Book Reviewby Desmond Ford

A new book on the SDA doctrine of the InvestigativeJudgment contains strong advances. Yet many of the problems

discussed at Glacier View in 1980remain.

Roy Adams The Sanctuary: Understandingthe Heart of Adventist Theology. Review andHerald Publishing Association, Hagerstown,Maryland, 1993. 160 pages. $9.95.

We commend RoyAdamsforforthrightly say-ing things on thistopic that must be said. Evenifthe things said go contrary to old traditions.He says:

To say today that after His greatvictory at the cross, our spotless HighPriest was confined to one section of theheavenly sanctuary-assuming therewas literally such a place-for 1,800years would be theologically incongru-ous and intolerable. (p. 113)

Christ Always in Inner ShrineOnly since Glacier View has this New Testa-ment teaching been acceptable to theAdventist Church.For nearly 150 years, the great majority ofofficial pronouncements on this topic deniedthe plain teaching of Hebrews 6:19-20:

We have this hope, a sure and stead-fast anchor ofthe soul, a hope that entersthe inner shrine behind the curtain, whereJesus, a forerunner on our behalf, hasentered, having become a high priestforever according to the order ofMelchizedek. (Heb 6:19-20 NRSV)

There are also twelve New Testamenttexts (outside the Gospels)thatspeak of Christhaving ascended to "the right hand of God"(Acts 2:33; 5:31; 7:55-56; Rom 8:34; Eph 1:20;CoI3:1; Heb 1:3; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2; 1 Pe 3:22).

Investigative Judgment and GospelDr. Adams clings to the doctrine of the Inves-tigative Judgment even though he removescertain of its 'pillars.' He writes:

It is perha ps safe to say that noother Adventistteaching has occasionedmore ridicule and contempt than that ofthe investigative judgment. The reactionof non-Adventist theologians has been

16

virtually totally negative, some seeingthe doctrine as a face-saving device toexplain the failure of 1844. Even withinthe Adventist Church itself prominentleaders have from time to time expressedstrong misgivings about the concept.

My assessment ofthis negative re-action leads me to the conclusion thatthe common denominator runningthrough it all is the perception that theconceptof an investigative judgmentfliesin the face of righteousness by faith andChristian assurance. This was clearlythe case with defrocked Adventist minis-ter-evangelist Albion Fox Ballenger. (p.117)

1844We have in this tiny volume an attempt to"steer us away from a stale and uncriticalorthodoxy."

Yet, while Dr. Adams rejects the long-cherished view of an incomplete atonementof the cross (awaiting consummation in 1844)

-Arthur Koestler

-Alexis de Tocqueville

him to the Investigative Judgment (the date1844) is thoroughly loosed.

... The ultimate truth is penultimately al-ways a falsehood. He who will be provedright in the end appears to be wrong andharmful before it.

-

HELPFUL QUOTES

When the existence of the Church isthreatened, she is released from the com-mandments of morality. With unity as theend, the use of every means is sanctified,even cunning, treachery, violence, simony,prison, death. For all order is for the sakeof the community, and the individual mustbe sacrificed to the common good.

-Dietrich von Nieheim,Bishop of Verden

Time, events, or the unaided individual ac-tion of the mind will sometimes undermineor destroy an opinion without any outwardsign of change .... No conspiracy has beenformed to make war on it, but its followersone by one noiselessly secede. As its op-ponents remain mute or only interchangetheir thoughts by stealth, they are them-selves unaware for a long period that agreat revolution has actually been ef-fected.

A new truth does not triumph by convinc-ing its opponents and making them seethe light, but it conquers because its op-ponents eventually die and a new genera-tion grows up that is familiar with it.

-Max Planck

*In chapter 8, Roy Adams discusses a newname for the controversial InvestigativeJudgment. He favors dropping "investiga-tive" and substituting "pre-Advent."

I would like to emphasize that I, too,believe in a pre-Advent judgment (though notif it's a renamed Investigative Judgment).The biblical pre-Advent judgmenttakes placeimmediately before Christ's revelation asKing of kings and Lord of lords. Revelation22:11-12 points to Christ's final work at thelast moment of his priesthood above. As theOmniscient One, Christ will impute perfectrighteousness to believers on the verge ofeternity. This confirms forever the verdictmade earlier, the moment they believed (In3:36; Rom 5:1, 19; Gal 5:5; 2 Tim 4:1, 8).

-

his dominion shall be taken away,to be consumed and totally destroyed.

(Dan 7:26 NRSV)The saints are not to be "totally de-

stroyed." The "his" referred to here is theantichrist.

Glacier ViewIn the appendix, Dr. Adams refers to his doc-toral dissertation, which he completed aboutthe time of Glacier View. In that disserta-tion,

I criticized, sometimes ratherstrongly, the position that certain promi-nent Adventist theologians (and thechurch as a whole) have taken in thepast, and called attention to the posi-tive contributions to the doctrine of thesanctuary made by some of thechurch's critics, notably Albion FoxBallenger. (p. 154)Dr. Adams continues,

For day after day at the conference[Glacier View] I witnessed what I con-sidered to be free and frank discussionson the important issues surrounding thistopic by some of the keenest theologi-cal minds in the denomination. The con-sensus that resulted has been a pro-found inspiration to me.

Another Glacier ViewNot all who were present at Glacier Viewwould agree with Dr. Adams's description.

He does not mention, for example, whatDr. Ray Cottrell concluded, that most of thedelegates had not read the Glacier Viewmanuscript! Nor does Roy Adams mentionthat the Consensus Statement endorsedmany of the key positions of the DesmondFord manuscript. This Statement has nowbeen dropped by the church.

Nevertheless, you can sense Dr.Adams's great relief about Glacier View. Hefound many there, who, despite doubts aboutcertain areas of the Adventist InvestigativeJudgment doctrine, could still vote in its de-fense!

Dr. Adams does the same in this book. Idoubt, however, that any Adventists wholived during the first 100 years of the de-nomination would recognize his version ofthe doctrine.

Closing CounselBut we must pay our tribute to an honestChristian brother.

Perhaps the best counsel we can offerhim is the suggestion that he study The Endof Historicism by Kai Arasola, president ofthe SDA Finland Finnish Conference. ThereDr. Adams will find that the chief tie binding

he clings to a judgment beginning in 1844.Still, he acknowledges the difficulty of

an omniscient God taking at least one and ahalf centuries to judge the church. He says:

None of us can adequately explainwhy it's taking so long. We might arguethat a computer, given the right kind ofdata, could judge all humanity in muchless than 150 years-the period since1844. But in the first place, God doesnot react to time as humans do. Sec-ond Peter 3:8 makes it clear that thepassage of time, as we experience it,means little to God. (p. 146)He urges us all to drop the "investiga-

tive" from "investigative judgment," but wethink that what remains amounts to some-thing very similar. *

Author's AppealWith deep feeling, Roy Adams appeals tohis church:

Adventists who are concernedabout the image of the church will seethe need for refinement in those areasof our theology that easily lend them-selves to misunderstanding and carica-ture. We can ill afford to have thechurch portrayed as anything less than"the repository of the riches of thegrace of Christ," through which thewhole universe will witness the "finaland full display of the love of God." (p.122)Dr. Adams rightly recognizes the pri-

macy of God's love. Yet he rejects the moralinfluence theory of the atonement taught atLoma Linda University for decades (see pp.137-138l. This theory denies such plain state-ments as, "without the shedding of bloodthere is no forgiveness" ( Heb 9:22).

Saints or AntichristOn page 102, Roy Adams considers a con-troversial Old Testament issue. Are the sinsto be cleansed in Daniel 8:14 the sins of theAntichrist ("little horn") or of the saints?

For historically we have seen in thetext the antitypical cleansing of thesanctuary from the sins of God's people,whereas the fact of the matter is thatclearly the emphasis in Daniel 8 is onthe sins of the "little horn." (p. 102)Yet, drawing upon Daniel 7:9-10, he en-

deavors to support a judgment upon thesaints.

Dr. Ferch is quoted for substantia-tion. Yet Dr. Ferch realized thatthe judg-ment of Daniel 7:9-10 was a judgmentupon the antichrist. This is made clearin Daniel 7:26:Then the court shall sit in judgment, and

17