, you have to be as sinless as Jesus was. When probation closes, Caleb, you mentioned it earlier. That’s when when the Adventist Jesus will cease being a mediator. So, he ceases being a mediator. You have to be totally sinless by that point. So, you can stand during the time of trouble

Because during the time of trouble is when the courtroom scene is taking place. It’s because of statements like this in 1888 that you have the church making statements the following year claiming that if you’re not perfectly keeping the commandments, you’re a moral like we saw earlier. So, in order to make it through the coming time of trouble, you have to be as sinless as Jesus was. So, this nonsense of of trying your best, it’s like no, she says this is the condition that those must be found who will stand in the time of trouble. That’s before the second

Coming. And how sinless was Jesus, Caleb? Oh, perfectly sinless in in every sense. You know, as she says here, you know, not even a um you know, a sinful desire or um what did she use here? She used a thought that not even a thought, an evil thought of any kind was because Jesus is the great example. Yeah. You have to become like that. Uh he’s the model condition in which you must be found if you want to stand in the time of trouble. Pretty crazy. Pretty crazy. I mean, when they try to argue this stuff, man. It just like So, all of this is out of context. Every bit

Of it is out of context. All of it’s out of context. We have no clue. I have no clue what I’m talking about here. No, dude. This is systematically part of it. And there was a point in time where Adventists owned this. But in modernity, the longer time goes on, the worse it gets for their movement. Time is the biggest enemy of a of a movement that was born out of a failed time prophecy. So the longer time goes on, they’ve had to try and say, “Well, to make inroads with Christians, we got to start changing some of this stuff and we got to try and look and appear like we’re no

Different than they are.” But there was a point in time where Adventists owned this stuff. They’re trying to give out a billion copies of the Great Controversy. This is supposed to be the prancipium, the the chief cornerstone of her, you know, her her magnum opus. It’s supposed to be her her pinnacle work. And here it is right there. The condition that Jesus was in is what you have to get into. This quote contradicts what we read in the fundamental beliefs book earlier. You know, there’s some people out there, Caleb, that are saying you can achieve

Glorification before the second coming. Oh, you mean you’re prophetus? Yeah. Yeah. Over and over and over again. Yeah. Yeah. Again, the fundamental belief number 10 that that Fitz tried appealing to claims that everyone’s going to struggle with sin their whole life and perfection of character is not going to come till the second coming. Yeah. Okay. And again, I mentioned this earlier and I’m just going to show it so people can see it. Selected messages, book three, page 122, paragraph 2. Quote, “How many have read carefully Patriarchs and Prophets, Great Controversy, and Desire

Of Ages? I’ve cited from all those tonight. I wish all to understand that my confidence in the light that God has given stands firm because I know that the Holy Spirit’s power magnified the truth and made it honorable, saying, “This is the way. Walk ye in it.” In my books, the truth is stated, barricaded by a thus saith the Lord. The Holy Spirit traced these truths upon my heart and mind, as indelibly as the law was traced by the finger of God upon the tables of stone, which are now in the ark to be brought forth in the great day when sentence will be pronounced

Against every evil seducing science produced by the father of lies. Close quote. So, crazy. So, which one is it? Is great controversy right or is the fundamental belief book right? Yeah. Ellen claimed the words in Great Controversy are from God. So, was Ellen wrong in the fundamental beliefs book right, which means it’s not barricaded by a thus sayeth the Lord and Ellen’s a false prophet, or is the fundamental beliefs book out of harmony with Ellen White, which means it needs to be corrected to better reflect what God has allegedly shown them from his throne

Room, and they need to rethink their understanding of Philippians 3. You can’t have it both ways. Yeah. This is why Adventism is in such a mess of doctrinal confusion. And Adventists have been thrown about by every wind of doctrine, not knowing what to actually believe, despite the great controversy supposedly making Adventism immune from such confusion. Caleb, any thoughts or comments before transitioning to the investigative judgment and its role in all of this, which is the final step here? No, I mean that that last bit there where she says that, you know, her her

Books, you know, are barricaded by thus says the Lord and uh the Holy Spirit traced these thoughts, these truths upon her heart and mind as indelibly as the law of God was traced by the finger of God upon the tablets of stone. I mean, that’s that’s crazy. That’s really crazy. Just honestly, but they’re not equal with the Bible. But they’re not equal with the Bible, they’ll tell you. That’s right. Yeah. No, no, no. They’re just light that shines onto the Bible. They’re the lesser light that points to the greater light. You know, the whole point of solar scriptor is that the only

Infallible source of authority is the word of God. And yet, she’s claiming that she’s that her writings are an infallible source of authority. So, there’s a denial of soloscriptor right there. Well, I show it all the time, man. I can show you literal statements where they outright say the infallible Bible has to be infallibly interpreted and it has to be done so by Jesus himself. You recently did a video on the spirit of prophecy. That’s what they claim the spirit of prophecy is that it’s the testimony of Jesus and the testimony of Jesus is wherever Jesus is

Speaking. So he’s speaking allegedly through Ellen White’s writings. this whole silliness that they do of like well no it’s the they’ll try and do stuff like well you can’t have Ellen you know Ellen White’s writings don’t replace the Bible we’re not claiming that that’s not the criticism I’m not claiming solar scriptorra which is that the scripture alone is the final and sole infallible authority for all matters related to Christian faith and practice you know they’re saying no there’s another author authority uh and that is the writings of Ellen White that he’s

Also infallible and uh uh for matters relating to Christian faith and practice. So yeah, that’s a denial. That’s the that’s the issue. It’s pretty it’s pretty crazy and really it’s it’s very similar again to the Roman Catholic Church because they have their magisterium, you know, that the uh Bible must be interpreted by the Catholic magisterium. Um you can’t just grab a Bible and read it for yourself. you have to have the Catholic magisterium in order to understand it. And in the same way, this is what you know, Ellen White is is basically saying as well. Two

Things on that. One, to be fair to Roman Catholics, not that I’m saying that you’re misrepresenting them, but just to clarify for people, um, even the even Rome hasn’t made the crazy claim that the Adventist Church has. Rome has only claimed to infallibly interpret a handful of passages of the Bible. The Adventist Church claims that Ellen White’s commentary on the whole Bible M is an infallible. So they’ve at least gone consistent with like we’re going to put our flag our flag down and we’re going to say that we have an infallible interpret. That’s what their Bible

Commentary is. It’s the Ellen White SDA Bible commentary. Yeah. It’s her comments on any given passage. And that’s what their statement of confidence in her writings clearly states. Folks, this stuff’s not hidden. I show this all the time on my channel where they clearly state that the the writings of Ellen White, they uplift the normative character of scripture. Yeah. And they correct inaccurate interpretations of it derived from tradition, human reason, and and uh modern culture. So that literally what they’re saying is she’s an infallible interpreter. But I have it interesting

To make a video contrasting the claims of, you know, Ellen White and the Seventh Day Adventist Church with the claims of the Catholic Church and show the similarities that they have. But how much more insane the Adventist claim is. Yeah, that’s right. Like at least Rome ethics. At least Rome’s not trying to say, you know, it’s like papal pronouncements. There’s been like the the pope has spoken ex Cathedral like what, like three times in human history or something like that. Yet the pope of Adventism has spoken ex Cathedra like hundreds of thousands of times

Supposedly. So yeah, they really screw themselves on that. The second thing is Caleb, it’s not just that Ellen White is the uh second infallible rule of faith and practice for Adventism. And I’m glad that you defined it correctly. That’s correct. Solos scriptor is not Bible only. It’s that the Bible’s the only infallible rule of faith and practice. But they have a third infallible uh rule of faith and practice as well. Ellen White said that the general conference when in session is God’s most authoritative body on the planet. And when they when they make a decision on

Something, your private opinion has to be yielded to that. Yeah. Yeah. So they have Ellen White, the general conference in session, and the Bible. Yeah. All three of those things. And you can’t really understand the Bible without Ellen White. So when they do this whole like, well, you can just read the Bible. Well, no. Your organization’s telling us if we do that, we’re not going to actually be able to understand what it’s what’s saying. We’re supposed to have Ellen White who’s supposed to clarify for us and they’re supposed to be 100% harmony and unity when we rally around

That. Yet, as we’re seeing here, their own fundamental belief book contradicts their own uh prophetus. Yeah. So, we already saw what Norman Gully said about substitutionary atonement and that they don’t mean the same thing Protestants and evangelicals do uh regarding penal substitutionary atonement. But it goes much deeper than this. To really understand the investigative judgment, Caleb, you have to also understand what they mean by the word atonement. This is from salvation contours of adventiology, which is supposed to be this new gold standard work within

Adventism that is a compilation book uh of a bunch of chapters uh contributed by various SDA scholars. Norman Gully actually uh contributed uh a chapter in this. But notice what SDA theologian John Pauline writes. Quote, one of the most debated topics of Christian theology is expressed in these questions. Why the cross? What really happened at the cross? The answer to the or the answers to these questions have been widely debated under the general heading of the atonement. But when 7th Day Adventists approach the matter of atonement, an immediate

Dilemma is perceived. When Adventists talk about atonement, they refer specifically to what Jesus is doing now in the heavenly sanctuary. On the other hand, when scholars outside the 7th Adventist Church discuss the atonement, they refer specifically to the cross of Jesus Christ and what God was doing there. Close quote. This is what Ellen White is talking about when she said in that last quote while our great high priest is making an atonement for us. We should seek to become perfect in Christ. And when she said in Spirit of Prophecy volume one that through faith

In the atonement you can be redeemed. She is referring to the investigative judgment. You have to, if you’re a Christian, be paying very close attention, very close attention to when an Adventist says the atoning sacrifice versus the atonement. Two different things. Yeah. The atonement is what started in 1844 as this second phase. Now, they’ll tell you the first phase was still atonement, but they refer to that primarily as the atoning sacrifice. She mentioned that earlier. When you get empowered to come to C or you come to Christ and you have faith in his atoning sacrifice, the

Merits of his blood, you’re then empowered to begin keeping the law. The atonement is referring to what Jesus is supposedly doing in the investigative judgment, which means that yes, believing the investigative judgment is necessary to be saved unless you are ignorant of it. If you have had it explained to you and you reject it, you’ll be lost. I’ll show this later. But like my sanctification chart showed, before the close of probation, you have to get to a totally sinless condition. The second probation closes once the investigative judgment ceases. No one

Knows when. So get busy. But in Adventist theology, atonement refers to the investigative judgment, not the cross of Christ. That was where the atoning sacrifice took place and God’s law was vindicated. This is to say they teach the atonement has two phases. Jesus supposedly began the second phase of the atonement on October 22nd, 1844 when he entered into the most holy place um or or yeah of an apartment building in heaven. They believe what was on earth, the the temple that was on earth was like a scaled down model of what’s up in heaven, which is just much much

Bigger than what we saw on earth. So from the ascension until 1844, Jesus had only entered into the holy place apartment of that building. So he was doing an analogous work to the Levitical priests while they were on earth up in heaven in the holy place. He wasn’t doing a bunch of sacrifices like they were. He was using his own blood. Yeah. So he wasn’t doing a bunch of sacrifices up there, but he was only doing that outer apartment work. But on October 22nd, 1844, he entered into the most holy place to begin that most holy place work, which they say was typified

In Leviticus 16 by the day of atonement. So the day of atonement is this long drawn out period from 1844 to the present day. M and the day of atonement will end once the investigative judgment ceases. Now there is no way for me to exhaust what they claim about this because it is a very complex with many moving parts fiasco. But I want to focus on the aspect that is pertinent to your discussion with fitz and how the doctrine plays a larger role in the SDA model of reconciliation. Okay. The investigative judgment or as they will sometimes call it the pre-advent

Judgment is only one of seven steps in their sevenst step sanctuary model of salvation. The investigative judgment is step five out of seven steps through the sanctuary. It is also only one of three phases of judgment that they teach. Remember earlier when we read from Dr. Peter Vanbean where he talked about justification and they have he said in the something to the effect of you know Adventists have a very comprehensive view of of of judgment. The investigative judgment is only one of three phases of judgment that they teach. You and Fitz got into this a

Little bit. The first phase is the is the investigative judgment which is only for professed believers. The second is the millennial reign judgment. So, the thousand-year millennial reign. And the third phase is the executive or postmillennial judgment. The pre-advent judgment, like I said, is only for professed believers. And it’s a work to determine who is and isn’t fit for heaven. Before beginning the judgment of the wicked, God starts with the professing believers, starting with Adam’s generation. This is from a book, Christ in His Sanctuary. It is a compilation book

Which it’s the Ellen G. White estate who took Ellen White’s quotes and compiled them on any given subject. They do this with a lot of books. So they’ve compiled together all of her statements as it come or not all but they’ve systematized basically together her statements on the sanctuary and they lay it out for you. It’s about nine chapters long and it lays out basically in a succinct way the teaching noticing Christ in his sanctuary. Quote, “As the books of record are opened in the judgment, the lives of all who have believed on Jesus come into

Review before God, beginning with those who first lived upon the earth. Our advocate presents the cases of each successive generation and closes with the living. Every name is mentioned, every case closely investigated. Names are accepted, names rejected. When any have sins remaining upon the books of record, unrepented of and unforgiven, their names will be blotted out of the book of life, and the record of their good deeds will be erased from the book of God’s remembrance. And again, quote, “At the time appointed for the judgment, the close of the 2300

Days in 1844 began the work of investigation and blotting out of sins. All who have ever taken upon themselves the name of Christ must pass its searching scrutiny. Both the living and the dead are to be judged out of the things which were written in the books according to their works. Close quote. No sins were canceled at Calvary in their view. Which Ellen outright says in Patriarchs and Prophets. I’ve shown it I don’t know how many times. Patriarchs and Prophets page 358. People can go look it up. No sins were canceled at Calvary. But everyone has a book in heaven, and

An angel has been assigned over each person that professes faith to record their thoughts, words, deeds, and motives in this book. In the investigative judgment, Jesus is going over these books to see which sins have been confessed and which ones have not. While you’re on the path to salvation, you’re gradually receiving the imparted righteousness of Christ. When you stumble along the way, you confess that sin and it’s transferred to the book in heaven for Jesus to see if you have or haven’t confessed it. It It’s crazy because they completely undermine

Everything Jesus did on the cross. You know, Jesus paid the penalty for all of our sins on the cross. Every single one of our sins, you know, past, present, and future. He took the punishment for them, and we received the benefits of that through faith. uh but but they just don’t believe that at all. They they seem to believe this idea that we have to confess every sin, repent of every sin, and forsake every sin in order to be, you know, forgiven of those sins. And that’s just a complete undermining of what Jesus did on the cross. Well, and it’s just silly, too, because it’s

Like all of my sins were future to the cross. Yeah, that’s right. You know, Yeah. But I think I I think I slightly misspoke a second ago. When you commit a sin, the angel documents that sin and it’s transferred to the book in heaven for Jesus to see if you then confess it. Yeah. If a sin has been confessed, he blotss it out with his blood. If it hasn’t been confessed, it remains on the books and it’s going to stand against you in the courtroom scene. Something we’re going to look at momentarily. Whereas the book of Hebrews says he has perfected forever. Yeah. Those who are

Being sanctified, you know. And not just that, but chapter seven, that he lives forever by virtue of his indestructible life as a mediator forever. Yeah, he mediates forever. He’s not going to cease being a priest. That’s hot. Which Ellen White said she saw in vision that he took off his priestly garments and he put on his kingly garments. The guy I mentioned earlier, Roy Gain, he has a response to this where he’s like, well, cuz she in her vision, she sees him wearing Levitical priesthood garments, which Exodus tells us were specifically for the Levites and only for the

Levites. Yeah. Um, and Roy Gain’s response to this is, well, it’s it’s not that she literally saw him wearing Levitical priesthood garments in that he’s literally wearing them. It’s just representative of a function. Okay. Well, she claims that after the investigative judgment ceases, he’s going to take those off and put on his kingly garments. So, it’s going to represent him ceasing being a priest and a mediator, and then he’s going to put his kingly garments on and assume the role of a king. Well, they don’t understand Melkisedc. Hebrews 7:1 Jesus is a is a priest after

The order of MelkiseDC. MelkiseDC was a simultaneous priest king. Yeah. Simultaneous dual role. Not he was a priest and then he later became a king or no. And it says he lives forever and and the the the father swore and and his mind will never change. You’re a priest forever. He’s citing from Psalm 110. So that the whole thing just flies in the in the face of this. But yeah, this is what the investigative judgment is for. There’s a lot of misrepresentations out there to be fair to Adventists. There’s a lot of people out there, and I have articles on our site, for example, that

Correct this. You’ll get people that say, “Well, is Jesus learning in the investigative judgment, he has to see who is and isn’t.” That’s not their claim. Now, you might be able to through logic and deduction point out holes where it’ be like, “Well, based on what’s being said over here, that would mean this over here.” But that’s not what they claim this is for. They claim this is ultimately about the vindication of God and for it to be demonstrated to all those other intelligences that are looking in that God is who he says he is. So this is to see who’s fitted for

Heaven for them to see that see God is only going to save people that can lawfully be saved. It can be kept. The law can be kept etc. That’s what they claim this is for. It’s essentially a separation of the wheat and the tears if you will. And it’s one of the seven steps that the avenous gods are acting out to ultimately vindicate themselves from Satan. Now, you mentioned this quote in your discussion. Look at it in light of everything I’ve shown you. Whoops. Quote, “How solemn is the thought day after day passing into eternity bears its burden of records of the books of

Heaven. Words once spoken, deeds once done, can never be recalled. Angels have registered both the good and the evil. The mightiest conqueror upon the earth cannot call back to record uh the record of even a single day. Our acts, our words, even our most secret motives all have their weight in deciding our destiny for will or woe. Though they may be forgotten by us, they will bear their testimony to justify or to condemn. Close quote. A single sin on your record will disqualify you, even those that are forgotten. Remember, this judgment is only for professed believers. And it’s

For those to see who it’s it’s to see who is and isn’t fitted for heaven. And notice, quote, “Do not appeal to your own sympathies. Do not dwell upon what brother Jay has done or has neglected to do. Humble your own heart before God. You’re not to sit in judgment upon the case of others until you show greater wisdom in making straight paths for your own feet.” You may say, “Does Sister White think me all bad?” No, I do not. But one blot upon the character. One sin unconfessed or and and unrepented of will close for you the gates of the city of God. Close quote.

Here she was responding to someone that was worried about someone else’s sanctification. This was her response to them. Before worrying about someone else’s sanctification, you need to make sure you don’t have a single blot or stain on your own character because one single blot on the character will disqualify you from entering heaven. And again, in testimonies volume 5, for those that don’t know, testimonies is also like spirit of prophecy. It can be referring to a 10 volume set of books, but it can also be shorthand for the writings of Ellen White. So, this is from the series

Of books, testimonies for the church, volume 5. quote, “Not one of us will ever receive the seal of God while our characters have one spot or stain upon them. It is left with us to remedy the defects in our characters to cleanse the soul temple of every defilement. Then the latter rain will fall upon us as early uh as the early rain fell upon the disciples on the day of Pentecost.” Close quote. Not going to be getting into the seal of God and the sealing message tonight, which are two different things kind of, but one single spot or stain upon the

Character will keep one from receiving the seal of God. It’s left with who to remedy these defects. Caleb, you and me. No, it’s all of Jesus. It’s all Jesus doing it through me. I’m just this passive agent that just submits myself to Jesus and then Jesus just does it. If it’s all Jesus, then like it’s a kind of a form of election, you know, ironically enough. Yeah. Especially when they when they reject election outright when it’s like predestination. They think John Calvin originated. It’s like, well, Roman Catholics have a view of predestination. Lutheran have a view of

Predestination. Ang like what? It’s in the Bible. We have to deal with what does it mean? That that’s the the difference is what does it what does it mean? One must totally cleanse themselves from every defilement, not try their best because, hey, we’re all going to struggle with sin until we die, you know, and are resurrected to be glorified. It’s only after enough Adventists reach sinless perfection that they that they can claim the latter reign will happen. So, the latter rain in their view is just like when the the rain fell in the early church at Pentecost, the spirit

Was poured out and and this all this miraculous stuff happened. Their view and teaching is that there’s going to be a latter reign that comes right before the close of probation where once enough Adventists have basically gotten to a point where it’s almost over the top where enough people are vindicating God, God’s going to give that final little boost, if you will, and they’ll claim all sorts of people are going to have visions and dreams. And so when you press some some Adventists on Ellen White and and the fact that it’s like, well, you talk about the gift of

Prophecy, but you really just mean Ellen White. who else had the gift of prophecy. You’ll get some Adventists that are going to tell you, well, if during the latter reign, there’s going to be all sorts of prophets. That type thing. But that’s what she’s talking about here, that not one person’s going to receive the seal of God with their characters have one stain or blot upon them. And it’s left with us to remedy the defects of our characters and cleanse the temple of every defilement. And it’s once that happens, then the latter rain will fall upon the disciples

On the day of Pentecost. That’s why on my chart that I had earlier, the step before the close of probation was the falling of the latter reign. And it’s like you’re basically to the point where like there’s no more impartation of righteousness taking place. You’re like, because that all has to happen before the close of probation. The impartation of Christ’s righteousness is only available while the investigative judgment’s going on because he’s going to cease being a mediator. You you you’re not going to have that opportunity once that closes. And then

You stand before God without a mediator. And you’re going to be able to only do that because once that happens, we’re going to get into the courtroom scene here in a moment and you’ll see why that’s necessary. But this was the consistent teaching over and over and over despite her talking out of both sides of her mouth. I mentioned earlier how she said you have to believe this doctrine, the investigative judgment, to be saved. Here’s what I was referring to. Bit of a long quote here. quote, “It is those who by faith follow Jesus in the great work

Of the atonement.” Pause. Caleb, what does the atonement mean in this model? For them, it’s the entire um you know, SDA system of atonement where including 1844 and all these things that he’s supposed to be doing in heaven and investigative judgment and all that. So, they mean it’s much more than just the cross. Yeah. Because what did John Pauline tell us back in salvation contours of adventiology? When Adventists talk about atonement, they refer specifically to what Jesus is doing now in the heavenly sanctuary. That’s right. So when we read that quote

From Ellen White, it is those who by faith follow Jesus in the great work of the atonement. You could say it is those who by faith follow Jesus in the great work of the investigative judgment who receive the benefits of his mediation in their behalf while those who reject the light which brings to view this work of ministration are not benefited thereby. Get that folks. Now she uses one of her favorite examples. The Jews who rejected the light given at Christ’s first advent and refused to believe on him as the savior of the world could not receive pardon through

Him. When Jesus at his ascension entered by his own blood into the heavenly sanctuary to shed upon his disciples the blessings of his mediation, the Jews were left in total darkness to continue their useless sacrifices and offerings. The ministration of types and shadows had ceased. The door by which men had formally found access to God was no longer open. The Jews had refused to seek him in the only way whereby he could then be found, through the ministration in the sanctuary in heaven. Therefore, they found no communion with God. To them, the door was shut. They

Had no knowledge of Christ as the true sacrifice and the only mediator before God. Hence, they could not receive the benefits of his mediation. Close quote. So, if you don’t believe the doctrine of the investigative judgment, you don’t truly understand the work that Jesus is doing, and you can’t be benefited by it. You’re no different than the unbelieving Jews in Jesus’s day who rejected him as Messiah and they weren’t benefited by it. Now, a few more quotes here and we will have things wrapped up. Another reason sinless perfectionism is so vital

In their system is because they claim that mediation’s only a temporary function, like we’ve talked about, of the Adventist Jesus. And Hebrews 7 clearly contradicts this, which shows that their model clearly doesn’t understand what the mediation of Christ actually is. But she also says in Christ in his sanctuary, quote, “Those who are living upon the earth when the intercession of Christ shall cease in the sanctuary above are to stand in the sight of a holy God without a mediator. Their robes must be spotless. Their characters must be purified from

Sin by the blood of sprinkling.” That’s the work that was taking place in the investigative judgment. through the grace of God and their own diligent effort. They must be conquerors in the battle with evil. While the investigative judgment is going forward in heaven, while the sins of penitent believers are being removed from the sanctuary, there’s to be a special work of purification of putting away of sin among God’s people upon earth. This work is more clearly presented in the messages of Revelation 14. Close quote. So, in light of everything else I’ve

Shown, the second probation is for you to be able to have time to get to a totally sinless state through the imparted righteousness of Jesus. We saw what they mean by Christ’s robe of righteousness earlier. And here we see it again. Once the investigative judgment finishes, probation closes and the opportunity to get fitted for heaven is over. And if you haven’t gotten to a condition in which the law of God is perfectly fulfilled in you through the imparted merits of Jesus, you won’t be able to make it. Just like she said in Great Controversy, the time of trouble

Is going to begin and you’re not going to make it. I also want to point out how once again she states that it’s through the grace of God and your own diligent efforts that this happens. That’s not grace. So Fitz, I’m sorry. He was wrong when he tried doing the whole it’s it’s Christ doing it all thing. He may personally believe that. But he said it as though what he was saying is the official position of the organization and it’s not. It is a co-laboring work alongside Jesus. But one final reason why sinless perfection is a key component of this worksbased model of

Salvation. What Ellen referred to as the courtroom scene and I’ve mentioned a number of times. It’s often depicted in SDA art like you see on screen. After probation closes and the investigative judgment finishes, the courtroom scene begins. Jesus will cease being a mediator and switch to being an advocate. Now, sometimes they use that term interchangeably, but what I’m I’ll explain what I’m I’m getting at by that uh in a moment. It’s interesting in that picture, Jesus is at the top and the man stands, you know, in front of the law, being judged by the law, rather than

Christ standing in between him and the law. Yeah. In his place. Now, you will find some SDA art where you see it depicted differently where Jesus is sometimes he has his arm around the person and he’s pointing at the law. You’ll also see some uh later depictions which again this shows the influence of of change and development over time. You will find some depictions of it where Jesus is standing in front of the person. But after probation closes and the investigative judgment finishes, the courtroom scene begins. Jesus will cease being a mediator and become the

Advocate. He’ll only be able to lawfully advocate for those that vindicated God’s character by keeping the Ten Commandments perfectly because it’s only those individuals that Satan’s accusations won’t stand against because he’s going to be there too accusing you. Yeah. Those that still had sins on the books, Satan will be able to point to their record and his accusations will stand. He’ll be able to say, “See, they weren’t able to do it.” Jesus will only be able to be an advocate for those who received a spotless record through what was done in

The pre-advent judgment. Writing about this, Ellen White said, quote, this is the the the courtroom scene, those who in the judgment are accounted worthy will have part in the resurrection of the just. Jesus said, “They which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that world and the resurrection from the dead are equal unto the angels and are the children of God, being the children of the resurrection.” Luke 20:35-6. And again, he declares that they that have done good shall come forth unto the resurrection of life. John 5:29. My an interesting chapter to cite from the

Righteous dead will not be raised until after the judgment at which they are accounted worthy of the resurrection of life. Hence, they will not be present in person at the tribunal, that’s the courtroom scene, when their records are examined and their cases decided. Close quote. So, first you have to understand you won’t be physically present for this. You will be present by way of your record book. This will be going on during the time of trouble. And it’s why it will be uh and it’s why during the time of trouble, that quote we read earlier, you have to have gotten

To an identical uh disposition as Jesus because Satan’s going to be accusing. And if your record’s not perfectly identical to his, he’ll be able to lawfully accuse you. And it’s only those who are accounted worthy who will be able to uh partake in eternal life. But then she describes how this plays out. Long quote here, folks. Quote, “The deepest interest manifested among men in the decisions of earthly tribunals, but faintly represents the interest uh evinced in the heavenly courts when the names of uh when the names entered the wrong quote up.” Oh,

Sorry. You’re right. Uh I may have forgotten one here. Well, yep. I’m gonna have to I forgot one here. So, I’m just gonna I’m just going to read and then uh we’ll we’ll get into this. She starts by saying, “The deepest interest manifested among men in the decision of earthly tribunals, but faintly represents the interested in the heavenly courts when the names entered in the books uh in the book of life come up in review before the judge of all the earth.” The divine intercessor presents the plea that all who have overcome through faith in his blood be forgiven

Their transgressions that they be restored to their Eden home and crowned as joint heirs with himself to the first dominion. Satan in his efforts to deceive and tempt our race had thought to frustrate the the divine plan of man’s creation. But Christ now asks that his plan be carried into effect as if man had never fallen. He asks for his people not only pardon and justification but full and complete but share in his glory and a seat upon his throne. Close quote. So this what you see on screen is actually before what I just read. So I will start there and it will chain into

That. So she starts the beginning of the courtroom scene by saying while Jesus is pleading for the subjects of his grace, Satan accuses them before God as transgressors. So that’s what I’ve been mentioning. The great deceiver has sought to lead them into skepticism to cause them to lose confidence in God. Remember, during the time of trouble, he’s going to be coming after him. And if they’re not in the identical identical condition of Jesus, he’ll get them. He’s trying to uh cause them to lose confidence in God, to separate themselves from his love, and to break

His law. Now he points to the record of their lives, to the defects of character, the unlikeness of Christ, which has dishonored their redeemer, to all the sins that he has tempted them to commit, and because of these, he claims them as his subjects. Jesus does not excuse their sins, but shows their penitence and faith, and claiming for them forgiveness. He lifts his wounded hands before the father and the holy angels, saying, “I know them by name. I’ve graven them on the palms of my hand. The sacrifice of God are a broken spirit, a broken and contrite heart, oh

God, thou will not despise. And to the accuser of his people, he declares, “The Lord rebuke thee, oh Satan, even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusalem rebuke thee. It is not a brand plucked out of the fire. Christ will clothe his faithful ones with his own go uh with his own righteousness, that he may present them to his father, a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or any such thing.” Ephesians 5:27. Their names stand enrolled in the book of life. And concerning them, it is written, “They shall walk with me in white, for they are worthy.” Revelation

3:4, “As the final atonement of sins, uh uh as the final atonement, the sins of the truly penitent are to be blotted from the record books of heaven, no more to be remembered or come into mind.” So in the type they were born away into the wilderness, forever separated from the congregation. Since Satan is the originator of sin, the direct instigator of all the sins that caused the death of the son of God, justice demands that Satan shall suffer the final punishment. Christ’s work for the redemption of men and the purification of the universe from sin will be closed by the removal

Of sin from the heavenly sanctuary and the placing of these sins upon Satan who will bear the final penalty. So in the typical service, the year uh the yearly round of ministration closed with the purification of the sanctuary and the confessing of the sins on the head of the scapegoat. Close quotes. So I know that was a lot and like I said, sorry I got a little bit out of order there. But those who overcome all sin and kept the law perfectly, Jesus intercedes for them in this courtroom scene. And Jesus then asked the father uh to carry out the

Plan into effect as if man had never fallen. Remember that plan that I showed you in spirit of prophecy that he pleaded with the father three times. And what was that plan? That through faith in Christ’s merits and obedience to the law, man could have the favor of God and be brought back into the garden to eat of the tree of life. Same thing that was put forth in this quote. same thing as what’s being said here. Yeah. So, it’s a it’s a clearly a consistent theme throughout their system that uh man from the beginning the plan of salvation for man has not been that

Jesus would die on the cross for their sins and declare them righteous before the throne of God when they believe. That’s not the plan of God. The plan of God for the Seventh Day Adventist is that Christ would come, die for their sins so that they could have another opportunity of probation so that they can then perfect a righteous character throughout their life and claim through the merits of Christ and through the obedience to the law the rights of the children of God. It’s a system that they have and it’s the same from the beginning to the end. It’s not as though

We’re misrepresenting them when we say they believe in faith plus works. Um, they clearly do. Correct. And they’re going to tell you, “No, it’s not works. It’s not works.” But see, no works based system says we teach works salvation. Yeah. I mean, what you know, it’s like what works that it’s like, what worksbased system claims they teach works based salvation? Yeah. They’re going to tell you it’s not works because they don’t believe that the person’s works are meritorious. But like I showed you earlier, that’s really irrelevant because you’re still saying that what

You do has to supplement what Jesus did. That’s not the gospel. Yeah. Faith in what Jesus Christ did on the cross is not enough for someone’s eternal salvation. Uh Jesus said very clearly, you know, whoever believes on me, you know, will not be judged, will not come into the judgment, but has passed from death to life. Um it’s very clear. He explicitly says it. Um what is that verse? Um, is it John John uh judgment? Let me just quickly search. Yeah. Well, that’s why I said John. It’s John 5:23-24. Yeah. That’s why I that that’s why I said it’s so ironic that she cited John

Five in that in that quote because it’s like she literally cited from later on when it’s like well Jesus is talking about judgment for condemnation which is exactly what the investigative judgment is is a judgment for condemnation. And yet Jesus says believers don’t come into judgment for condemnation. They’re still going to stand before God at the final judgment, but it’s not going to be for condemnation. That’s right. It’s going to be different for them than it will be the person who stands giving an account by themselves where Jesus is not there.

So you’re seeing how the system takes actual truths, general truths, but then subtly twists them because of this paradigm of God is at war with Satan and he has to vindicate himself and the law is under attack. And that’s why they’re so like if you don’t agree with them on the law, they think, “Oh, see, Satan has got you and he’s convinced you and you just think people can live lawless.” And it’s this major false dichotomy. So, let me connect the dots here just to to clarify things since my slides got a little out of whack there at the end. Those that make it through the

Investigative judgment vindicated God’s law. They ended up silencing Satan’s accusations against the law just like Jesus did. They’re then found worthy of eternal life. And the glorious ones without spot or wrinkle that make up the church. That’s who will be part of God’s true people that are end up being saved. They’ll be without spot or wrinkle. That’s what Paul was supposedly talking about in Ephesians is this whole they’ll be sinlessly perfect and make it through this this process. M and after this Satan’s going to be used as a means to eliminate sin from the universe where he

Will function like the scapegoat in Leviticus 16 and have the sins of those found worthy placed upon him where he’s then going to be annihilated along with the wicked and sin will finally be removed from the universe with everyone now knowing that God is who he says he is. He’s ultimately vindicated. So that’s the role that Satan as the scapegoat basically plays in all of this which is to say that Jesus and Satan accomplish the atonement in their model because atonement for them isn’t complete until Satan is banished bearing the sins and annihilated. Now some

Adventists are going to be quick to try and downplay Ellen White say their pastor never mentions her. They don’t read her etc. At the end of the day folks none of that matters when it comes to authoritative sources that speak for Adventist theology proper. She’s baked into the cake. The organization upholds her writings as divinely inspired and direct light from the throne room of God. Not just the conflict of the ages series. You’ll get some Adventists that say that too. Is that what the statement of confidence in her writing says? No. They say her writings her writings

Don’t do specifically in the exposition outlines, you know, all these things that Yeah. Yeah. And it’s funny because the exposition of in the fundamental beliefs which I was citing from where they’re constantly utilizing her to explain the fundamental beliefs. They’re citing from across the board. They cite from all sorts of stuff. Testimonies, the conflict of the ages series, selected messages, they’re citing letters and manuscripts. They’re citing all sorts of stuff. Yet then when those of us that are critical of Adventism do, they try to do this whole like, well,

No, you can’t site from those. Those aren’t authoritative. Okay. Well, the organization says that they are. Yeah. So, she’s baked into the cake. The organization upholds her writings as divinely inspired, correcting of inaccurate interpretations of scripture, and that they’re direct light from the throne room of God. That’s the only reason I cite her, because she carries more weight than any other Adventist when it comes to speaking for SDA theology. But, Brother Caleb, I’m not sure if you were expecting quite the fire hose of information, but this is

What the SDA system of theology teaches about how a person can be made right with God. It’s entirely informed by their pre-earth origin narrative. And without actually understanding that, you’ll just talk past one another. Yeah. They’re gonna tell you it’s not a worksbased system because it’s only Jesus’s merits that have any value. But that doesn’t negate that you have to be found worthy of eternal life through your own diligent efforts, co-laboring with Jesus, getting to a totally sinless state to help vindicate God and silence Satan. So, it doesn’t really matter that

They claim it’s only Jesus’s merits. They’re still rejecting Christ alone. It’s Christ plus your co-laboring to get you to where you meet the conditions to be saved. They don’t believe the same thing evangelicals and Protestants do. Yeah. Yeah. It’s very it’s a very different system. And and I mean that was really long, but I think going through it um it it does clear it up in my mind what they believe. And so it’s this entire system that they have. And so when you discuss with um seventh day Adventists, you need to have an understanding of that so that when you

Get to the different pieces or nuances, you can clearly kind of um deal with them appropriately and say, “Okay, so are you saying this?” Because you can take them back to the different parts to clarify what they’re actually saying. Well, in a lot of individual SDAs, man, you’re going to come across if you engage with them, you’re going to get a lot of SDAs, they don’t understand all these connection points. Yeah. Yeah, they may have like you explain it to them and they’re like, “Yeah, that does sound familiar.” I mean, I’ve had I don’t know how many SDAs at this point,

Man. I’ve engaged with thousands of seven damn thousands. And there’s a spectrum. There’s going to be some that are just died in the wall. These, you know, these SDA critics of Christianity, I call them these apologists. You know, they’re they’re going to they’re going to die on this hill. They’re going to die for Adventism. They’re just I just love Adventism. anybody that says anything about Adventism. Um, you know, and those types, um, they’re going to argue every single thing you say about Adventism is wrong. They’re going to nitpick every little nuance and every

Little thing here and there. But then you’re going to get your average SDA man. They are not reading these sources. They they don’t they’re going to their SDA church. They’ve been born and raised SDA or whatever it may be and they don’t have an understanding of the systematics, but they may have nuggets or or pe pieces and parts of things or they may have been told things like, well, yeah, I know the model man stuff, but that was that the church has changed since then. And so that’s why you have these multiple streams which they’re not supposed to have. They’re supposed to

Have the theological god particle. They’re supposed to be completely united unlike Protestants who are Babylon. They’re all They’re all disunited and confused and divided. I find Seventh Day Adventism extremely confusing. Yeah. Yeah. Far Yeah. Christianity is much more simple, you know, and clear, but Seventh Day Adventism is so confusing. It’s uh crazy. But it’s it’s that confusing, man, because of all of the change. And it’s because of present truth. This idea, and me and you were talking about this a little bit before we started, it’s like this idea of

Present truth is what totally just ruins their whole thing. They treat it like a magic wand. It’s just like, oh, anytime something happens where things change, bonk. Oh, present truth. Oh, we can just move along when it’s like, well, no, it doesn’t really work that way. Your prophet has claimed to see this stuff in vision, and then in another vision, 50 years later, she’s claiming something that contradicts a previous vision, yet both are from God. Well, right because inspiration and then they’ve just changed what inspiration means. It’s like, well, her writings can have errors

Because they don’t believe the Bible’s inherent. They don’t because they don’t believe Ellen White’s writings are inherent. So, because it’s really interesting when you look at their system because their story line is very different to the Bible story line. The Bible story line when you read Genesis chapter 1, you know, in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. He created everything good. Everything was was perfect. He put man in this garden and he gave man one command you know don’t eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil and mankind

Fell into sin and as a result sin entered into the world and you know Cain you know became a murderer and you had um you know angels and I mean I don’t know what your view is but you know fallen angels coming and sleeping with men corrupting mankind more then you get the flood and and so forth you see it’s a different it seems like a different story and then the final reconciliation is that through the cross through faith in the cross, we can receive complete forgiveness of all of our sins. We can be completely reconciled to God. You know, it’s a very different story to the

Story of the Seventh Day Adventist, which begins much earlier. You know, they have this whole system going all the way back to, you know, pre-earth conditions and some sort of controversy back then that’s not even in the Bible. And somehow that then interprets the whole Bible all the way down through to um you know, the present time. So now simple faith in Christ for salvation is not enough. You’ve got to, you know, it just becomes crazy land as you keep keep going, you know. Well, and I I pointed this out a couple weeks ago, too. It’s everything is backwards in their system.

It’s even the same with like the whole idea of the remnant. It’s like their view of of God’s people is a whittling down. It gradually is getting smaller and smaller and there’s going to be the shaking where all the fake phony SDAs are shaken out of the movement and only the true SDAs are left. when actually all the prophets talked about the Messiah’s kingdom coming and it being this big expansion to all the families. It it goes from a nation state to the whole world and it’s going to keep growing and growing and growing and getting bigger and bigger and bigger.

Yet their system is this whole it’s getting smaller and smaller and smaller and whittling down. Everything is backwards in their system, man. Everything is backwards. And again, I I I have no ill will towards Seventh Day Adventist despite the amount of, you know, died in the wool SDAs that hate my guts and everything I say is wrong and everything I say is out of context and yada yada. Okay. I don’t really take those types of aveness seriously. I I have conversations with actual SDA scholars who um are on record saying things like this is the first individual

To come along who’s critically analyzed our theology and is actually fundamentally engaging with it. Now, they don’t agree with all of my criticisms. Um, but at the end of the day, it it just nullifies and and completely extinguishes this silly notion that I know nothing about Adventist theology. Everything I say is a lie. I I’m completely confused on everything. Everything’s out of context. It’s like, no, you’re coping. You’re coping. You don’t actually know the system that you’re a part of, more than likely, and you don’t understand the actual development over time. And unlike

You, I put in uh not just my upbringing within Adventism, but then 10 years of of systematic dissection, studying, etc. Before I even started a platform, I was sitting back studying and listening, um being discipled by actual Christians, and then going back and testing SDA claims and ironing all this stuff out long before I started answering Adventism. I didn’t just like leave Adventism and then a week later start this thing. Yeah. Yeah. No, they can say what they want, but at the end of the day, that’s what the Adventist system teaches. That’s what it teaches. And

They can’t get out of this. I don’t care what the neoadists say, how they’re like, “Well, we’ve rejected model man. We’ve rejected sinless perfectionism.” Well, no, you you individually may have, but you don’t understand the grave implications for your whole system that that brings about. You’re then saying that so God’s not vindicating his character. Yeah. That’s supposed to be the central crux of the great controversy is over God’s character and the keeping of the law. Yeah. So even though they don’t talk about these things like they may not be talking

About spirit of prophecy volume one or great controversy the book. Some churches are but not all SDA churches are. It’s still embedded in the cake. And all SDAs regardless of where they fall in the spectrum they still have a great controversy world view. That’s the problem. Christians don’t have a great controversy worldview. Any final thoughts that you have, brother, before we shut things down? No. Uh, it’s been uh a long three and a half hours. Yeah, I told you it’d be long, but hopefully now you have a far better grasp and understanding of of why all that

Pre-earth stuff is necessary to understand and and you saw what Douglas is saying about how that informs all of why why Jesus came. Well, why did Jesus come? Well, as we saw, it’s it’s not what Christians believe. That’s not what the Bible teaches about why Jesus came. Yeah. Jesus came to seek and save the lost. Jesus came to to fulfill all righteousness. Jesus came as the second Adam to uh be a new federal representative of those who can can can place their faith in him and be transferred from the fallen domain of darkness into the kingdom of light. Um

And a number of other things that they’re going to say they believe all those things. But again, it’s interpreted and defined by the great controversy theme. It’s not the same thing as as Christians. So folks, thank you so much for being here. May Christ richly bless you in the grace and peace won by him and his vicarious death on the cross for sinners. Hallelujah. Marinatha. Until next time, God bless.