Dragă Amina & Costel,

Vă trimit aici câteva din concluziile mele la subiectul Legăminte. Ceea ce vă prezint aici nu
reprezintă neapărat poziţia oficială a Bisericii. Dar noi AZS nu avem alt CREZ (mărturisire de
credinţă dogmatică) decât Biblia. Mărturisirile de credinţă oficiale nu sunt nişte dogme care ni
se impun de la GC, ci pur şi simplu o mărturisire a credinţei noastre comune, aşa cum
înţelegem şi credem la o anumită dată. Doctrina noastră s-a dezvoltat foarte mult între anii
1844-1888., dar chiar şi după aceea au avut loc dezvoltări, şi orice dezvoltare implică
schimbare. Ideea că totul ne-a fost dat pe tavă la 1844 (sau, după preferinţa altora, la 1888) şi
că n-avem altceva de făcut decât să ingerăm ce ne-au transmis înaintaşii, nu este corectă, nici
oficială, chiar dacă este populară.

Cred că este nevoie de un studiu complet al legămintelor, care să ia în calcul tot ce spune în
mod explicit sau implicit Biblia despre diverse legăminte, şi care să analizeze afirmaţiile lui
Pavel şi să le integreze armonios într-un sistem mai general. Altminteri, dacă vom construi
numai pe afirmaţiile lui Pavel, rezultatul, deşi corect şi folositor, din punct de vedere practic,
va fi controversial – deoarece Pavel nu a intenţionat să facă o teologie a legămintelor în
scrisorile lui, ci să rezolve nişte chestiuni de principiu în dispută cu susţinerile iudaizanţilor
(care erau creştini legalişti).

Cred că primul lucru de care are nevoie cineva ca să înţeleagă un subiect biblic, nu este
dorinţa de se clarifica în cinci minute, sau de a dobândi o înţelegere armonioasă a subiectului
după ce la studiat la 1-2 autori, fie ei şi autori biblici. Cel mai util este să se studieze lucrurile
în ordinea cronologică, biblică, uitând pentru moment tot ce ai citit până atunci despre
subiect. Trebuie studiate toate locurile în care se vorbeşte, în mod explicit, de legăminte între
Dumnezeu şi oameni.

Legăminte cu Adam
1. 2 legăminte (implicite, fără utilizarea termenului legământ)
făcute cu Adam, unul înainte de cădere (Gen 2:15-17, un
legământ al dreptăţii), cerând ascultare din încredere şi
iubire, şi unul după cădere (3:15-24, legământul harului, al
celei de-a doua şanse),1 care, în mijlocul pedepselor
disciplinare, numite blesteme, aduce prima promisiune a
mântuirii. Acest legământ de har se întemeiază pe un alt
legământ, făcut între Tatăl şi Fiul înainte de veşnicii (2 Tim
1:9, Tit 1:2, In 7:24, Ef 1:4-5.11, 2:10, 1 Pt 1:2.20, Rom 3:25,
8:29-30, Mt 25:34, Ap 13:8, 17:8).2 Sămânţa femeii sunt fiii
lui Dumnezeu (Gen 6:2), adevăraţii credincioşi (Rom 16:20,
Ap 12:1-17), dar într-un sens special, Christos (Ap 12:5).
1
Cf. Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 370.”The covenant of grace was first made with man in Eden, when after the
Fall there was given a divine promise that the seed of the woman should bruise the serpent's head. To all men
this covenant offered pardon and the assisting grace of God for future obedience through faith in Christ. It also
promised them eternal life on condition of fidelity to God's law. Thus the patriarchs received the hope of
salvation.”
2
Cf. E. G. White, Youth's Instructor, June 14, 1900, p. 186. ("The Price of our Redemption") {1MR
121.3}:„Christ was not alone in making His great sacrifice. It was the fulfillment of the covenant made between
Him and His Father before the foundation of the world was laid. With clasped hands they had entered into the
solemn pledge that Christ would become the surety for the human race if they were overcome by Satan's
sophistry. „
Legăminte cu Noe
2. 2 legăminte făcute cu Noe, implicând familia şi urmaşii
(toată omenirea): Gen 6:18-22, 9:9-17. Legământul cu
vieţuitoarele este o exprimare poetică a promisiunii divine
că, în folosul omului, Dumnezeu se ocupă şi de animale (cf.
Os 2:20)

Legăminte cu Avram / Avraam şi cu alţi patriarhi

3. 2 legăminte făcute cu Avraam şi cu urmaşii lui etnici şi
spirituali: Gen 15:18-21, 17:2-17.3 Petru învăţa că evreii
contemporani lui erau „sămânţa lui Avraam” (FA 3:25).
Pavel, arăta, că, dimpotrivă, Sămânţa aceasta era Christos
(Gal 3:15-16).
4. A făcut Dumnezeu legăminte şi cu alţi patriarhi ? A făcut
Dumnezeu promisiuni şi altora, ori a cerut ascultare şi
altora ? Este aceasta o intrare implicită în legământ cu
Dumnezeu ? Ex 2:24, Ps 105:8-10.

Legăminte cu poporul Israel

5. Pe temeiul cărui legământ a scos Dumnezeu pe Israel din
Egipt ? Ex 2:24, 6:3-8. Pe temeiul cărui legământ Dumnezeu
S-a îndurat de poporul Lui, chiar când n-au fost credincioşi,
pe vremea regilor ? (2 Rg 13:23, 17:15).
6. La Sinai, Dumnezeu face legământ cu Israel (Ex 19:4-8), apoi
îi dă Cele Zece Porunci (Ex 20), care sunt „cuvintele
legământului” (Ex 34:28, Dt 4:13.23, 5:2-22), scrise pe
„tablele legământului” (Dt 9:9-115, Ev 9:4) şi puse în
„chivotul legământului” (Num 10:33, 14:44, Dt 10:8, 31:9.25-
26, Ios 3:3.6.8.11.14.17, 4:7-9-18, 6:6, 8:33, Jud 20:27, 1
Sam 4:3-5, 2 Sam 15:24, 1Rg 3:15, 6:19, 8:1.8.6.21-23, 1 Cr
15:25.26.28.29, 16:6.37, 7:1, 22:19, 28:2.18, 2 Cr 5:2.7, 6:11,
Ier 3:16, Ev 9:4), precum şi „cartea legământului” (Ex 24:3-8,
2 Rg 23:2.21, 2 Cr 34:30-21). Dumnezeu a continuat „să facă
legăminte” (sau să înnoiască legământul, sau să se refere la
acest legământ) cu Israel: Ex 34:10-28, Dt 28:69 / cap 29, 30,
31. Ne 9:8. Un termen strâns legat de „legământ” este
„mărturia”, adică documentul scris al legământului,
Decalogul (Ex 25:16.21) De aici provin expresiile „tablele
mărturiei” (Ex 31:18, 32:15, 34:29) „chivotul mărturiei” (Ex
25:22, 26:33-34, 30:6.26, 39:35, 40:3.5.20.21, Num 4:5, Ios
4:16) şi „mărturiile” Domnului (Ps 119 în ebraică).
7. Sabatul, care fusese dat de la Facerea Lumii, era acum dat
lui Israel ca un semn distinctiv, ca simbol al legământului (Ex
31:16-17). Dar existau şi alte semne ale legământului, care
nu sunt de la început, nici universale: SAREA presărată peste
jertfe (Lev 2:13), circumcizia (moştenită de la Avraam, dar

3
A se observa dacă este vorba de legăminte diferite, sau dacă un anumit legământ este doar o confirmare a unui
legământ anteior, sau poate este o dezvoltare a unui legământ anterior.
 înnoită prin poruncă lui Israel: FA 7:8), „pâinile Prezenţei”
din Templu (Lev 24:8-9).
8. Păzitorii speciali ai acestui legământ au fost puşi leviţii, când
Dumnezeu le-a transformat bletemul părintesc într-o
binecuvântare, fiindcă au trecut de partea Domnului la Sinai:
Dt 33:9, Mal 2:4-8. Marele preot era, astfel, căpetenia
legământului (Dan 11:22) Metafora obişnuită a legământului
este dragosta dintre bărbat şi femeie (Ez 16:8).
9. Lagământul era însoţit de binecuvântări şi blesteme, toate
fiind condiţionate (Lev 26:9-15-45, Ier 11:1-10).
LEGĂMÂNTUL este ÎNTOTDEAUNA CONDIŢIONAT, aşa cum
scrie şi în Decalog: Dt 7:9, cf. Ex 5:10, Ios 23:16, Jud 2:1-
2.20, 1 Rg 11:11, Ps 25:10.14, 44:17, 103:17-18, Ier 22:9-10)
Dumnezeu a continuat „să facă legăminte” (sau să înnoiască
legământul, sau să se refere la acest legământ) cu Israel: Ex
34:10-28.
10. Legământul de la Sinai a fost încălcat (rupt) din partea lui
Israel, fapt simbolizat prin spargerea primelor table (Ex
32:19). Dar s-au făcut alte table, scrise la fel şi puse în
acelaşi chivot (Ex 34:1-4.29, Dt 9:15, 10:1). Legământul de la
Sinai era valabil şi pentru generaţiile următoare, (Dt 4:31,
5:2-3) pentru „1000 de generaţii” (1Cr 16:15), un „legământ
veşnic” (1 Cr 16:17, Ps 111:9, Is 24:5) El a mai fost rupt şi în
alte generaţii (1Rg 19:10.14, 2Rg 17:35-41, 18:12, Os 8:1, Ps
78:10.37, Ez 44:7). Chiar şi după eşecul ultimei generaţii a
legământului sinaitic (generaţia care a dat la moarte pe
Messía), legământul Celor Zece Porunci a rămas în vigoare
pentru cei care au intrat în legământul lui Christos (Ap
11:19, 15:5, Lc 18:20). Inclusiv porunca Sabatului a fost
sfinţită de Christos pentru urmaşii Săi (Lc 23:56, în greacă:
„s-au odihnit după Poruncă”; FA 13:42, 16:12-13).
11. Legământul se întemeia pe harul lui Dumnezeu, pe credinţa
care se dovedeşte în ascultare din iubire, nu pe merite
omeneşti (Dt 8:18, 2 Cr 6:14, Ne 1:5, 9:32, Ps 50:5.16-17.23,
74:20, 106:45, 111:5, Is 50:1-17, Ier 14:20-21, Dan 4:9, Os
6:6-7.
12.Fiindcă Israel nu era doar o împărăţie spirituală a lui
Dumnezeu, ci un stat pământesc, care avea nevoie de legi şi
penalitate, încălcarea legământului atrăgea (potrivit cu voia
descoperită a lui Dumnezeu) pedepse civile, mergând până
la pedeapsa capitală: Dt 17:2-7, Ios 7:11.15 etc.
13.Planul lui Dumnezeu era ca legământul Său să fie extins şi la
alte popoare, în primul rând legea Sabatului original, dar şi
ceremoniile mozaice (Is 56:1-8),
14. Legământul Domnului a fost adesea întărit şi printr-o
convenţie (legământ) între conducători şi popor: Ios 24:25-
28, 2 Rg 11:4.17, 23:2-3, 2 Cr 15:12, 23:1-3.16, 29:10, 34:32,
Ezra 10:3, Ier 34:8-18 Şi în aceste cazuri, legământul era
aplicat la situaţiii concrete.
 15. Oamenii pot încheia legăminte între ei (Avraam şi Abimelec,
israeliţii şi gabaoniţii, David şi Ionatan, David şi Hiram), pe
care Dumnezeu le confirmă (Ps 55:20, Pr 2:17, Is 33:8, Ez
17:13-19, Os 10:4, Am 1:9, Mal 2:10-14), sau pe care le
dezaprobă (Is 28:18, Os 12:1). De asemenea, pot încheia
legământ cu ei înşişi (Iov 31:1).
16.Dumnezeu a încheiat un legământ special cu Aaron,
legământ care implica sistemul jertfelor (Num 18:19 şi
contextul). Dumnezeu a încheiat un legământ cu preotul
Fineas, nepotul lui Aaron, asigurându-l că din urmaşii lui se
vor recruta preoţii (Num 25:11-13). De fapt, leviţii intrau
într-un legământ special cu Dumnezeu: Dt 33:9, Ne 13:29.
17. Dumnezeu a încheiat un legământ special cu David şi cu
urmaşii lui, promiţând venirea lui Messía din dinastia lui, o
promisiune necondiţionată 2 Sam 23:5, 2 Cr 13:5, 21:7, Ps
89:3-52, 132:11-12. Chiar după căderea definitivă a dinastiei
davidice, Dumnezeu promite că Îşi va ţine cuvântul: Ier
33:20-22. Zaharia a confirmat că în timpul său Dumnezeu
împlinia promisiunea legământului davidic, care era, în
acelaşi timp, o promisiune a legământului abraamic (Lc 1:67-
72-79).
18.Mântuitorul Lumii este personificarea unui legământ pe care
Dumnezeu voia să-l încheie cu toate popoarele, nu numai cu
israel. El este o confirmare a legământului făcut cu David: Is
42 6 şi contextul, Is 49:7-26, Is 55:3.
19.În virtutea cărui legământ vorbeşte Dumnezeu lui Israel în Is
61:8 şi contextul ?
20. După ce Dumnezeu a aruncat pe Israel în Captivitate,
deoarece rupseseră legământul, a hotărât întoarcerea lor pe
temeiul unui NOU LEGĂMÂNT, mai bun decât cel de la Exod.
Dar şi acest legământ era condiţionat. Noul Legământ
profeţit de Ieremia este adresat întregului Israel şi prevedea
restaurarea de după Exil, cu un Ierusalim care să nu mai fie
distrus niciodată: Ier 31:31-40, 32:36-44, 33:25-26, 50:2-5-
10. De acest legământ aveau să beneficieze şi alţii: Ez 16:59-
62. El se întemeia, după cât se pare, pe legământul davidic,
(Ez 34:22-31, 37:25-28), a cărui principală făgăduinţă era
necondiţionată. Totuşi el era condiţionat şi reprezenta, în
acelaşi timp, o reeditare a celui de la Sinai, având ataşate şi
pedepse: Ez 20:34-38, şi mari promisiuni condiţionate: Ez
37:25-28 şi vezi cap 40-48. Acesta este legământul mesianic
promis mai întâi lui Israel, dar proclamat apoi lumii întregi:
Daniel 9:24.27, Zah 9:10-11.4 Messía era aşteptat ca Sol
(mijlocitor şi vestitor) al acestui legământ (Mal 3:1).
21.Legământul profeţit de Ieremia în cap. 31 a fost profeţit şi
de Moise (Dt 30:1-10).

4
Nu este foarte clar la ce legământ se referă Zah 11:10.13 etc. În KJV, v. 10 zice „cu tot poporul”, nu „cu toate
popoarele”. Pe de o parte, pare să fie o referire la ruperea legământului care adusese exilul, pe de altă parte poate
fi o profeţie tainică despre eşecul final al lui Israel de a-L accepta pe Iisus ca Messía.
 22. Termenul legământ a început să fie folosit şi ca echivalent
pentru religie (Dan 11:28.30).
23. Iisus a înţeles că misiunea Lui sigiliează un nou legământ
făcut cu Israel şi cu toate popoarele: Mt 26:28, Mc 14:24, Lc
22:28, 1 Cor 11:25 Toate legămintele sunt, MAI ÎNTÂI pentru
Israel (Rom 9:4, In 4:22).
24. Domnul a prevăzut un legământ cu israeliţii care se pocăiesc, luând ca garanţie şi
semn veşnic, profeţiile „evanghelice” ale lui Isaia şi ale tuturor profeţilor care-l vor
urma (Is 59:20-21). Pavel aplică profeţia legământului mântuirii la Evanghelia lui
Christos (Rom 11:27, cf. Is 59:20-21).
25. Numirea celor două părţi ale Bibliei (Vechiul Testament şi Noul Testament), provine
de la teologia creştină a legămintelor. Ele nu sunt denumirile naturale sau originale ale
acestor Scripturi iudeo-creştine, ci sunt convenţionale, bisericeşti, relativ târzii şi
creează confuzie, pentru că, deşi ambele sunt în aceeaşi măsură inspirate şi provin de
la aceeaşi autoritate, se creează impresia că primele Scripturi sunt învechite şi
inferioare, în practică sau în teorie, Scripturilor creştine. În cadrul unor universităţi nu
se foloseşte denumirea de Vechiul Testament, ci Biblia Ebraică. Iar profesorii de VT
adesea obişnuiesc să spună că ei sunt profesori de „Primul Testament”.

LEGĂMINTELE în teologia lui Pavel

1. Pavel vorbeşte despre noul legământ, în contrast cu cel vechi, arătând că vechiul
era un legământ al literei Legii, în timp ce noul este al spiritului Legii (2 Cor 3:6).
Cultul literei (săpate în piatră) era plin de slavă, dar nu oferea decât moarte (v. 7),
în timp ce serviciul spiritual adus lui Dumnezeu, şi care duce la viaţă, este
incomparabil mai glorios şi nemuritor (v. 7-11). Înţelegerea spirituală a noului
legământ s-a descoperit în mod desăvârşit prin Christos; cei ce nu-L acceptă, citesc
Cartea Legământului printr-un văl, care-i împiedică să vadă sursa adevăratei slave
a lui Moise (v. 14 în context). Trebuie să se observe, însă, că Pavel pune în contrast
cele două legăminte, ţinând seama de maniera oarbă, legalist-literalistă a
înţelegerii şi practicării religiei iudaice contemporane, fără a se referi la cerinţele
spirituale care erau ACELAŞI în legământul de la Sinai (Dt 6:5-6, 30:11-14, cf. v.
6.8).
2. Legământul abraamic, fiind făcut înaintea celui de la Sinai, deci nu pe temeiul
Torei (Legii), şi înainte de a fi dată orice poruncă din Lege, chiar înainte de
porunca circumciziei, ilustrează faptul că Dumnezeu primeşte, prin credinţa în
Christos, şi pe neevrei, socotindu-i fii ai lui Avraam: Gal 3:15-29. Astfel
promisiunea precede Darea Legii şi are putere chiar dincolo de călcarea ei,
principala atribuţie a Legii fiind rolul pedagogic, de a ne conduce la Christos, care
este Domnul. În exemplul, învăţătura şi puterea Lui avem Legea întreagă, vie, şi în
adevăratul ei spirit; nu ne mai limităm în mod jalnic la cerinţa literei. Cele două
legăminte sunt ilustrate prin Agar şi Sara, Sinai [şi Golgota], Ierusalimul
pământesc şi Ierusalimul ceresc, Ismael şi Isaac (Gal 4:24-31). Vorbind despre
Ierusalimul ceresc, Pavel, totuşi, aplică liber profeţii despre Ierusalimul pământesc
postexilic, în care era prevăzut loc şi pentru neevrei (Gal 4:27, cf. Is 54-55),
profeţii aproape total eşuate din cauza necredinţei şi neascultării lui Israel (cf. Is 2,
Mica 4, vezi Ieremia 18).
3. În 2:12, Pavel spune creştinilor neevrei că acum au parte de „legămintele
făgăduinţei”. Căutaţi în notele de mai sus, de ce foloseşte el pluralul ?
4. Legământul „mai bun” din Evrei 7:21 este legământul preoţiei lui Christos „în
felul lui Melkisedek”, care anulează legământul levitic (cf. Dt 33:9, Mal 2:4-8,
 Num 13:29, 18:19). Totuşi, legământul levitic era strâns legat de legământul
sinaitic făcut cu întregul Israel, şi care era reprezentat prin simbolurile şi
ceremoniile specifice ale cultului mozaic (Ev 8:1-6). Pavel reduce totul aici la
două legăminte care sunt echivalente cu cele două religii: iudaismul şi
creştinismul, afirmând că noul legământ este „legiferat pe temeiul unor
PROMISIUNI MAI BUNE” (Ev 8:8-12). Care sunt promisiunile noului, reiese din
v. 8-12. Dar care au fost acelea, mai puţin bune, ale vechiului ? Pavel nu
menţionează aici, iar diverşi scriitori şi predicatori spun că ar fi vorba de
făgăduinţele evreilor de a ţine Legea (e.g. Ex 19:8).5 Aceste făgăduinţe de a ţine
Legea n-au fost însă niciodată criticate de Dumnezeu sau de oamenii lui.
Dumnezeu mustră doar făgăduinţele nesincere (Ios 24:16.19.21) sau neîmplinite
(încălcate); în rest, asemenea făgăduinţe întărite cu jurământ, şi asemenea
legăminte „din iniţiativă omenească” sunt binevăzute în Scriptură (Ps 119:106, Ne
10:29, 1 Cor 9:16-17.27). Dacă în cazul Noului Legământ se menţionează
promisiunile „mai bune” ale Domnului, atunci şi în cazul vechiului, zic eu,
făgăduinţele mai puţin bune trebuie să fie tot ale Domnului. Într-adevăr, vechiul
legământ (chiar şi în inima Decalogului, vezi porunca V), nu oferă altceva decât
ţara Canaanului, mulţi urmaşi, viaţă lungă şi fericită pe pământ etc., cu condiţia
ascultării. În cazul greşelilor, oferea iertare, în mod limitat (FA 13:38-39) în timp
ce noul legământ aduce desăvârşirea, atât în posibilitatea iertării, cât şi în
înnobilarea caracterului (Ev 7:25, 9:9, 10:1.14, Mt 19:20-21).
5. Pavel spune că profeţia noului legământ din Ier 31 era ca o mustrare adresată lui
Israel (Ev 8:8). Cine este mustrat aici: Cel care a dat legământul dintâi, sau cei care
l-au rupt ? Aceasta înseamnă că legământul era bun şi trebuia ţinut.
6. Al doilea legământ era superior. Dar în ce anume diferea de primul ? Autorul pare
să spună că superioritatea lui consta într-o religie moral-spirituală, motivată
interior şi personală, în contrast cu religia literalist-legalistă, exterioară (în cele
morale şi ceremoniale) şi predominant didactică şi comunitară a primului legământ
(Ev 8:9-12, 10:16-18). Ceea ce este însă deosebit de interesant, deşi autorul nu
menţionează, este că şi legământul dintâi cerea şi promitea scrierea Legii în inimă
(Dt 6:5-6, 30:11-14, cf. v. 6.8). Atunci în ce mai stă contrastul între cele două ?
Probabil în faptul că primul legământ, fiind o religie de stat (naţională), era
obligatorie şi cu o serie de cerinţe exterioare, măsurabile, pentru a căror călcarea
puteai fi pedepsit; în timp ce spiritul noului legământ se realizează cu precădere în
creştinism, prin Evanghelie, deoarece se pune accentul pe religia liber aleasă,
personală şi spirituală. Morala socială (chiar şi după Church Manual) nu poate fi
decât exterioară, de aceea nici disciplina Bisericii şi calitatea de membru nu pot fi
confundate cu criteriile Împărăţiei, care sunt spirituale. A fi un bun cetăţean, sau un
bun membru al Bisericii este doar o fază moralistă, echivalentă cu starea aceea de
„sub Lege” (Rom 6:14+), a vechiului legământ, care încă nu te face candidat
5
When they were requested to decide whether they would agree to all the conditions given, they
unanimously consented to obey every obligation. They had already consented to obey God's
commandments. The principles of the law were now particularized, that they might know how much
was involved in covenanting to obey the law; and they accepted the specifically defined particulars of
the law. {E. G. White, 1 Manuscript Releases, p. 114}. „Bravely did the Israelites speak the words promising
obedience to the Lord, after hearing His covenant read in the audience of the people. They said, "All that the
Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient" (Exodus 24:7). Then the people were set apart and sealed to God. A
sacrifice was offered to the Lord. A portion of the blood of the sacrifice was sprinkled upon the altar. This
signified that the people had consecrated themselves-- body, mind, and soul--to God. A portion was sprinkled
upon the people. This signified that through the sprinkled blood of Christ, God graciously accepted them as His
special treasure. Thus the Israelites entered into a solemn covenant with God. EGW, Ms 126, 1901, pp. 15-17.
("The Giving of the Law," December 10, 1901.) {1MR 115}.
 pentru Cer. Numai dacă eşti „în Christos”, dacă eşti condus de Spiritul Lui, nu de
motivaţiile „firii pământeşti”, înseamnă că ai intrat în noul legământ (Rom 8).
Adevărata cunoaştere de Dumnezeu începe cu experienţa iertării păcatelor (Ev
8:11-12, cf. 2 Cr 33:12-13).
7. Pavel arată că, pe vremea lui Ieremia (citează din Ier 31), legământul sinaitic era
îmbătrânit, „aproape de pieire” şi de înlocuire (Ev 8:13). Într-adevăr, Ieremia
prevedea, aşa cum s-a arătat mai sus, că Dumnezeu va face un nou legământ, în
virtutea căruia, după exil, Israel va fi complet restaurat. Dar acest nou legământ
despre care vorbeau Ieremia şi alţi profeţi nu excludea sistemul ceremonial cu tot
ce ţinea de el. Pavel nu explică profeţia lui Ieremia, ci o aplică, prin extensie, la
Evanghelia creştină. Eu cred că autorul n-a intenţionat să explice şi să clarifice o
serie de aspecte teoretice (teologice) la care ne gândim noi, ci a aplicat spiritul
acelor profeţii la mesajul creştin pe care-l predica, având doar scopuri practice.
8. Legământul nou aduce răscumpărare de sub abaterile comise sub primul legământ
(Ev 9:15), prin moartea lui Iisus Christos (v.16-17).
9. Noul legământ (aici se referă direct la legământul creştin) a fost ratificat prin
sângele lui Iisus ca să poată deveni efectiv, după cum şi cel sinaitic a fost ratificat
prin sânge (v. 17-23).
10. Călcarea noului legământ este mai gravă decât călcarea primului legământ (Ev
10;28-29). Aceasta înseamnă că noul legământ nu ne scuteşte de împlinirea
condiţiilor, cum învaţă unii.
11. Ev 12:18-24. Dacă în legământul sinaitic, apropierea de prezenţa fizică a lui
Dumnezeu, manifestată prin semne, cerea cel mai profund respect faţă prezenţa şi
autoritatea divină; în noul legământ, apropierea de realităţile nevăzute, cereşti (de
Ierusalimul de sus, Templul şi închinătorii lui, Judecătorul Suprem, întregul
univers al fiinţelor sfinte şi IISUS ÎNSUŞI cu meritele jertfei Lui) cere cu atât mai
multă evlavie şi temere de Dumnezeu (12:24-28). Legământul creştin conţine
aceleaşi cerinţe neschimbătoare ale lui Dumnezeu (Ap 11:19).
12. Legământul creştin (noul) este numit „veşnic” (Ev 13:21-22), ceea ce în sensul
limbilor biblice se referă la mare vechime (uneori chiar eternitate) în trecut sau în
viitor. De aceea şi Evanghelia predicată de Cei Trei Îngeri se numeşte Evanghelia
Veşnică (Ap 14:6-7).

EGW referitor la Noul Legământ:

„Though this covenant was made with Adam and renewed to Abraham, it could not be
ratified until the death of Christ. It had existed by the promise of God since the first intimation
of redemption had been given; it had been accepted by faith; yet when ratified by Christ, it is
called a new covenant. The law of God was the basis of this covenant, which was simply an
arrangement for bringing men again into harmony with the divine will, placing them where
they could obey God's law.”.{Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 370}.

EGW referitor la Vechiul Legământ:

„Another compact--called in Scripture the "old" covenant--was formed between God and
Israel at Sinai, and was then ratified by the blood of a sacrifice. The Abrahamic covenant was
ratified by the blood of Christ, and it is called the "second," or "new," covenant, because the
blood by which it was sealed was shed after the blood of the first covenant. That the new
covenant was valid in the days of Abraham is evident from the fact that it was then confirmed
both by the promise and by the oath of God--the "two immutable things, in which it was
impossible for God to lie." Hebrews 6:18.
 But if the Abrahamic covenant contained the promise of redemption, why was another
covenant formed at Sinai? In their bondage the people had to a great extent lost the
knowledge of God and of the principles of the Abrahamic covenant. In delivering them from
Egypt, God sought to reveal to them His power and His mercy, that they might be led to love
and trust Him. He brought them down to the Red Sea--where, pursued by the Egyptians,
escape seemed impossible--that they might realize their utter helplessness, their need of divine
aid; and then He wrought deliverance for them. Thus they were filled with love and gratitude
to God and with confidence in His power to help them. He had bound them to Himself as
their deliverer from temporal bondage.
But there was a still greater truth to be impressed upon their minds. Living in the midst
of idolatry and corruption, they had no true conception of the holiness of God, of the
exceeding sinfulness of their own hearts, their utter inability, in themselves, to render
obedience to God's law, and their need of a Saviour. All this they must be taught. God brought
them to Sinai; He manifested His glory; He gave them His law, with the promise of great
blessings on condition of obedience: "If ye will obey My voice indeed, and keep My
covenant, then . . . ye shall be unto Me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation." Exodus
19:5, 6. The people did not realize the sinfulness of their own hearts, and that without Christ it
was impossible for them to keep God's law; and they readily entered into covenant with God.
Feeling that they were able to establish their own righteousness, they declared, "All that the
Lord hath said will we do, and be obedient." Exodus 24:7. They had witnessed the
proclamation of the law in awful majesty, and had trembled with terror before the mount; and
yet only a few weeks passed before they broke their covenant with God, and bowed down to
worship a graven image. They could not hope for the favor of God through a covenant which
they had broken; and now, seeing their sinfulness and their need of pardon, they were brought
to feel their need of the Saviour revealed in the Abrahamic covenant and shadowed forth in
the sacrificial offerings. Now by faith and love they were bound to God as their deliverer from
the bondage of sin. Now they were prepared to appreciate the blessings of the new covenant.
The terms of the "old covenant" were, Obey and live: "If a man do, he shall even live
in them" (Ezekiel 20:11; Leviticus 18:5); but "cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words
of this law to do them." Deuteronomy 27:26. The "new covenant" was established upon
"better promises"--the promise of forgiveness of sins and of the grace of God to renew the
heart and bring it into harmony with the principles of God's law. "This shall be the covenant
that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in
their inward parts, and write it in their hearts. . . . I will forgive their iniquity, and will
remember their sin no more." Jeremiah 31:33, 34. {Id. p. 371-372}.

Aceleaşi principii, aceeaşi condiţionare:

„The teacher is the same in both dispensations. God's claims are the same. The
principles of His government are the same. For all proceed from Him "with whom is no
variableness, neither shadow of turning." James 1:17. {Id. p. 373}
„Under the new covenant, the conditions by which eternal life may be gained are the
same as under the old. The conditions are, and ever have been, based on perfect obedience.
Under the old covenant, there were many offenses of a daring, presumptuous character, for
which there was no atonement specified by law. In the new and better covenant, Christ has
fulfilled the law for the transgressors of law, if they receive Him by faith as a personal
Saviour. "As many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God"
(John 1:12). Mercy and forgiveness are the reward of all who come to Christ trusting in His
merits to take away their sins. We are cleansed from sin by the blood of Christ Jesus our
Saviour.6
6
Letter 216, 1906, p. 2. (To "My Dear Brother in Christ Jesus," July 2, 1906.) {1MR 117}.
Legământul sinaitic are principii valabile şi pentru creştine
The covenant God made at Sinai is for the Israel of God for all time. Herein is
revealed God's purpose for us, if we will only cooperate with Him. The Lord Jesus today will
gather His people as a hen gathers her chickens beneath her wings, if they will only come to
Him.
God's messengers ........... are to present things new and old. They must continually
hold up the covenant of peace between God and man, that He made with His people Israel.
Ms 64, 1903, pp. 1-7. ("God's Covenant with Israel," July 2, 1903.)
If it were not possible for us to be commandment keepers, then why does He make the
obedience to His commandments the proof that we love Him? Letter 16, 1892, pp. 2, 3. (To
Brother and Sister Holland, November 10, 1892). {1 Manuscript Releases, p. 108-1010}.7
____________________________________________________________________

The 1888 message: Ellet J. Waggoner

What did he actually teach in 1888?

Lee F Greer III

Loma Linda, California
© 2001

(Last updated December 2002)

The Jesus Institute Forum: http://www.jesusinstituteforum.org/1888message.html

Introduction. The General Conference session of the 1888 in Minneapolis, MN,

continues to be very significant for the Seventh-day Adventist Church. At that
meeting there was a struggled attempt to restore the truth of justification by
faith to the center of the young church's message which was only about 40
years beyond the Great Disappointment of the Advent (Millerite) Movement
(1844). The message was spearheaded by young minister Ellet J. Waggoner
supported by his friend Alonzo T. Jones (with an enthusiastic reception by
Ellen G. White). Part of the great significance of this 19th century conference
was that here was a small, young Sabbatarian church (without a lot of creedal
inertia), which taught a personal, premillenial Second Advent of Jesus and a
pre-Advent judgment (like the NT), poised to recapture justification by faith, the
mighty truth of the New Testament and the Protestant Reformation! What was
the glorious potential of that moment? By the Spirit of grace, the young Advent
movement might then and there have recaptured the Gospel of justification by
faith alone in its original NT-eschatological, Day of Atonement, judgment
context! The earth might have been 'lightened with his glory' (Rev. 18:1) in
preparation for the long-delayed Second Advent! What might have been...
quickly degenerated into a narrow spirit of denominational bickering and
closed-minded resistance by far too many of those delegates of yesteryear.
The session ended without breakthrough.

However, the General Conference of 1888 remains a beacon of Advent hope for
many Seventh-day Adventists because what might have been represents what
7
http://egwdatabase.whiteestate.org/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates$fn=default.htm
many see as the real raison d'etre and hope of the Advent faith. The history of
that era has long been clouded by the sad fact that Ellet J. Waggoner and
Alonzo T. Jones abandoned the NT-Reformation truth of justification by faith
and drifted during the 1890s into subjectivism (justification by the indwelling
Christ, rather than sanctification by the indwelling Christ, as Scripture teaches)
and pan[en]theism (Christ as really 'present' in every human being and in all
nature). The pantheistic trend reached full crisis with Dr. John Harvey Kellogg's
book The Living Temple about the turn of the century, who therein
acknowledged his special indebtedness to both Waggoner and Jones. Those
subjective, pantheistic teachings now supported by the charismatic medical
director of Battle Creek Sanitarium in Michigan (and brother of the founder of
Kelloggs, the cereal company) nearly destroyed the Seventh-day Adventist
Church by obscuring the Gospel: Christ's objective substitutionary atonement
(His perfect doing and dying) and intercession at God's right hand in heaven.
Providentially, the crisis finally came to an end about 1906 – largely through
the writings of Ellen White leading up to and during this era (Steps to Christ,
The Desire of Ages, Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing, Christ's Object
Lessons, and a spate of articles on justification by faith especially from 1888-
1892), the young church was slowly being nudged toward faith in Christ's
eternal divinity, and toward acceptance of the objective substitutionary
atonement and intercession of Christ, and a faith that believing sinners are
"justified alone through the imputation of Christ’s righteousness" (RH,
11-11-1890).

What started out as the young SDA church's greatest opportunity, when
missed and resisted, led almost inexorably to the pantheism crisis which
nearly spelled its destruction. The theological turmoil of the 1890s has led
many over the years since then to misunderstand what was proclaimed in
1888. Ellen White's long-continued endorsement of righteousness by faith, of
openness to light, and of the work of Waggoner and Jones was certainly not an
endorsement of those subjective, pantheistic views which she never taught
and which were directly contrary to the tenor of her own work, and far more
importantly, contrary to Scripture. Sadly, we as Seventh-day Adventists more
than 120 years later have yet to grasp justification by faith in its NT-
Reformation splendor.

In the compendium below, we cite primary historical evidence for what Ellet J.
Waggoner actually taught in 1888. How wonderfully close E. J. Waggoner was
in 1888 to recapturing the NT-Reformation truth of justification by faith alone,
let the reader note from the historical evidence cited below! God will yet have a
people who will preach the everlasting Gospel in proper relation to His eternal,
objective Law in full eschatological, New Testament glory (Rev. 14:6-12; 18:1-
4)!

The Ellen G. White 1888 Materials, p. 1575

"To U. Smith"
"The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that
we might be justified by faith." In this scripture, the Holy Spirit
through the apostle is speaking especially of the moral law. The
law reveals sin to us, and causes us to feel our need of Christ, and
to flee unto him for pardon and peace by exercising repentance toward
God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

An unwillingness to yield up preconceived opinions, and to

accept this truth, lay at the foundation of a large share of the
opposition manifested at Minneapolis against the Lord's message through
Brethren Waggoner and Jones. By exciting that opposition, Satan
succeeded in shutting away from our people, in a great measure, the
special power of the Holy Spirit that God longed to impart to them.
The enemy prevented them from obtaining that efficiency which might
have been their's in carrying the truth to the world, as the apostles
proclaimed it after the day of Pentecost. The light that is to lighten
the whole earth with its glory was resisted, and by the action of
our own brethren has been in a great degree kept away from the world."

Seventh-day Adventists in General Conference

Assembled,
Minneapolis, MN: 17 October – 02 November 1888

The General Conference Daily Bulletin

Wednesday, October 17, 1888:

"At 10:30 a.m., Elder Uriah Smith discussed the question of the ten horns of
the fourth beast of Daniel vii., the speaker taking the position of that the Huns
were one of the ten kingdoms into which Rome was divided. Some held the
view that Allemanni should be counted as one of the ten kingdoms instead of
the Huns [i.e., A. T. Jones]. A spirited discussion was held at the conclusion of
the remarks, in which a number of the delegates participated. At the close of
the discussion it was voted that, taking all the light we have received, and all
the reference given, we will faithfully and carefully study this question, praying
that the spirit my guide us into the truth.

"It was also voted that the chair appoint a committee of seven to devise a plan
by which those who think they have received light on any point, may present it
to the denomination.

"At 2:30 p.m. Elder E. J. Waggoner discussed the question of the law of God
and its relation to the Gospel of Christ. The discussion was based principally
on the Epistle to the Romans" [Uriah Smith, "First Day's Proceedings," General
Conference Daily Bulletin 2, no. 1 (19 Oct. 1888): 2.]

Thursday, October 18, 1888:

"At 9 a.m. Elder E. J. Waggoner gave another lesson on the law and gospel. In
this lesson the first and second chapters of Galatians, in connection with Acts
15, were partially presented by him to show that the same harmony existed
there as elsewhere; that the key to the book was ‘justification by faith in
Christ,’ with the emphasis on the latter word; that liberty in Christ was always
freedom from sin, and that separation from Christ to some other means of
justification always brought bondage. He stated incidentally that ‘the law of
Moses’ and ‘the law of God’ were not distinctive terms as applied to the
ceremonial and moral laws, and cited Num. xv., 22-24, and Luke ii., 23-24, as
proof. He closed at 10:15 by asking those present to compare Acts xv., 7-11,
with Rom. ii., 20-25. Appeals were made by Brother Waggoner and Sister White
to the brethren, old and young, to seek God, put away all spirit of prejudice and
opposition, and strive to come into the unity of faith in the bonds of brotherly
love." [Uriah Smith, "Second Day's Proceedings," General Conference Daily
Bulletin 2, no. 1 (19 Oct. 1888): 2.]

Friday, October 19, 1888:

"At 9 a.m. Elder Waggoner continued his lessons on the law and gospel. The
Scriptures considered were the fifteenth chapter of Acts and the second and
third of Galatians, compared with Romans iv. and other passages in Romans.
His purpose was to show that the real point of controversy was justification by
faith in Christ, which faith is reckoned to us as to Abraham, for righteousness.
The covenant and promises to Abraham are the covenant and promises to us."
[Uriah Smith, "Third Day's Proceedings," General Conference Daily Bulletin 2,
no. 2 (21 Oct. 1888): 1.]

Waggoner's series continued until Thursday, October 25, 1888. Uriah Smith
then wrote this summarizing comment:

"A series of instructive lectures has been given on 'Justification by faith' by

Eld. E. J. Waggoner. The closing one was given this morning. With the
foundation principles all are agreed, but there are some differences in regard
to the interpretation of several passages. The lectures have tended to a more
thorough investigation of the truth, and it is hoped that the unity of the faith
will be reached on this important question." [Uriah Smith, "Eighth Day's
Proceedings," General Conference Daily Bulletin 2, no. 7 (26 Oct. 1888): 3.]

Of considerable interest is Waggoner's synopsis of both A. T. Jones’ and his

own lectures in the November 2, 1888, issue of the Signs of the Times:

"The principal subjects of Bible study were the ten kingdoms into which,
according to the prophecy, the Roman Empire was divided, the establishment
of the Papacy, and of its counterpart, the proposed National Reform
Government; and the law and the gospel in their various relations, coming
under the general head of justification by faith. These subjects have aroused a
deep interest in the minds of all present; and thus far during the Conference
one hour a day has been devoted to a continuance of their study." [E. J.
Waggoner, "Editorial Correspondence," Signs of the Times, 02 Nov. 1888, p.
662].
"However, the lack of a complete record of Waggoner’s presentation has made
it easy for some to read their own particular views on righteousness by faith
into the 1888 conference" (McMahon, 1979). Sadly, proper weight has not been
give to the General Conference Bulletin of 1888 and Waggoner’s actual
published work from 1888.

Explicit historical evidence long neglected

Although neglected, it is very significant that in The Gospel in the book of

Galatians: A Review (Oakland, December 1888) we have exactly what E. J.
Waggoner taught in 1887-1888:

• On the meaning and centrality of justification by faith,

• On the nature of sin,
• On faith and pardon,
• On the covenants,
• On the moral & ceremonial laws,
• On the human nature of Christ,
• On Acts 15, Romans 4, and Galatians 2-3 (the very texts at issue in
Minneapolis, 1888),
• On the Reformation ideal of continual reform and growth in Bible
doctrine in the church,
• As well as what were the key arguments of the opposition.

The Gospel in the book of Galatians: A Review was written and privately
circulated in 1887 in response to George I. Butler’s booklet The Law in
Galatians. However after the public exposure of the issue at the General
Conference at Minneapolis in the fall of 1888, E. J. Waggoner published this
book as his official position for the world to see in December 1888.

OUTLINE of

The Gospel in the book of Galatians: A Review. (December 1888):

Explanatory note. E. J. Waggoner opens by giving the reasons why he delayed

nearly two years to publish this letter (Feb. 1887 till Dec. 1888) – to avoid
controversy before the general public. Now with the public nature of the
General Conference, Waggoner doubtless felt free to publish his views on
justification by faith and the issues at controversy. This book contains a
summary of the 1888 message and of its reception by church leaders.

Pages 1-2. Waggoner expressed his personal regard for the GC president,
George I. Butler and insisted that all he has published was in harmony with the
denomination.

• "In my articles in the Signs [published in 1886] I have mentioned only a

few points that might seem to be objections to the law, and which are
often quoted as showing its abolition, to show that they are really the
strongest arguments for the perpetuity of the law."
 • "As to the propriety of publishing the matter in the Signs when I did, I
have nothing to say. Whatever censure is due on that score, I willingly
take, as I already have. … Quotations that will appear further on, will
show that I am not the one who has departed from the standard works of
our people."

Page 2. Waggoner cites Butler’s misapprehension of the meaning of

circumcision as "a sign of their [Jewish] separation from the rest of the human
family" and notes the practice of circumcision as common among the ancient
Egyptians, and among many indigenous peoples of Africa and S. America, and
among the Arabs, "tutur tahir" i.e., purification. What made it unique for the
Jews was that it was a ‘sign’ of their "putting off the impurity of the heart"
(Deut. 10: 16), of their Covenant relationship with God, a "sign of the
possession of righteousness; and when righteousness was wanting the
circumcision amounted to nothing."

On the Biblical definition of Righteousness by faith

Page 2. Waggoner gives the Scriptural meaning of circumcision by citing

Romans 4: 11, from the only passage in Scripture that explicitly defines the
meaning of the phrase "the righteousness of faith" or "righteousness by faith":

"And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the

righteousness of the faith which [he had yet] being
uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that
believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness
might be imputed unto them also"

Or literally in the Greek:

"And a sign he received of circumcision, a seal of the

righteousness of the faith [while] in uncircumcision, for
to be a father of all the [ones] believing through uncircumcision,
for the righteousness to be reckoned to them [also] ….
But to us also to whom it shall be reckoned if we believe" (Rom. 4: 11, 13, 24).

Here we see the only explicit definition in Scripture of "righteousness by faith"

or of the "righteousness of faith" – it is the perfect Righteousness which God
Himself reckons to all who believe, i.e., Justification by faith. It explains exactly
what Romans 3 means when it refers to ‘being justified by faith.’ In the Greek,
‘justification’ and ‘righteousness’ come from the same verb dikaiou, to declare
righteous; adj. dikaios, righteous; n. dikaiosune, righteousness.

On the Bible meaning of Justification by faith and its centrality in

Romans and Galatians

Page 5. Waggoner defines justification by faith and its centrality in Romans

and Galatians:
• Romans: "Now let us look for a moment at the subject of the two books,
– Romans and Galatians. The leading thought in the book of Romans is
justification by faith. The apostle shows the depraved condition of the
heathen world; then he shows that the Jews are no better, but that
human nature is the same in all. All have sinned, and all are guilty before
God, and the only way that any can escape final condemnation is by faith
in the blood of Christ. All who believe on Him are justified freely by
the grace of God, and His righteousness is imputed to them
although they have violated the law. This truth, which brought out
so clearly in the third chapter of Romans, is repeated and emphasized in
the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh chapters. And in the eighth
chapter the apostle concludes that there is no condemnation to
them which are in Christ Jesus. He has before shown that all sinners
are under, or condemned by the law, but when we come to God through
faith in Christ, and are justified freely by His grace through the
redemption that is in Jesus Christ, we are no longer under the law but
under grace. This condition is represented in various places as 'dead to
the law by the body of Christ,’ ‘delivered from the law,’ etc. Everywhere
faith in Christ and justification by faith are made prominent. So we may
say that justification by faith is the key-note of the book of Romans.
• Galatians: "Now how about the book of Galatians? There is no question
in the mind of any but that the Galatians were being induced to submit to
circumcision. Were they submitting to the demands of the Jews[ish
Christians] that they should be circumcised, because they thought it a
great privilege to be circumcised? Not by any means, but because
certain Jews were teaching them that if they were not circumcised they
could not be saved. See Acts 15: 1. They were therefore looking to
circumcision as a means of justification. But since there is none other
name under heaven except that of Christ whereby we can be saved, it
follows that to depend on anything except Christ for justification is a
rejection of Christ. It was this which called out Paul's letter to them. Now
since the Galatians were being led to trust in circumcision for
justification from sin, what else could be the burden of a letter designed
to correct this error, but justification by faith in Christ? That this is the
burden of the epistle is seen from Galatians 2: 16-21; 3: 6-8, 10-14, 22, 24,
26, 27; 4: 4-7; 5: 5-6; 6: 14-15, and other passages. In the book of
Romans the apostle develops his argument on justification by faith in a
general way, building up a general treatise; but when he wrote to the
Galatians he had a special object in view, and he adapted his epistle to
the necessities of the case. It is the most natural thing in the world that
he should write on justification by faith to the Galatians, when there were
in danger of losing their faith, even if his treatise on the subject to the
Romans had been already written. The truth is, however, that the book of
Galatians was written first. In the book of Romans he expanded the book
of Galatians into a general treatise."

On the real issue of law in the Jerusalem Council of Acts 15 and its
connection to the book of Galatians and Romans – the hot issue at
Minneapolis
Pages 8:3 – 11:2. Waggoner showed that the justification by faith and the moral
law were especially the subjects of Jerusalem Council of Acts 15.

• "Do you really believe that the council took no cognizance of the ten
commandments? If so, can you tell me of what law fornication is the
transgression?…"

Pages 11:2 – 13:2. Waggoner showed that both the moral and ceremonial laws
were spoken of in Galatians but especially the moral law – the main trust of his
argument.

On faith and pardon (or justification by faith)

Pages 13:3 – 15:2. EJW clearly defined the moral law and the ceremonial law.
He showed that "the ceremonial law was simply the ordinances of the gospel"
and to despise the ceremonial law was to reject the only way of pardon and
peace. The Covenant rituals might change, but the everlasting Covenant is the
same in both the OT and NT and justification by faith is the way of salvation in
both OT and NT times. This was the mature position of the Protestant
Reformers centuries before.

• "Let me repeat the argument: If the curse attaches to the ceremonial law,
then violation of the ceremonial law is sin; and if violation of the
ceremonial law is sin, then there is sin not forbidden by the ten
commandments; and then the ten commandments are not a perfect rule
of action; moreover, since the ceremonial law is done away, it follows
that the standard of righteousness is not so perfect now as it was in the
days of Moses. It this is not a legitimate conclusion from your premises,
I must confess my ignorance of logic. Another point: No sin can remove
itself, neither can it be atoned for by any subsequent good deed. So then
there must be some scheme of atonement for sin. Now if sin were
imputed for neglect of the ceremonial law, what remedy was provided for
that sin? The ceremonial law was simply the ordinances of the
gospel. If condemned sinners were still further condemned by the very
remedy provided for their salvation, then indeed it must have been a
yoke. A man is in a truly pitiable condition when the remedy given him
for a sore disease only aggravates that disease.
• "But you will say, and correctly too, that those who refused to comply
with the requirements of the ceremonial law were put to death. Why was
this, if the curse did not attach to the ceremonial law? I will answer. The
violator of the moral law justly merited death, but God had provided a
pardon for all who would receive it. This pardon was on condition of faith
in Christ, and it was ordained that faith in Christ should be manifested
through the rites of the ceremonial law. Now if a man repented of his
sins, and had faith in Christ, he would manifest it, and would receive the
pardon; and then of course the penalty would not be inflicted upon him.
But if he had no faith in Christ, he would not comply with the conditions
of pardon, and then of course the penalty for sin would be inflicted. The
penalty was not for failure to carry out the rites of the ceremonial law,
but for the sin which might have been remitted had he manifested faith. I
 think anybody can see the truthfulness of this position. Let us illustrate
it…. [story of a murder offered a pardon by the governor]. So it is with
the sinner in his relation to the law of God. If he despises the offer of
pardon, and shows his disregard by a refusal to take the steps
necessary to receive the pardon, then the curse of the law, death , is
allowed to fall upon him. But refusing to receive pardon is not a sin. God
invites men to receive pardon, but He has no law to compel them to be
pardoned. The murderer who has been offered pardon and has rejected
it, is no more guilty [of murder] than another man who has committed
the same crime but who has not been offered a pardon. I do not know as
this can be made any clearer; I cannot see that it needs to be. The sum of
it all is simply this: Sin is the transgression of the moral law, and
the violation of no other law; for the moral law covers all duty.
There is a curse attached to the violation of the law, and that curse is
death; ‘for the wages of sin is death.’ But there is provision for the
pardon of those who exercise faith in Christ. And this faith is indicated
by a performance of certain rites. Before Christ, it was by the offering of
sacrifices; since Christ it is by baptism and the Lord’s Supper. Those
who have real faith will indicate it in the prescribed manner, and will
escape the penalty. Those who have no faith will receive the penalty.
This is exactly what Christ meant when He Himself said to Nicodemus:
‘For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world; but that
the world through Him might be saved. He that believeth on Him is not
condemned; but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he
hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.’ John
3:17, 18" [Italic emphases are Waggoner’s; underlining mine].
• "I marvel that you can read Galatians 3:11, 12, and imagine that the word
law in those verses has the slightest reference to the ceremonial law. I
quote them: ‘But that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it
is evident; for, The just shall live by faith. And the law is not of faith; but,
The man that doeth them shall live in them’…. The question is not what
law may be referred to, but what law is referred to? The law here referred
to is a law of which it is said, ‘The man that doeth them shall live in
them.’ Now this is emphatically true of the moral law. It is equivalent to
Romans 2:13: ‘The doers of the law shall be justified.’ The sad fact that
there are no doers of the law does not destroy the truth that the doers of
the law shall be justified. Perfect compliance with the moral law alone is
all that God can possibly require of any creature. Such service would
necessarily give eternal life….
• "Again, the text says, ‘And the law is not of faith.’ But the ceremonial law
was of nothing else but faith; it was a matter of faith from beginning to
end. It was faith that constituted all the difference between the offering of
Abel and that of Cain. See Hebrews 4:11…."

What part of Christ's atonement is universal and what part is individual? Christ
has made a universal atonement in that the SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD
WERE IMPUTED TO HIM (Isa. 53; Rom. 5:18-19; II Cor. 5:17, John 1:29) and so
His death expiated the sins of the whole world (II Cor. 5:14-21). This is
universal, objective, and forensic (judicial). This provides our temporal life
today (John 6; Rom. 5:18), and the promise of eternal life. However, there is a
second individual, objective and forensic side of the atonement: HIS
RIGHTEOUSNESS IS IMPUTED TO THE ONES WHO BELIEVE (Gen. 15:6 = Gal.
3:5 = Rom. 4:3 = James 2:23; Rom. 1:16-18; 3: 19-28; 4:1-24-25; 5:1-17; John
3:16-19, 5:24; II John 5:11-13, Gal. 2:16; 3:7-8, 11, 24; Lev. 1-17; etc.) This is
individual, objective, and forensic (judicial) mediated above at the right hand of
God (Heb. 4:12-16; 7:25; 12:20-25; Rom. 8:31-39; etc.). This is what justifies the
individual believer and saves eternally.

Scripture is clear on both the universal forensic work and even more at length
on the individual forensic justification. To obscure or lose either is to miss part
of the Gospel: Especially if the individual, objective part is missing, then the
way to eternal life for lost, despairing individual souls is obscured. For it is the
individual, forensic imputation of Christ's that justifies and saves the believing
sinner eternally.

It must be remembered that the only truth that can possibly change the selfish
motivation to an unselfish one is the faith that Christ has paid it all, and that
His perfect doing and dying are accounted ours! This is grace! This is the
Biblical definition of grace! All other 'graces' flow from and are fruits of this.

On the ‘added’ law in Galatians

Pages 16 – 20:5. Waggoner with crisp, starkly beautiful logic shows that the
law added 430 years after the Covenant promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:17-19) was
emphatically the moral law, not the ceremonial law, but rather the same law
referred to in Rom. 5:20.

• Page 17:1. "You say that the ceremonial law was added because of
transgressions, that is, as a remedial system. Then why was it not added
as soon as the transgression was committed, instead of 2,500 years
later? I claim that the remedial system entered immediately after the fall,
and for proof I cite you to the offering of Abel. Your argument would put
off the remedial system until the exode. You may say that at that time the
ceremonial law was given more formally and circumstantially than
before; very good, but if that argument will apply to the ceremonial law,
as it undeniably will, why will it not apply to the moral law?"
• Page 19:1. "The very same thing is stated in Romans 5:20, ‘Moreover, the
law entered that the offense might abound;’ and I never knew any
Seventh-day Adventist to have any trouble in applying that to the moral
law, yet it is certainly as difficult a text as Galatians 3:19. The word
rendered ‘entered’ is, literally, ‘came in.’ … Although the law existed in all
its force before the exode, yet it ‘came in,’ ‘entered,’ was spoken or
given, or ‘added’ at that time. And why? That the offense might abound,
i.e., ‘that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful;’ that
what was sin before might be more plainly be seen to be sin. Thus it
entered, or was added, ‘because of transgressions.’… And so it became
the school-master, pedagogue, to bring men to Christ, in order that they
 might be justified by faith, and be made the righteousness of God in
Him."
• Page 20:5. "Your argument against the moral law being ‘added because
of transgressions’ will apply with equal force against the moral law
having ‘entered that the offense might abound.’ If you claim that
Galatians 3:19 cannot apply to the moral law, then you must claim also
that Romans 5:20 does not apply to that law."

On the relation between the Abrahamic Covenant and the Law

• Page 21. "But God had made a covenant with Abraham, and had
promised wonderful things, but only on condition of perfect
righteousness through Christ…. So the law entered that the offense
might abound; and because the offense abounded, and men saw their
depravity, they found that grace super-abounded to cover their sins. The
case is so plain, and the argument in Galatians 3:19 is so plainly parallel,
that I marvel how anybody who has any just conception of the relation of
the law and the gospel can question it for a moment."
• Page 26:2-27. "…the law was given upon Mount Sinai, because of
transgression, that is, that the people might know what sin was, and
might appreciate the pardon that was offered in the covenant to
Abraham…." (Gen. 15:6 = Gal. 3:5 = Rom. 4:3 = James 2:23).

Summary of the message of 1888

Pages 32-34. Waggoner summarizes in 8 points the message of 1888 (italic

emphases his; underlined emphases mine) from Galatians 3: 19-25:

• 1) "Wherefore the law was our school-master to bring us unto Christ,

that we might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come, we are no
longer under a school-master.’ By no manner of reasoning whatever can
these verses be made to apply to ceremonial law. The reference must be
to the moral law, and to that alone, as I shall show.
• 2) "The text does not read that the law was our school-master to point
us to Christ… [but] ‘to bring us to Christ’ … that is, the was our school-
master till we came to Christ. Now the ceremonial law brought no one to
Christ. The performance of it was an act of faith on the part of the
performer, showing the belief he already had in Christ.
• 3) "Faith did not release people from the observance of the ceremonial
law; on the contrary, the person did not begin the observance of the
ceremonial law until he had faith in Christ.
• 4) "…[v. 22] ‘before faith came, we were under the law;’ but before faith
came, people did not have anything to do with the ceremonial law.
• 5) "If the ceremonial law were referred to in this verse, then, according
to verse 25, we should conclude that as soon as people learned to have
faith in Christ they had nothing more to do with the ceremonial law; but
the truth is that the patriarchs and prophets were most punctual in their
observance of the ceremonial law, and no one had more faith than they.
Take the case of David; his writings abound with references to sacrifices
and to ceremonies in the court of the Lord’s house. He offered
 multitudes of sacrifices, yet there is no writer in the Bible who shows a
more perfect knowledge of Christ, or who exhibits more faith in Him.
• 6) "But you say that the apostle is reasoning of dispensations, and not
of individual experiences, and that bringing them to Christ means
bringing them to His first advent, and to ‘the system of faith there
inaugurated.’ But that is the weakest position you could take, for if that
were the meaning, then it would follow that the law accomplished its
purpose only for the generation that lived at Christ’s first advent….
• 7) Again; the text says it brings men to Christ, that they may be
justified by faith. Are people justified by faith in a national capacity [or in
a dispensational capacity?] …. Justification by faith is an individual, and
not a national [or dispensational], matter…. I repeat, justification by faith
is something that each individual must experience for himself.
Thousands who lived at Christ’s first advent knew nothing of this
experience, while thousands who lived long before, were actually
brought to Christ for pardon, and they received it. Abel was counted
righteous through faith; Noah was heir of the righteousness which is by
faith; and Abraham actually saw Christ’s day, and rejoiced in it, although
he died 2,000 years before the first advent. And this most positively
proves that the apostle, in the third chapter of Galatians, is speaking of
individual experience, and not of dispensational changes. There can be
no Christian experience, no faith, no justification, no righteousness, that
is not an individual matter. People are saved as individuals, and not as
nations.
• 8) The strongest argument against the ceremonial law view is found in
verse 24: ‘Wherefore the law was our school-master to bring us unto
Christ, that we might be justified by faith.’ Now it is an undeniable fact
that the possession of faith led to the offering of sacrifices, and not the
offering of sacrifices to faith. ‘By faith Abel offered unto God a more
excellent sacrifice than Cain.’… if that [ceremonial law theory] were true,
then the text would teach that no man was justified until Christ’s first
coming, which is preposterous and unscriptural…. The law must retain
its office of pedagogue or task-master, until all have come to Christ who
will, and this will not be until probation closes and the Lord comes….
This promise was made to Abraham, not because of his inherent
righteousness, but because of his faith, which was accounted to him for
righteousness. The promise was confirmed in Christ, that is, none but
those who exercised faith in Christ for the forgiveness of their sins could
be heirs of the promise. But forgiveness of sins depends on repentance
of sin, and repentance of sin presupposes a knowledge of sin, and a
knowledge of sin can be obtained only by the law. Therefore the law acts
as a pedagogue, overseer, or task-master, to overwhelm men with a
sense of their sin, that they may flee to Christ to be justified by faith. And
this office it must perform until all those who can be influenced to come
to Christ have come…." (Note the use of Romans 4).

On faith in the Object, rather than faith as the object

vs. Dispensationalism
 • Page 36:1. "In your pamphlet (page 50) you make considerable of the
words ‘the faith’ or ‘that faith,’ as though the word ‘faith’ were used in a
different sense than a personal faith in Christ. But I repeat again (1),
There can be no faith except faith in Christ. And (2) faith in Christ is a
personal matter; each one must have faith for himself. Therefore the
coming of faith is to each individual as an individual, and to not to any
people as a class [or to a dispensation]. For the same reason I cannot
accept your statement that ‘the faith’ refers to ‘the whole system of truth
devised by God of the salvation of men,’ and that its coming refers to the
revelation of Christ at His first advent. If that were true, it would prove
that the system of truth devised by God for the salvation of men, was not
known till Christ came, which is so evidently unscriptural as to need no
comment. The theory you hold, when traced to its conclusion, inevitably
makes God have two plans of salvation, one for people before the
coming of the Lord, and another for those after. It makes the Jews
judged by one standard, and the Gentiles."

On Justification by faith being the exegetical subject of Romans 3

• Page 38. "Galatians 3:22 says that the Scripture hath concluded or shut
up all under sin, ‘that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given
to them that believe.’ In the third [chapter] of Romans Paul shows that
Jews and Gentiles are alike under sin, in order to prove that ‘the
righteousness of God, which is by faith of Jesus Christ,’ may be ‘unto all
and upon all them that believe; for there is no difference; for all have
sinned [historic past tense], and [continue] to come short of the glory of
God [present continuous tense]; being justified freely [present continuous tense]
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.’ Verses 22-24. And in
Romans 11:32 he states that God hath shut them all up together (both
Jews and Gentiles) in unbelief, ‘that He might have mercy upon all.’ All
are in the same bondage – all are under the law – and none can be
delivered from their prison until they come to Christ. He is the only door
to freedom."

On the two covenants – matters of status before God not dispensation

• Page 39. "The law does no leave the man when he comes to Christ, but
the man’s relation to it is changed. Before he was ‘under the law,’ now he
is ‘in the law’ (Psalm 119:1) and the law is in him (Psalm 37:31). He is in
Christ, who is the personification of the law, and in Him he is made the
righteousness of God. 2 Corinthians 5:21."
• Page 40:3-41:2. "[Quoting GB]. "Here you yourself admit the charge
which I have brought against your theory, namely, that it virtually makes
two plans of salvation. If the ‘great system of justification by faith’ was
not reached till the cross of Christ, pray tell me whether anybody was
ever justified before Christ came, and if so, how? My reading of the Bible
convinces me that ‘the great system of justification by faith’ was known
as soon as sin entered the world. I read that ‘by faith Abel offered unto
God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness
that he was righteous.’ Hebrews 11:4. And in Psalms 32:1, 2; 68:6, 13;
 Isaiah 1:18, 53:10, 11; 55:6, 7; Habakkuk 2:4, and scores of similar texts, I
find the clearest reference to the great system of justification by faith…. I
have never seen a man with so much knowledge of God that he could
not study with profit the words of David and Isaiah concerning
justification by faith…."
• Page 41:2. "After the battles we have had to wage with Campbellites
concerning the value of the Old Testament Scriptures, and the unity and
universality of God’s plan of salvation, it seems almost incredible that
anyone should be called on to defend, against Seventh-day Adventists,
the idea that the well-informed Jew had a full knowledge of Christ, and
was justified only through faith."

On the human nature of Christ and ‘original sin’

Pages 43-48. Waggoner argues that to be "under the law" always means to be
"under the condemnation of the law." He protests George Butler’s citation of
lexicographer Greenfield (turned commentator) as an authority that "under the
law" in Galatians 4:4 means "subject to the law." Waggoner wrote, "Seventh-
day Adventists, of all people in the world, ought to be free from dependence
upon the mere opinion of men. They should be Protestants indeed, testing
everything by the Bible alone" (44:1).

Galatians 4:4-5: "But when the fullness of the time came, God sent for the His
Son,
having become of a woman, having become under law, that those under law He
might
redeem, that the adoption of sons we may receive" (from the Greek).

George Butler took great exception in his assessment of E. J. Waggoner’s

understanding of Gal. 4:4. Butler wrote, "That He did voluntarily take the sins
of the world upon Him in His great sacrifice upon the cross, we admit; but He
was not born under it condemnation. Of Him that was pure, and had never
committed a sin in His life, it would be an astonishing perversion of all proper
theology to say He was born under the condemnation of God’s law" (Butler,
The Law in Galatians, p. 58). Waggoner retorted by quoting John 1:1, 14; Rom.
8:3; Phil. 2: 5-7; Heb. 2:9; Rom. 1:3, Heb. 2:16, 17 to show that Christ really
became a human being. He cited II Cor. 5:21 ‘made Him to be sin for us’ as
parallel to Gal. 4:4. He cited Isa. 53:4 about Him bearing "our griefs and
sorrows" and even cited Ps. 51:5 to show that David, an ancestor of Jesus, had
a sinful nature.

• Page 46:5. "It may be a perversion of all proper theology, but it is exactly
in harmony with the Bible, and that is the main point. Can you not see
that your objection lies just as much against your position as against
mine? You are shocked at the idea that Jesus was born under the
condemnation of the law, because He never committed a sin in His life.
But you admit that on the cross He was under the condemnation of the
law. What! Had He then committed sin? Not by any means."
Now concerning the question at which Waggoner seems at first to hesitate:
When he asserted "that Christ was born under the condemnation of the law"
(46:5; 47:3), did he mean

• 1) Christ was ‘born under the law’s condemnation’ becoming our Sin-
Bearer because He became a human
being OR
• 2) Christ was ‘born under the law’s condemnation’ becoming our Sin-
Bearer because our sins were imputed to Him, the opposite of
justification by faith.

One of these options is indeed a perversion and a falsehood, but the other is
splendid Bible truth. Whatever he taught in later years, in 1888, Ellet J.
Waggoner gave the only Biblical answer:

• Page 47:2. "Again; why was Jesus baptized? He said that it was ‘to fulfill
all righteousness.’ We may not say that it was simply as an example; for
that would be really denying the vicarious nature of the atonement. It
must have been for the same reason that He died, namely, for sin. Not
His own sin, but ours; for as in His death, so in His life, our sins were
counted as His. And thus it is that He could be all His life, even from His
birth, under the condemnation of the law. It was not on His own account,
but on ours."

Nowhere in Scripture is it taught that Christ became our Sin-Bearer because

He was born in our humanity. For He who was "holy, harmless, undefiled,
having been separated from sinners" (Heb. 7: 26), whose humanity is
described as that "holy thing" in Luke’s gospel, was never born as we are with
"the carnal mind which is enmity against God" (Rom. 8:7). He is able to "suffer
with our weaknesses" because he has "been tempted in all respects according
to [our] likeness apart from sin" (Heb. 4: 15, Greek). He was never a sinner by
nature as we are. The description of the human race in Romans 3:1-23 was not
a description of the Lamb without blemish. As in the Gospel "is revealed the
righteousness of God from faith to faith...[that] the one righteous by faith shall
live" (Rom. 1:16-17) so also in it "is revealed [the] wrath of God from heaven
against all impiety and unrighteousness of men" (Rom. 1:18); "for all have
sinned and continue to fall short [present continuous] of the glory of God"
(Rom. 3:23); "the many were constituted sinners" (Rom. 5:19); even the truly
converted whose minds have been renewed to serve God, discover the inward
battle of that "sin indwelling within me....the sin dwelling in me. I find then the
law that when I would do good that evil is present with me...the law of sin, the
one being in my members" (Rom. 7:17-23); "if we say we have no sin [present
tense] we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us" (I John 1:8); "for in
many ways we all offend [stumble]" (present tense, James 3:2); "the carnal
mind is enmity against God" (this is precisely what we inherit; Rom. 8:7);
"conceived in sin, shapen in inquity" (Ps. 51:5); "the wicked are estranged from
the womb, they stray from the belly, speaking lies" (Ps. 58:3); "by nature
children of wrath" (Eph. 2:3); "For I know you will surely betray and trespass,
from the womb you were called such" (Isa. 48:8); "the heart is deceitful above
all things and desperately wicked" (Jer. 17:9); "all evil is from within…defiles
the man" (Mark 7:18-23); "the day you were born… I saw you squirming in your
blood…. I said, Live!" (Ez. 16:6); "who can bring a clean out of an unclean
thing, not one" (Job 14:4); "every man is tempted from within, tempted by his
own lusts…" (James 1:13-15). All these show that it is by nature that we are
sinners, condemned by the eternal Law of a holy God, and not only by our
deliberate commissions or omissions. None of these were ever true of Jesus
Christ.

Christ became our Sin-Bearer, condemned on our behalf, only through

imputation, i.e., because our sins were reckoned as His: "the LORD has laid on
Him the iniquity of us all …. He was reckoned with the transgressors; and He
bore the sin of the many, and made intercession for the transgressors" (Isa. 53:
12). "He made Him to be sin on our behalf Who knew no sin" (II Cor. 5: 21).
"Then said He unto them, ‘But now, he that has a purse, let him take [it], and
likewise [his] wallet: and he that has no sword, let him sell his garment, and
buy one. For I say unto you, that what has been written must be fulfilled in Me,
And with the lawless He was reckoned: for the thing concerning Me has a
fulfillment’" (Luke 22: 36-37). "Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; He has
put [Him] to grief: when You shall make His soul an offering for sin" (Isa.
53:10). Only thus could He "carried up our sins in His body onto the tree" (I
Pet. 2:24) because He received the full curse of sin and death within because
of an outside-of-Himself sin reckoned as His. Even so, by faith alone we
receive the full blessing of life and righteousness within, because of an
outside-of-ourselves Righteousness reckoned as ours(Isa. 53; Rom. 3-4; Ps.
32:1).

On E. J. Waggoner’s main desire in writing

• Page 52:2. "I have written this brief review, as I did my articles in the
Signs, with the desire to vindicate the law of God, and to show its
perpetuity, its binding claims upon all mankind, and the beautiful
harmony between it and the gospel. The law of God is the groundwork of
all our faith. It may be said to be the backbone of the Third Angel’s
Message."

Ecclesia Reformata Semper Reformanda

On the ‘Reformed Church Ever Reforming’

Ellet J. Waggoner saw himself as helping to recover the faith once delivered so
gloriously to the saints in the 1st century AD and recovered so mightily in the
16th century. On the subject of the law and the gospel in the book of Galatians,
he declared the need for reform. His words still ring true for us as a people
today on our need to more fully grasp the Gospel in its New Testament,
apostolic, Day of Atonement context. In 1888, Ellet J. Waggoner stood with
Ellen White as a Protestant Reformer to the Advent people:

• Page 52:3. "I know you will say that it will be a humiliating thing to
modify our position on so vital a point as this, right in the face of the
enemy. But if a general has a faulty position, I submit that it is better to
correct it, even in the face of the enemy, than to run the risk of defeat
 because of his faulty position. But I do not see anything humiliating in
the matter. If our people should to-day, as a body (as they will sometime),
change their view on this point, it would simply be an acknowledgment
that they are better informed to-day than they were yesterday. It would
simply be taking an advance step, which is never humiliating except to
those whose pride of opinion will not allow them to admit that they can
be wrong. It would simply be a step nearer the faith of the great
Reformers from the days of Paul to the days of Luther and Wesley. It
would be a step closer to the heart of the Third Angel's Message. I do not
regard this view which I hold as a new idea at all. It is not a new theory of
doctrine. Everything that I have taught is perfectly in harmony with the
fundamental principles of truth which have been held not only by our
people, but by all the eminent reformers. And so I do not take any credit
to myself for advancing it. All I claim for the theory is, that it is
consistent, because it sticks to the fundamental principles of the gospel.
(1)

Concluding remarks on the overwhelming centrality of Justification by

faith

• Page 53:1-2. "Before I close, I cannot refrain form expressing my regret

to see in your book (on page 78) the expression, ‘the much-vaunted
doctrineofjustification by faith.’ Do you know of any other means of
justification? Your words seem to intimate that you think that doctrine
has been overestimated. Of one thing I am certain, and that is, that those
who have held to the theory of the law, which you are endeavoring to
uphold, have not overestimated the doctrine of justification by faith;
because that theory leads inevitably to the conclusion that men are
justified by the law. But when I read Romans 3:28, and read also that
Paul knew nothing among the Corinthians but Jesus Christ and Him
crucified, and that ‘the just shall live by faith,’ and that ‘this is the victory
that overcometh the world, even our faith’ (1 John 5:4), and that Paul
wanted to be found [in Him] when Jesus comes, having nothing but ‘the
righteousness which is of God by faith’ (Philippians 3:9), I conclude that
it is impossible to overestimate the doctrine of justification by faith. You
may call it a ‘much-vaunted’ if you please; I accept the word, and say
with Paul: ‘God forbid that I should glory [or vaunt], save in the cross of
our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified to me, and I unto
the world.’
• "Hoping that you will read this letter in the spirit in which it was written,
and that you will believe that I have written it with only the utmost good-
feeling and brotherly love for you personally, and praying that God will
guide both of us and all His people to the most perfect knowledge of the
truth as it is in Jesus, I remain your brother in Christ, E. J. WAGGONER."

Comparison of E. J. Waggoner’s position in 1888 with that of the

Protestant Reformation:
Topic Protestant Reformation Waggoner’s position in 1888
Justification by faith (i.e.
'righteousness by faith')
Nature of the Atonement
Sanctification
Centrality of Justification by
faith
Nature of faith
Nature of sin
Human nature of Christ
Christ as our Sin-Bearer
Old & New Covenants
The Covenant to Abraham
Law in Galatians
The pardon and righteousness
reckoned to all who believe
• grasped by faith alone
"without works" (Rom.
4:1-8)
• Christ’s life & death
reckoned ours
continuously not just
for past sins but for
our present ‘coming
short’ (Rom. 3:24-28;
4:8; 8:1, 31-39; Heb.
7:25)
Substitutionary
= "fruit of the Spirit" [in] love,
obedience, and good works; to
be "completed in you until the
day of Jesus Christ" (Gal. 5:
22-23; Phil. 1: 6)
"the article of the standing and
falling church" (Luther); "the
principal hinge of religion"
(Calvin)
Faith in the Object, Christ
(because faith is without merit
or virtue in itself)
Not faith as the object, love (as
held by the Medieval church)
Explicitly and Biblically: Not
only what we do but what we
are
Like us in all things, sin
excepted
By imputation only
A matter of status before God
not dispensation (sinners
justified by faith alone in the
OT also)
= the Gospel
Both but especially the moral
law
The pardon and righteousness
reckoned to all who believe
• grasped by faith (not as
clear on "without
works")
• Christ’s righteousness
reckoned ours mostly
for past sins (EJW like
fellow SDAs not clear
on the ‘present
continuous’ nature of
justification)
Substitutionary
= love and obedience (less
explicit on the nature of the
work of the Holy Spirit in
sanctification)
"impossible to overestimate"
(Waggoner)
Faith in the Object, Christ
More implicitly: Not only what
we do but what we are (not as
clear on the nature of sin)
Like us in all things, sin
excepted (although not as
clearly articulated)
By imputation only
A matter of status before God
not dispensation (sinners
justified by faith in the OT also)
= the Gospel
Only the moral law
Justification by faith in its NT-
apostolic, eschatological Day
of Atonement context (Rom. 1-
3; Hebrews; John 12; 16; Rev.
12, etc.)
Not fully recovered: Sensed a
connection with acquittal in
the final judgment, but not the
full significance or
consequences
Not fully recovered: Sensed its
connection with 3rd Angel’s
message but not the full
significance or consequences

At the gate
Francis S. Greene
(25 October 1989)

There came two men to heaven, and at its splendid gate

They answered, each man for himself, the Keeper of their fate.
The Searcher there of hidden hearts, Who for each seeker yearned,
Gave test to all their source of trust and all their souls had learned.
"What claim for your redemption can grant you entrance here?
How do you qualify to walk where holy angels fear?"

The first man said, "My life is clean! Behold me, void of sin.
This did the Christ within my life, that I might enter in.
All holy, harmless, undefiled, and such a one as He.
All praise to Him, who fashioned thus a miracle like me!"

The candidate who followed next then stood before his Lord
To answer Him whose holy voice was as a two-edg’d sword.
"What offering do you present? Do you have Heaven's key?
No flesh can come with empty hands. Where is your gift to Me?"

"I have no gift to make Thee, Lord," the second softly said.
"All good appearing in my life, Christ wrought it in my stead.
He wove the very robe I wear, and made my eyes to see
That there is not a scrap of good belonging unto me.
Therefore, my ransom is His blood; in it I rest my fate.
I claim Thy Christ as entrance, Lord, for Jesus is my Gate."

To whom did Heaven open wide? The answer's clear to see:

No flesh shall be self-justified, and none can buy what’s free.

Appendix I

A brief compilation of clear statements on Justification by faith

Martin Luther & the Reformers Ellen White & Seventh-day Adventists

• "God accounts and acknowledges him • "Christ was a Protestant…. Luther and
as righteous without any works who his followers did not invent the reformed
apprehends His Son by faith alone…. religion. They simply accepted it as
 This, then, is the amazing definition of
Christian righteousness. It is the divine
imputing or accounting for
righteousness or unto righteousness
because of faith in Christ or for Christ’s
sake" (D. Martin Luthers Werke, Vol. III,
p. 1229).
• "It is faith alone that achieves this that
all sins are remitted to us and that the
whole Decalogue is fulfilled by faith,
because faith alone gives me Christ,
who is the fulfillment and the end [telos
completion] of the law. What else does
faith give? It imparts and brings with it
the Holy Spirit, from whom all good
works flow" (D. Martin Luthers Werke,
Kuitische Gesamtausgabe [Weimar,
1883-], Vol. XXXIX, Pt. 1, p. 482).
• "But the doctrine of Justification is this,
that we are pronounced righteous and
are saved solely by faith in Christ, and
without works. . . . it immediately
follows that we are pronounced
righteous neither through monasticism
nor through vows nor through masses
nor through any other works. . . ."
(Martin Luther, Lectures on Galatians,
1535).
• ‘The article of Justification, which is our
only protection, not only against all the
powers and plottings of men but also
against the gates of hell, is this: By faith
alone [sola fide] in Christ, without
works, we are declared just [pronuntiari
iustos] and saved’ (Martin Luther, comp.
E. M. Plass, What Luther Says, 2: 701).
• ‘Therefore a man can with confidence
boast in Christ and say: ‘Mine are
Christ’s living, doing, and speaking, his
suffering and dying, mine as much as if
I had lived, done, spoken, suffered, and
died as He did’ (Martin Luther, Luther’s
Works, 31: 297).
• "… the obedience of Christ is imputed
to us for righteousness. That glory
cannot be taken away from Christ and
transferred to either our renewal or our
obedience without blasphemy" (Martin
Chemnitz, 1522-1586; Examination of
the Council of Trent, Pt. 1, pp. 490-491;
cf. Rom. 10: 4).
• "Justifying righteousness is the doing
and suffering of Christ when He was in
the world. This is clear because we
are…justified by His obedience… (Rom.
5:19; 10:4). This righteousness resides
in and with the person of Christ; it is of
presented by Christ and the apostles"
(Ellen White, ‘Visit to the Vaudois
Valleys,’ Review and Herald, 06-01-86).
• "The great doctrine of justification by
faith, so clearly taught by Luther, had
been almost wholly lost sight of…
[England, 18th c.]" (Ellen White, The
Great Controversy, p. 253).
• "The point which has been urged upon
my mind for years is the imputed
righteousness of Christ. I have
wondered that this matter was not made
the subject of discourses in our
churches throughout the land, when the
matter has been kept constantly urged
upon me, and I have made it the subject
of nearly every discourse and talk that I
have given to the people. (Ellen White,
MS 36 1890 cited in Faith and Works, p.
18).
• "The believing sinner is pronounced
innocent, while the guilt is placed on
Christ. The righteousness of Christ is
placed on the debtor's account, and
against his name on the balance sheet is
written: Pardoned. Eternal Life" (Ellen
White, RH, 08-24-1897).
• "Through His imputed righteousness
they are accepted of God as keeping all
His commandments" (Ellen White, TM
37).
• "Righteousness without a blemish can
be obtained only through the imputed
righteousness of Christ" (Ellen White,
RH, 9-3-01).
• "Let not the fallacies of Satan deceive
you; you are justified by faith alone ….
but genuine faith… bring[s] forth the
fruits of the Spirit." (Ellen White, Signs
of the Times, 03-24-90).
• "They [sinners] are justified alone
through the imputed righteousness of
Christ" (Ellen White, Mss. Rel., Vol. 8, p.
255).
• "Christ only is the way, the truth, the life;
and man can be justified alone through
the imputation of Christ’s righteousness.
Man is justified freely by God’s grace
through faith, and not by works, lest any
man should boast. Salvation is the gift of
God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
Many have felt their hopeless condition,
and have asked in perplexity, ‘How shall
we gain … the world to come? Earth lies
under the curse, and is doomed to
destruction; how shall we be able to
 justifying virtue only by imputation, i.e.
by God’s reckoning it to us, even as our
sins made the Lord Jesus a sinner…by
God’s reckoning it to Him" (John
Bunyan, Justification by an Imputed
Righteousness, a sermon; 17th
century).
• "…if we are justified on the grounds of
the work of the Holy Spirit in us, we are
called to rest on a work, which, so far
from being finished and accepted, is not
even begun in the case of any
unrenewed sinner; and which, when it is
begun in the case of a believer, is
incipient only…marred and defiled by
remaining sin…and never perfected in
this life" (J. Buchanan, The Doctrine of
Justification, p. 402).
enter the city of God?’ We would point
you to Christ, the way, the truth, the life –
the mystic ladder between heaven and
earth" (Ellen White, RH, 11-11-1890)
• "…What is the ground of our
acceptance; And we reply that it is not
our righteousness, nor our humility, nor
contrition, nor tears, nor repentance, nor
anything that the Holy Spirithaswrought
in us, but what Christ has done for us"
(John Brunson, RH, 12 August 1902).
• "When the sinner believes that Christ is
his personal Saviour, then, according to
his unfailing promises, God pardons his
sin, and justifies him freely. The
repentant soul realizes that his
justification comes because Christ, as
his substitute and surety, has died for
him, is his atonement and
righteousness" (Ellen White, RH, 11-04-
1890).

References & Notes

Buchanan, J. (1867). The Doctrine of Justification: An Outline of its History in

the Church and of its Exposition from Scripture. Carlisle, PA: The Banner of
Truth Trust (1961, 1984, 1991, 1997). One of the finest works ever on
Justification by faith. Clearly elucidates a Biblical position on the Covenants,
showing that believers in the Old Testament were also justified by faith alone in
the imputed righteousness of Christ who was yet to come.

Bunyan, J. "Justification by an Imputed Righteousness." For the full text of

John Bunyan's timeless sermon on justification by faith.

Chemnitz, M. (1522-1586). Examination of the Council of Trent, Part 1. St. Louis,

MO: Concordia Publishing House (1971). A systematic evaluation of the
teachings of the Council of Trent in the light of Scripture and history by a
leading Protestant Reformer of the 16th cenutry. One of the best works on the
doctrinal issues of the Protestant Reformation.

The General Conference Daily Bulletin (October 17 – November 2, 1888). Battle

Creek, MI: The Review and Herald Publishing Association. Primary, albeit brief,
historical evidence for what E. J. Waggoner actually taught at the pivotal 1888
General Conference.

McMahon, D. (1979). Ellet Joseph Waggoner: The Myth and the Man (The full
text online). Fallbrook, CA: Verdict Publications. An evaluation of the tenor and
development of E. J. Waggoner's teachings from 1882 to his death in 1916 in
the light of the NT-Reformation teaching of justification by faith alone. Contains
probably the most comprehensive bibliography of Waggoner's works available.
Waggoner, E. J. (1888, December). The Gospel in the book of Galatians: A
Review. Oakland, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Association. Definitive, primary
historical evidence on what E. J. Waggoner actually taught in 1888.

White, E. G. (1888-1915). The 1888 materials. Washington, DC: The Ellen G.

White Estate (1987). Collected letters and manuscripts relating to the 1888
General Conference and its aftermath. This collection especially highlights the
need to accept justification by faith and be sanctified by the truth in our solemn
time. Ellen White strongly endorsed the necessity of reform and being open to
the leadings of the Holy Spirit into all truth, i.e., Ecclesia Reformata Semper
Reformanda.