XXXIII - 5(00) “Watchman, what of the night?” "The hour has come, the
hour is striking and striking at you,
THE FINAL ATONEMENT -I Page 2 T Page 6
E
This issue of WWN
is different than any previous issue. It will be a true "thought
paper," as others have been. A "thought paper” is
written to stimulate thinking. It is not perceived as an infallible or
dogmatic pronouncement on the subject discussed, but rather a discussion of the
subject from a viewpoint not previously investigated. In this issue, we intend
not only to stimulate thinking but also to explore as far as possible all texts
which relate to the subject of the Final Atonement. It is admitted from the
start that in so doing, there is the possibility that cherished traditional
concepts will come under close scrutiny. It is also possible that some of these
traditions will be found to be at variance with the Biblical data. This has
been the record of religious contention in all time. This was a key factor of
conflict between Christ and the Pharisees of His day. (Matt. 15:2-3). Is not
the counsel given in connection with the 1888 experience still apropos today?
It read: "If the pillars of our faith will not stand the test of
investigation, it is time that we knew it. There must be no spirit of Pharisaism cherished among us" (TM. p. 107) Standing as we
are at the end of time with the coming of the Great High Priest as King of
kings and Lord of lords, should we not carefully explore every aspect of the
Final Atonement? Since the book of Revelation (15:8) indicates a brief period
of time between the close of the High Priestly ministry of Christ and His
return as King of kings during which the saints must live in the sight of a
holy God without an Intercessor, should we not be sure that our position
is truly Biblically sustainable? This issue will not
complete our intended study on the subject of the Final Atonement: others will
follow.
Page
2 "Review, The Final Atonement -
I The typical
services of the Wilderness Sanctuary evidenced a dual atonement. The convicted
sinner who brought the prescribed offering in confession of his guilt was,
through the ministry of the officiating priest, forgiven. The text reads -
"The priest shall make an atonement for him as concerning his sin, and it
shall be forgiven him" (Lev. It was around
these typical services and their anti-typical significance that the present
theological crisis in Adventism evolved. Following the Great Disappointment, a
small group seeking to find an answer as to why Jesus did not return according
to expectation on One who had embraced this message, O. R. L. Crosier,
after the disappointment, produced a lengthy and detailed study on "The
Sanctuary." In this study, he designated the two atonements of the typical
services as "the individual atonement" and "the National
Atonement." In meeting objections to his emphasis of the National
Atonement as the answer to the Disappointment, he rejected the position taken
by the mainline churches' theologians, that the atonement had been completed at
the cross. In doing so, he denied that there was an atonement made at the
cross, holding that the cross was merely the sacrifice by which the atonement
was made in the sanctuary in heaven by Christ as the great High Priest. The early
pioneers of Adventism adopted Crosier's position, publishing his study in 1850,
along with other articles, in a 48 page pamphlet called the Advent Review.
In 1853 into all unsold copies, James White "tipped" a leaf which
contained this comment regarding the Crosier study - "The subject of the
sanctuary should be carefully examined, as it lies at the foundation of our
faith and hope." The 1872 Statement of Beliefs, the first to be drawn up
after the organization of the During the
1955-1956 Conferences with the Evangelicals, the Adventist conferees not only
adopted the position that the atonement was completed on Adventists do not hold any theory of a dual
atonement. "Christ hath redeemed us" (Gal. This denial of
faith ruptured Adventism. If the Adventist conferees really were convicted that
the positions of the Evangelicals had merit, then the only honest approach
would have been to say, "It appears we have some 'home work' to do, so
that our positions harmonize with the Word of God." Then there should have
followed a prayerful and diligent study of the Word to bring our doctrinal
concepts into harmony with the revealed truths of the types and their fulfilment in the reality of Jesus' sacrifice and high
priestly ministry. There should have been no abandonment of the original
position, nor a denial of the faith, until such was done. It is true that
research was permitted, as in the case of Dr. Desmond Ford, but it was to
defend a position assumed, not to discover truth. In this there is a dis- Page 3 tinct difference. It is our
objective in this "review" of the final atonement to: 1) Consider the Scriptural facts and
data given regarding the typical Day of Atonement; and 2) Note other texts which contribute to the questions raised which
reflect on traditional perceptions. After examining carefully the questions and
problems which surface from the data thus obtained, we will detail the actual
services performed on that day by the high priest. Leviticus 23 The 23rd chapter
of Leviticus lists with instructions "the feasts of the Lord, even holy
convocations" which were to be observed during the ceremonial year
beginning with the Passover on the fourteenth day of the first month (vs. 4-5).
The anti-typical fulfilment of this "feast of
the Lord" is noted in the New Testament. Paul writing to the Corinthian
church declared, "Christ our passover is sacrificed for
us" (I Cor. 5:7). Thus this ceremonial year of ancient In the Hebrew, as
we noted in the first paragraph, the word "atonement" is in the
plural form - "Day of Atonements" ( Not only did the
Day of Atonements provide ceremonial cleansing for the people from all their
"sins before the Lord" (16:30); but it also provided for a judgment
to be executed if something was done, and if something was not done: 1) "Whatsoever soul it be that
shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from among his
people" (23:29). 2)
"Whatsoever soul it be that doeth any work in that same day, the same soul
will I destroy from among his people" ( Revelation and Daniel Let us turn our
attention to one verse from each of these books. First, Revelation 14:6-7,
which reads: And I saw another
angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto
them that dwell on the earth ..., saying with a loud voice, Fear God and give
glory to Him; for the hour of His judgment is come. Literally, the
last clause reads - "Because came the hour of the judgment of Him."
The Greek word for "is come" is
ηλθεν, a second
aorist (past tense) indicative, and can be translated by either the simple
English past tense, or in this case by the perfect tense as is done in the KJV.
However, how is the phrase, "the judgment of Him," to be understood?
It could indicate a simple possessive sense - "His judgment" - or it
could mean that God goes on trial, that He faces a judgment - "the
judgment of Him" (τηζ
κρισεωζ αυτου). The book of Revelation
gives a picture of both concepts. In Chapter 20, John sees the "great
white throne" and before this throne of God, stand the "dead,"
and they are "judged" by "those things which were written in the
books, according to their works" (vs. 11-12). This is God in judgment -
"His judgment." In Chapter 12, after the symbolic representation of a
war between "the dragon" and "Michael," a loud voice is
heard saying in heaven - "Now is come ... the kingdom of our God and the
power of His Christ (Messiah)" (ver. 10). Has the
Page
4 the sin problem place God on trial? If answered in the
affirmative, then Revelation 14:7 could mean as it literally reads - "the
judgment of Him." We shall leave in
abeyance any conclusions, but must also note in passing, that in Revelation a
single book is introduced - "the book of life" (Rev. 20:12). This
book is also called, "the book of life of the Lamb slain from the
foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8). Further, since the names of those
redeemed are in this book, and evidently not in the "books," Paul's
comment to the Corinthian church is significant in a full consideration of any
heavenly "judgment." He wrote - "We must all appear before the
judgment seat of Christ" (II Cor. Turning next to
Daniel, let us note Chapter 8 verse 14 which reads: And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed. The margin in the
KJV indicates that the word translated, "cleansed" in the Hebrew
means "justified." Other translations in this final clause read: Then the sanctuary will be reconsecrated. (NIV) Then the Then the sanctuary shall be restored to its
rightful state. (RSV) Then the Then is the holy place declared right. (Young's Literal Translation) Interestingly,
the NKJV translates the verb "shall be cleansed" without a marginal
reference to the Hebrew. In the KJV, there are two marginal notations in this
verse both giving the reading of the Hebrew text. The NKJV retained only one of
them, the first. This could be saying one of two things: 1) That the Hebrew word, nisdaq, can mean, "cleansed," and should
be so translated in this instance, or
2) That this word appearing in the Massoretic
Hebrew text is incorrect, and that the LXX and the Vulgate should be followed
which would have been translated from a different Hebrew and/or Aramaic text of
Daniel than the text used by the Massorites. The first of
these possibilities is pressed by theologians at Other linguistic
problems involving the entire book of Daniel; which reflect on Daniel 8:14, need to be addressed. There are Hebrew scholars
(Zimmermann and Ginsberg) who contend that the whole of the book of Daniel was
originally written in the Aramaic, and that parts of it were translated into
the Hebrew. Ginsberg (Texts and Studies
of the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, Vol. XIV, p.41-42) further
maintains that the Aramaic word in Daniel To summarize this
linguistic problem, we need to keep in mind that we are discussing three texts
of the Sacred Scriptures, one in Hebrew, the Massoretic;
two translations, one in Greek, the LXX; and the other in Latin, the Vulgate.
The latter two agree that Daniel
Page
5 worked from a text of Daniel which read, taher, "cleanse" rather than nisdaq. Gesenius indicates that the adjective form
of sadaq is usually translated in the LXX by the Greek word,
dikaioV,
meaning, "just or righteous." But the LXX does not use a form of
dikaioV, but
rather, καθαρισθησεται, which Thayer says is the choice of the LXX for tihar, the Piel form of
the Hebrew, "to cleanse." The Gospel of John In a very sharp contention with the Jews over Sabbath observance and His claim to equality with God, Jesus made two pronouncements which relate to the judgment. He declared: The Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all judgment (κρισιν) unto the Son ... Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on Him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation (κρισιν - judgment) but is passed from death unto life. ... And (the Father) hath given Him authority to execute judgment (κρισιν) also, because He is the Son of man. (John 5:22, 24, 27) What is Jesus
saying? First, let us analyze these words: 1) "The Father judgeth no man." Then the question must be asked, is
the "judgment" of Daniel 7:9-10, "the judgment of Him" as
Revelation 14:6 can imply? However, the response to such a conclusion can also
be in the form of a question, Why then are the books
opened? However, a careful reading discloses that the "dead" are not
judged out of "the books" until the judgment of the "great white
throne" (Rev. 20:11-12). This then leaves the question still unanswered -
why are the books opened in the judgment that "was set" in Daniel 7? Into this
picture, as noted previously, the prophecies of both Daniel and Revelation
inject for consideration "another book" (Rev. 20:12; Dan. 12:1). This
is "the book of life" (Rev. 20:12), which if one's name is found
therein, he is "delivered" (Dan. 12:1). This "book" belongs
to "the Lamb, slain from the foundation of the world" (Rev. 13:8). It
lists the names of those who "overcome" through "the blood of
(that) Lamb" (Rev. 3:5; 2) "The Father ... hath
committed all judgment unto the Son," and a reason is given in
verse 27, "because He is a Son man" (No article in the Greek text).
First, what is meant by "all" judgment? It is obvious that two
aspects of judgment are involved first a determinate involving those "who
heareth (Christ's) word and believeth on Him that sent (Him)" ( Further, this
pronouncement of Jesus in John 5 presents a major conflict with a long standing
tradition. Jesus as the Son of man demonstrated His authority to make
determinate judgments. To the thief on the Cross, who pled, "Lord,
remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom,"
Jesus replied, "Verily I say to thee today, shalt thou be with me in
paradise" (Luke 23:42-43). Jesus gave His judgment that day. The question arises, does that thief have to face an investigative
judgment again? If indeed the blood of the Lamb blots out sin, then the thief's
sins are no more, and neither his name nor his deeds can be found "in the
books," but his name is in "the book." What would apply
to the thief would equally apply to Enoch, Moses, Elijah, and the "many
... saints" which arose at the resurrection of Jesus (Matt. 27:52-53).
Also included in this picture are the "four living creatures" and
twenty-four "elders" who pro-
Page
6 claimed of the Lamb - Thou "has redeemed us to God by
thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation" (Rev.
5:9). The question is simply, do these who have been redeemed have to face a
second investigation to see if they can stay in heaven? This is placing them in
double jeopardy. Dare we impute to God such an injustice? We dare not, for unto
the Son all judgment has been "committed." When
He gives the word - as to the dying thief - that word stands. Further, there
can be no question but the sequence which is emphasized in the prophecy of
Daniel 7, points to the fact that the judgment pictured in verses 9-10, relates
to the time indicated in Daniel 8:14, and that "the judgment," the
"cleansing of the sanctuary," and the "final atonement" all
focus on the same activity in the plans and purposes of God. It is left to us
to carefully reconsider our tradition and bring it into line with all divine
revelation involving judgment and the final atonement. There is one
important factor that is often, if not entirely, overlooked. Judgment must
begin with the resolution of the issue over which sin began. The Scripture is
clear that sin began with an angel whose responsibilities placed him at the
very Throne of God (Eze. 28:14). It ultimately led to a part of the heavenly
host, joining Lucifer in his rebellion against God (Rev. 12:4). Therefore, we
must conclude as a starting point, that there is deep significance to the fact that
the prophecy of Daniel 7 regarding the judgment begins with the assembling of
the entire angelic host before the Ancient of days. There is still more exploration to be made. (To be continued) Two Parables In the Gospel of Luke there are two parables of Jesus recorded unique to his Gospel. The significance and meaning of one is obvious. We shall note it first. Jesus said: Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God I thank thee, that I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other. (Luke 18:10-14) The message comes
through clear and distinct. Justification is the free gift of God bestowed in
answer to the prayer of faith which recognizes one's sinful condition. The
question then follows, does the forgiven sinner return to his house to live as
he lived before? The answer is, obviously not if he truly loathes the sin he
confessed and appreciates the mercy of God which freed him from its guilt. The
unmerited favor of God elicits a love that fulfils the law. But the question
is: Does this endeavor to keep the law because of love constitute work merit
toward one's salvation? In other words, is sanctification merely the extension
of justification, being the contribution of man to his justification? Here is where the second parable of Jesus enters the picture. He asked: Which of you, have a servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat? (But) will not rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat and drink? Doth he thank that servant because he did the things that were commanded him? I trow not. [NKJV - "I think not"] So likewise, when ye have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to do. (Luke 17:7-10) This is
sanctification - doing that which it is our duty to do. Does this accrue merit?
Never, because even in doing that which it is our duty to do, there is so much
of self woven into our every act, due to the encumbering of our fallen nature,
that we can only confess, we are still "unprofitable servants."
Servants, yes, but sustained by the grace and mercy of God through the
redemption in Christ Jesus we become sons of God. This is the gospel given to Paul by the risen Lord to proclaim. In the Ephesian letter, Paul not only wrote: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast (2:8-9). But he also
follows these verses with these words:
Page
7 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them (v.10). We are no longer
to walk after the flesh to fulfil the lusts thereof,
but after the Spirit to seek "the prize of the high calling of God in
Christ Jesus" (Phil. “All that is in the world ... is not of the
Father" (I John # Update: The issues of WWN
are prepared sometimes two to three months prior to the date of publication.
Thus some articles reflect the situation at the time of writing, and are not
current with the time of printing. Such was the case of the editorial,
"Let's Talk It Over," in the April issue. In February, we received a
letter from Elder Alfons Balbach
indicating he would answer my previous correspondence upon his return from an
overseas trip. This he did in a letter dated, February 29, which we received a
few days ago. As soon as we find time to carefully read his response, we will
write. The summary of the exchange, we will endeavor to note for the readers of
WWN in a future issue. Further Update: After completing
the Special Issue on the "Accord Between the The copy of the accord will be included among the documents offered to those interested. See the offer on p.7 of the Special issue. To signify your interest, contact ALF, P.O. Box 69, Ozone, AR 72854, U.S.A. (This service is no longer available.) "There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is
no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions are without an
error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years
by our people is not proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make
error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose
anything by close investigation." (CW&E. p.35)
WEBSITE
E-
Originally published by Adventist Laymen's Foundation of Mississippi/Arkansas
Wm. H. Grotheer, Editor
Adventist Laymen's Foundation was chartered in 1971 by Elder Wm. H. Grotheer, then 29 years in the Seventh-day Adventist
ministry, and associates, for the benefit of Seventh-day Adventists who were deeply concerned about the compromises of fundamental
doctrines by the Church leaders in conference with those who had no right to influence them. Elder Grotheer began to publish the monthly "Thought Paper," Watchman, What of the Night? (WWN) in January, 1968, and continued the publication as Editor until the end of 2006. Elder Grotheer died on May 2, 2009.
|