FORD AND WEBER DIALOGUE

Section IV: Ford back to Weber

Typical of Martin's courtesy and consistent with his entire character is his generous
allowance to me of the last word. I will be brief.

1. Omega was an inaccurate book, as Adventist scholars rushed to demonstrate.

2. Many Adventist scholars today concur that the starting point for the "2300 days" was
uncertain, so how could we be dogmatic on 1844?" Here are the words of the G.C. Daniel and
Revelation Committee scholars themselves, which we cited in the publication of Good News
Unlimited magazine, November 1990, pp. 3-6:

. . . the actual wording of the command of Artaxerxes I of 457 B.C. makes no explicit
mention of any order to rebuild the city of Jerusalem. . . . the validity of applying the 457
B.C. decree depends upon an uncertain interpretation of Ezra 4:7-23.

Unfortunately, no explicit proclamation (to rebuild Jerusalem) is known. . . . Interpreters,

therefore, have been obliged to deduce. . . . Ezra 7 mentions a third decree, issued this
time by the Persian King Artaxerxes I. . . . ASSUMING that this king is Artaxerxes I. . . .
The return of Ezra and his group of fellow Jews described in Ezra 7 APPEARS to be
related to the events recorded in Ezra 4:7-23.

We also quoted the following from the Adventist Review (Vol. 158, No. 31, 1981):

. . . it seems clear . . . it seems clear . . . Assuming . . . . suggests . . . . The Scriptures do

not offer a detailed explanation of the work that was to begin in heaven in 1844 . . . . it is
reasonable to assume . . . . The term investigative judgment is not found in the Bible. . .
.(Ibid.)

3. The apostolic message of the New Testament summed up saving truth "once for all"
(see Jude 3 NIV). Here, indeed, we do find reference to a DAY of judgment but no hint of one
that would take nearly two centuries or more. The New Testament's reference to that event is
always linked with the second coming of Christ and never with a simultaneous succession of
terrestrial events. All Martin says about the Jewish concept of judgment is happily true but has
no connection whatever with an INVESTIGATIVE Judgment.

There is not a single verse of Hebrews which suggests two phases of Christ's ministry in
the heavenly sanctuary. The three distinct functions of atonement that Martin mentions are never
set forth in Hebrews as having separate antitypical fulfillments. All three found their fulfillment
at the cross. (See Hebrews 1:3; 7:27; 9:8,12,23-25.)

Martin's reference to the Greek plural form for sanctuary shows an unawareness that
2 Ford back to Weber - IV

Greek plurals sometimes denote intensity, not multiplicity. The plural Greek words for heaven
and for seventh day Sabbath prove this. Our own SDA commentary (Vol. 7:449) tells us that the
Greek plural for sanctuary in Hebrews has a singular meaning.

Yes, Revelation is full of Day of Atonement imagery. But if Martin applies these
references to a continual Investigative Judgment, he will have one spanning from A.D. 90 (when
the book was written) to the present. The references are merely an expansion of the words of
Jesus about the cross found in John 12:31-33.

The application of Revelation 14:7 to an Investigative Judgment of God's people ignores

the context about Babylon's subsequent fall. See the next verse and compare 18:10, which uses
the same words as 14:7 but with reference to Babylon's fall and not to a review of the sins of the
saints.

4. SANCTIFICATION BY FAITH ALONE. No one is questioning the glorious fact that

faith in Christ gives a wonderful impetus to victory over sin. But when Paul links righteousness
with faith, he is always referring to justification, not sanctification. (The Greek word for
righteousness is the same word translated as justification. See Bible translations in other
languages.) "In Christ" likewise is a formula for justification, not sanctification, and is merely a
synonym. Yes, I have always believed that sanctification is an inevitable part of the justification
by faith EXPERIENCE, but one must remember the theological principle that things which must
be distinguished should never be separated. (For example, the members of the Trinity, the two
natures of Christ, etc.) Martin sees the truth of "no separation" but not as clearly the truth of
"distinction."

When faith is linked with justification in the New Testament, it is in order to make the
point that salvation is NOT by our own achievement but through our acceptance as needy
beggars of Christ's achievement. Sanctification by faith alone is not found in the New
Testament. It is the teaching of the heresy Quietism and is repudiated by the NT writers and
evangelical writers in general, including Ellen White. One must beware of implying that faith is
a doing word--otherwise, you are back to the Roman Catholic theology which has sadly been
found in our lesson quarterlies of recent years and against which whole Divisions are rebelling.

My gratitude to Martin Weber for his thoroughly Christian spirit and for his openness.
We are in agreement that salvation is by grace alone, based on the blood alone, received by faith
alone, but which is always revealed by the fruitage of a holy life.