The action of the 1986 Annual Council held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, sets the year - 1988 as a crisis year in the Adventist Community. The delegates "voted to hold a special centennial convocation in early November, 1988. The meeting will convene in Minneapolis, site of the historic session." (Adventist Review, Oct. 30,1986, p. 12 ) The report noted further that the hierarchy "initiated the commemoration to affirm the righteousness by faith doctrine and raise the level of awareness among church members."

Besides the reenactment of the 1888 session, study paper on righteousness by faith are planned. These will include discussion of such topics as: "What really happened? What were the key doctrinal issues, personalities, events, and results? How is righteousness by faith involved in specific Adventist doctrines?" In addition to the centennial celebration discussion, the Week of Prayer also scheduled for early November will likewise emphasize the subject of righteousness by faith. (ibid.) Already the tone has been set for the answers to the suggested questions for the study papers. Several books known as "The 1888 Centennial Series" are already off the press. One of these - From 1888 to Apostasy - is a devastating indictment of A. T. Jones. The author, Dr. George R. Knight, is a member of the Church History Department of the Theological Seminary at Andrews University. He is also the author of the book - Myths in Adventism.

Page 2

Having been alerted that this book was being written and due off the press in late '87, we obtained a copy as quickly as possible. The data pages of the two books by Knight differ significantly. For the book - 1888 to Apostasy - "the author assumes full responsibility for the accuracy of all facts as cited in this book." (p. 4) While this may get the hierarchy off the hook for any adverse exposure of the book, this does not clear the Ellen G. White Estate of involvement. Both in supplying documents, and in offering "helpful suggestions regarding content and format," Dr Robert Olson, Secretary of the Estate, is named. (p. 14) Of significance, it is Olson's comments that are reported in the announcement of the action of the 1986 Annual Council setting the tone and agenda for the 1988 celebration. Neither must it be forgotten that "church leaders initiated the commemoration." It will be seen as we focus attention on his book - 1888 to Apostasy - that Knight is the "hatchet man" for the devastation of A. T. Jones. But while doing this service for the hierarchy, he is assuming full responsibility for the evaluation of the data supplied to him by the various libraries and archives of the Church. Time alone will tell how great will be his reward for performing this service!

The key to his approach in writing this "biography" of A. T. Jones is discovered in the Preface. There Knight writes - "I have tried never to forget that my primary aim was to write an interpretive biography of the man." (p. 13, emphasis mine) The depth to which he went in seeking to "interpret" A. T. Jones, to his readers, is revealed in this evaluation of the man - "Because Jones frequently did not really believe he was wrong when reproved [by Ellen G. White], his differences with Mrs. White festered in the subterranean compartments of his mind." (p. 228, emphasis mine) This is judgment gone wild! How can anyone human being read the subconscious of another, let alone motive? And then, Knight is at least removed eighty years from the event being "interpreted"!

This is only one example of the lengths to which this author went in seeking to "kill" A. T. Jones, a man whom he admits was "powerful" and "one of the most fascinating personalities ever to grace a Seventh-day Adventist pulpit." (p. 11)

This book also brings Wieland and Short to their moment of truth. Knight forthrightly deals with the questions of "denominational repentance." He writes:

Recent years have seen a call for corporate repentance on the part of the Adventist Church. That is an interesting appeal, since it has a biblical basis. Unfortunately, that base rests upon the corporate nationhood of Israel in the Old Testament. Since the beginning of the gospel era God has worked with individuals rather than nations or groups. People must accept and apply righteousness by faith as individuals. It is not a creedal enactment by the church leaders for members. In the era of the priesthood of every believer, individual commitment and surrender is the only avenue of gospel appeal ... The whole idea of corporate repentance is not very helpful. (p. 64)

The answer to the position taken by Dr. Knight can be found in both the Bible and the Writings. In Jesus' prophecy found in Luke 21:24, it is evident that God was still dealing with nations or Gentiles (same word in the Greek) as corporate entities when He permitted the "signal" which marked the close of their probation. The research of this prophecy by the editor of this Thought Paper, Elder D. K. Short declared "holds water" but Wieland will have no part of it! Then in Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 5. pp. 207-209, it clearly states that at the time "when Jesus is about to leave the mercy-seat of the heavenly sanctuary," "the Infinite One" still deals with nations, and thus with groups, as corporate bodies. But Wieland will not touch this chapter from the Writings with "a ten foot pole." It will be interesting to see how Wieland and Short reply to Dr. Knight on this point, for reply they must, or be completely discredited.

It should be obvious in the light of all these factors that 1988 will not only be a momentous year in Adventism, but also a year of crisis in doctrine and historical evaluation. Our work as editors of this publication is cut out for us. Not only will we continue to evaluate the revision of 1888 Re-Examined, but we will pursue in detail the "interpretive biography" of A. T. Jones written by Dr. Knight, and other pertinent materials as they are released. If you are not a regular reader of "Watchman, What of the Night?" you need to be, so as to have a "front seat" as the drama in Adventism unfolds during 1988.

WHG

From 1888 to Apostasy by George R. Knight can be obtained from Adventist Book Centers.

Page 3

Among the charges leveled in the "Second General Conference Report" (1958) reviewing the original edition of the manuscript, 1888 Re-Examined, was the accusation that "there is a consistent pattern throughout the manuscript of using [Spirit of Prophecy] quotations out of their setting and applying them to fit certain pre-conceived conclusions rather than letting the sources speak for themselves." (p. 47) Wieland and Short note this charge in their new edition, and comment that after they had submitted a 70-page reply, the General Conference Appraisal "was withdrawn and no longer became available to the field." (1987 ed., pp. 167-168) The inference is clear - the charges in Appraisal were incorrect! But this is only stating part of the facts. This "Second General Conference Report" was made available to those who wished to study it by A. L. Hudson in his documentary publication for the North Pacific Union Conference Committee captioned - A Warning and Its Reception. It is true that this documentary is now out of print, but it is also true that Wieland has opposed it being reprinted.

A careful comparison between the quotes given above from page 47 of the "Second General Conference Report" and the quotes as it appears in the 1987 edition of 1888 Re-Examined reveals a purposeful deletion of a key part of the sentence. Note the part of the charge omitted decries Wieland and Short's deletions because of their attempt to twist the sources to fit their preconceived conclusions. (p. 167) This is clearly stated in the body of the report. It reads:

It is to be regretted that in the urgency to find in the Ellen G. White writings, support for conclusions obviously already reached by the authors, that they allowed themselves, perhaps unwittingly, but none the less erroneously, to resort to the use of the E. G. White statements written concerning one situation and to apply them to an entirely different situation. (A Warning and Its Reception, p. 264)

It is not the object of this "examination" to review the accuracy or inaccuracy of the charges regarding the 1950 edition. This was done by Wieland and Short in their 70-page reply. The basic premise of the original manuscript stands. The tragedy is that this charge made concerning the 1950 edition is valid when applied to the 1987 revision of 1888 Re-Examined. The presupposition that Laodicea will repent and that what God had planned for "the faithful city" in 1888 will be carried out without alteration so colors Wieland and Short's thinking that they are unable to rightly evaluate the force of the full context, nor the historical setting in which a testimony was written. A key example can be found in the chapter - "The 'Alpha' and 'Omega' Crises." (p. 133)

The basic premise of this chapter is that rejection of light leads to a darkening of the discernment to detect error. In this the authors are correct. To support this thesis they quote:

At the time of the loud cry of the third angel those who have been in any measure blinded by the enemy, who have not fully recovered themselves from the snare of Satan, will be in peril, because it will be difficult to discern the light from heaven, and they will be inclined to accept falsehood. (R&H, Dec. 13, 1892; See p. 133, 1987 edition)

This is an excellent quote to give support to the premise, but it is taken out of context and thus Wieland and Short fail to give a full picture of the tragic results of the rejection of the message of 1888.

Three weeks prior to this article, Ellen White had written:

The time of test is just upon us, for the loud cry of third angel has already begun in the revelation of the righteousness of Christ, the sin-pardoning Redeemer. This is the beginning of the light of the angel whose glory shall fill the whole earth. (ibid., Nov. 22, 1892)

What were the conditions in 1892 when the "loud cry" had begun? 1) The greater part of God's true people were still in "the churches which constitute Babylon." (GC, p. 390) [In 1892, the SDA membership had not even reached the prophetic 144,000] 2) No landmarks had been removed in the preaching of the 1888 Message. (See C to W&E, p. 30)

But what is the context of the quotes used by Wieland and Short? In the paragraph

Page 4

immediately prior to the one quoted, it is stated:

After the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all nations, every conceivable power of evil will be set in operation, and minds will be confused by many voices crying, "Lo, here is Christ, Lo, he is there. This is the truth, I have a message from God, he has sent me with great light."

What follows the witness? Note carefully:

Then there will be a removing of the landmarks, and an attempt to pull down the pillars of our faith.

What other activity will be taking place?

Satan and his angels will be wideawake, and intensely active, working with energy and perseverance through human instrumentalities to bring about his purpose of obliterating from the minds of men the knowledge of God. But while Satan works with his lying wonders, the time will be fulfilled foretold in the Revelation, and the mighty angel that shall lighten the earth with his glory, will proclaim the fall of Babylon, and call upon God's people to forsake her.

[Then the paragraph begins which Wieland and Short quote]

The "loud cry" in this Review article will not be given under the same set of circumstances as the "loud cry" as described in the article written three weeks earlier would have been given. The "loud cry" noted in the warning which Wieland and Short quoted out of context comes "after" the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all nations. it comes "after" there has been "an attempt to pull down the pillars of our faith." it comes "while" Satan works "his lying wonders." It should be clear that if "the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all nations," the greater part of God's true people could not still be in Babylon.

The whole of the final scene was to be changed as indicated in this article coming just three weeks after God's original intent had begun to be fulfilled. The light was withdrawn because of the rejection of the Message of 1888 as Wieland and Short well know. But their presuppositions stand in the way of their walking in the light which has now been bestowed. They would rather delete that section of the testimony, thus placing out of context that which they chose to quote. This is not being honest with truth, nor with the light God has been pleased to give.

In the 1987 edition of 1888 Re-Examined, the authors even recognize at the "loud cry" is "increased light." (p. 14) Yet when "increased light" is revealed, they resist in the same way that the leadership resisted the message of 1888. They would believe that had they lived in the days of spiritual forefathers, they would not have done as they did; but they are doing exactly as they did - rejecting light because it does not meet their presuppositions.

Blinded by the Enemy

The part of the article which is used on p. 133 of the new edition, reveals the experience of the authors themselves. They are unable to discern the light from heaven which God is giving at the present time. They have problems with the contextual preceding paragraph, and thus omitted it. This preceding paragraph states clearly that apostasy - attempting "to tear down the pillars of our faith" - comes after the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all nations. Only one completely blinded with Laodicea's affliction can deny that between 1950 - the date of Wieland and Short's call of God - and the present, this apostasy has been finalized in official action. The documentation is too extensive to deny it.

In the final chapters of the new edition "From 1950 to 1971" and "From 1971 to 1987 and Beyond" - there is not a single mention, nor a slight reference to, the apostasy which began in the period covered by the first of the two chapters, and which became final in the time covered by the final chapter. Following the 1952 Bible Conference which is noted (pp. 165-167), came the SDA-Evangelical Conferences. Yet clearly, the tragedy of the compromises with truth in the books - Questions on Doctrine and Movement of Destiny - resulting from those conferences came because the warning sent by God in 1950 through Wieland and Short was not heeded.

The first edition of 1888 Re-Examined recognized this possibility and noted the areas wherein this compromise with truth would come. This has been deleted from the new edition, and the "omega" pushed into the future. Note what is written:

Whenever the omega does appear, it will very likely claim the support of the Spirit of Prophecy, and "many" undiscerning minds will agree. And it is also possible that some prominent, influential leaders will foster the deception. (1987 edition, p. 144; emphasis theirs)

Page 5

A no more accurate description could be written of what took place during the SDA- Evangelical Conferences, and the book which resu1ted - Questions on Doctrine. The evidence is clear. The book contains three appendices - 52 pages - of quotes from the Writings which are used to support the apostate contentions in the book along with positions of truth. it is a fearful mingling of truth and error. And what about the "prominent, influential leaders" who would give support to this apostasy? The list is a Who's Who of the General Conference leadership at that time. (See SDA- Evangelical Conferences - facsimile reproduction of documents published by the Adventist Laymen's Foundation)

Elder M. L. Andreasen, one of Adventism's great theologians, perceived the compromise with the Evangelicals as the "omega" and stood up to meet it. He wrote - "In this crisis we are now in, it would be cowardice for me to fail to come up to the help of the Lord against the mighty." (Letters to the Churches. P. 64) His wife, after his death wrote - "He lived with Sr. White so long and she told him of the 'Omega' and he was to 'meet it, meet it'. He did his best to do just that. ..." DF - "Andreasen", ALF Library)

Yet Wieland and Short would still place the "omega" into the future. The reason is simple. If the "omega" has come - and it has! - they are faced with the fact that corporate Laodicea has passed the limits of God's patience. Their presuppositions will not permit this, and therefore in their self-imposed blindness, they choose to ignore the facts of history. What an accounting will have to be given for the souls thus deceived at the 1888 Message Conferences, and through the distorted new edition of 1888 Re-Examined!

Another Use of 8T:247-251

In Part Two of this analysis of the 1987 edition, (XX-12, p. 5), we stated that we had found only two references to this testimony. A review of the book produced a third reference which illustrates the allegation being made that the Writings through deletions are structured to support the presuppositions of the authors rather than letting the Writings speak just as they are written. But the irony of this use is that "off-shoots" are charged with doing the very thing which Wieland and Short have done in the use of this testimony. We shall quote in full context noting the emphasis given by the authors, and then comment. Here is what is written - note the deletions:

The end of the detour is good news. It will bring the church to a true sense of her condition and a genuine repentance, an experience which will be the greatest of its kind in all ages of history:

In the balances of the sanctuary, the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed ... If the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the sentence, "Found wanting."[p. 247] ...

When this reformation begins, the spirit of prayer will actuate every believer, and will banish from the church the spirit of discord and strife. ... All will be in harmony with the mind of Christ. (8T:250, 251; emphasis added.)

Off-shoot enthusiasts quote excerpts from this passage in an effort to prove that the church has been rejected by the Lord. In proper context, Ellen White is here predicting an experience of denominational repentance. (1987 edition, p. 134)

Now the key question is simply - Does Ellen White in this reference predict an experience of denominational repentance?

It should be noted first, that the referencing is not even accurate. We have bracketed ( [ ] ) the correct page after the first quoted section. The second deletion covers two and one half pages of testimony, but because the page is not noted, the reader unless he took time to check, would conclude the whole was quoted from pages 250-251. This is simply dishonest scholarship, perhaps unwittingly committed due to "blinders" of self-inflicted deception. It might be said that this was an oversight due to poor editing, but it must be kept in mind that both Wieland and Short have been in editorial work during their church ministry. Thus this excuse is eliminated.

A Review of Facts

Again let us review the facts concerning

Page 6

this testimony:

1) This testimony was written within two weeks following the close of the 1903 General Conference Session and is dated, April 21, 1903. This is the time noted as "now" in the Testimony.

2) The second paragraph in this testimony uses verbs in the future tense - "is to be"; and "will" with the third person.

What then is being said by this testimony?

1) The Seventh-day Adventist church as a corporate entity "is to be" weighed "in the balances of the sanctuary." This is not an "if" or "perhaps" statement, but a statement of fact of what was to take place at some point beyond 1903.

2) The basis of judgment was to be - (a) "the privileges and advantages" given to the church; (b) "her spiritual experience"; and (c) how she related to "the work entrusted to her."

3) If the church should fail in these three categories, the verdict would be inevitable - "On her will be pronounced the sentence, 'Found wanting.'"

The next question which demands a correct answer is - What can avert the sentence "Found wanting"?

Here again the testimony is clear. It reads: "Unless the church, which is now being leavened with her own backsliding shall repent and be converted, she will eat the fruit of her own doings, until she shall abhor herself."

What follows this sentence describes what would result should the church repent, which Wieland and Short state is a prediction that she will repent. BUT these men fail to quote the paragraph preceding the condition set forth. The deleted paragraph describes the once "faithful city" as becoming "an harlot", and His Father's house as "a place whence the divine presence and glory have departed!" This testimony, thus leaves unanswered what the verdict of the judgment of the sanctuary was to be. It was to be written in the unfolding of history. But to ignore history is to remain ever a child in understanding.

By quoting "excerpts" different conclusions can be drawn. Wieland and Short charge the "off-shoots" with doing it, but they have fallen into the same pit!

Two questions demand an honest answer:

1) Has the Seventh-day Adventist church as a corporate entity been weighed in the balances of the sanctuary?

2) The basis upon which the verdict will rendered, did the church's record tip the balances against her?

These questions Wieland and Short have not addressed in their 1987 revision, but have ignored facts of history which cast light on these questions. Because of this, they are unable to arrive at truth and must, therefore, "excerpt" the testimonies to conform to their presuppositions.

Observations

This much discussed testimony - 8T:247-251 indicates that in 1903, the Church entered into a "backsliding" experience which was a "leavening" process. Note again the exact wording - "Unless the church, which is now being leavened with its own backsliding,..." The backsliding in 1903 was not the rejection of the 1888 Message per se. It was the fruitage in the life of the corporate church because of the rejection of the message in the lives of those who exercised authority in the church.

It is concerning the experience at the 1903 General Conference session that repentance was called for by Ellen White - a repentance if genuine, would require a reorganization of the very structure of the church in full harmony with the call given in 1901 at that time Ellen White stated - "What we want now is a reorganization. We want to begin at the foundation, and build upon a different principle." (1901 GC Bulletin, p. 25)

This facet of our history must be considered in any true examination of the 1888 Message. There was also a third aspect at the 1888 General Conference Session in which A. T. Jones took the lead, and that was the question of true religious liberty. All these aspects have been thrust to the forefront by the publication of From 1888 to Apostasy. This reveals the nakedness of Wieland and Short's revised edition of 1888 Re-Examined as they have attempted to skirt around these other parts of the 1888 Message which do not fit so well into their presuppositions.

WHG & AS

"Absolutely nothing which does not bear the test of truth will be triumphant in the Judgement."(1888 Re-Examined, 1950 ed., p. 2; omitted in the 1987 ed)

Page 7

CHRIST OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS

Lesson # 11

Acceptance with God

Question                                         Answer

1. Has God bought us?     1 Cor. 6:19, 20

2. What was the price that God paid to purchase us?     Acts 20:28 & 1 Peter 1:18, 19

3. Why did God give His Son for us?     Titus 2:14 & Galatians 1:4

4. For whom did God give His Son?     John 3:16

5. Did Christ die for any certain group of people?     Romans 5:6-8 (See note 1)

6. Is Christ satisfied with the purchase that He made on the cross of Calvary?     Isaiah 53:11 & Hebrews 12:2 & Phil. 2:6-8

7. Did Jesus know what He was getting when He purchased man?     John 2:24, 25 (See note 2)

8. Will Christ accept us?     John 6:37

9. What has God given to us?     I John 5:11, 12

10. Can we know that God accepts us and gives us eternal life?      1 John 5:13 & John 6:47

11. What do we need in order to make this a reality?     Hebrews 11:1 (See note 3)

12. How do we become children of God?     Galatians 3:26

13. How do we obtain this faith?      Romans 10:17

14. To those who believe in Christ, what privilege is given to them?     John 1:12 (See note 4)

15. Why have these precious promises been given to us?     2 Peter 1:4

NOTES