Dxliments From Glacier View

Interview Ith Desmond Ford

A QuarterlyJournal of the A___.;;sod;ajion of Adventist FOfUl1lS Volurne 11) Number 2

SPECTRUM
EDITOR Roberta J. Moore Eric Anderson
Journalism History
Roy Branson Lorna Linda University Pacific Union College
Charles Scriven' Roy Benton
EXECUTIVE EDITOR Theology Mathematics
Richard Emmerson Graduate Theological Union Columbia Union Colle!
Ottilie Stafford Raymond Cottrell
EDITORIAL BOARD English Theology
Atlantic Union College Lorna Linda, California
Roy Branson
Ethics, Kennedy Institute Judith Folkenberg
Georgetown University ASSIST ANT EDITOR Researcher
Washington, D.C.
Molleurus Couperus Carolyn Stevens
Physician English Lawrence Geraty
Angwin, California Walla Walla College Old Testament
SDA Theological Semir
Tom Dybdahl
Fritz Guy
Editor
Allentown, Pennsylvania
EDITORIAL Theology
ASSISTANTS SDA Theological Semir
Richard Emmerson
English Kenneth Fletcher Jorgen Henrikson
Walla Walla College Walla Walla College Artist
Boston, Massachusetts
Alvin L. K wiram
Chemistry CONSULTING Edward Lugenbeal
University of Washington Anthropology
EDITORS Berrien Springs, Michil
Gary Land Kjeld Andersen
History Eric A. Magnusson
Physician President
Andrews University Lystrup, Denmark Avondale College, Aus

Association of Adventist Fonuns

EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS Corresponding Seer.
Sean McCarthy
COMMITTEE Of Academic Affairs
Leslie Pitton Undergradaute
President Youth Director Columbia Union Colle
GlennE. Coe Central Union Conference Takoma Park, Marylar
State's Attorney Lincoln, Nebraska
West Hartford, Connecticut
OfIntemational Relations REGIONAL
Vice President Molleurus Couperus
Lyndry A. Niles Physician REPRESENl
Communications Angwin, California Atlantic
Howard University, Washington, D.C. Richard B. Lewis, Jr.
Of Membership Advertising
Executive Secretary Ronald Cople Boston, Massachusetts
Claire Hosten Business
Attorney Silver Spring, Maryland Central
Washington, D.C. Erwin Sicher
STAFF History
Treasurer Legal Consultant Southwestern Adventi
Richard C. Osborn Bradley Litchfield Keene, Texas
History Attorney
Takoma Academy Washington, D.C. Central Pacific
Takoma Park, Maryland Paul Dassenko
Systems Manager Financial Analyst
Don McNeill San Francisco, Califon
'Graduate Student Computer Programmer
Spencerville, Maryland

SPECTRUM is a journal established to encourage SPECTRUM is pi

Seventh-day Adventist participation in the discussion of Adventist Forum:
contemporary issues from a Christian viewpoint, to look SPECTRUM, Bm
without prejudice at all sides of a subject, to evaluate the ters of style and do
merits of diverse views, and to foster Christian intellectual MLA Style Sheet (I
and cultural growth. Although effort is made to ensure written, double sp:
accurate scholarship and discriminating judgment, the along with a self-ac
statements of fact are the responsibility of contributcrs, and tations of space, n
the views individual authors express are not necessarily before publication
those of the editorial staff as a whole or as individuals. In order to recei'
The Association of Adventist Forums is a nonsubsidized, ($12 per volume, e
nonprofit organization for which gifts are deductible in the countries) to Asso
report of income for purposes of taxation. The publishing of Takoma Park, Ma
SPECTRUM depends on subscriptions, gifts from indi- chased for $3.50. ~
viduals and the voluntary efforts of the contributors and the changes to the san
staff. by check made out
© 1980. All right
In This Issue
ARTICLES Volume Eleven, Number Two, Published November 1980
The Sanctuary Review Committee and Its New Consensus Raymond F. Cottrell 2
In the Shadow of the Sanctuary: The 1980 Theological
Consultation Warren C. Trenchard 26
Daniel 8:14 and the Day of Atonement Desmond Ford 30
Daniel and the Judgment William H. Shea 37
Confidence in Salvation: The Meaning of the Sanctuary Fritz Guy 44
Interview with Desmond Ford Adrian Z ytkoskee 53
FORD DISMISSAL: REACTIONS AND RESPONSE
An Open Letter to President Wilson Andrews Scholars 61
Bureaucratic Theology? Lorenzo H. Grant 62
Journalistic Fairness ? Walter C. U tt 63
The Bible Alone Eryl Cummings 64
Theologians'Statement Andrews Society for Religious Studies 65
Wilson Responds Neal C. Wilson 65
SANCTUARY DEBATE DOCUMENTS
Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary 68
. The Role of the Ellen G. White Writings in Doctrinal Matters 71
The Ten-Point Critique 72
Papers Prepared for the Sanctuary Review Committee 75
Desmond Ford Correspondence 76
THEOLOGICAL CONSULTATION DOCUMENTS
Recommendations of the Theological Consultation 79
Papers Prepared for the Theological Consultation 80

About This Issue

T he developments
within Adventism
out of which this issue arises are both disturb-
extensive account yet of the Glacier View
conference. Warren Trenchard, who gave a
paper at the Theological Consultation, re-
ing and heartening. When a passionate and ports on its deliberations. SPECTRUM is
dedicated seeker after truth, like Desmond also pleased to provide a summary of Des-
Ford, can no longer carryon his scholarly mond Ford's nearly 1,000-page manuscript
activities as an employee of the church, many on the sanctuary and an interview with Ford
Adventists, including academic and church that will allow readers to decide for them-
administrators, must be profoundly sad- selves the impact of the actions after Glacier
,dened. Apprehension deepens when so many View on his attitude toward the church and
lay persons and younger ministers are re- its leadership. William Shea and Fritz Guy
examining their sense of commitment to the provide versions of the highly influential pa-
organized church. However, it is gratifying pers they presented at Glacier View. So that
that an increasing number of Adventists are readers may have in one place all the do~u­
being drawn into sustained and serious con- ments of record, we have published material
sideration of their most basic beliefs. that has appeared elsewhere, including
We are pleased that this issue includes con- statements approved at the Glacier View'con-
tributions from participants in recent discus- ferences, a few representative reactions to
sions of the meaning of Christ's ministry in them and information as to how to obtain I
the sanctuary. Raymond Cottrell, who has papers prepared for the conferences. j
already published his own views on the sub- The Editors
ject (Vol. In, No. 4)~has writtenthe_Ill?~t
1I
i
i
 The Sanctuary Review Committee
and its New Consensus
by Raymond F. Cottrell

T he meeting of the
Glacier View Sanc-
tuary Review Committee (referred to here as
as a whole. A document of nine pages, a ten-
point critique that set forth in considerable
detail points of agreement and disagreement
the Sanctuary Committee) Aug. 10-15, 1980, with Dr. Ford's position paper, was read to
was the most important event of this nature the Sanctuary Committee, but not dupli-
in Adventist history since the 1888 General cated or placed in their hands. The full com-
Conference in Minneapolis. With sober mittee that had been working all week long
thoughts, its 115 members from around the to produce and vote its approval of the con-
world converged on Glacier View Ranch, sensus statement was not asked to debate or
located in the foothills of the Rocky Moun- vote, for or against, the ten-point critique.
tains northwest of Denver . Despite very real This document is not a product of the com-
differences of opinion and some tense mo- mittee, nor does it reflect the thinking of the
ments, an atmosphere of openness, freedom committee.
and mutual confidence prevailed; anatmos-
phere that could not have been possible ten,
The Conference
five or even two years ago. Overview. The Sanctuary Committee
The principal product of the conference studied issues whose roots extend at least as
was a 15-page consensus statement (see far back as the Minneapolis General Confer-
pp. 68-71) presented to the full assembly Fri- ence. 1 Albion F. Ballenger, 75 years ago, was
day morning, when it was debated, amended the first person of record to identify the spe-
and duly voted. Although the document did cific issues subsequently raised by numerous
not represent the thinking of every delegate others, such as L. R. Conradi, W ~ W.
on every point, the vote did accurately reflect Fletcher, Harold Snide, R. A. Greive and of
a reasonable working consensus of the group course, most recently Desmond Ford.
Dr. Ford traces his concern with the
sanctuary doctrine back to 1945. Since then,
Raymond F. Cottrell, formerly associate editor of he has sought unsuccessfully in papers, arti-
the Review and Herald and of the Seventh-day Adven- cles and books to persuade church leaders to
tist Bible Commentary, was a member of the original
Daniel Committee and the Sanctuary Review Com- face up to what he regards as serious non
·mittee. s:eq:uitutsin:Jhe tr.aditional· Adventist. in-:-
 Volume 11, Number 2 3

terpretation of Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9. tional pages - a formal reading assignment
From 1962 to 1966, the select General Con- of 1 ,840 closely reasoned pages. A few addi-
ference Committee on Problems in the Book tional papers were distributed during the
of Daniel had given protracted attention to conference.
these problems without being able to reach a
consensus with respect to them. 2 The 1970s
witnessed implementation of a policy that
reserved decisions in theological matters
T he Sanctuary Com-
mittee was represen-
tative in composition. The administrative
primarily to administrators, which made it and biblical scholarly communities of the
impossible to resolve a growing tension church were dominant. With some overlap-
about the· sanctuary through normal schol- ping of categories, the 111 regular delegates
arly study and deliberation. and four "special invitees" included 56 ad-
ministrators, 46 Bible scholars, five editors,
Desmond Ford, chairman of the theology six pastors, six graduate students, six mem-
department at Avondale College in Aus- bers of the former committee on Problems in
tralia, had been serving as exchange profes- the Book of Daniel, and 14 retired persons.
sor at Pacific Union College in Angwin, Administrators included virtually all the
. California, when he accepted an invitation to church's top world leaders. Nineteen were
speak to the local forum chapter on October members of the General Conference head-
27, 1979. Subsequently, he was granted six quarters staff. Nine of the ten world division
months' leave at General Conference head- presidents were present, along with 11 union
quarters to write his reasons and conclusions, and three local conference presidents.
in consultation with an ad hoc guidance Thirty-four were from divisions outside
committee chaired by Richard Hammill, a North America. Minority racial groups and
vice president of the General Conference and third-world nations were liberally repre-
a Bible scholar. The purpose of this commit- sented.
tee was not to control Ford's research, but to The daily schedule provided for seven
assist him in preparing his formal statement small study groups, consisting of 16 to 18
of problems and solutions. members each, which conversed for three ,
- -..- . -
The resulting document, "Daniel 8:14, and a half hours each morning. The full as-
i
The Day of Atonement, and the Investiga- sembly met an equal length of time for dis-
tive Judgment" (see for a summary, pp. 30-36), cussions in the afternoon, and then met for
provided the basis for the Sanctuary Com- lectures each evening. Each day the study
mittee's deliberations. This nearly 1,000-page groups and full assembly followed an as-
document reviews the history of Adventist signed agenda. 5 Each study group drew up a
debates over the sanctuary during the past 75 consensus report on the topic for the day, for
years, examines the biblical evidence in de- presentation to the full afternoon assembly.
tail, and presents Dr. Ford's own conclu- An official tape recording of proceedings of
sions. In his manuscript, Ford contends that, the full assembly was made by Dr. Donald
at several points, the traditional Adventist Yost, General Conference archivist; indi-
interpretation of Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9 vidual records were limited to handwritten
lacks an accurate, adequate basis/ and Ford notes. 6
proposes what he calls an apotelesmatic4 sol- Original plans for the conference did not
ution. In varying degrees, most contempo- provide for Dr. Ford to address the group or
rary Adventist Bible scholars, including to answer questions publicly. Many dele-
those in attendance at Glacier View, agree gates, however, wanted to hear him and
with his analysis of the exegetical problems, thought that he should be given the opportu-
but not with his proposed solutions to them. nity to speak. Accordingly, the last hour of
Several weeks before Glacier View, the the last three afternoons (Tuesday, Wednes-
General Conference provided each partici- day, and Thursday) was devoted to this pur-
pant with copies of not only the 991-page pose. At some points, the questions and
Ford documept, ..but . lLothersof849-addi- comments. w~re very. direct·and expliFit":(ll1d
4 Spectrum

there were tense moments. But even the Pacific Union College, and some interpreted
most emphatic speeches were made in a spirit his remarks as a challenge to the church.
of deep earnestness and sincerity. There was a strong reaction which led the
Two identical opinion polls of delegates on Pacific Union Conference and Drs. Cassell
the substantive issues were taken, one before and Madgwick - president and academic
the committee entered upon its task and the dean of Pacific Union College - to take the
other at the close, with a view to evaluating initiative in bringing the problem to the Gen-
the effect of study and deliberation on the eral Conference. The brethren planned an
thinking of the participants.' Each poll con- approach they thought would be consistent
sisted of 21 questions dealing with her- with Christian principles, and arranged for
meneutical principles, points of exegesis and Dr. Ford to have a leave of six months in
attitudes concerning relevant sections of the Washington to research his position thor-
recently revised Statement of Fundamental oughly and to write a statement of his views.
Beliefs. A tabulation of responses to each of Ifhe is teaching error, we ought to know it; if
these polls was read to the delegates. The most he is right, we should stand by his side.
noteworthy difference in responses to the
two polls was a measurable trend toward a
higher level of consensus on some of the key
questionnaire items of the latter pOll.7
E llen White has told us
that we should study
the truth for ourselves, that we are not to take
Sunday Evening: The General Conference any man's word for it, and yet we are to be
President Speaks. The opening meeting of the subject to one another. Some have felt that
conference Sunday night featured an address investigation should not be permitted, but
by Neal Wilson, president of the General she wrote that when no new questions or
Conference and chairman of the committee differences of opinion arise there will be a
that had assisted Dr. Ford in the preparation tendency to rely on tradition. We are not to
of his position paper. In his keynote remarks, think our opinions infallible, but we are to be
Elder Wilson traced the historical back- teachable and prayerful as we study. We are
ground of concern with respect to the not to study in order to find support for our
sanctuary doctrine and commented on the preconceived opinions, but to hear what God
purpose and objectives of the conference. has said. God would have all of our positions
WILSON: There never has been a meeting thoroughly examined. 8
quite like this. It is not going to be an easy If the church has been remiss in the past, it
meeting, but we are optimistic and believe it has an even greater obligation to provide re...,
will prove to be a blessing to the church. sponsible leadership for our people today.
Between 1961 and 1966, the General Confer- Ignorance is no excuse. We are thankful for
ence Committee on Problems in the Book of our Bible s'cholars, hermeneuticists, theolo-
Daniel gave study to the same problems that gians, and exegetes.
bring us together here at Glacier View. Its 45 HAMMILL: One of the crucial problems
study documents have never been released. facing the church today is the interpretation
Its members, six of whom are with us to- of cleansing of the sanctuary beginning in
night, were in agreement on ultimate conclu- 1844, as set forth in Daniel 8:14. It has be-
sions but could not reconcile their differences come evident that we need better answers to
of opinion as to what they considered some of the contextual problems. The guid-
adequate evidence on which to base these ance committee9 did not force its views on
conclusions. These problems continue to fes- Dr. Ford. Its role was to point out what
ter, and it is unhealthy for the church that seemed unclear and to aid him in securing the
more has not been done to resolve them. documents he needed. The committee met in
Discussions of a confusing nature continue to a spirit oflove and good will. The resulting
multiply, and this is why we are here tonight. paper of nearly 1,000 pages is Ford's. His
Last October 27, our friend, our brother, paper touches on areas for which the Adven-
o\lr fellow minister Desmond Ford addressed a tist church needs to give careful study. In
large-:=m.:eetmg':of::the AdverttistFofum-at such study; it is vital that none of usr-unsoff
Volume 11, Number 2 5

on our own. Ellen White has said that people the 1980s as the role of the Spirit of Prophecy .
with strong minds must work with great It will be the issue, he says.
care. It is our earnest prayer and hope that as a
WILSON: I want Des Ford, his wife Gill, result of our deliberations here at Glacier
and their son Luke to know that we love View, God's church will prosper· and the
them very much, and that we appreciate all coming of our Lord will be hastened.
that he has written. This is, and is not, a Des Monday Morning: The Small Study Group.
Ford meeting. Des is not on trial before this The planning committee had drawn up an
group, though some of his views are on trial. agenda for each day of the conference, Mon-
day through Thursday, covering the prob-
"Please be honest and say lems relating to the sanctuary doctrine as pre-
sented by Dr. Ford in his position paper. The
what you think lest people topics for the four days were: Monday, "The
misunderstand you. Here in Nature of Prophecy," Tuesday, "The
this Dleeting, you will have Cleansing of the Sanctuary and the Investiga-
tive Judgment - 1," a consideration of the lin-
immunity." guistic and contextual problems in Daniel;
Wednesday, "The Cleansing of the
He is not a member of this group; he is here to Sanctuary and the Investigative Judgment -
answer questions and to clarify his position. 2," a consideration of the sanctuary in the
It will be our endeavor to be fair and open. book of Hebrews; Thursday, "The Role of
We will work toward a consensus, but not a the Ellen G. White Writings in Doctrinal
majority vote. We need to find out if we do Matters." Each of the seven study groups
have problems, what is central, and what was composed of administrators, Bible
needs more study. Please be honest and say scholars, and other delegates.
what you think lest people misunderstand The various groups of 16 to 18 members
you. Here in this meeting, you will have met in appropriate locations throughout the
immunity. We greatly appreciate the work of camp. As already mentioned, remarks here
our Bible scholars on the new Statement of attributed to each speaker give the gist of his
Fundamental Beliefs adopted at Dallas. 10 comments, in his own words. These com-
They will be partners of ours in reaching ments are reported inthe order in which they
decisions on doctrine. occurred, but it should be remembered that a
Some have suggested that several articles speaker is not necessarily responding directly
in the Adventist Review 11 in recent months to the one who preceded him, and that the
were biased, prejudiced, and that they pre- bare gist of his remarks may, in some in-
judged the case: I assure you that there has stances, tend to obscure continuity. The
been no calculated strategy. The editors have chairman of each group was a vice president
done what the leaders expect them to do - to of the General Conference; its recording sec-
affirm and defend Adventist positions. It is retary was elected by the group. Item by item,
not the role of the Review to give contrary each group debated the agenda for the day
views equal time, or to promote "new light" and agreed on a consensus response to each.
before that light has been studied by respon- The secretary recorded these responses and
sible groups. The Seventh-day Adventist combined them into a formal report which
Church is not on trial. It has a clear position the group approved for presentation at the
on certain points; we are not here searching general assembly in the afternoon.
for a position, but we are reaching out for A detailed report of proceedings in all
answers. seven study groups, or of anyone group over
The bottom line, of course, is the role of the four days, would be repetitive, tedious
Ellen White in doctrinal matters. This is cen- and longer than space permits. Instead, a vir-
tral. Dr. Sakae Kubo, now president of tually complete but considerably condensed
Newbold College, has identified the great report of the Monday morning discussion in
. issue thatwillC:{)I1:1eb~(oreth~.:~hllfc:h<ttlcfi~g. .Q:roll:p :~:~!Rp!"9Yig~~11__~4~q!:l:::l~~:c9J:l(.;~p!()f
 6 Spectrum

the general nature, scope and tone of the the Adventist Seminary of West Africa): We
group discussions. Group 2 chairman was need to recognize that many of the Old Tes-
Charles Bradford, vice president of the Gen- tament prophecies have a dual application.
eral Conference for North America, and the (Some voices called for an emphatic "no";
secretary was Kenneth Strand, professor of others for a qualified "no.")
church history at Andrews University. FARAG: Predictive prophecy is a declara-
tion based on God's foreknowledge.

The agenda for Mon-

day called for a dis-
cussion of "The Nature of Prophecy." That
WOOD: We have wrestled with the idea
that prophecy is an expression of God's
foreknowledge; some consider it to express
topic was subdivided into seven specific God's purpose rather than His foreknow-
questions. A. Could all the Old Testament ledge.
prophecies have been fulfilled within the time of
HARDER: Our perspective does not pre-
the covenant with Israel, i.e., by the time of the
clude the idea that the prophecies all had a
first advent of Christ? if so, what if.fect does this
meaning for former ages.
have on our interpretation of the time prophecies of
Daniel? 12 WOOD: Ellen White said that they were
WADlE FARAG (pastor-evangelist, Al- more for our day than for former ages.
berta Conference): The Encyclopedia Judaica JAMES COX (professor of New Testa-
quotes the Midrash as recognizing a ment, Theological Seminary; under ap-
sanctuary in heaven, as well as one on earth. pointment as president of Avondale Col-
Accordingly, it is not possible to prove that lege): Are we saying "no" to this question
Daniel did not know about a sanctuary in from our point of view, or from that of the
heaven. author? Daniel evidently did not envision
MERLE MILLS (General Conference field multiple fulfillments of his prophecies, but
secretary): We can give this question a deci- the ongoing people of God have always con-
sive "no. " sidered the prophecies applicable to their
FRED HARDER (retired executive secre- own situation. From the author's perspec-
tary of the General Conference Board of tive, we would have to answer "no." The
Higher Education): If the prophecies were predictive prophecies had meaning for the
based on how the Lord knew things would people of the time in which they were given;
work out, He would not have given them in there was something that could have been
the form He did. applicable. But time has gone on.
KENNETH WOOD (editor, Adventist STRAND: There are two types of prophe-
Review): The prophecies could not have been tic literature - classical and apocalyptic -
based on God's foreknowledge. Had they. and this makes a difference. It is not proper to
been, the Lord would have been prejudging attribute multiple fulfillment to apocalyptic
the result. prophecies, as Dr. Ford does.
BRADFORD: Perhaps we should re- BRADFORD: I fear we would be giving
word the statement by omitting the word the prophecies a wax nose.
"all. " B. Does the Old Testament set forth the two
A. N. DUFFY (ministerial secretary, Aus- advents of Christ separated by an interim cif many
tralasian Division): The predictive proph- years? 13
ecies of Daniel are unconditional. DUFFY: The Old Testament did not
FARAG: Daniel's prophecies are definitely foresee two advents separated by 2,000 years.
unconditional. FARAG: There is an Old Testament indi-
WOOD: If we take the question as it reads, cation of two advents.
our answer must be an absolute "no." Some BRADFORD: The Old Testament recog-
Old Testament prophecies could not have nizes a heavenly sanctuary. We want revela-
been fulfilled within that time frame. tion, not speculation.
A. A. ALALADE (graduate student at DUFFY: Ifwe did not have the New Tes-
. AnrlrewstIniv:ersity, on study leave from tament, what would-we conclude about there
Volume 11, Number 2 7

being a second advent, from the Old Testa- another principle. I believe the year-day
ment? principle is based on the sabbatical year and
CLYDE O. FRANZ (retired secretary of the jubilee system. (He presented evidence
the General Conference): Ifwe had only the for the jubilee system as a basis for the
Old Testament, we would not have much principle.)
information about what we call the second JOHN W. FOWLER (president, Ohio
advent. The difference in our perspective is a Conference): The jubilee system in addition
result of the fact that 2,000 years have to Numbers and Ezekiel.
elapsed. HARDER: We will have to recognize that
BRADFORD: Our consensus, then, is the day-year principle does not apply in
" no. " Daniel 9.
COX: Ido not use Numbers and Ezekiel at
"This is, and is not, a Des all. But it is a biblical principle; Ijustsay, "A
day symbolizes a year," and let it go at that.
Ford meeting. Des is not on Let us not use specious arguments when it is
trial before this group, not necessary to do so.
though some of his views HARDER: Ezekiel does not satisfy me at
all. We need to provide something that we
are on trial." can rely on.
BRADFORD: We are saying that the
DUFFY: There has been a progressive un- day-year principle is valid.
folding of the prophecies. MILLS: Are we to tell our people that we
MILLS: Daniel clearly sets forth two ad- have been wrong? Doesn't Sister White use
vents, with a time interval between them. this argument?
WOOD: The question is not whether FRANZ: It is a biblical datum.
Daniel sets forth two advents, but whether ALALADE: There is no problem in rec-
what he wrote is perceived as indicating two ognizing that we have been wrong. We be-
advents. The question before us is, does lieve in progressive revelation, and that im-
Daniel set forth two advents with a time plies progressive understanding, does it not?
interval between them? WOOD: Ellen White speaks of an "un-
COX: That is a specious argument. We are folding." The word "progressive" has evo-
stuck with perception. lutionary connotations. This church has a lot
HARDER: It is clear from Matthew 24, to lose by being iconoclastic with the
which Christ Himself based on the pioneers. We should build on, and enrich,
prophecies of Daniel, that neither He nor the their insights.
disciples envisioned a long time before He STRAND: I am withJim Cox onshabu'ah
would return. ("weeks" or "sevens" of years).
FARAG: Spiritual things are spiritually
COX: Why should we insist on using ar-
discerned.
guments that are weak?
C. Is the New Testament church predicted or
acknowledged in the Old Testament? STRAND: Our consensus, then, is "yes,"
. BRADFORD: I think our answer will but that we need to base it on better reasons
have to be "no." (No objections.) than we have in the past.
D. Does the New Testament indicate the DUFFY: We should not use negative ex-
likelihood of afirst-century return of Christ? 14 pressions in our report.
VOICES: "Yes." (No objections.)
Recess.
E. Is the year-day principle a biblical teach-
STRAND: The crucial issue is how Ellen
White used these texts (Numbers 14:34 and
Ezekiel 4:6) . God always communicates with
I
,

His people in terms of their own time.

ing?IS
JEAN ZURCHER (secretary, Euro-
Africa Division): We cannot prove it' from
F. Do the time prophecies of Daniel contain
conditional elements, or are they exclusively
I
Numhers14:34:arrd Ezekiel4~6: -We need .·uneond#icnall1 § . . ' .... - . . • .•• _ -

I
i
 8 Spectrum

There was no discussion; all in this group imposed a sealing of the prophecies of
agreed that Daniel believed his prophecies Daniel.
were unconditional. Group 2 adjourned its FARAG: There is a difference between ap-
morning session half an hour late and there plication and fulfillment. God's people may,
was not time to discuss the last question. at times, apply a prophecy to their time that is
C. To what extent do the prophecies of Daniel not to be considered a fulfillment.
permit application to multiple situations or ful- R. L. aDaM (retired, member offormer
fillments? Daniel Committee): The classical prophecies
Group 2 took this item up first the follow- could all have been fulfilled in ancient Israel,
ing morning, and there was unanimous but not the apocalyptic time prophecies of
agreement that Daniel makes no provision Daniel.
for multiple fulfillments.
Monday Afternoon: The Full Assembly. Each "Some of us are not as certain
afternoon, the secretary of each of the seven as others on the matter of
study groups presented its consensus report. .
With a few minor variations, there was re-' conditionality. Are we saying
mark able agreement. Monday afternoon, the that God intentionally deceived
consensus of all seven groups concerning the His people for 2,000 years?"
questions was approximately as follows:
A. Some, but not all, of the Old Testament BEA TRICE NEALL (professor of theol-
prophecies could have met their fulfillment ogy, Union College): The outcome of Is-
in connection with the first advent of Christ. rael's probation was conditional. There were
B. There is no consensus as to whether the two possible outcomes of Daniel 9 and the 70
Old Testament presents two advents sepa- weeks.
rated by an interval of many years. aDaM: Let us get something positive.
C. There is no Old Testament intimation LESLIE HARDINGE (dean of the semi-
of the New Testament church. nary, Philippine Union College): We are
D. The New Testament clearly indicates wasting time on speculation. Let us cut off
the likelihood that Christ could have re- the "ifsies." (A loud chorus of "Amens.")
turned in the first century of the Christian Afternoon recess.
era. V. N. OLSEN (president, Lorna Linda
E. The year-day principle is biblical, but University): Old Testament eschatology is
there is some uncertainty as to the best evi- realized in the New Testament.
dence for it. A. L. WHITE (retired secretary of the
F. The time prophecies of Daniel are Ellen G. White Estate): On page 472 of Pa-
unconditional. triarchs and Prophets, we read that God, in His
G. The prophecies of Daniel are not sus- foreknowledge, opened the future to Moses
ceptible to multiple fulfillments. down to the end of time.
FRED VEL TMAN (chairman, depart-

A fter the group con-

sensus reports were
read to the full assembly, discussion began.
ment of religion and biblical languages,
Pacific Union College): The New Testament
clearly expected an early fulfillment of the
In response to a request from Group 2, Dr. promised return of Christ. We cannot use the
Jean Zurcher repeated the evidence for the same arguments as we have in the past.
sabbatic year/jubilee system as a basis for the JAN PAULSEN (secretary, Northern
year-day principle in Bible prophecy, which Europe-West Africa Division): We need to
he had presented to the group that morning. consider the "ifs." Let us refer the matter of
HAMMILL: All Old Testament prophecy conditionality back to the groups for further
could have been fulfilled in an end-time back study.
there. NEALL: We should consider the possibil-
RICHARD LESHER (director, Bible ity that the Old Testament prophecies have
'Research Jnstitute):: .God's. foreknowledge be.en reinterpreted:bylater;,;,inspiredcwriters.
Volume 11; Number 2 9

HARDER: In Matthew 24, Christ inter- confidence in the gospel ofJesus Christ.
preted the prophecy of Daniel to His disci- ROBERT ZAMORA (chairman, de-
pIes, and in so doing explicitly assigned their partment of religion, Columbia Union Col-
fulfillment to the generation of the apostles. lege): We must listen to what the writer him-
HAMMILL: For twelve years, I have had selfis trying to say. This subject needs much
the uneasy feeling that the eschatological more study.
prophecies of the Old Testament could have HARDER: Thereis no question as to what
met their fulfillment in New Testament "this generation" meant to the people who
times. Was the New Testament church de- heard Jesus speak.
luded in its belief that Christ could have come NORMAN YO UN G (professor of theol-
in that generation? Clearly, the Lord could ogy, Avondale College): The distinction
have come in that time, and if so, the Old some make between classical prophecy and
Testament prophecies would have met their apocalyptic prophecy is not valid. The book
fulfillment then. Daniel 7 does present the of Revelation interpreted the book of Daniel,
sweep of history , but not to A.D. 2,000. and Revelation emphasizes the imminence of
JAMES LONDIS (pastor, Sligo Church, Christ's return at that time. The principle of
Takoma Park, Md.): Some of us are not as reinterpretation should be given further
certain as others seem to be on the matter of study.
conditionality. Are we saying that God in- Tuesday Afternoon: The Heppenstall-Ford-
tentionally deceived His people for 2,000 Wilson Encounter. For his assigned hour, Dr.
years? Ford stood at a small lectern on the main
GERHARD HASEL (professor of Old floor immediately in front of the platform,
Testament, Theological Seminary): It was where the chairman and his assistants sat.
not a delusion. God's only intention in The substance of Ford's remarks Tuesday
Daniel 8:14 was to point forward to 1844. afternoon was as follows.
(Chorus of "Amens.") FORD: The day of atonement is clearly
JOHN BRUNT (associate professor of reflected in Daniel 8 and 9. The prayer in
New Testament, Walla Walla College): I Daniel 9 is a day of atonement prayer and
second Drs. Hammill and Londis. The book Daniel 9:24 is stated in day of atonement
of Revelation, at the very close of the New terms. Vindication is the keynote of every
Testament, repeatedly speaks of the time of chapter of Daniel. The motif of judgment is
Christ's return as near. We need a hermeneu- clearly reflected in Daniel and, in fact,
tic for Daniel that does not have God playing throughout the Bible, but not an investiga-
games with people. tive judgment. Daniel 8:14 and 9:24 refer to
STRAND: Our consensus on the book of the same event at the end of the 70 weeks.
Daniel seems to be in conflict with our con- Many Adventists fear judgment even after
sensus on the book of Revelation. We are their sins have been forgiven, because of the
raising questions that were irrelevant in Bible way in which the investigative judgment is
times. presented. The book of Revelation makes
LEROY MOORE (coordinator, Native clear that Christ's kingdom could have come
American [Indian] Affairs): God intended in the first century of our era, and Daniel 7
that His people should receive comfort from could have been fulfilled then.
an application of the prophecies to their time, I fully believe that God raised up the
though the application may not have been a Seventh-day Adventist Church in 1844. I be-
fulfillment. The sealing of Daniel provided lieve in the year-day principle, but not on the
for a positive fulfillment at a later time. basis of Numbers and Ezekiel. When that
K. G. VAZ (ministerial director, West In- which could have happened did not happen,
dies Union Conference): We need to make a God led people to apply the year-day princi-
distinction between application and fulfill- pIe to Daniel's prophecies. I believe that God
ment, and between the classical prophecies spoke to Ellen White miraculously. This
and apocalyptic prophecy. It is of great im- church would have been ship-wrecked with-
portance-thatthiscommittee .leave us-with .... out -her. Butwehave~misused: EUen::White ...
j
1
10 Spectrum

Inspiration comes to us today as Christ came accept his counsel? You never listen to your
- ~n the culture of our day. As Donald brethren. If you believe in Ellen White, and
McAdams and Walter Rea have demon- the brethren tell you what they think, you
strated, our usual views of inspiration have had better practice what you preach. If you
been wrong. Ellen White was a creature of are not willing to accept the counsel of your
her time, as the twelve disciples were of brethren . . . .
theirs. None of this in the least degree de- FORD: I appreciate your counsel.
tracts from Ellen White's gift of inspiration. While the final housekeeping remarks of
It does prove, however, that "inerrancy" is the session were being made, Dr. Ford
not the correct word to describe her inspira- gathered up his papers and left the lectern.
tion. This challenge to Dr. Ford's integrity
brought Tuesday afternoon to an abrupt halt,
and the Sanctuary Committee to its moment
H ighlight of the Ford
hour Tuesday after-
noon was the result of a question addressed to
of highest tension. To be sure, the lengthy
disquisition Neal Wilson interrupted was not
him by E. E. Heppenstall, emeritus chairman one of which even Ford's most ardent sup-
of the department of theology, Seventh-day porters could be proud; in fact, it was the
Adventist Theological Seminary; Dr. Ford nadir of his performance at Glacier View.
studied with Heppenstall in classes 25 years Even so, many members of the committee
ago. were taken completely by surprise, and were
HEPPENSTALL: Des, what took place in at a loss to understand why the president of
heaven in 1844, in relation to the judgment of the General Conference had considered it
Daniel 7 :9-14? Do you see in this a new phase necessary to speak in such uncharacteristi-
in Christ's ministry in the heavenly cally strong language. For the first time,
sanctuary? some of the scholars began to 'Wonder if their
Misunderstanding Dr Heppenstall's inten- presence at Glacier View had been intended
tion, Dr. Ford responded with a lengthy dis- to provide support for a decision concerning
quisition. Later, after talking with Hep- Ford that had been already determined.
penstall, he understood that Heppenstall's in- Wednesday Afternoon: Exchanges with Ford.
tention was to affirm his own loyalty to the FORD: I am sorry that I misunderstood yes-
Adventist understanding of the judgment, terday. My response was not as positive as if!
and to give Ford an opportunity to join him had understood. I have told the brethren
in doing so. He apologized to Ford for the many times that I am fully prepared to be
misunderstanding. Some delegates con- quiet on the issue. I have no wish to crusade
strued this verbal exchange as evidence that in this area. I have published many hundreds
Heppenstall, a long-time friend and sup- of pages on the subject over the past 23 years.
porter of Ford, turned against him. Hep- I believe in our sanctuary message, but the
penstall, however, denies that he has changed way in which we have expressed it has not
his attitude toward Ford and says that his always been the best way. I am perfectly
remarks on this point have been mis- happy to accept the counsel of the brethren
construed. After Ford's disquisition had con- on this matter. Since October 27, I have
tinued at some length, Neal Wilson, chair- refused to speak on the judgment, and I have no
man of the session, who was seated behind a intention of speaking on it until the brethren
table on the platform, interrupted. have studied it. I long for the insights of my
WILSON: You mentioned that you have brethren. Many invitations have come to
changed your mind on some things and that work outside the church, but I have had no
you could be wrong. You have stated your wish to accept them. I cannot go against my
great affection for Ellen White. Her counsel conscience, and I am sure you do not want
is that you should present your opinions to me to.
the brethren, and that if they see no light in WILSON: The statement Des just made
them, you should lay them aside. Dr. Hep- brings great rejoicing to me. I believe it is an
pertstillhas appealed to youibd6so;]Jo~you~ answer to prayer. I accept your statement,
Volume 11, Number 2 11

Des, at full value. At no time has this church FORD: The things I have been saying are
endeavored to control minds. It gives con- set forth in the article on "The Role ofIsrael
siderable latitude for opinions, but this car- in Old Testament Prophecy" in volume 4 of
ries with it an enormous sacred responsibil- the SDA Bible Commentary. I did not invent
ity. It does not give latitude to create doubts, them. Also, the book of Revelation is crystal'
to undermine faith, or to muffle the message _ clear on the subject.
of this church. We cannot afford to confuse LONDIS: I am puzzled about your use of
others' minds with our personal opinions. the term "pastoral" in referring to the writ-
When a person becomes a minister, he ac- ings of Ellen White. Is it not fair to say that
cepts a commitment to preach and teach the she is one doctrinal authority?
message this church has to give. Des, you are FORD: Of course, she has teaching au-
not only to be silent on certain things; you thority. Again and again she urges us to base
have a message to proclaim to the world. All all our teachings on the Bible. Her- writings
I was trying to say yesterday was: Think can be used doctrinally when what she writes
through carefully the counsel of brethren of is clearly supported by Scripture.
experience. You are teachable, yield to their K. S. PARMENTER (president Aus-
judgment. I am accepting your statement at tralasian Division): I hold Des Ford in the --- --~ -

full value. highest esteem. He is a man of God, a man of

FORD: The church has not really put its high moral principles, a man of much ability
act together. Some of the opinions we have who has had a powerful ministry. He has
heard expressed the past few days are very potential to help this church as a minister.
different from our published statements. But unless there is pastoral concern along
Our published literature had denied that He- with his ministry, it will prove to be a power
brews 9:23 refers to Calvary. The investiga- for evil. Our friendship has been on a most
tive judgment and the cleansing of the cordial, friendly basis. We are still support-
sanctuary are not identified in Hebrews 9. As ing Dr. Ford fully, and it is my responsibility
Dr. Heppenstall has pointed out, blood never to protect his name. Des, I urge you to listen
to, and accept, our counsel. Lay your views
"Some of the scholars began aside. For six years you have been appealing -
~-----

to wondt:r if their presence at to the General Conference for a hearing, and l

~ --

Glacier View had been intended you have implied a dereliction of duty on its 1

part for not giving you such an opportunity.

to provide support for a But you have changed your position; your
decision concerning Ford that manuscript and your book do not agree.
had already been determined." FORD: You must look at the problems,
and then you will see that the two are in
defiles, but cleanses. The New Testament agreement.
clearly uses the language of last things to PARMENTER: I greatly appreciate your
describe the first advent and events that fol- acceptance of the counsel of your friends.
lowed it. This is what I was taught at the The dialogue this afternoon has been good.
seminary. It has been published in The Minis- But it is not enough to say that you are will-
try. The question is, do we want the best ing to be silent on some things . Your docu-
answer or the traditional answer? I have ment has gone everywhere in Australia, and
made many mistakes, and I may be wrong we have a pastoral problem of tremendous
agam. magnitude there as a result. As I read your
G. RALPH THOMPSON (secretary of document, morning light turns to midnight.
the General Conference): We do not have all Is there any shift in your position? I refer to
the answers to all the problems, but it is our such things as conditionality in the
duty to proclaim the accepted beliefs of the prophecies of Daniel, to your apotelesmatic
church when we preach. We are safe when principle, and to the idea that Christ could
we stay with these beliefs. Further study in have comein the first century of our era.
groupsls'OJ{:-:_-- --~~.--.--- -----~-::~:.. -- ~~.~~.~:..-- ..- --- -·~FeRD:~-r-h:a'Ve-TIC5n:h;rfiged·lffy-positiofi-ofi
12 Spectrum

conditionality. I abide by what the Bible years, and he is sadly wrong. No one has a
Commentary teaches on that subject. It is also right to teach or preach such things while he
clear from Scripture that if the Jews had been is being supported by the church. It is mor-
faithfulJerusalem would never have been de- ally and intellectually dishonest for a person
stroyed. Nineveh would have been de- to accept financial support ifhe is undermin-
stroyed if the city had not repented. Look at ing the church. Ifhe is not in harmony with
what the prophecies of Daniel meant to the the church, he should be honest enough to
people who first read them. No, there is no withdraw to a climate in which he feels com-
shift in my position on conditionality. fortable. Academic freedom and responsibil-
Thurday Afternoon: Statements by Pierson, ity, yes, but not academic license.
Blehm and Provonsha. The first item of busi-
ness Thursday afternoon was the reading, by
retired General Conference secretary Clyde
O. Franz, of a lengthy letter from Robert H.
L ater Thursday after-
noon, W. D. Blehm,
president of the Pacific Union Conference,
Pierson: 17 "An Appeal to the Sanctuary Re- spoke in a similar vein:
VIew Committee." In substance the letter BLEHM: I see better today than ever be-
read: fore that the meaning of the past is correct. 1.
accept what I believe to be a divine com-
"Is our ltlessage to be tested munication through Ellen White. It is our
privilege to improve the pillars of the faith,
by the norltls of unbelieving but not to change them. Dr. Ford' s ~hallenge
theologians and scientists? Are has already borne fruit in the Pacific Union
we to accept an eltlasculated - split congregations, doubts in the minds
of pastors leading them to give up their cre-
view of Ellen G. White?" dentials, divided faculties. Anything that di-
vides this church or leads to doubt is wrong.
Glacier View is a historic convocation in Some of our theologians are hotbeds of
Adventism. I hope it will create a new doubt. Let us get our act together. We have
awareness of the hour in which we live. The an obligation to go back and get our churches
papers prepared for the conference are moving for God. We need each other today
thought provoking. I believe in the need for as never before. We've got to forget our sus-
change in appropriate circumstances, but picion of administrators. This is where I
there must be valid reasons for change. Some stand.
change is good, some is hurtful. In an attempt to heal the rift between Dr.
As I read the conference papers, I saw Ford and the Australasian Division, Dr. Jack
lights flashing - some green, some amber, Provonsha commented on the importance of
some red. I come, in all sincerity, to raise healing as a prelude to a question he intended
certain vital questions. I am deeply con- to put, in turn, to Neal Wilson, K. S. Par-
cerned that so many of our distinctive doc- menter, and Desmond Ford.
trines are being questioned. As I read Dr. JACK PROVONSHA (professor of
Ford's manuscript, I felt a sense of abandon- ethics, Loma Linda University): As a physi-
ment. Is our message to be tested by the cian, I am more concerned with healing than
norms of unbelieving theologians and scien- I am with surgery. In 1910, Ellen White ad-
tists? Are we to be asked to accept an emascu- vised that graduates ofLoma Linda should be
lated view of Ellen G. White? Is it intellectu- fully qualified medical practitioners. This led
ally honest to affirm faith in Ellen White and to the accreditation of Loma Linda, of our
then attack what she wrote? Are we to reas- colleges that prepare students for Lorna
sess our position on the judgment? Are we to Linda, and of our academies that prepare stu-
jettison or update our sanctuary truth be- dents for our colleges. It led, eventually, to
cause some challenge it? Brethren, I protest. higher education for our ministers and to
Desrp.ond Ford has been teaching and accreditation of schools in which they are
preaching this doctrinal·· position [Ol":maiiy ·traih€G~c'I'hec:{;..lltll·clr~has~never been quite the
Volume 11, Number 2 13

same since that fateful statement by the mes- we have committees. I would want you to
senger of the Lord in 1910. It has enabled us write out your statement.
to fulfill the message of Revelation 14:6-7 WILSON: One further small step is
more fully than we ever could have other- needed, I think. You should add, "I stand by
wise. Except for Ellen White's insight, our the position of the church; I am committed to
witness would have remained on a more lim- it." Dr. Provonsha has given us something
ited level. very important; Des Ford is a man worth
As a result of higher education there is, savmg.
today, a broad spectrum of thought in the PARMENTER: I take my stand with
church. I believe in the 2,300 days, in the Elder Blehm. Des, if you are honest, you will
heavenly sanctuary, and in the investigative pass in your credentials and do so without
judgment, but these words have a different being asked.
content for me than when I was a child. I PROVONSHA (turning to the audience):
cannot accept the literalism of my father, but All of you, would you do that? If you ask
we can all stand on the shoulders of our people in this room to turn in their creden-
fathers. They would not be happy with what tials, not a few would have to do so on the
I have to say. But at the same time I do same basis that Ford is being asked. Integrity
believe in continuity with our fathers and is more important than church belief. The
with what they believed. The church is like a real question is, am I a man of integrity? If
tree that springs from seed; as one of the you brethren can't think more about healing
branches, I belong to the roots of the tree. I - surely there must be other ways of dealing
believe in continuity. There are depths yet with this. I could not sell my soul in order to
undreamed of in the sanctuary and the irtves- be a member of the Seventh-day Adventist
tigativejudgment. There is a very real prog- Church.
ression in our perception of truth. PARMENTER. Healing must be on a
(Addressing Elder Wilson, Dr. Provonsha wider basis. Our churches in Australia are
continued:) The other day Des stood on the severely polarized. Healing must reach
further thanjust one man.
spot where I am now standing. If you asked
PROVONSHA: This meeting is bigger
me to put my convictions in my pocket, I
would have to reply, "I am sorry; I can't do than Des Ford. We need to find a way of
that. My personal integrity is more valuable keeping this broad spectrum of thought to-
to me than credentials or church member- gether; we need something that will keep us
together.
ship. I can't put my integrity in my pocket.
But if you asked me not to speak publicly on JOE BATTISTONE (pastor, Fletcher,
certain matters, I could put them in my North Carolina): It has been a great blessing
pocket. I will do what I can to overcome for me to be here. I am stunned at the thought
tensions." IfI sent you a letter in which I gave that a number of my colleagues in the minis-
try are considering turning in their creden-
this assurance, would you accept it in good
faith? tials if Des Ford has to surrender his. I am
stunned at the idea of split, polarized
WILSON: Yes, I would accept that. churches. If they are polarized, this serious
PROVONSHA: The reason for the ten- state is not the result of the present crisis, but
sion we all feel over this matter is that we of something much more basic. We, as
have not been meeting together, as we have ministers, have not been nurturing our
here at Glacier View. I must agree with most churches as we should. That is why the
of what Des Ford is saying. (Then, turning to churches react as ~ome are doing today. What
Elder Parmenter, Dr. Provonsha addressed you refer to is a symptom of a much greater
to him the same question to which Elder CrISIS.
Wilson had just replied in the affirmative.) FORD: Some confuse loyalty with not
PARMENTER: Your statement should asking questions. I am not committed to all
also affirm that you stand loyally by the the church has taught, nor are you. None of
church. This church is not led byo~eman; u~~eliev~~~v:~!y!~~{~}~e ~hll~ch h~s!~\lg~!
 14 Spectrum

down through the years. On that basis, we all University Church): Des, I have profited and
ought to be excommunicated. benefited from your inquiry. I would like to
GEORGE W. BROWN (president, ask, however, did something change in
Inter-American Division): Dr. Heppenstall heaven in 1844?
directed your attention to 1844 and the FORD: In 1844, God set the third's angel's
judgment. Ellen White endorses the message in motion.
sanctuary as the foundation of our message. D. P. GULLON (professor, River Plate
How do you reconcile your rejection of this College): Then there is really no room for
. doctrine withyour appeal to Ellen White? 1844 as we have understood it?
FORD: I believe Ellen White's messages FORD: Yes, there is; the church teaching
regarding 1844 and the heavenly sanctuary. I on the sanctuary is not all tentative.
believe God gave us the sanctuary message. GERARD DAMSTEEGT (pastor, Fair-
The problem is with our way of saying it; we fax, VirgInia): We need to distinguish be-
need to find a better way. tween inaugurated and consummated es-
A. H. TOLHURST (president, Trans- chatology.
Tasman Union Conference): You have lim- HAMMILL: The interpretation of He-
ited access to the first apartment of the brews 9:8's making the earthly first apart-
heavenly sanctuary in the era of ancient Is- ment figurative for the entire Mosaic dispen-
rael, and you imply that Christ has no first sation, and that of the second apartment
apartment ministry in the heavenly figurative for the entire ministry of Christ in
sanctuary. How do you reconcile this dis- the heavenly sanctuary, seems contrary to
crepancy between the earthly and heavenly the author's intent. On certain key doctrinal
sanctuaries? issues, you differ from the rest of us . You
FORD: In the comparison of Hebrews 9, seem to do away with the intercessory minis-
the service in the first apartment of the try of Christ in the first apartment. Most of
earthly sanctuary stands for the entire Mosaic the people here would not agree with you.
era, and that in the most holy place of the We do not ask you to do something contrary
. ancient earthly sanctuary stands for all of to your conscience, but a minister must be
Christ's ministry in the heavenly sanctuary able to win people to the church, to prepare
since His ascension. candidates for baptism. Are you clear in your
H. E. DOUGLASS (book editor, Pacific own mind that you could prepare candidates
Press Publishing Association): In support of for baptism?
your position, you have repeatedly appealed FORD: Certainly.
to the SDA Bible Commentary article on "The MILLS: I appreciate Dr. Provonsha's heal-
Role ofIsrael in Old Testament Prophecy" in ing message. The sanctuary is not really the
volume 4. As.! remember, Ray Cottrell, you main issue, but the gift of prophecy. Dr.
wrote that article. I would like to ask you Ford, you do not really believe in the Spirit of
how you reconcile Ford's understanding of Prophecy. Ellen White's teaching about the
that article with this sentence in it: "This rule sanctuary is one of our main pillars. How,
does not apply to those portions of the book then, am I to relate to Sister White?
of Daniel that the prophet was bidden to FORD: I am not against Ellen White, but
'shut up' and 'seal,' or to other passages against a misuse of Ellen White. The problem
whose application Inspiration may have lim- has to do with a person's view ofinspiration .
ited exclusively to our own time" (p. 38). MILLS: How can I know what part of the
RAYMOND COTTRELL (retired book Spirit of Prophecy is still good today? Can I
editor, Review and Herald Publishing Asso- be selective? In order to accept progressive
ciation, and member of former Daniel Com- light, I do not have to reject former light.
mittee): Yes, I wrote that article, but Elder How can I accept new light if it contradicts
Nichol added the sentence to which you former light?
refer, during the editorial process. Ask him. FORD: I am not against the church, nor
(General laughter .) Ellen White nor this message.
.... LOUIS VENDE~:Jp::~st?:c,. Lo.ma.l.jnda .WILSON: TomQrrow morning we will
Volume 11, Number 2 15

study two statements, one addressed to our Friday Morning: Adopting the Consensus
people and the other a-response to Des Ford's Statement. As the close of the conference ap-
document. Then PREXAD and the Aus- proached, a drafting and screening committee
tralasian Division will sit down and talk with combined the seven-group consensus reports
Des. The church deals honorably and sym- for all four days into a unified conSensus
pathetically with people. It may make mis- statement for the committee as a whole. The
takes, but it intends to be fair. Des, you have 1S-page consensus statement consists of two ~
i

made a contribution to our lives and to the parts: "Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary,"
church. and "The Role of Ellen G. White' s Writings
in Doctrinal Matters."18 All present, includ-
"If you ask people in this ing Dr. Ford, found the statement viable,
roottl to turn in their creden- some because it affirmed the traditional in-
tials, not a few would have to tepretation and others because it recognized
the problems and need for further study.
do so on the same basis that
Another document, a ten-point critique of
Ford is being asked." Ford's position paper (see pp. 72-75) was read
FORD: "In essentials, unity; in non- the same morning to the full assembly in "the
essentials, liberty; in all things, charity." spirit oflove and a desire to heal," and with
PARMENTER: The Australasian Divi- the intention of being "fair to Dr. Ford, to his
sion will work in close harmony with the position paper, and to the church." The
General Conference. The patient himself drafting committee of six expressedappreci-
must help in the healing process. I agree with ation for Ford's many years of service to the
Neal Wilson; we will work closely with the church, for the example of his personal life-
General Conference and accept their advice. style, for his talents as a Bible scholar and for
his deep concern for an accurate exposition of

A fter the reading of the

consensus reports
from the small study groups on "The Role of
the Bible.
Drafted overnight, this document was
considered "preliminary" until Dr. Ford and
Ellen G. White in Doctrinal Matters," dis- the General Conference could review the ac-
cussion continued. curacy with which it reflected Ford's posi-
WILSON: There is clear harmony in these tion. Elder Wilson explicitly told the dele-
reports. It is beautiful. gates that they were not being asked to ex-
WALTER R. SCRAGG (president, press their approval or disapproval of the
Northern Europe-West Africa Division): document. In other words, although formu-
How close the statements are! lated at Glacier View, it does not reflect the
HARDINGE: There are no errors in Ellen thinking of the Sanctuary Committee, which
White's writings. Beware of historians. did not discuss it or to vote on it. After the
HARDER: The church is a living commu- reading, one of the delegates, Dr. Louis Ven-
nity. This group is an instrument of God's den, specifically called the chairman's atten-
revelation. We should recognize the author- tion to the fact that the Sanctuary Committee
ity of the church. The church does not con- had not "approved" the critique. Another
trol Scripture. The church would not have delegate, Dr. Fritz Guy, professor of theol-
retained the investigative judgment without ogy at the seminary, asked if orthodoxy
Ellen White. would be determined by the ten-point
OLSEN: Our joy here reflects the fact that critique. Elder Wilson replied that "no, the
things have not been as they should be. This document would not be used in that way."
meeting is a unifying factor, an evidence of Both it and the consensus statement would
the unity of the church. The seven groups be considered "working documents."
have all come to the same conclusions. This is Soon after one o'clock, the Sanctuary
our best understanding at the present time. committee adjourned sine die.
As a result of setting up creeds, Protestantism Friday Afternoon: General Conference and I
stagnated.. Australasian Division Leaders Meet with Dr.
i
1
 16 Spectrum

and Mrs. Ford. At four o'clock Friday after- sider his answer, and that, instead, he said,
noon, three hours after the Sanctuary Review "You have made it very easy for me, breth-
Committee had concluded its deliberations, ren. I cannot do what you ask. We don't need
Dr. and Mrs. Ford were summoned before time to think it over . You may consider this
an ad hoc committee of nine, chaired by the our final answer to your conditions."
president of the General Conference. Early in Ford also remembers asking, "Are you
the meeting, the president told Dr. Ford asking me to lie?" and Parmenter replying, in
about the small committee that had worked substance, "No, we don't want you to go
on the ten-point critique and showed him a against your convictions. But if you can't
copy of the document to make sure it in- affirm these requirements, I shouldn't have
cluded accurate summaries of Ford's main to ask you for your credentials - you should
points. The president urged Ford to admit, be giving them to me." He further recollects
after reading the critique, that his positions that at the close of the meeting, Elder Par-
were tentative. After the president's initial menter told him and his wife Gill that the
statement that included, according to J. R. Australasian Division would pay their fare
Spangler's account in Ministry, a discussion . back to Australia and that they would receive
of not only Dr. Ford's theology, but also his six months' severance pay. "There was no
attitude and judgment, other members of the doubt in our minds that the decision was
group questioned Ford. 19 final," the Fords have subsequently said.
In his responses to the ad hoc group, Dr. While this session was in progress late Fri-
Ford said that apart from wording on two day afternoon, members of the Theological
points, he considered the critique to repeat Consultation were arriving for the second
accurately his positions before it attempted to Glacier View meeting, which began that
refute them. He also assured the group that evening (see pp. 26-30). The Fords remained
he was "pleased" with the consensus state- at Glacier View until Sunday, August 17,
ment and that he could live with it and preach when they returned to Washington, D.C.
it - not that it was perfect, but that it was far After Glacier View: Dismissal ofFord. While
in advance of any previous statement which in Washington, the Fords received Elder
Adventists had put out. Parmenter's typed version of his letter. In the
letters dated August 26 and September 1 (see

L ater in the meeting,

Keith Parmenter
read a handwritten draft of a letter to Dr.
pp. 77-78), Dr. Ford replied to Parmenter's
letter stating specifically how he could and
could not comply with the requirements
Ford containing much of what appeared in being made of him.
the subsequently typed letter (see p. 76). The At the direction of the president of the
extent to which the handwritten letter was General Conference, W. Duncan Eva con-
more demanding than the later typewritten tinued to meet with Dr. Ford in an endeavor
version is a matter of some dispute, as is the to find common ground that would make it
nature of the discussion that followed the possible for Ford to retain his credentials and
reading of the letter. Spangler and other continue to serve the church. The president
members of the ad hoc committee insist that at of the General Conference met with Dr. Ford
no time were Dr. Ford's credentials called for more than an hour on the morning of
for. August 22. There appeared to be every indi-
Dr. Ford remembers the handwritten ver- cation that the General Conference was at-
sion as being so differently worded from the tempting to mediate between Dr. Ford and
later version that he was justified in thinking his home division, and for two or three
.that he was being asked to surrender his per- weeks it seemed that this attempt at media-
sonal convictions on the exegesis of Daniel tion would be successful.
and Hebrews, and on the basis of the ten- The climax came when the President's
point critique to declare publicly that he was Executive Advisory Committee (PREXAD)
in error and ready to change his views. He met September 2. Dr. Ford was informed of
agrees that he was urged totakf! ~imet~~~::: . Jt~~<!f!~~~~ tw() day~ later. PREXAD recom-
 Volume 11, Number 2 17

mended to the Australasian Division that Dr. the General Conference said: "It will be our
Ford be given the opportunity to withdraw endeavor to be fair arid open . . . . Please be
voluntarily from the ministry of the honest and say what you think lest people
Seventh-day Adventist Church. If he chose misunderstand. Here in this meeting you will
not to do so, the Australasian Division have immunity. . . . The scholars will be
should relieve him of his responsibilities and partners of ours in reaching decisions here on
withdraw his ministerial credentials. The doctrine.' ,
first reason for this action was PREXAD's How fully and effectively was this assur-
judgment that Ford had failed to use clear, ance of academic freedom implemented,
concise, unambiguous, unqualified answers in how fully and effectively did the Bible schol-
his letters to Elder Parmenter. The second ars participate, and were they heard? To what
was that the Sanctuary Committee had re- extent do the consensus statement and the
jected his arguments and conclusions on the ten-point critique reflect their contribution
heavenly sanctuary, the investigative judg- to the conference? And even more impor-
ment and the role of Ellen G. White as insuf- tant, to what extent has their point of view
ficient to cause the church to change its dis- been taken into consideration in subsequent
tinctive teachings in these areas. Third, Dr. administrative proceedings regarding Dr.
Ford had not accepted the advice of adminis- Ford?
tration, the guiding committee, or the
Sanctuary Committee in areas vital to the There was general agreement that all pro-
church, and had failed to sense his responsi- ceedings of the conference, including the
bility for the divisive effect of his speaking, small study groups and the full assembly,
writings and recordings. Fourth, Dr. Ford were conducted in a "free and open" manner.
had repeatedly declined to disassociate him- With one exception - the presentation of the
self openly and specifically from activities ten-point critique Friday morning - there
considered to be subversive to the well-being was no indication of any attempt at control.
of the church. This was generally acknowl- It is also fair to say that the small-group con-
edged to refer to the activities of Robert sensus reports to the full assembly each day,
Brinsmead and his associates. and the consensus statement voted at the
Two weeks after PREXAD's action, on close of the conference Friday morning, were
honest attempts to express the consensus of
"Before we criticize Ford's the groups and the committee as a whole. By
no means is this to say that every delegate
proposed solution to the found the consensus statement an accurate
exegetical problents, we expression of the truth; it is to say that each
have an obligation to offer delegate found his own convictions reflected
in it, and voted for it as the best statement
a better one." that could be expected at the time and under
the circumstances.
September 18, the Australasian Division Com-
mittee and the Board of Avondale College im- A Crucial Difference in Methodology. In
plemented the recommendation of the Gen- order to understand theological differences
between church administrators and theolo-
eral Conference. Meanwhile, on September 10,
gians, one must recognize a fundamental dif-
. the Fords had taken up residence in Auburn,
California, a small community in the footh- ference in their respective methods of inter-
preting Scripture. Until about 1940, practi-
ills of the Sierras 35 miles northeast of Sac-
ramento, with friends who had offered him cally all Adventist Bible study relied on what
employment as chaplain of the Health Educa- is known as the proof text method. Today,
tion and Research Foundation. most non-scholars in the church still follow
that method, whereas almost all Bible schol-
Evaluation of Glacier View ars follow the historical method. The SDA
1
The Conference. At the opening session of Bible Commentary in the fifties (1952-57) was I
th_e cOl!fer.~nce Sunday night}-the.presidentof the first major Adventist public~ltiontQ f01-

1
18 Spectrum

low the historical method as its guiding tion"), and a pre-Advent judgment , but they
principle. reject the proof text method reasoning on
The proof text method of Bible study con- which these tenets of Adventist belief were
sists essentially of a study of the Bible in originally based. Dr. Ford's apotelesmatic
translation (English for instance), of reliance principle for interpreting Daniel 8:14 is one
on the analogy of Scripture on the verbal of the severaPl that have been proposed in an
level with little if any attention to context, of attempt to build a bridge between a valid
giving, at best, inadequate attention to the historical understanding of these passages,
historical setting of a statement or message and the objective realities to which the trad-
and what it meant to the people of its own tional Adventist interpretation points. Be-
time, and of permitting subjective precon- fore we criticize Ford's proposed solution to
ceptions to control conclusions arrived at de- the exegetical problems, we have an obliga-
ductively. tion to offer a better one.
By contrast, the historical method consists From a hermeneutical point of view, the
of a study of the Bible in its original lan- basic flaw in our thinking at Glacier View lay
guages, of accepting the literary context of in assuming the traditional Adventist in-
every statement and message as normative terpretation of Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9 as
for its meaning, of determining what the the norm for measuring Ford's position
messages of the Bible meant to the various paper. With this as our norm, it was inevita-
reading audiences to which they were origi- ble that we would find his position defective.
nally addressed, in terms of the intention of But if we had been willing, and able, to let the
the inspired writer and the Holy Spirit, of Bible itself, and the Bible alone, serve as our
accepting that original meaning as a guide to norm, we would have come to a somewhat
an accurate understanding of their import for different conclusion. The consensus state-
us today, and of reasoning inductively, arriv- ment sets forth several new and seemingly
ing at conclusions on the basis of the plausible reasons for retaining our traditional
evidence. interpretation, but at no point does it face up
to even one of the exegetical and hermeneuti-

U se of the historical
method by the de-
cided majority of our Bible scholars, and of
cal problems posed by Ford or make an at-
tempt to deal with it on the basis of "the
Bible, and the Bible only, as our rule of faith
the proof text method by most non-scholars, and doctrine." In the thinking of the majority
has been responsible for practically every at Glacier View, Adventist tradition was the
theological difference of opinion over the norm for interpreting the Bible, rather than
past 40 years, including that posed by Ford. the Bible for tradition.
The traditional Adventist interpretations of Dr. Leslie Hardinge aptly described this
Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9 were formulated approach when he said to the full assembly
by the proof text method. 20 Priocto about Wednesday afternoon, "I search the Bible for
1940, a very few Adventists - among them evidence that our message is true." This
A. F. Ballenger, W. W. Prescott, L. R. Con- comment elicited a loud chorus of" Amens."
radi and W. W. Fletcher - had begun to use In contrast, a majority of the Bible scholars
some elements of the historical method; it present would have said: "I search the Bible
was this that made them aware of some of the to hear what is it saying, in order that my
problems of exegesis of our traditional in- presentation of our message may be true to
terpretation, and precipitated their individual the Bible."
CrIses. A common commitment to the historical
Let it be clear that Adventist Bible scholars method resulted in the majority of the bibli-
using the historical method all accept the va- cal scholars at Glacier View concurring with
lidity of 1844, Christ's day-of-atonement Ford's identification of the problems of
ministry in the heavenly sanctuary, an es- exegesis and interpretation. One attempt to
chatological "restoration" of the heavenly ascertain the views of members of the
sanctuary. to its" rightfuLstate "._Gor: ~'yin1ii~a":. .San~tu<lryC:ornmittee was· the use of polls
 Volume 11, Number 2 19

conducted at the beginning and end of the Daniel, could have been fulfilled not later
conference. On a series of items, the ques- than the first century of the Christian era, and
tionnaires provided a choice between the tra- that Christ and the eschaton envisioned by
ditional interptetation and the position taken Daniel could have come at that time. It is
by Ford. Many have challenged the value of significant that this and other majority points
the results of the poll because of ambiguities of view lost in the process were favorable to
in the wording of a number of the questions. Dr. Ford's position. In other words, al-
However, my personal acquaintance, both at though the consensus statement does accu-
Glacier View and over a period of many rately represent a majority consensus of the
years, with the thinking of approximately 115 delegates taken as a whole, it does not
three-fourths of the Bible scholars present, fully reflect the extent to which the majority
indicated that four-fifths of this number of Bible scholars at Glacier View concur with
(24% of the 115 delegates) acknowledge the Ford's identification of problem areas in
same problems in interpreting Daniel and Daniel and Hebrews.
Hebrews to which Ford has called attention. Why then, did the scholars vote for the
That is almost exactly the proportion of the consensus document? To them it represented
total committee that sided with Ford's posi- a major step by the church in the direction of - --~ -~

tions in the reported tabulation of the final an objective consideration of the facts, it cau-
poll taken at Glacier View. 22 tiously recognized the reality of the problems
Further corroborating evidence for this is in our traditional interpretation, and it
provided by the scholars' speeches reported opened the door for further study of these
above. In a typical debate of the full assembly problems. To the scholars, this document
Monday afternoon, 11 of the 15 speeches by represented the best that could be expected at
scholars supported one aspect or another of the present time. On the other hand, if the
Ford's position. ten-point critique of Ford's position paper
had come to a vote, the majority of the bibli-
"In the thinking of the majority cal scholars would doubtless have rejected its
evaluation ofFord's position.
at Glacier View, Adventist The Documents. Comparison of Ford's
tradition was the norm for position paper, the consensus statement, and
interpreting the Bible, rather the ten-point critique ofFord's paper reflects
the significant fact that the consensus state-
than the Bible for tradition." ment identifies the same points in our tradi-
tional interpretation as less than convincing
Furthermore, some points of view ex- and in need of further study, as Ford's paper
pressed by the majority of the Bible scholars does. For this reason, the very dogmatic
in the study groups were lost in the group ten-point critique of his paper stands in ten-
consensus reports, and as a result, in the final sion with the consensus statement. The con-
. consensus statement of the conference as a sensus statement clearly affirms that there is
whole. This was probably not intentional on no doubt in our minds as to what we believe,
anyone's part; it was simply that the majority but tacitly admits that we are not at all certain
of the Bible scholars constituted a minority as to why we believe as we do. It explicitly
of the whole. Here is one illustration of sev- acknowledges that our supporting evidence
eral that could be given - the first item on lacks a clear exegetical basis on a number of
Monday's agenda: points, and this ambivalence gives rise to an
Could all the Old Testament prophecies have internal tension within the document itself.
been fulfilled within the time of the covenant Both the consensus statement and the
with Israel J i. e. J by the time of the first advent critique emphatically reaffirm the validity of
of Christ? the traditional Adventist interpretations of
At least 16 speeches were made Monday Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9. The consensus
morning in Group 2 affirming that all Old statement deals with the substantive issues
.TestaI1!~11!:~:pr9P}l{~(;iesf inc1tltiingthose of }Vholly.: apart from.DL Ford's. paper, . . while
20 Spectrum

the critique deals with them specifically in the Sanctuary Committee, he reaffirmed this
relation to his paper. But there is an implicit confidence:
dichotomy between the two documents: I fully believe in 1844 and that God
whereas the consensus statement explicitly raised up the Seventh-day Adventist
recognizes the problem areas in the tradi- church ....
tional interpretation as problems, the critique I believe in the year-day principle ....
ignores them as problems. In fact, the I believe that God spoke to Ellen White
critique - which was never formally miraculously ....
adopted as a consensus of the Sanctuary Of course she has teaching authority...
Committee, condemns Dr. Ford for the very
things the consensus statement, which was "The abrupt and unexpected
formally adopted by vote as reflecting the
consensus of their thinking, implicitly com- turn of events of the first
mends him. In other words, the critique re- week in September 1980 came as
quires him to be positive at the very points at a seismic shock to the academic
which the consensus statement realizes we
cannot be all that positive. This dichotomy
community of the church."
implies that we can be reasonably objective
when dealing with the issues, but not with Only a dedicated Seventh-day Adventist
the person who brought them to our atten- could make statements such as these.
tion. While the critique censures Dr. Ford for The magnitude of the doctrinal issue and
speaking to the church about these problems, the fact that knowledgeable Adventists
the consensus statement acknowledges that around the world are deeply concerned about
there is substance to what he has said and it, inevitably focuses attention on the person
written on the subject. This ambivalence in who has become identified with it as a result
the Glacier View statements makes evident of his Adventist Forum remarks. Even be-
that the church itself, and not Dr. Ford, is fore that lecture, his years of teaching in A v-
responsible for the persistent ambiguity be- ondale College, his numerous articles and
tween what we believe about the sanctuary books published by the church, and his par-
and why we believe it. ticipation in the ongoing debate on right-
Knowing that he and the majority of Ad- eousness by faith, had made him a world
ventist Bible scholars are in substantial figure in Adventist theological circles.
agreement with respect to the exegesis of
these passages, Dr. Ford feels that he cannot For perhaps ten years,
conscientiously say that he is wrong in this there has been in-
respect without forfeiting his personal integ- creasing tension in Australia with respect to
rity as a Seventh-day Adventist Bible scholar. Dr. Ford, especially regarding righteousness
This is especially true, inasmuch as ,the SDA by faith. Hundreds of students who have sat
Bible Commentary, and now the Glacier View in his classes - many of them now ministers
consensus statement, acknowledge the same - appreciate his contribution to their lives as
exegetioal problems he does. His firmness in an inspiring teacher and spiritual leader . On
this area has been construed as intransigent the other hand, the responses of some veteran
unwillingness to accept the counsel of his ministers to what they consider his innova-
administrative brethren, who are not Bible tive theological concepts are emphatically
scholars. On the other hand, he has volun- negative. The result today is acute polariza-
teered to abandon his apotelesmatic principle tion: congregations are divided, a number of
of interpretation if somebody can find a better younger ministers have threatened to turn in
one. their credentials ifhe has to surrender his, and
Polarization. In his position paper, Ford all this has confronted church administrators
emphatically and repeatedly affirms his per- "down under" with a traumatic problem of
sonal confidence in the sanctuary doctrine "tremendous magnitude," as Elder Par-
and-inE~n White (see pp. -35-36). Addr~-5sing --~£-::4~.§s::~iJ~1~4j~~Q.tll-€ San{:t-ua-ry-Com-
Volume 11, Number 2 21

mittee. Add to this the fact that a greater September 1980 came as a seismic shock to
percentage of Australian Adventists seem to the academic community of the church
get more deeply involved in theological dis- around the world. Why did the General Con-
cussions than do Adventists in other parts of ference, which everyone had been thinking
the world. of as the attorney for the defense trying to
Long before Dr. Ford became the A von- work out a mutually satisfactory solution be-
dale exchange professor at Pacific Union tween Ford and his home division, suddenly
College three years ago, polarization was appear in court as the prosecuting attorney,
developing - over the past decade - in demanding a professional death sentence?
North America between administrators and The academic community could under-
the Adventist academic community. Here, as stand Australia's pressing its charges all the
in Australia, Ford has been both widely and way. In the first place - judging by past
appreciatively received as a teacher and events - that would be in character, and in
speaker, but also opposed by a few theolo- the second place, an extremely traumatic
gians and a number of ministers, editors, and situation has developed in the academic
administrators, all of whom take a dim view community over Ford. In extremis, a physi-
of certain aspects of his theology. Probably cian will sometimes resort to procedures he
none of the Bible scholars and theologians would not attempt at other times. But why
agrees completely with his application of the should the General Conference choose to be
apotelesmatic principle to Daniel, but they an accomplice in the deed, instead ofletting
are deeply concerned that he be treated fairly. the brethren" down under" chart their own
The majority of Adventist Bible scholars course - or, better yet, to continue working
feel personally involved in the issue because on other alternatives? This action is particu-
censure of Dr. Ford on the exegetical points larly inscrutable in view of the following
inevitably implies censure of them also, in- considerations:
asmuch as they recognize the same exegetical 1) The Glacier View consensus statement
problems, although they differ as to the solu- acknowledged a valid biblical basis for every
tion to these problems. Beyond that, any real significant point of exegesis to which Ford
or apparent miscarriage of justice with re- had called attention, and that the church must
spect to one member of the Adventist give these points further study.
academic community would inevitably be 2) The consensus statement represented a
felt by the community as a whole. clear and unquestioned consensus of the en-
With a charismatic personality, Dr. Ford tire Sanctuary Committee, and Dr. Ford
unintentionally tends to polarize his auditors, himself had explicitly accepted that state-
many of whom appreciate him as an inspiring ment. With one or two minor exceptions, he
spiritual leader , whereas others resent him as said that he could preach and teach it with
if he were an evil genius. His deep convic- conviction.
tions tend to antagonize those who differ 3) The ten-point critique, which was spe-
from his point of view. One factor in this is cifically used as an indictment ofFord's posi-
his intense personal dedication to truth that tion, was not produced by the Sanctuary
finds expression in his manner of speaking - Committee. That committee was explicitly
his naturally incisive, dynamic delivery, instructed not to debate it or to vote on it, as
which those who do not know him well with the consensus statement. Yet the
sometimes misconstrue as egocentric his- critique was used as if it did reflect a consen-
trionics. He does not intend to be as dog- sus against Ford.
matic as he sometimes appears to be, but he 4) On the floor at Glacier View, and in his
does tend to overemphasize certain points in August 26 and September 1 letters to Elder
an endeavor to get them across. There may Parmenter, Ford had made clear beyond any
also be a touch ofjealousy on the part of some quibble that he accepted the counsel of the
who lack the luster of his charisma. brethren and that he would remain silent on
The Academic Community. The abrupt and the issue for as long as they might deem j
-unexpectedturnofev.ents.ofthefirst weekin _. --.necessary_~or.der...to-give._it_stuciy: __ He-.had
1
j
22 Spectrum

offered to comply with all the requirements direction this future study should take. It not
imposed upon him, except that of repudiat- only reaffirms the doctrine of the sanctuary
ing his conscientious convictions with re- as essential truth for our time, but recognizes
spect to the problems of exegesis, whose va- that this truth has much larger dimensions
lidity the consensus statement recognized. than we have realized before.
5) Ford is by no means alone in these con- Those larger dimensions came into clear
victions; most of the convictions are either focus Tuesday night in a paper presented by
stated or implicit in the SDA Bible Commen- Dr. Fritz Guy of the Theological Seminary
tary, which has been in use for 25 years with- (see pp. 44-53). This paper met with instant
out challenge; some of the points he had and enthusiastic approval from all the dele-
learned at the Theological Seminary. Except gates. It rose serenely above the confusing
for a few relatively minor details, the decided exegetical problems and focused attention on
majority of Adventist Bible scholars were in the ultimate reality to which the sanctuary
agreement on the point of exegesis. doctrine points. This focus looks beyond our
traditional thesis and its exegetical antithesis,

A t Glacier View, the

Bible scholars had
expressed themselves freely on all of these
to synthesis on a higher and more mature
level of understanding than we have hereto-
fore attained.
points, in the study groups and in the full Guy's paper reflects the fact that we have
assembly, and in the guarded language of the been relying on the day-of-atonement sym-
consensus statement. The ten-point critique bols to explain the apocalyptic symbols of
did not emerge out of the week-long, Daniel, and that this second set of symbols is
painstaking process of consensus building, not altogether compatible with the first set.
and was not voted by the Sanctuary Review
Committee. Since Glacier View, the Bible "Since Glacier View, the Bible
scholars have been represented as saying the
precise opposite of what they actually did say scholars have been represented as
there - emphatically and repeatedly. Little saying the precise opposite of
wonder that many scholars feel betrayed by what they actually did say there-
being represented as willing accomplices in
condemning Ford, and that many of them emphatically and repeatedly."
have drafted letters of protests. All but two
members of the department of theology at We have been engrossed in working out so
Southern Missionary College signed a letter exegetically precise a correlation between the
to the president of the General Conference details of the two sets of symbols - which do
asking a series of questions that reflects their not in fact match in all respects as precisely as
dismay at steps to discipline Ford. Thirty- we would like - that we are in danger of
nine signatures appear at the end of an losing sight of the reality to which each set
"Open Letter to President Wilson from Con- was designed to point. Dr. Guy's approach is
cerned Pastors and Scholars at Andrews Uni- right. To translate one coded message into
versity Seminary and Graduate School" (see another code (in this case, to interpret the
pp.61-62). cryptic apocalyptic symbols of Daniel in
The Future. The long-range significance of terms of the day-of-atonement symbols of
Glacier View for the church is that, for the Leviticus and Hebrews) still leaves the mes-
first time, a large group of administrators and sage encoded; what we need is a translation
Bible scholars entered into meaningful into the everyday language of the real world.
dialogue, reached a working consensus on With the sanctuary, that reality is not a struc-
substantive matters reasonably acceptable to ture on earth or even one in heaven, but is
both, and agreed to continue the dialogue. what Christ has done for us at Calvary, what
The consensus statement not only recognizes He is doing for us now, and what he will yet
certain problems and summons the church to do for us at His second coming. God gave us
give them further study, but indicates t~'? .t!!~~~~~YI1lP.pJ~:::~f.~<l_lY&£~P?£9P()in~. :the way
Volume 11, Number 2 23

to the reality of salvation in Jesus Christ, in be due cause. Vindictiveness is a clear denial
anticipation of His Son coming to restore all of the gospel (1 John 3:10).
things to their rightful state. Wednesday afternoon, Dr. Ford told the
By their enthusiastic acclaim of Dr. Guy's Sanctuary Committee, "I have made many
paper, the administrators and Bible scholars mistakes." Doubtless the delegates all
at Glacier View made evident that they were agreed, though not all for the same reasons.
in full agreement on this ultimate reality to Dr. Ford might have chosen to leave the
which both sets of symbols point. If we, church on account of certain ambiguities in
individually and as a church, can rise above our sanctuary doctrine, as others have in the
the symbols into the clear sunlight of reality, past, but instead he has sought to enter into
we, too, will find that unity for which Christ responsible dialogue with the church con-
prayed. We have much to lose by measuring cerning them.
one another's orthodoxy in terms of these Is it ethical, or even in our own interest, to
symbols of salvation instead of by the ulti- blame a competent physician for an unwel-
mate reality to which they point. come diagnosis and for prescribing an un-
By recognizing the inadequacies of our pleasant remedy? Or is it ethical to hail him
traditional supporting evidence for the into court for malpractice when he has sin-
sanctuary doctrine at several points, the con- cerely exercised his best professional judg-
sensus statement tacitly acknowledges that ment - even ifhe may at times make honest
Dr. Ford had valid exegetical reasons for rais- mistakes ofjudgment - as we all do? Those
ing the questions he did. There may be dif- who bring problems to our attention are not
ferences of opinion as to the wisdom of the enemies, but friends.
way in which he did so, and there may be Nor is the Australasian Division to be
reason to censure him for that. But are we blamed for its justifiable pastoral concern. It
consistent, honest, fair, or responsible if we is the duty of administrators to be concerned
censure him for raising questions whose va- about the health and well-being of the
lidity our own consensus statement ac- church. For attempting to do what it believed
knowledges? After all, Dr. Ford did not in- to be its duty, it deserves our understanding,
vent these questions. One person after our appreciation, our prayers, and our intel-
another has been raising them for 75 years. 23 ligent support - not our criticism and opposi-
As a church, we have dealt decisively with tion. Nor are "the brethren" in Washington
the people who did so, one by one, but we to be blamed. They did not originate· the
have done little or nothing yet by way of problem. But when Pacific Union College
providing the church with viable answers to did not deal with it as a scholarly problem to
the questions they asked. We have treated the be solved on campus, but instead passed it to
questioners as if they were trouble-makers, church administrators, th~y did act responsi-
and the questions as if they did not exist, bly and wisely in working toward a solution
except in someone's perverted imagination. that would be right and fair to all concerned.
It would be difficult to defend this long- They, too, deserve our understanding, ap-
standing default on our part as a responsible, preciation, prayers, and intelligent support.
Christian way of relating to what we all rec- Our leaders in both Wahroonga and in Wash-
ognize as a major theological problem. ington would be the first to acknowledge
Perhaps we should all censure ourselves for that they can, and sometimes do, make mis-
this dereliction of duty: Mea culpa! takes. But so do we all. To acknowledge a
mistake, honestly made, inspires confidence

B ut this is no time .to

weep over past mIS-
takes; we now have an opportunity to relate
and loyalty, and especially so when appro-
priate remedial measures are taken to redress
the wrong done.
responsibly to the issues that have brought us For at least 20 years, a decided majority of
to this kairos in our history. We have no Adventist Bible scholars have recognized the
reason to be vindictive - 1 Corinthians 13 hermeneutical and exegetical problems in
forbids that - even when there may seem to Daniel Sand Hebrews 9 to which Dr. Ford
j
I
I
I
 24 Spectrum

has recently called attention, but because of there was a much better way of resolving
neglect on our part to deal realistically and both these problems - a way that would not
responsibly with these problems, there is, as have hurt anyone and that would, at the same
yet, no consensus concerning a viable solu- time, have preserved the unity of the church
tion to them. This is an important part of the for which Christ prayed. The proverbial
unfinished business of the church. Unless we mills of the gods do not always grind as fast
proceed to care for this unfinished business as we impatient mortals might like them to,
- as the Glacier View consensus statement but they do grind. And if God can be patient
proposes - our children will have to wrestle with all of us in our mistakes, we can well
with the same problems all over again, and afford to be patient with one another while
they will blame us and not Dr. Ford for their we await the solution to which the Holy
plight. Spirit will lead, if we do not sabotage His
Fortunately, we do agree with respect to purpose Hy our petulant impatience.
the ultimate reality to which the sanctuary We believe that God overrules in the affairs
and its day-of-atonement symbols point - of men, and that in His own good time He
what Christ did for us on the cross, what He will restore the present unhappy state of af-
is now doing for us in heaven, an4 what He fairs - as well as the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14
will yet do for us when He comes again. If - to its rightful state. In the meantime, let us
our relationship to Him and to one another is use all available stones to build the temple of
as it should be, we will all find a ready en- the Lord, not to slay one another and thereby
trance through the pearly gates irrespective forfeit the ultimate reality to which the sym-
of how we may understand the symbols of bols of salvation point. If mistakes have been
Daniel 8 and the sanctuary. Our salvation made by Dr. Ford, by the folk in Wahroonga,
depends on how we relate to that ultimate Angwin, or Washington, or by any of the
reality and to one another in our endeavor to rest of us, it is now time to redress these
understand the symbols that point to it, not mistakes, to forgive and to forget, and to go
on the precision with which we are able to forward together to finish the task Christ has
exegete and interpret them. entrusted to us.
But if we depart from the agape principle of
1 Corinthians 13 and make our particular
interpretation of these symbols a shibboleth "If there is room in heaven for a
by which to test one another's integrity, we person irrespective of his under-
will all find ourselves quarantined outside the
pearly gates - permanently. But if there is
standing of the symbols, there
room in heaven for a person irrespective of should be room for him as a min-
his understanding of the symbols, there ister of the church on earth. . . ."
should be room for him as a minister of the
church here on earth as well - so long as he
does not make an issue of his particular views The one we elected at Dallas to lead the
and insist on them as a standard to which he world church opened the final session of the
requires other people with equally sincere Glacier View conference with -the ultimate
convictions of their own to conform. And question: "How do we stay together all over
this applies to the rest of us as well as to Dr. the world?" Dr. Guy's Tuesday night paper
Ford. offers a viable answer to that question, an
We all realize that something needed to be answer that can bring us all together and keep
done, both with respect to finding a viable us together. The solution to our problem will
solution to the points of exegesis to which come when we learn to see through the sym-
Dr. Ford called attention in his forum address boIs to the reality they represent. That paper
at Pacific Union College, and to the situation spontaneously unified those present at
that resulted from that address. But a decided Glacier View, whatever their opinion about
majority of Dr. Ford's peers in the Adventist Daniel 8:14, 1844, and the investigative
_c:~lrlIIl~nity of Bible scholars believe tha~_J~~<!~~~t. Is this not tangible evidence of
Volume 11, Number 2 25

what can happen to the church as a whole if grounds. If we follow through with the spirit
we follow where his paper points the way? In and the letter of the Glacier View consensus
so doing, we will find unity and strength for statement and Dr. Guy's paper, we will more
proclaiming the message God has given us, convincingly witness to our faith in the soon
in a way even the bitterest critics of Adven- coming of our Lord, and so hasten the day of
tism cannot successfully assail on biblical His return.

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. See, for example, Bert Haloviak, "Pioneers, Old Testament Prophecy," SDA Bible Commentary,
Pantheists, and Progressives: A. F. Balenger and Di- IV, 25-38; "A Hermeneutic for Daniel 8:14," pp. 18,
vergent Paths to the Sanctuary," a Glacier View 35-36.
document. 13. The Book of Zechariah implies two advents
2. See Raymond F. Cottrell, "Sanctuary Debate: with a very short span of time between them. See
A Question of Method," SPECTRUM, 10 (March Zechariah 9:9-10,12:2,9-11; 13:6-7; 14:1-4. The New
1980),16. Testament applies some of these passages to Christ at
3. See Cottrell, "A Hermeneutic for Daniel 8:14," His first advent; some apply to what we refer to as the
a Glacier View document. second advent.
4. "Apotelesmatic" is a technical theological term 14. See Raymond F. Cottrell, op. cit., pp. 19-20,
meaning "multiple fulfillments." See also Ford's posi- 37-38. .
tion paper, pp. 345-47 and 485-89. 15. Cottrell, op. cit., pp. 10-14.
5. See Adventist Review, 157 (September 4,1980), 16. Nothing in Daniel implies conditionality.
11. Christ and the New Testament apply Daniel's
6. Throughout this report of the Glacier View prophecies to New Testament times. According to
conference, remarks attributed to a speaker (taken Ellen White, God's eternalpurpose for the salvation of
from shorthand notes) give the gist of his comments the world could have been completed with Israel as the
on the point under discussion, in his own words as chosen people long ago. See Prophets and Kings, pp.
condensed - Reader's Digest style - for presentation 499-502, 703-704, 712-714; Christ's Object Lessons,
here. p.290.
7. There were noteworthy increases of the follow- 17. The retired General Conference president was a
ing items, with the percent of increase in the second member of the Sanctuary Committee but under doc-
poll, over the first: the prophecies of Daniel were
unconditional (15%), the prophecies of Daniel have a
tor's orders not to attend.
18. Some references made to these two documents
1
single fulfillment (15%), the year-day principle is . since Glacier View are ambiguous. Care should be
supported by Scripture (10%), the Old Testament taken to determine whether the author refers to these
presents two advents separated by a long span of time two parts of the consensus statement,which were
(20%), defilement of the sanctuary was by the little originally distributed as separate documents, or to
horn and the sins of the saints (15%), sacrificial blood these two as one document and the other the ten-point
in the daily service cleansed from sin but did not critique.
transfer sin to the sanctuary (10%), agree strongly 19. In addition to the president, the group included
with the Statement of Fundamental Beliefs, Section from the General Conference, Ralph Thompson, sec-
23, "Christ's Ministry in the Heavenly Sanctuary" retary; Francis Wernick, general vice president; C. E.
(10%). Bradford, vice president for North America; J. R.
8. These statements are based on Great Contro- Spangler, ministerial association secretary; Charles
versy, p. 598; Fundamentals of Christian Education, p. Hirsch, education departmental director; Duncan
307; Counsels to Writers and Editors, pp. 39-40; Tes- Eva, retired general vice president on special assign-
timonies, V. 706-707; Counsels to Teachers, p. 463; Tes- ment to the president; and from the Australasian Divi-
timonies to Ministers, p. 105; Christ's Object Lessons, p. sion, Keith Parmenter, president; and A. N. Duffy,
112. ministerial association secretary.
9. In addition to Hammill (chairman), the com- 20. See Cottrell, "Sanctuary Debate: A Question of
mittee consisted ofW. R. Lesher (secretary), T. H. Method," SPECTRUM 10 (March 1980),16.
Blincoe,j.j. C. Cox, Gerard Damsteegt, W. D. Eva, 21. For example, those by E. E. Heppenstall and
Fritz Guy, Gerhard Hasel, W. G. johnsson, Robert R. F. Cottrell. .
Olson, J. R. Spangler, Kenneth Strand, Fred Velt- 22. 1. All Old Testament eschatological prophecies
man, and Don Yost. were originally to be fulfilled to Israel within
10. Adventist Review, 157 (May 11, 1980),651 and the first century of our era. 23%
649. 2. The prophecies of Daniel were con-
11. For example, W. R. Lesher, "Landmark Truth ditional. 23%
Versus 'Specious Error,' " Adventist Review, 157 3. Each prophecy of Daniel has more than one
(March 6,1980), 4; and "Truth Stands Forever," Ad- fulfillment. 38%
ventist Review, 157 (March 13,1980),6; D. F. Neufeld,
"How Adventists Adopted the Sanctuary Doctrine," 4. The year-day principle is not supported by I
Scripture. 10%
Adventist Review, 157 (January 2,1980) 14 and (Febru- 1
ary28, 1980), 17. 5. jesus expected to return during the lifetime j
12. See Ra:ymond F. Cottrell>-"TheRQle ofIs(aeLin . ofHis contem;t,_oral.'i(!s; .._:.:::. _._~.::..:_~.:::_=-_jO%__
~1
1
 26 Spectrum

6. The Old Testament does not provide for tive of the entire Mosaic dispensation. 18%
two advents separated by a long span of 13. The heavenly sanctuary needs no cleans-
time. 34% ing. 18%
7. Application of the 2,300 days of 1844 was a 14. "The hour of his judgment" (Revelation
secondary filfillment. 19% 14:7) refers to the judgment of the wicked
8. The heavenly sanctuary was defiled by the only. 18%
little horn, not by the sins of the saints. 19% 15. In Hebrews 9, the second apartment minis-
9. Sacrificial blood in the daily services of the try in the earthly sanctuary represents Jesus'
sanctuary cleansed the sinner but did not trans- beginning His second apartment ministry at His
fer sin to the sanctuary. 36% ascension, not in 1844. 28%
10. The cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary did 16. Agree in part ("somewhat") with the
not begin in 1844. 10% statement on Christ's ministry in the heavenly
11. The concept of an investigative judgment is sanctuary, in the Dallas Statement of Funda-
not supported by Scripture. 10% mental Beliefs, No. 23. 18%
12. In Hebrews 9, the first apartment ministry Average 22.6%
in the earthly sanctuary is said to be representa- 23. See Ford's position paper, pp. 53-115.

In the Shadow of the Sanctuary:

The 1980 Theological Consultation
by Warren C. Trenchard

A lthough it had his-

toric importance, the
1980 Theological Consultation called to dis-
America; members of the Biblical Research
Institute at the General Conference; and
selected pastors, periodical editors, ministe-
cuss the relationship of administrators to rial secretaries and evangelists.
theologians was overshadowed by the meet- The impact of the Sanctuary Review
ings of the Sanctuary Review Committee, Committee on the Theological Consultation
which met immediately before the consulta- began immediately .At the first Friday eve-
tion in the same Glacier View location with ning meeting, the platform chairman an-
many of the same members. The 100 partici- nounced that instead of the scheduled vesper
pants in the consultation were selec;:ted with service, there would be a series of reports
the specific topic of the consultation in mind: from various members of the Sanctuary
administrators serving on the General Con- Committee, whose work had ended just a
ference President's Executive Advisory few hours before. The next day, in the Sab-
Council (PREXAD), and all union confer- bath morning worship service, with Dr. and
ence presidents from the North American Mrs. Ford in attendance, Elder Neal Wilson,
Division; theologians from the SDA president of the General Conference, deliv-
Theological Seminary at Andrews Univer- ered a moving prayer of dedication, calling
sity and religion departments of all the North especially for Desmond Ford's reconciliation
American colleges; presidents of the Adven- to his brethren. Sunday evening, in his first
tist colleges and universities in North presentation to the consultation, Neal Wil-
son issued an exhaustive report on the lead-
Warren C. Trenchard, whose M.Div. is from An- ers' dialogues with Ford and the events that
drews University, took his doctorate in New Testa-
ment from the University of Chicago. He teaches had transpired since the Sanctuary Review
•. theologyat:Canadian Uniori College:· Cornmitteeha:d,finlshedcitswetk;········
 26 Spectrum

6. The Old Testament does not provide for tive of the entire Mosaic dispensation. 18%
two advents separated by a long span of 13. The heavenly sanctuary needs no cleans-
time. 34% ing. 18%
7. Application of the 2,300 days of 1844 was a 14. "The hour of his judgment" (Revelation
secondary filfillment. 19% 14:7) refers to the judgment of the wicked
8. The heavenly sanctuary was defiled by the only. 18%
little horn, not by the sins of the saints. 19% 15. In Hebrews 9, the second apartment minis-
9. Sacrificial blood in the daily services of the try in the earthly sanctuary represents Jesus'
sanctuary cleansed the sinner but did not trans- beginning His second apartment ministry at His
fer sin to the sanctuary. 36% ascension, not in 1844. 28%
10. The cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary did 16. Agree in part ("somewhat") with the
not begin in 1844. 10% statement on Christ's ministry in the heavenly
11. The concept of an investigative judgment is sanctuary, in the Dallas Statement of Funda-
not supported by Scripture. 10% mental Beliefs, No. 23. 18%
12. In Hebrews 9, the first apartment ministry Average 22.6%
in the earthly sanctuary is said to be representa- 23. See Ford's position paper, pp. 53-115.

In the Shadow of the Sanctuary:

The 1980 Theological Consultation
by Warren C. Trenchard

A lthough it had his-

toric importance, the
1980 Theological Consultation called to dis-
America; members of the Biblical Research
Institute at the General Conference; and
selected pastors, periodical editors, ministe-
cuss the relationship of administrators to rial secretaries and evangelists.
theologians was overshadowed by the meet- The impact of the Sanctuary Review
ings of the Sanctuary Review Committee, Committee on the Theological Consultation
which met immediately before the consulta- began immediately .At the first Friday eve-
tion in the same Glacier View location with ning meeting, the platform chairman an-
many of the same members. The 100 partici- nounced that instead of the scheduled vesper
pants in the consultation were selec;:ted with service, there would be a series of reports
the specific topic of the consultation in mind: from various members of the Sanctuary
administrators serving on the General Con- Committee, whose work had ended just a
ference President's Executive Advisory few hours before. The next day, in the Sab-
Council (PREXAD), and all union confer- bath morning worship service, with Dr. and
ence presidents from the North American Mrs. Ford in attendance, Elder Neal Wilson,
Division; theologians from the SDA president of the General Conference, deliv-
Theological Seminary at Andrews Univer- ered a moving prayer of dedication, calling
sity and religion departments of all the North especially for Desmond Ford's reconciliation
American colleges; presidents of the Adven- to his brethren. Sunday evening, in his first
tist colleges and universities in North presentation to the consultation, Neal Wil-
son issued an exhaustive report on the lead-
Warren C. Trenchard, whose M.Div. is from An- ers' dialogues with Ford and the events that
drews University, took his doctorate in New Testa-
ment from the University of Chicago. He teaches had transpired since the Sanctuary Review
•. theologyat:Canadian Uniori College:· Cornmitteeha:d,finlshedcitswetk;········
Volume 11, Number 2 27

The convergence of the Sanctuary Review Church, led in the first of the morning devo-
Committee and the Theological Consulta- tionals which they conducted daily. Niels-
tion contributed to the adoption of a key Erik Andreasen of Loma Linda University
statement in the official report of the consul- followed by tracing the origin, course and
tation: outcome· of the tension between royal au-
A consensus emerged that the whole thority and prophetic ministry in ancient Is-
church, including laity, pastors, theolo- rael. He compared the kings to today's
gians and administrators, must be in- church administrators and the prophets to
volved in the resolution of doctrinal con- present theologians, seeing the former con-
flicts, the definition of essential doctrines, cerned with continuity and the latter with
and the ongoing quest for better under- discontinuity.
standing and proclamation of the church's The recently appointed president of A v-
message. It was clearly seen that no one ondale College, James]. C. Cox, presented a
group or individual could justly or safely lecture, instead of a written paper, in which
carryon these tasks alone. he demonstrated that the New Testament
The format of the consultation involved reflects a church committed to several central
the model of formal presentations accom- doctrinal and ethical cores. From these cores
panied by prepared responses. The secretary emerge a variety of theological and situa-
of the consultation, Arnold Wallenkampf of tional extensions that differ from place to
the Biblical Research Institute, sent most of place and from time to time. An extension
the papers and many of the responses to the becomes heresy only when it loses contact
participants in advance. Although both pre- with its core.
senters and respondents did not adhere to Sunday afternoon, C. B. Rock, president
prearranged guidelines, and often read major of Oakwood College, addressed the ques-
portions of their papers, enough time gener- tion, How can the church be "at once truly
ally remained for lively discussion. Enough meaningful to contemporary man and mean-
time, indeed, to range widely from the topic ingfully true to its historic determinants?"
at hand. He answered with the word "renewal," by
which he meant maturation. According to

O n the first formal pre-

sentation, Saturday
evening, Charles E. Bradford, vice president
Rock, this condition "whereby an institution
maintains relevance without loss of purpose
or mission, is possible only when that people
of the General Conference for North hold in strictest equipoise the twin principles
America, described the church as a compos- of absolute commitment and rigorous criti-
ite of kingdom of God, body of Christ and .
Clsm. "
people of God. He characterized the church's According to Ron Graybill of the Ellen G.
leadership in terms of the service model, a White Estate, one of the most important
sentiment shared by several other presenters. questions confronting the church today is
Bradford called for the church to see itself as a "How much and what kind of authority Ellen
ministerium not a magisterium. For him, the
J G. W.hite should have." However, Graybill
New Testament church represented the did not attempt to an~wer this question;
pluriform pattern that must be copied today. rather, he reviewed several conflicts in Ad-
One of the respondents to Bradford, Jack ventist history in which Ellen White played a
W. Provonsha of Loma Linda University, role. He noted that although she claimed not
obsetved that a representative church gov- to have settled early doctrinal disputes, she
ernment should be truly representative: "A did at times endorse one interpretation over
healthy organization such as a church is one another. Graybill also gave examples of Ellen
1
in which there is a perceived coincidence of White's changing her position on a theologi- "}

actual power with the structure of power." cal matter and siding with those who inter- j
On Sunday morning, Norman and Dottie preted her writings contextually. However, j
Versteeg, who share pastoral duties in the she stood by what she considered to be a
Garden Grove, California,· Adventist noxmative piQJ1.eef.exper ience and the valida- 11
,j
i
ij
28 Spectrum

tion of her visions in the face of the Ballenger been functioning totally in concert." He
challenge. suggested that church administrators
In the lead-off presentation on Monday "should take the lead in creating a climate for
morning, Walter Douglas of Andrews Uni- mutual understanding, trust and creativity."
versity reviewed the transition from theolo- Another General Conference Vice Presi-
gian to administrator made by several re- dent, M. C. Torkelsen, addressed the role of
formers of the sixteenth century. Douglas the church administrator. Among the many
showed that in the latter role these reformers characteristics which he saw necessary for
entrenched in their newly formed church success in leadership, Torkelsen identified
organizations many of the abuses which they servant consciousness as the most vital. He
had condemned in their former roles of con- called for a representative study committee
frontation. that would seek solutions to the confidence
Charles Teel,]r., of Loma Linda Univer- gap between leaders and the led.
sity, offered a lengthy critique of former Gen- In a companion paper, Fred Veltman, then
eral Conference President Robert Pierson's cpairman of the Pacific Union College theol-
valedictory appeal made upon his an- ogy department, noted that the tension be-
nouncement of retirement. Pierson had tween administrators and theologians is
called for church leaders to resist the internal neither new nor confined to Adventists. He
forces that would move the denomination called for "making the future more produc-
from sect to church, a shift which he consid- tive of common good than trying to locate
ered negative. Teel rejected Pierson's asser- the causes for our past failures." For Veltman
tion that Adventism had been moving from also the servant model should characterize
sect to church, as well as any generalization both administrator and theologian.
that always sect is positive and church is Willis J. Hackett, who had recently retired
negative. Instead, Teel proposed that Advent- as vice president of the General Conference,
ism become a prophetic remnant, expres- made the final formal presentation of the
sing the content of its beliefs in the ideals of consultation. On the basis of his understand-
the other world, while carefully attending to ing of the meaning of church in scripture and
the structure of its machinery in this world. in Adventism, Hackett concluded that one
In the afternoon session, Raoul Dederen of may expect "a basic doctrinal unity among
Andrews University discussed elements of a the believers and members of the church to-
theology of the church, the concept of church day." He attacked the "historical-critical
authority, teaching authority in Adventism, method of Bible interpretation" practiced
and the relationship between teaching au- by many Adventist biblical scholars as
thority and the task of theology. He called for "threatening the very unity of our teachings,
the actualization of the Adventist ideal of a if not the structured unity of the church." In
representative form of church government. place of this methodology, Hackett proposed
a three-point program to achieve doctrinal
unity: first, a return to the pioneers'

O n Tuesday morning,
Fritz Guy of An-
drews University presented a paper centered
"straightforward acceptance of Scripture";
second, "an acceptance of the writings of
Ellen G. White as God's divine message
on two theses: that "theology is an essential given to the church"; and third, a utilization
task of the church"; and that "theology is the of "the church's organizational structure
task of the whole church." Guy portrayed with its representative form of govern-
the role of the theologian in the latter as one ment. "
of assistance in hermeneutics, methodology, One of the respondents to Hackett, Earl
issue identification, resources and discussion W. Amundson, president of the Atlantic
initiation. Union Conference, delivered one of the most
In a response to Guy, General Conference penetrating responses of the consultation.
Vice President Lowell Bock recognized that According to Amundson, the development
administrators~ .and:.theologians:.::.thaYe:..::.nnt . :.o£Ymature Christians~_~... ismore im pcQrtant
Volume 11, Number 2 29

than the provision of "more controls." On ing to these objections, Wilson suggested
the issue of free discussion of varying views, that unless better answers can be found than
Amundson responded to Hackett's question these, the board of trustees will have to give
about the degree of toleration that could be careful consideration to arranging for the
permitted, by asking, "How can we ever publication of all the Ellen White material.
survive without discussion and study?" The second question that Wilson treated
Amundson suggested that while our beliefs was, What does one do if 12 theologians
agree on a biblical interpretation against
Ellen White's interpretation of the same bi-
"Hackett attacked the 'historical-
blical material? Wilson responded that one
critical method of Bible inter- would have to consider the importance, na-
pretation' practiced by many ture and extent of the issue. He would advise
Adventist biblical scholars as the assembling of a representative group of
scholars to evaluate the situation. Wilson
'threatening the very unity of then presented two possible scenarios. If
our teachings, if not the scripture was not explicit and Ellen White did
structured unity of the church.' " not contradict scripture, the church would
support Ellen White. If scripture was explicit
and Ellen White did not agree in the view of
may be nonnegotiable, our interpretations of the church, the church must stand by scrip-
them must always be negotiable. He ob- ture. One must remember that this question
served that the pioneers employed a proof- was posed as a hypothetical question with no
text method of biblical interpretation, which specific reference or example offered, and
is unacceptable today, and that scholars can Wilson's answer must be read in that light.
use the contemporary critical tools within the
context of commitment to the Bible as God's
authoritative word. In what he considered a
"delicate issue," Amundson expressed con-
cern over Hackett's apparent assignment of
F or the few who re-
mained until the end,
the last event of the consultation was the
authority "to Ellen White, even over the Bi- consideration of the report by the summation
ble." His final appeal called for "the unifying and resolution committee delivered on Wed-
spirit oflove, rather than the unification of all nesday morning. The committee distilled the
of the details of our beliefs." contributions of the presenters and respon-
Preliminary to his scheduled Tuesday eve- dents, along with concepts that had emerged
ning presentation on his aspirations for the from the discussions, into a statement of the
church in the decade, General Conference characteristic ideas of the consultation. In ad-
President Neal Wilson addressed himself to dition to this, the committee presented to the
two questions that had emerged in the dis- group for approval a list of recommendations
cussion during the consultation. The first concerning the implementation of ideas gen-
question was, What has prevented the Ellen erated during the consultation and sugges-
G. White Estate Board of Trustees from tions on the format and frequency of future
making available all the Ellen White mate- consultations.
ri.al? Wilson reviewed some of the typical According to the summation statement,
objections, which included: the reluctance to the consultation was "designed to increase
release confidential correspondence; the con- understanding and trust" among adminis-
tention that a total release would not contri- trators and theologians. This, of course, pre-
bute to more truth; the fact that all the mate- supposes that such understanding and trust
rial has not been indexed and researched by has not always existed, at least to the extent
the White Estate personnel; the notion that desired. Most participants, in fact, admitted ;

we already have enough material; the realiza- that this condition existed. For example, l
1

tion that the cost would be huge; and the Raoul Dederen, a theologian, recognized
apprehension of some trustees. In respond- .!h~!~kh()~~.!h~~~_~~_a "-K~~w~g_ cogctbora:- ..
1
1
1
30 Spectrum

tion between some theologians and some administrators were not nearly so predicta-
leaders, the mutual relationship between the ble. Although some approached the issues
two groups is still fraught with misun- from a preservation perspective, not all ad-
derstanding, tensions, distrust and occa- ministrators reflected that position. Some
sional bitterness." Lowell Bock, an adminis- offered more intense criticisms of the preser-
trator, echoed the same sentiment when he vation mentality than did certain theolo-
observed the existence of "an element of sus- gIans.
picion between our theologians and church While this consultation did not achieve any
administrators" and called for the elimina- significant concrete results in terms of major
tion of this" debilitating condition." policy recommendations or theological con-
Most observers of, and participants in, the sensus statements, it did succeed in bringing
consultation would have predicted that in administrators and theologians face to face
these meetings administrators and theolo- into amicable dialogue. This achievement
gians would quickly flee to their respective must not be underestimated. Before two
corners of the ring. The former would play groups can work together, they must learn to
the role of preservers in the right corner. The talk together. Before they can enter the cruc-
latter would act as provocators in the left ible of contemporary challenges, they must
corner. For the most part, the theologians forsake the security of their isolated domains.
performed as expected. Most called for the Therefore, this initial step toward eliminat-
continuity of a creative tension between ing the suspicion must be applauded, al-
preservation and provocation. However, the though the walk must also continue.

Daniel 8: 14 and the

Day of Atonement
by Desmond Ford

exegetical problems that 1 find concerning

S ince the ad hoc
Sanctuary Review
Committee was specifically summoned to
Daniel 8:14; fourth, my understanding of the
sanctuary in Hebrews; fifth, my solution to
review my views as set forth in my 991-page the problems in Daniel and Hebrews; sixth,
manuscript, "Daniel 8:14, the Day of my concept of Daniel 8:14 and 1844; and
Atonement, and the Investigative Judg- finally, my use of Ellen G. White. I quote
ment," the editors believed that it was essen- from the manuscript as much as possible,
tial that the reader be thoroughly familiar citing it by page numbers so that readers may
with my positions in order to evaluate them refer to it for further analysis.
intelligently. They have, therefore, asked me Methodology. As I state in the manuscript,
to summarize my manuscript. This sum- my twofold objective is to "make clear the
mary covers seven principal points: first, my doctrinal problem confronting our church"
methodology; second, my review of Adven- and to "suggest a solution to the problem"
tist sanctuary studies; third, the specific (42). I follow the "grammatical-historical"
method as "the only valid means of doing full
Desmond Ford, for many years chairman of theol- justice to the meaning of Scripture" (43), and
ogy at Avondale College, took his doctorate from
Manchester University. The author ofDaniel , he now assume that the book of Daniel was written
resides in N e'Wcastle ,C::;~liforl1ia. in the sixth century before Christ, that Ell~!l
30 Spectrum

tion between some theologians and some administrators were not nearly so predicta-
leaders, the mutual relationship between the ble. Although some approached the issues
two groups is still fraught with misun- from a preservation perspective, not all ad-
derstanding, tensions, distrust and occa- ministrators reflected that position. Some
sional bitterness." Lowell Bock, an adminis- offered more intense criticisms of the preser-
trator, echoed the same sentiment when he vation mentality than did certain theolo-
observed the existence of "an element of sus- gIans.
picion between our theologians and church While this consultation did not achieve any
administrators" and called for the elimina- significant concrete results in terms of major
tion of this" debilitating condition." policy recommendations or theological con-
Most observers of, and participants in, the sensus statements, it did succeed in bringing
consultation would have predicted that in administrators and theologians face to face
these meetings administrators and theolo- into amicable dialogue. This achievement
gians would quickly flee to their respective must not be underestimated. Before two
corners of the ring. The former would play groups can work together, they must learn to
the role of preservers in the right corner. The talk together. Before they can enter the cruc-
latter would act as provocators in the left ible of contemporary challenges, they must
corner. For the most part, the theologians forsake the security of their isolated domains.
performed as expected. Most called for the Therefore, this initial step toward eliminat-
continuity of a creative tension between ing the suspicion must be applauded, al-
preservation and provocation. However, the though the walk must also continue.

Daniel 8: 14 and the

Day of Atonement
by Desmond Ford

exegetical problems that 1 find concerning

S ince the ad hoc
Sanctuary Review
Committee was specifically summoned to
Daniel 8:14; fourth, my understanding of the
sanctuary in Hebrews; fifth, my solution to
review my views as set forth in my 991-page the problems in Daniel and Hebrews; sixth,
manuscript, "Daniel 8:14, the Day of my concept of Daniel 8:14 and 1844; and
Atonement, and the Investigative Judg- finally, my use of Ellen G. White. I quote
ment," the editors believed that it was essen- from the manuscript as much as possible,
tial that the reader be thoroughly familiar citing it by page numbers so that readers may
with my positions in order to evaluate them refer to it for further analysis.
intelligently. They have, therefore, asked me Methodology. As I state in the manuscript,
to summarize my manuscript. This sum- my twofold objective is to "make clear the
mary covers seven principal points: first, my doctrinal problem confronting our church"
methodology; second, my review of Adven- and to "suggest a solution to the problem"
tist sanctuary studies; third, the specific (42). I follow the "grammatical-historical"
method as "the only valid means of doing full
Desmond Ford, for many years chairman of theol- justice to the meaning of Scripture" (43), and
ogy at Avondale College, took his doctorate from
Manchester University. The author ofDaniel , he now assume that the book of Daniel was written
resides in N e'Wcastle ,C::;~liforl1ia. in the sixth century before Christ, that Ell~!l
Volume 11, Number 2 31

White was a true prophet, and that the golden sanctuary; second, what defiled it, and the
rule applies to the reader as well as the writer nature of its cleansing or restoration; third,
(43-44). I furthermore caution against basing its "daily" or "continual" services and its day
doctrine on types or apocalyptic symbols of atonement/investigative judgment em-
(471), and against preconceived opinion, as a phasis; and finally, the 2,300 evenings-
barrier to the discovery of truth (609). To mornings and the year-day principle.
support my views, I have included footnotes According to the traditional Adventist in-
and other documentation and 37 appendices terpretation, the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14 is,
arranged by chapters providing additional exclusively, the sanctuary in heaven presented
documentation. Much of this information is in Hebrews, especially chapters 6 to 9. The
from significant original sources heretofore validity of this concept hinges on the rela-
unavailable in print. tionship of the sanctuary of 8:14 to the
Adventist Sanctuary Studies. The first chap- sanctuary mentioned in verses 11 to 13, and
ter of my manuscript is devoted to a histori- on the validity of the analogy with Hebrews
cal resume of problems related to the 9. I assume that the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14
sanctuary doctrine over the past 75 years. I is the earthly sanctuary, or Temple, in
quote from 17 Adventist writers who recog- Jerusalem, but according to the apotelesma-
nized these problems (53-115), name seven tic principle (the dual or multiple fulfillment
who left the church at least in part because of of prophecy), it also becomes the symbol of
them, and others who, though perplexed, the kingdom of God (in earth and heaven) in
remained with the church (5). Although the all ages.
recurrence of problems is not surprising, I According to the traditional Adventist in~
note that the "failure to deal adequately with terpretation, the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14 is
[them] is the strangest feature of any histori- difiled by the confessed and forgiven sins,lor
cal review of the subject" (47). To illustrate sin guilt, of God's repentant people of all
this point, I quote from a letter of M. L. ages, transferred to it by the ministry of
Andreasen to J. L. McElhaney and W. H. Christ our Great High Priest during the an-
Branson (December 25, 1942). Andreasen is titypical phase of the" daily" or "continual"
concerned that once the immediate crisis oc- ministration; it is cleansed on the antitypical
casioned by such "heresies" as those of Con- day of atonement that began in 1844, which
radi and Fletcher had passed, the church cleansing consists of the removal of the sins
gave the matter no further study and as a or sin guilt thus accumulated. The validityof
result was unprepared for the next crisis. this concept hinges on the meaning of nisdaq,
This tendency, Andreasen writes, has "un- "cleansed," or "restored to its rightful state,"
dermined the faith of the ministry in our on the relation of this word to its context and
doctrine of the sanctuary." He continues: on the validity of a supposed analogy with
If my experience as a teacher at the the day of atonement cleansing of Leviticus
Seminary may be taken as a criterion, I 16.
would say that a large number of our I affirm that nisdaq is to be understood in
ministers have serious doubt as to the cor- terms of its context in verses 9 to 13 as a
rectness of the views we hold on certain restoration of damage done by the little horn.
phases of the sanctuary. They believe, in a In terms of the apotelesmatic principle, fur-
general way, that we are correct, but they thermore, the sanctuary of8:14 is "restored"
are as fully assured that Ballenger's views by a rediscovery of the true gospel as imaged
have never been fully met and that we in the sanctuary and by an understanding,
cannot meet them. They decide that the appreciation and appropriation of the great
question is not vital and relegate it to the principle of righteousness by faith in Jesus
background (159). Christ. Thus, I argue that "while it is true
Exegetical Problems in Daniel 8: 14. Four that among the many lesser meanings of nis-
specific areas of our traditional interpretation daq, 'to cleanse,' could be invoked, the cleans-
of Daniel 8:14 receive special attention in my ing thus indicated would have to comport
manuscript: first, the identity of the with what the context states about the need
l
J
!
32 Spectrum

for cleansing" (348). It is essential, therefore, further affirm that "at every point in His
to remember that "the context says nothing intercession, Christ knows whether pro-
about believers doing despite to the fessed believers are truly abiding in Him"
sanctuary, but unbelievers'" (346). In terms (477), that "the professed Christian must
of the apotelesmatic principle, however, I stand before thejudgment bar of God" (476),
also state plainly that I do not "question the and that men are being judged now (523).
eschatological cleansing of the sanctuary, and I also point out that the debate over "the
the fact that the day of atonement and Daniel daily" in the early decades of this century was
8:14 point to that." I further state that "such a "battle to give the context its right place"
positions were landmarks of our pioneers by relating verse 14 directly to verse 13 (395).
and I accept them heartily" (595). The new view of "the daily" "practically
ignored the investigative judgment concept
ccording to the tradi- '
tional Adventist in-
terpretation of Daniel 8:14, the cleansing of
A and spoke in terms of restoring the 'daily' -
the gospel of Christ which had been taken
away by Antichrist" (395).
the heavenly sanctuary on a great antitypical According to the year-day principle of the
day of atonement consists of an investigative traditional Adventist interpretation, the
judgment - an examination of the life rec- 2,300 evenings-mornings stand for 2,300
ords of those of all ages who have professed days which, in turn, represent 2,300 years
to be among God's people. This judgment that commenced in 457 B.C. and terminated
culminates in the transfer of their confessed
and forgiven sins, or sin guilt, which has
accumulated there, to Satan. This concept
"Adventist Bible scholars
depends on an analogy between the cleansing have repeatedly affirmed that
of 8:14 and that on the day of atonement in it is impossible to prove the
Leviticus 16, interpreted as a work of judg- investigative judgment from
ment by analogy with the judgment of
Daniel 7, and on the validity of applying the the Bible. . . ."
year-day principle to the 2,300 evenings-
mornmgs. in 1844. This interpretation hinges on the
The concept of an investigative judgment meaning of ereb-boqer) "evenings-morn-
was proposed about 13 years after Adventists ings," on the validity of the year-day
had adopted the idea of a heavenly sanctuary; principle, on the viability of457 B.C. as their
it was not an original part of that concept terminus a quo} and on the relation of the 2,300
(293). The Bible does not teach an investiga- evenings-mornings to the 70 weeks of Daniel
tivejudgment as we proclaim it (651). Thus, 9. But, according to the apotelesmatic prin-
I believe that "our use of sanctuary imagery ciple, there is no biblical basis for the year-
to support the investigative judgment con- day principle. The 2,300 evenings-mornings
cept has been faulty" (651). It is a metaphori- met their original fulfillment when An-
cal concept that points to reality but is not tiochus Epiphanes desecrated the Templejn
reality itself (624). Ellen White's description Jerusalem, and the cleansing of the sanctuary
of it is not stated in literal terms (626). In at their close was fulfilled by restoration of
Daniel,judgment has to do with unbelievers, the everlasting gospel in the Advent Move-
not believers (355ff). However, I agree that ment of1844 (646).
"Seventh-day Adventists have been right in Furthermore, I note that Numbers 14:34
seeing the theme ofjudgment in Daniel 8:14" and Ezekiel 4:6 do not yield the day-year
(367), for "the fact that Scripture clearly principle, nor is it to be found, contextually,
teaches two resurrections with only the in either Daniel 8:14 or 9:24 (295). Adventist
righteous coming up in the first, demands Old and New Testament scholars frequently
that their destiny be settled prior to Christ's confess that it is impossible to prove the
coming, for they are released from the house year-day principle from the Bible (35), and
of (leath',Vith immortal bodies" (650). I
.. ' .. ... ". ,_ ..
" - "." _ _-_... _----- _.__._----- ........._....
.... ..
even the Seventh-day .t!dventistEf1,c}'~(ope4ia
Volume 11, Number 2 33

assigns its origin to medieval times (326-36). first century was engaged in the equivalent
However, I believe that "it was in the provi- ministry to that which the typical high priest
dence of God that the year-day principle was performed in the second apartment of the
espoused after the Advent hope of the early tabernacle on the Day of Atonement" (175).
church had faded away" (294). It "is not a In Hebrews, the day of atonement spans "the
primary Bible datum, but a providential whole period from the cross to the coming ...
strategy of God, only pertinent after the long [it] reaches its climax in eschatological sal-
centuries of unnecessary delay" (643-44). vation" (204-205; see verses 27-28). Fur-
Concerning the viability of 457 B.C., the thermore, I believe "this relationship be-
Seventh-day Adventist Commentary notes that tween fulfillment in the days of the first Ad-
several dates in the traditional Adventist in- vent and consummation with the second is
terpretation of Daniel 8:14, including those vital for our understanding of use made of the
of the restoration decree, the crucifixion and [ancient] day of atonement in the Atonement
the terminus ad quem of the seventieth [of Christ]" (442).
"week," are not precisely known (317, 320, In this connection, it is important to note
345). that "the whole weight of New Testament
The Sanctuary in Hebrews. I argue that the testimony that God's ideal plan was thatJesus
-- --- - --
expression ta hagia J "the holies," of Hebrews should have returned in the first century --~

9:3,8, 12,24,25, Hebrews 10:19, and He- A.D., not long after His ascension to heaven .
brews 13:11 is a plural with singular meaning; . - This is clearly taught from Matthew to Reve-
it refers exclusively to the Most Holy Place. : lation and recognized by the vast majority of
The same is true of the expression "within New Testament scholars" (295-197), as it is
the veil" or "the inner shrine behind the cur- by the Spirit of Prophecy , the Bible Commen-
tain" of Hebrews 6:19-20 (RSV) , which is tary and numerous Adventist scholars. We
equivalent to "after the second veil. .. the believe "that the long delay in our Lord's
Holiest of all" or "behind the second curtain return was not necessary, but caused by the
. . . the Holy of Holies" of Hebrews 9:2-3 failure of the church" (643-644).
(RSV) (57,261).
In the comparison of Hebrews 9 "the first
apartment [of the ancient sanctuary] is sym- O ver the past 20 years,
Adventist
bolic of the whole earthly sanctuary during scholars have repeatedly affirmed that it is
Bible

the Jewish age" prior to the cross (243; see impossible to prove the investigative judg-
verse 9), and the second apartment, of the ment from the Bible, and pointed to the fact
entire ministry of Christ in the heavenly that Hebrews 9 clearly assigns Christ's minis-
sanctuary between His first and second Ad- try in the Most Holy Place and the antitypical
vents (480, 507). The antitypical day of day of atonement to the entire period be-
atonement thus spans the entire Christian tween the two Advents (34-35). Thus, I con-
era, with its inauguration at the cross and its clude that "frank denials [in the SDA Bible
consummation when Christ appears a second Commentary] that Hebrews teaches our
time (480). I make this comparison to point sanctuary position, plain statements to the
out the superiority of Christ's ministry to effect that Christ should have returned not in
that of the ancient sanctuary - direct access 1844 but in the first century, the teaching of
to the Father without the mediation of the conditional element in prophecy, and the
human priests. Ellen White repeatedly admonition that prophecy always had direct
applies the day of atonement to the cross, relevance for the people first addressed,"
with no mention of 1844 (550-551). these developments, along with our recogni-
According to my interpretation, since tion of "the true meaning of the key original
Hebrews 9:23 clearly applies the cleansing of terms," have changed "the complexion of
the heavenly sanctuary to "something al- our former apologetic in the area of the
ready accolllplished by our great High sanctuary" (525) .
Priest" (236), "Hebrews is saying as clearly as Over the years, we have made numerous
words can say it that Christ already in the chailgesinour ~~[l<;:tuary tea~hil1g, the first of
34 Spectrum

these being abandonment of the "shut door" a competitor with Calvary and the Second
theory of 1852 (564, 593). As background, I Advent" (367).
list 55 details in which our sanctuary teaching The apotelesmatic principle affirms that a
today differs from the nineteenth-century prophecy fulfilled, or fulfilled in part, or un-
exposition of it (28-33). After listing 12 fulfilled at the appointed time, may have a
proof-text era presentations of the sanctuary, later or recurring, or consummated fulfill-
I also note that all "have been repeatedly ment, with the recurring fulfillment repeat-
challenged by Adventist scholars, and several ing the main idea rather than precise details
of them, at least, repudiated by a majority of and each fulfillment being a pledge of that
those who are specialists in the particular area which is to follow (485, 489). The church has
of Scripture concerned" (466-77). Finally, I already accepted this principle when it inter-
point out that on 20 points, Adventist schol- prets the little horn as both pagan and papal
ars already agree in rejecting the traditional Rome (395). In fact, I list numerous Bible and
interpretation (469-70; see also 115-36, 564, Ellen White applications of the apotelesmatic
590, 593, 596). principle, to which I believe all will agree
Suggested Solution. I believe that the prob- (488-92,505,531,655) .
lems in Daniel and Hebrews may be solved Applying the principle to Daniel 8:14,
by applying. the apotelesmatic principle. then, I believe that "every era of revival of the
Numerous Adventist publications state that truths symbolized in the sanctuary" can be
all Bible prophecy is conditional (305-306, seen as fulfilling the prophecy (486). An-
tiochus was the first antichrist, the papacy
: "I maintain that the Bible is another and Satan in his final counterfeit of
Christ the last (486). It is essential, therefore,
'the sole basis of doctrine. But that we realize that "the Adventist applica-
for that very reason, I must tion of Daniel 8:14 to 1844 was an application
be open to any manifestation in principle, an apotelesmatic fulfillment - a
legitimate but not exhaustive application"
of the gifts of the Spirit .... " (574).
Daniel 8: 14 and 1844. I do not argue that the
366). Furthermore, when Ellen White church has been wrong in applying Daniel
"spoke ever in terms of the divine ideal for 8:14 to the "emergence of the Advent
the people of God," she noted that it "was movement." I believe that "the year-day
conditional on the faithful response of the principle as regards its practical essence has
church" (539). Scholars recognize that "ev- always been correct. That which could have
ery part of the Bible had meaning for the been fulfilled in days had the church been
people who first received it" (392), so that faithful is now taking years" (344). Further-
one may conclude that "all prophecy had more, "Seventh-day Adventists, and their
relevance for the people first addressed" predecessors the Millerites, were not wrong
(525,564). But "Scripture clearly shows that when they asserted the eschatological signifi-
prophecies may have more than a single ful- cance of Daniel 8:14" (366), for it "is an es-
fillment, and Ellen G. White amply chatological message regarding judgment"
exemplified that truth" (345). (367). I affirm that "Seventh-day Adventists
Thus, Daniel 8:14 may be understood as have been right in seeing the theme of judg-
pointing both "to a local sanctuary cleansing mentinDaniel8:14" (481).
in the days of Antiochus" and "to the final I also believe that 1844 is a key date, for it
resolution of the sin problem by the last was then that "in the providence of God, He
judgment" (347). From this, it follows that brought to birth the movement with the last
the 1844 interpretation was "a providential message to the world" (623). "In 1844, God
reinterpretation of an· apotelesmatic fulfill- raised up a people to preach the everlasting
ment, rather than the primary intention of gospel" (646). Thus, I see 1844 and the Ad-
the apocalyptic passage. It is by no means vent movement as "a fulfillment of Daniel
i9:s.igll.ificant because of that, but .ceas.esto be 8.;lt:,~~p-a,potelesmatic fulfillment in the s~T~
Volume 11, Number 2 35

sense that A.D. 70 was a fulfillment of per, must follow her example" (594). "I be-
Matthew 24, andJohn the Baptist of Malachi lieve that we should take the writings of Ellen
4:5, 6, and Pentecost of Joel 2:28" (624). In G. White, confident that God has spoken
my view, Daniel 8:14 "is the most important through her in a way He has not spoken
verse in the book" (643), and 1844 "a provi- through us, and acknowledge them as light.
dential reinterpretation and an apotelesmatic ... Let us read them for pastoral admonition,
fulfillment, rather than the primary intention for spiritual insight" (602). But we must be
of the apocalyptic passage" (367,420). How- clear that "Ellen White is not our [doctrinal]
ever, "the fact that 1844 rests on several as- authority. That position only Scripture can
sumptions impossible to demonstrate does hold. To divert from 'the Bible and the Bible
not invalidate God's raising up of a special only' as the 'sole bond of union' and 'our only
people at the time to preach 'the everlasting creed,' would be to cease to be either biblical
gospel' - in the sanctification setting of sal- or Protestant, and could only result in split-
vation and the judgment" (648). "In the pro- ting this church down the middle" (623).
vidence of God, Adventists were raised up in "Let us build our framework of truth solely
1844" (622), and to me "that message ... is on the Word, but use with gratitude the
beautifully enshrined in the symbolism of the counsels meant to be for 'upbuilding and en-
sanctuary" (623). couragement and consolation' " (628).
Ellen White. I maintain that the Bible is "the I conclude with the following point: "It is
sole basis of doctrine. But for that very rea- true that in the early days of the movement,
son, I must also be open to any manifestation when our brethren were yet dependent upon
of the gifts of the Spirit promised therein, the proof text method, and when every man
including the gift of prophecy. IfI find, as is had a different interpretation, at such a time
the case with Ellen G. White, one who leads God through Ellen G. White indicated some
me to Christ and His Word as supreme in all evidence from Scripture which decided the
things, and who exhorts to holiness, I should point at issue" (605). Later, however, she
accept the messenger, but without surrender- wrote: "I request that my words shall not be
ing the right to exercise the canonical test of used as the leading argument to settle ques-
Scripture" (641, 656). Since I found Christ tions over which there is now so much con-
through the writings of Ellen G. White and troversy. . . that they make no reference to -,--
since she has influenced me more than any my writings to sustain their· view of 'the
other writer since John the Apostle, I thank daily.' ... I cannot consent that any of my --;--

God for the spiritual help I find in her writ- writings shall be taken as settling this matter.
ings, and acknowledge her "as one of God's ... I now ask that my ministering brethren
greatest saints, specially raised up and en- shall not make use of my writings in their
dowed to lead the weak and needy remnant argument regarding this question" (608).
into areas of service allotted by the counsels Conclusion. To summarize my manu-
of heaven" (661). "What type of people script's argument as briefly as possible, I set
would we be if we followed the counsels of forth the following main points:
Ellen White? One word answers - saints" 1) Many recognized Adventist Bible
(614) . scholars, past and present, have acknowl-
edged the problems in the traditional Advent-

H owever, we must
remember that
"never did Ellen White claim to be a medium
ist interpretation of Daniel 8: 14 and Hebrews
9, and standard Adventist publications such
as the SDA Bible Commentary explicitly ac-
of truth that superseded Scripture" (604). knowledge them. Over the past 75 years,
"We do her wrong, therefore, to make her repeated crises have arisen over these prob-
writings the sovereign interpreter of the lems and not a few have left the church be-
Holy Scriptures. She never made that error, cause of them, but once each crisis had passed
but continually revised even her written little or nothing was done to deal adequately
statements on the basis of continuing light with the substance of the problems.
from the Word. The church, if it is to pros- 2) 01:1 the basis ofsoulld, recognized prin-
36 Spectrum

ciples of exegesis and interpretation these Advent judgment now in progress. All are
problems are: a) in context, the sanctuary of now judged according to their response to
Daniel 8:14 is the sanctuary or Temple in the gospel, and as Christ's ministry above
Jerusalem, not the sanctuary in heaven, a fact closes, their state will be fixed eternally by
that invalidates equating it with the sanctuary His fiat.
of Hebrews; b) in context, it is the acts of the 5) Over the years, we have progressively
little horn that defile the sanctuary of Daniel refined our understanding of Daniel 8:14 and
8:14, not the confessed and forgiven sins, or the sanctuary doctrine, with the result that at
sin guilt, of God's repentant people; c) in many points our present official teaching dif-
context, the "cleansing" or "restoration" of fers from what it was originally. The
the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14 consists of its apotelesmatic principle can be the final, mas-
restoration from the damage it suffered from ter link in this process.
the little horn, not from the sins or sin guilt of 6) The Bible itself, the writings of Ellen
God's repentant people; d) there is nothing in White and standard Seventh-day Adventist
the context to suggest a day of atonement publications have all acknowledged the con-
setting for the "cleansing" or "restoration" ditional element in Bible prophecy, the rela-
of the sanctuary of Daniel 8:14, a fact which tionship of Old Testament predictive
invalidates the day of atonement ritual anal- prophecy to the Jewish people and its in-
ogy with Leviticus 16; e) etymologically and tended fulfillment within the historical per-
contextually, the word nisdaq means "to be spective of God's covenant with them, the
right" or "to be restored," not "to be possibility of a first-century Advent and
cleansed;" f) there is no etymological or Christ's day of atonement ministry as our
analogical basis for interpreting ereb-boqer as great High Priest in the Most Holy Apart-
"days," nor is there any clear biblical basis ment of the heavenly sanctuary since His as-
for the year-day principle in 13ible prophecy; cenSIOn.
g) there is no unambiguous basis for identify- Finally, I would like to affirm my personal
ing the decree of Daniel 9:23, 25, to restore belief in the following: 1) the validity of
and build Jerusalem , with Artaxerxes' decree Daniel 8:14 as a message of eschatological
in 457 B.C., or that date as the commence- judgment; 2) the validity of the year-day
ment of the 2,300 evenings-mornings or 1844 as principle as a providential provision rather
marking their close; h) Hebrews 9 clearly than a biblical datum and its application to
equates Christ's ministry in the heavenly the prophecies of Daniel, though without
sanctuary commencing with His ascension punctilian precision - a rough rule of thumb
- and not 1844 - as the antitypical counter- that saved the waiting church from losing
part of the day of atonement. hope in the return of Christ; 3) the validity of
3) Despite this interconnected series oflin- the 1844 Advent movement as a fulfillment
guistic, contextual and analogical non- of the gospel-restoration motif of Daniel
sequiturs in the traditional Adventist in- 8:14; 4) the validity of 1844 as marking the
terpretation of Daniel 8:14 and Hebrews 9, time when God, in heaven and on earth,
the apotelesmatic principle of multiple ful- raised up a people to whom He entrusted His
fillments provides a sound, biblical basis for last, everlasting gospel message of righ-
applying Daniel 8:14 to a final gospel- teousness by faith in Christ, for the world; 5)
restoration message involving judgment, the validity of the prophetic gift manifested
and also to the ultimate eradication of evil as . in the life, ministry and writings of Ellen
"imaged" in the eschatological symbolism of White; and 6) the Scriptures as the sole basis
the ancient sanctuary day of atonement of doctrine, and Ellen White as God's chosen
ritual. and inspired messenger to the remnant
4) Every professed Christian must stand church, to bless His people and to prepare
before the judgment bar of God in a pre- them for the soon coming of Christ.
 Daniel and the Judgment
by William H. Shea

W hile other persons

present may have
had different ideas about the purpose of the
strate. There is a natural logic behind such
statements. God has judged in times past.
God resides in His sanctuary. Therefore, the
Glacier View Conference, the central issue at place where God has judged and from which
stake there, to me, was whether or not the He has issued His judgments is His
past teachipg of the Seventh-day Adventist sanctuary, whether earthly or heavenly .
Church that an investigative judgment began The general proposition can reasonably be
in heaven in 1844 was soundly based in Scrip- applied to all of the judgments in the Bible.
ture. I have answered this question in the That connection is made more definite and
affirmative, and Desmond Ford has an- direct, however, in the particular passages in
swered it ~n the negative.! In May of this which such a cOimection is explicitly stated.
year, Dr. Richard Hammill, the chairman of The Pentateuch refers to at least eight such
the small advisory committee that met with instances in connection with the tabernacle in
Ford three' times before the conference at the wilderness (Lev. 10, Num. 11, 12, 14, 16,
Glacier View, invited me to prepare papers 17, 20 and 27). The person or persons in-
for presentation there. What follows is a di- volved in stich cases came to the door of the
gest of a few important points from my ma- tabernacle and presented their cases before
terial on Old Testament sanctuary-judgment the Lord there. The Lord then gave His
theology, Antiochus Epiphanes and applica- judgment in those cases, unfavorable in five
tions of the year-day principle. For readers and favorable in three, and those judgments
interested in more details, copies of my full were then carried out by persons in the camp
manuscript are available through the Biblical or by God himself.
Research Institute. Later references in the Old Testament to
Although Ford does not directly address this type of divine activity come from the
the issue of Old Testament parallels for the prophets and psalms. Some of these instances
investigative judgment, it is important since involved only what we have called "execu-
Seventh-day Adventists have previously tive" judgments, but others included a work
held rather narrow views on this subject (i.e., of investigation into the cases of those in-
that the investigative judgment that began in volved. In some instances, these judgments
beaven in 1844 is utterly unique and repre- were connected with the heavenly temple
sents the only time that God has ever carried (Psalms 11, 14,29,53, 76, 102, 130; 1 Kings
out such a judgment). It is unique in its cos- 22 and Micah 1). In other instances, they
mic scope, but it is not unique in its basic were connected with the earthly temple
nature, as a number of passages in the judg- (Psalms 9, 50, 60, 73, 99; Isa. 6, 18; Amos 1,
ment literature of the Old Testament demon- Mal. 3,]oel2-3 and Eze. 1-10). An example
of the carrying out of such a judgment in the
William H. Shea took his M.D. from Lorna Linda heavenly sanctuary is the case in which the
University and Ph.D. from the University ofMichi-
gan. He teaches Old Testament at the Theological prophet Micaiah ben Imlah was shown and
Seminary, Andrews University. heard the deliberations of the heavenly cotirt
38 Spectrum

in the case of the wicked king Ahab (1 Kings rocosmic scale with the heavenly investiga-
22). Recent Old Testament scholarship has tive judgment.
emphasized the role of the prophet as one
who receives his message from God, residing
in the heavenly court. M any modern scholars
identify the actions
attributed to the little horn of Daniel 8 as
Among the cases of judgment connected prophetic symbols of the actions of An-
with the earthly temple, the one described in tiochus Epiphanes. While Desmond Ford al-
Ezekiel 1-10 comes closest in character to that lows for later reapplications of the basic prin-
which Adventists have posited for the judg- ciple of this prophecy, he accepts the in-
ment that began in heaven in 1844. The es- terpretation which sees the primary and most
sential point of the vision of Ezekiel 1 , which detailed fulfillment of Daniel 8:8-13 in the
commentators have missed by getting second century B.C., in Antiochus' time. 2
bogged down in its details, is that God is in Antiochus Epiphanes (175-164 B.C.) was
motion; He is going somewhere. That the eighth in the line of Seleucid or Hellenis-
somewhere is identified in Ezekiel 10, where tic kings who ruled Mesopotamia, Syria and
the departure of God from His temple in Palestine after the breakup of Alexander's
Jerusalem is described in the same terms as empire. He is well known from the apocry-
those in which His journey there is described phal books of 1 and 2 Maccabees for his at-
in Ezekiel 1. The two visions refer to divine tacks upon the Jews, his suspension of the
activity extending in different directions. Jewish rites in the temple in Jerusalem and his
God is described as traveling to His temple in defilement of the temple and its precincts
Ezekiel 1 and leaving it, for the last time through the celebration of pagan rites and
before its destruction, in Ezekiel 10. The sacrifices there. The temple was liberated
dates at the beginnings of the accounts of from Antiochus' forces in December of 165
these two visions indicate they were given 14 B.C., and the celebration of Hanukkah was
months apart and the second of them was instituted by the Jews to commemorate that
givenjust two years and four months before event.
Nebuchadnezzar began his siege of the city. The reason the interpretation of the little
The visions were a last warning message to horn in Daniel 8 as Antiochus is important
Judah and were given in terms of a special to Adventists in that according to verse 14,
work that God was to perform in His temple. it is in the context of the work of that little
Ezekiel 9 reveals the nature of this special horn that the cleansing or restoration of the
work since it describes how a distinction was sanctuary takes place at the end of the 2,300
to be made among God's people just before days. Ford holds with modern critical schol-
His final departure from His temple. The arship that the sanctuary in Daniel 8:14
righteous who were to be saved from the should refer to its ceremonial cleansing in
soon-coming destruction through exile were December of165 B.C., and not to anything
to be marked, whereas the unrighteous who like a cleansing of a heavenly sanctuary many
were not to be saved were not to be marked. centuries after Antiochus' time in 1844 A.D.
Decisions concerning individual cases be- On the other hand, if one sees the primary
came manifest at the end of the period of and detailed application of the activity of the
God's special work in His temple. Those de- little horn in Daniel 8 as referring to a work
cisions appear to follow as a direct conse- carried out over the centuries by pagan and
quence of God's special work identified as then Christian Rome, as Adventist interpret-
investigative judgment. This judgment ers have in the past, then it is logical to find
brought an end to the era of the Israelite the activity referred to in Daniel 8:14 as oc-
monarchy. Just so, the judgment that began curring at some point far down in the stream
in heaven in 1844 will also bring an end to an of time , such as 1844 A.D.
era, the present era of human history. The From this evident contrast, the question is
judgment in Israel's temple exemplifies in which of these two primary and detailed ap-
microcosm what is to occur on the mac- plications o(tht!_!it~le ~orn in Daniel 8 is
Volume 11, Number 2 39

correct? Is it the earlier Antiochus or the later This word for "prince" appears in only
Rome? The interested reader who wishes to one other passage in Daniel, the prophecy of
study this subject in more detail may com- 9:24-27. In 9:26 the destruction ofJerusalem
pare the treatment of it in chapter two of my is attributed to "the people of the prince
manuscript with Ford's treatment of it in the (nag"id) who is to come." Adventist commen-
third chapter of his manuscript. tators have commonly applied this prophetic
Here we can only touch on one final point phrase to the destruction of Jerusalem in
about the relationship between Antiochus A.D. 70. While I differ in some details as to
Epiphanes and the little horn of Daniel 8, and the way in which that application is made in
that involves the relationship of Daniel 8 and terms of the phraseology of this verse, I agree
that this historical application is the correct
"What is actually clinched is one. Ford holds to the same interpretation of
it.s
the point of view opposite from Daniel 9:27 also says that "he shall make a
Ford's, that Antiochus cannot strong covenant with many for one week."
possibly be the little horn Regardless of whether one identifies the an-
tecedent of "he" in this phrase as the Mes-
of Daniel 8." sianic nag"id of verse 25, the interpretation I
prefer, or as a Roman nag"id from verse 26, we
9 with Daniel 11. Ford maintains that Daniel still have a nilg"id here who makes a covenant.
11 provides the "clincher" in his argument to In terms of either historical application, this
identify the little horn as Antiochus. 3 How- also occurred in the first century A.D. Thus,
ever, he does not really argue this point, but the same two terms found in Daniel 11 :22 are
simply quotes five pages of transcript from linked together here in Daniel 9:26-27, and
the 1919 Bible Conference in support of his these are the only two places in the book
view. 4 where they are found linked together. Daniel
From this transcript, it is evident that H. C. 9:25-27 and Daniel 11:2 are the places where
Lacey held that view in 1919, but that does not the wordnag"id occurs referring to "the prince
necessarily make it any more correct than of the covenant." Therefore, there is a direct
Ford's espousal of it in 1980. The matter and unequivocal equation between these two
must be argued on the basis of the biblical passages. Daniel 9:26-27 and Daniel 11 :22
text and historical correlations with the bibli- refer to the same person, whose action is
cal prophecies. When this is done, I would connected with the covenant. Therefore,
suggest that what is actually clinched is the they must refer to the same time in history.
point of view opposite from Ford's, that An- Both Ford and I apply Daniel 9:26-27 to
tiochus cannot possibly be the little horn of events that occurred in the first century
Daniel 8. A.D., and he has specifically rejected the in- 1
Ford has emphasized repeatedly that terpretation which applies these verses to the 1--·----'--
1
Daniel 11 is an explanation of Daniel 8. With second century B.C. 6 But Daniel 11:22 oc-
this, I wholeheartedly agree. Ford has also curs nine verses before Daniel 11:31, which
emphasized repeatedly that Daniel 11 :31 re- describes the actions of the little horn in
fers to precisely the same work that the little terms essentially equivalent to the terms used
horn was to do according to Daniel 8:11-13. for it in Daniel 8:11-13. Thus, the correlation
With this, I also wholeheartedly agree. The of Daniel 9:26-27 with Daniel 11 :22 and the
problem arises when one compares Daniel correlation of Daniel 8:11-13 with Daniel
11 :22 with the preceding prophecies in the 11:31 indicate that the little horn of Daniel
book. Daniel 11 :22 refers to a historical entity 8:11-13 could only have come on the histori-
that was to break "the prince of the cove- cal scene of action after the first century A.D.
nant." In contrast to the Hebrew word sar, In this way, Daniel 11 provides the" clincher"
W h'
__ lCh' h common ,vor rl__r.or "prmce
__ IS L_e . " that demonstrates that the little horn of
elsewhere in Daniel, 11 :22 uses the Hebrew Daniel 8 cannot be Antiochus Epiphanes.
word nag"id to refer to this particular prince. The reason why Ford's work leads to this
40 Spectrum

problem is that he has attempted to follow The question then is, what is the antece-
two different schools of prophetic interpreta- dent of the word vision in Danie18:13? The
tion in these different prophecies. He has fol- most logical answer is that which the prophet
lowed the preterist - "it-all-happened- saw up to the time this question was asked, or
back-then" - school of interpretation on the prophet's view of what is described in the
chapters 8 and 11, and the historicist - "it- preceding 11 verses of Daniel 8 . There is only
has-happened-through-the-course-of-histo- one vision here, not two. Thus, the time
ry" - school in chapter 9. Adventists have period for the vision in the question of Daniel
previously accepted the historicist approach 8:13 should begin with the Persian ram with
and rejected the preterist interpretation. Ford which the vision of chapter 8 began. The
has attempted to reconcile these differences 2,300 days should start, therefore, some time
through the use of his apotelesmatic principle during the Persian period;9
(see below), but recourse to this theory has Ford has emphasized that Daniel 11 ex-
not resolved mutually contradictory in- plains Daniel 8. This position is quite sound
terpretations, as in this instance. and can be seen by comparing the contents of
chapters 8 and 11. The prophecy of Daniel 8

A dventist interpreters
of Daniel and Revela-
tion have previously held that the references
is given in terms of symbols, whereas the
prophecy of Daniel 11 provides a narrative
description of naturally recognizable politi-
to time which occur in their prophecies are cal actions of individual kings, and they
symbolic and should be interpreted accord- cover the same periods of history. The Per-
ing to the nile of a day for a year. Ford holds sian ram and the Greek goat and its horns in
that these time periods should be interpreted chapter 8 are described in chapter 11 in terms
literally. 7 As Ford himself has pointed out in of the actions of the successive rulers of
his earlier works, 8 there are a number of good
biblical reasons why the time periods in "Ford has now also come to
apocalyptic prophecies should be interpreted
according to the year-day principle. I will rej ect all the historical
restrict myself here to but one example of its dates that he formerly applied
use since that example comes directly from to the prophecies ofDartiel
Daniel and since it relates to the time period
which is most disputed here, the 2,300 days and Revelation. . . ."
of Daniel 8.
In considering this time period, it is impor- which the kingdoms depicted by those sym-
tant to notice the specific phraseology of the bols were composed.
question it was given to answer, "For how The same point can be made about the time
long is the vision concerning the continual elements in these two prophecies. In three
burnt offering, the transgression that makes passages of Daniel 11, the actions ofHellenis-
desolate, ... ", etc. (Daniel 8:13). The word tic kings of the third and second centuries
for vision carries the most important B. C. are referred to as occurring over periods
chronological implications in this question. of "years" (vv. 6,8 and 13). In chapter 8, we
The question is how long will the vision last, have symbolic time referred to in connection
not how long will any of the individual con- with symbolic figures, the 2,300 days of
ditions seen in that vision last. The distinc- verse 14, while in chapter 11 we have normal
tion is made clear from a comparison with time periods of "years" referred to in connec-
Daniel 12:11 , which refers to two of the same tion with the description of natural actions of
conditions referred to here and gives their recognizable kings. Since these time ele-
duration as 1,290 days. Thus, the 1,290 days, ments span the same historical period, a
during which these particular conditions comparison of the two chapters indicates the
were to obtain, comprised only a part of the years of chapter 11 should be utilized in in-
whole period of 2,300 days which spanned terpreting the days of chapter 8. The book of
the vision. [)~l1ie1 itself provides us with the year-day
Volume 11, Number 2 41

principle, and it is most directly connected What Ford has confused here is the ques-
there with the prophecy of the 2,300 days. tion of whether the Jews followed this
As a natural consequence of his rejection of Persian-Babylonian reckoning or applied
the year-day principle, Ford has now also their own fall-to-fall calendar to Artaxerxes'
come to reject all of the historical dates that regnal years. Since the dates in Nehemiah 1: 1
he formerly applied to the prophecies of and 2:1 can only be harmonized by
Daniel and Revelation in common with other Nehemiah's application of a fall-to-fall
Adventist interpreters. lO Ford's across-the- calendar to the twentieth year of the same
board rejection of all historicochronological king, there is direct contemporary biblical
applications of all time elements in apocalyp- evidence that this was the custom of the Jews
tic prophecies continues throughout the at that time. Thus, they dated Artaxerxes'
book of Revelation. 11 This dramatic reversal seventh year from Tishri in the fall of 458
in interpretation has occurred in a period of B. C. to Elul in the fall of457 B. C., and this is
less than two years since Ford's book on the year from which Adventist interpreters
Daniel was published. When Elder Par- have correctly reckoned the beginning of the
menter questioned Ford on this point from 70 weeks and the 2,300 days.
the floor of that conference, Ford replied that
he stood by 98 percent of what he had written
in Daniel. Elder Parmenter objected that the
difference· between Daniel and the present
F ord does not feel that
he has found suffi-
cient biblical evidence with which to support
manuscript was considerably greater than the doctrine of an investigative judgment
two percent. I agree that Ford's figure repre- that began in heaven in 1844. That poses the
sents a gross underestimation of the differ- problem of explaining the historical origin
ences involved. If there is just a two percent and reason for existence of the Seventh-day
difference between these two works, it surely Adventist Church, since it developed out of
is a critical two percent which has shifted an understanding of this prophetic teaching.
Ford from one school of prophetic interpre- Ford has attempted to solve this problem by
tation into another. the use of what he calls the apotelesmatic
Two historical dates have been selected principle: "It seems to this writer that the
here to represent the kind of problems one apotelesmatic principle is the very key we
runs into in examining Ford's reasons for need to authenticate our denominational ap-
denying their prophetic application. In his propriation of Daniel 8:14 to our own time
discussion of the 70 weeks of Daniel 9, Ford and work."13 He has defined the apotelesma-
stated, " . . . the date of 457 B.C. for the tic principle as affirming" ... that a prophecy
seventh year of Artaxerxes [is] still a matter fulfilled or fulfilled in part, or unfulfilled at
of considerable dispute, ... "12 The date of the appointed time, may have a later or recur-
the seventh year of Artaxerxes I is not a mat- ring, or consummated fulfillment."14
ter of considerable dispute. It has been fixed The idea that a prophecy may have more
through four lines of chronological evidence: than one fulfillment is not new among either
1) Ptolemy's Canon, 2) the complete list of Adventist or non-Adventist interpreters.
regnal years for the Persian kings in the What is new is the wholesale use to which
Neo-Babylonian contract tablets, 3) Ford has put this idea. Dahiel8:14 is a classi-
double-dates from the fifth century Aramaic cal case in point. According to Ford, it fits,
papyri from Egypt, and 4) data from classical ... not only the victory over the typical
historians. From these sources, the seventh Antichrist, Antiochus in 165 B.C., but the
year of Artaxerx~s can be fixed securely as great redemption of the cross, and its final
extending from Nisan in the spring of 458 application in the last judgment . . . . It
B.C. to Adar in the spring of 457 B.C., ac- applies also to every revival of true religion
cording to the Julian calendar. I know of no where the elements of the kingdom of
modern chronographer of the ancient Near God, mirrored in the sanctuary by the
East who disputes this well-established stone tablets and the mercy seat, are pro-
datum, claimed afresh, as at1844. 15
 42 Spectrum

Beyond that, it also refers to "the establish- apotelesmatic principle, Ford's Daniel indi-
ment of the new temple - first, the Christian cates that he holds that the principle should
Church; secondly, the new earth with its be applied to Daniel, but only in selected
New Jerusalem as the throne of God and the portions. Thus, Ford rejects several dates tra-
everlasting temple."16 ditionally associated with the time
Thus, the fulfillment of this prophecy has prophecies of Daniel, when, according to the
been generalized to such an extent that it can apotelesmatic principle, they should have all
mean almost anything good in the history of been accepted.
Israel, in the history of the church, and what- In the Glacier View manuscript, Ford has
ever happens for all eternity after the Second cited E. G. White in support of his applica- J
Corning of Christ. The one thing it cannot tion of the apotelesmatic principle to the
mean and to which Ford never applies the prophecies of Daniel. As far as I can deter-
apotelesmatic principle in Daniel 8:14 is a mine, none of the passages cited support such
judgment that began in heaven in 1844. Ford an application. The apotelesmatic connection
has spent ten pages of his recent manuscript of Daniel 8:13 with Matthew 24:15 is Ford's,
not Ellen White's .19 Patriarchs and Prophets (p.
"The final question here is, 358) is talking about Leviticus 16, not Daniel
whois right, the pioneers or 8:14 or 12:2.20 E. G. White has borrowed the
Ford? More accurate exegesis of phrase "to bring in everlasting righteouness"
homileticallyin Selected Messages, vol. 1, p.
the biblical text suggests 374. She is not reapplying the prophecy of
that the pioneers were right. . . ." Daniel 9:24 there. 21 The recurrence of his tor-
ical scenes from Daniel 11 is not the same
criticizing pioneer and current Adventist in- thing as reapplying verses from its prophecy
terpretations of this verse because they do not in Letter 104. 22
- in his view - answer the problem posed The ultimate irony in the controversy that
by the context of Daniel 8:9-13 . The question Ford has raised in this way is that he offers the
may reasonably be asked here whether Ford's apotelesmatic principle to the Church as the
extreme generalization of Daniel 8:14 fits the solution to the problem he sees in Daniel
discrete historical context of Daniel 8:10-13 8:14. It actually is his own refusal to employ
any better than those interpretations which his own principle that has created this prob-
he has criticized. lem. This is particularly the case in two im-
Ford holds that all of the positive points portant and linked instances. In his thesis,
from all of the schools of prophetic interpre- Ford did not use what he now calls the
tation should be accepted through the apotelesmatic principle to interpret the
apotelesmatic principle. His justification for prophecy of Mark 13 so that it might apply to
this, and thus the philosophical basis for the both the generation of the apostles and our
apotelesmatic principle, is his oft-repeated modern generation. For him, Mark 13 was i.
>

maxim that interpreters are "right in what intended to have occurred in the first century
they affirm, and wrong in what they and the first century only. No interpretation
deny."18 No further justification for this of it , apotelesmatic or otherwise, can allow it J-
basic premise of the apotelesmatic principle to apply to a time beyond then.
has been advanced, and its mere assertion is On this basis, none of the prophecies of
not, of course, proof ofits correctness. What Daniel could have had as their primary in-
this statement really says is that there are no tent, either in the mind of God or Daniel, any
such things as two mutually exclusive asser- extension of time beyond the first century
tions when those assertions are cast as posi- A.D. All of the time prophecies of Daniel
tive propositions. What this leads to is the must be shortened to meet this goal, accord-
nonfalsifiability of positive propositions and ing to Ford, and none of them could have
the non verifiability of negative proposi- been intended to have stretched to any time
tions. In contrast to his treatment of Mark 13 of the end after 1798 or 1844. This has led to
_ in~_i~_~~~~~~t_~~!?!1,wherehe [l~~er applied the the second problem not solved by the
Volume 11, Number 2 43

apotelesmatic principle: Ford's refusal to solve. The final question here is, who is
apply it to Daniel 8:14 in such a way as to right, the pioneers or Ford? More accUrate
accept the pioneers' interpretation of it. exegesis of the biblical text suggests that the
Daniel 8:14 can be applied to a preaching of pioneers were right in their final conclusion
the gospel at any time between Daniel's time about Daniel 8:14, but time and space do not
and our time, or it can be applied to the permit an examination of that side of this
establishment of the church in the New controversy. For the time being, we must let
Earth, but it cannot be applied to an inves- this matter rest with an application of Ford's
tigative judgment that began in heaven in own principle to this problem. The pioneers
1844. affirmed that an investigative judgment
Thus it is Ford's failure to apply his own began in heaven in 1844 on the basis of their
apotelesmatic principle to Mark 13 and interpretation of Daniel 8:14. Ford denies
Daniel 8:14 that has created the very con- this. Interpreters are "right in what they af-
troversy which he says he has proposed it to firm, and wrong in what they deny."23

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. My answer is developed in "Daniel and the vision actually begins with Medo-Persia, and thus we
Judgment," the paper presented at Glacier View. It would expect that the 2,300-day period should
considers the applicability of the year-day principle, as likewise begin in the days of that empire."
well as such topics as "Why Antiochus Epiphanes is 10. On pp. 292 and 323 of his Glacier View manu-
not the Little Horn of Daniel 8," and "The Judgment script, Ford rejects the idea that the three and a half
in Daniel 7 ." Desmond Ford's position is developed in times prophecy of Daniel 7:25 began in 538 A.D. and
his thousand-page manuscript, "Daniel 8:14, the Day ended in 1798. On pp. 287-88, Ford rejects the in-
of Atonement, and the InvestigativeJudgment." For terpretation that the 2,300 days prophecy of Daniel
purposes of the present discussion, I have also referred 8:14 began in 457 B.C. and ended in 1844. On pp.
to Ford's doctoral dissertation, The Abomination oj 288-89, he also rejects the belief that the 70 weeks
Desolation in Biblical Eschatology (Washington, D.C.: prophecy of Daniel 9:24-27 begins in 457 B.C. and
University Press, 1979), and to his commentary, applies to 408 B.C., 23 A.D., 31 A.D. and 34 A.D.
Daniel (Nashville: Southern Publ. Assn., 1978).
2. Ford, Glacier View manuscript, pp. 377-83. 11. Ford, manuscript, pp. 292, 325-26.
3. Ibid., p. 383; quotation marks are his. 12. Ibid. , p. 320.
4. Ibid., pp. 384-88. 13. Ibid., p. 345.
5. Ford,Daniel,p.232. 14. Ibid., p. 485.
6. Ibid., p. 208. 15. Ibid., p. 356.
7. Ford, manuscript, p. 330. 16. Ibid., p. 420.
8. Ibid., A 137-42; Daniel, pp. 300-305. 17. Ibid., pp. 346-56.
9. Ford has made the same point in his commen- 18. Ford, dissertation, p. 74; Daniel, p. 68; manu-
tary on Daniel, an exegetically sound position which script, p. 505.
he now unfortunately rejects in his manuscript, pp. 19. Ford, manuscript, pp. 484, 526.
346-88. In Daniel, p. 188, he states: "Furthermore, it 20. Ibid., p. 504.
should be noted carefully that the question is not 21. Ibid., p. 503.
merely, 'How long shall the sanctuary be trodden 22. Ibid. , p. 492.
underfoot?' but, 'For how long is the vision that cul- 23. Ford, dissertation, p. 74; Daniel, p. 68; manu-
minates in the terrible work of the little horn?' The script, p. 505.

~
1I
;
 ConfidenceinSllivation: The
Meaning of the Sanctuary
by Fritz Guy

F or the earliest Sev-

enth-day Adventists,
the doctrine of the sanctuary was "the key
including apocalyptic movements/ and we
recognize the historical conditionedness of
theological understanding. Furthermore, we
which unlocked the mystery of the disap- have not lived through the Advent expecta-
pointment of 1844."1 So, far from being tion of 1844 or its bitter disappointment;
merely an interesting insight into an aspect of however much we respect the Adventist
transcendent reality, it was for them the pioneers and want to identify with their ex-
theological validation of their experience and perience, it remains their experience, not
their hopes. It was the means by which these ours. So we must ask the question, What
Adventists could come to terms with their does the doctrine of the sanctuary mean for
unfulfilled expectations, in which they had us today, in 19807 What is its theological and
invested both their financial resources and experiential significance now? What differ-
their religious identity - indeed, the very ence does it - or should it - make in our
meaning of their lives. 2 In that moment of lives?
extraordinary spiritual intensity, the doctrine If we cannot answer this kind of question,
of the sanctuary "opened to view a complete or if we do not attend to it, we should not be
system of truth, connected and harmonious, surprised if the doctrine of the sanctuary is
showing that God's hand had directed the regarded, by most people outside Adventism
great Advent movement and revealing pres- and by some within, as a theological curios-
ent duty as it brought to light the position ity, a relic of the mid-nineteenth century -
. and work of His people."3 Thus, they could as strange and as irrelevant to our present
see that, although they had been mistaken, lives as a celluloid collar or a buggy whip.
they had not been utterly deluded; and they The construction of a fully developed, in-
still had a mission and a message. 4 telligible understanding of the sanctuary is
That, however, was 136 years ago, in a part of the present vocation of Adventism. It
historical situation that was very different is part of our obligation to the contemporary
from ours. In terms of technological and cul- Christian world - along with a theology of
tural change, we are as far removed from the Sabbath and a theology of the Second
1844 as 1844 was from the time of the New Advent. To be an Adventist means experi-
Testament. Ours is a time of hand-held elec- encing holy time as the presence of ultimacy
tronic calculators, instant global communi- in our lives, with its implications of both
cation (audio plus video in color) and jet lag. dignity and responsibility. It certainly means
Ours is also a time when we are aware of the looking to the future as the divinely initiated
sociological dynamics of religious groups, realization of our hope and the fulfillment of
our destiny. But being an Adventist also
means to know the liberating assurance of the
Fritz Guy, associate dean of the Theological Semi-
nary, Andrews University, took his doctorate in sys- ongoing ministry of our High Priest in the
tematic theology from the University of Chicago. immediate presence of God.
 Volume 11, Number 2 45

Many persons in many disciplines and curiosity about this particular kind of reality;
with many different backgrounds of culture, their purpose is rather to communicate an
education and experience need to participate understanding of God and His attitudes, con-
in exploring the meaning of the heavenly cerns and actions in relation to the created
sanctuary. What is important is not what we universe. In other words, the corre-
think about architecture, but how we relate spondence between earthly and heavenly re-
what is being accomplished there to our un- ality is best understood in terms of eternal
derstanding about God and ourselves. principles, ultimate values and interpersonal
relationships. For example, the "books of

T he basic meaning of
the sanctuary is that
God continues to act redemptively. The
heaven" may be seen as symbols of the fact -
all too easily ignored in our present existence
- that our decisions and actions have an
ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary enduring effect; they "make a difference"
is a revelatory symbol of continuing divine both for God and for the totality of created
activity. reality.
This general understanding may be sup- But it is essential that this negative argu-
ported by both positive and negative reason- ment about the meaning of the sanctuary in
ing. The positive argument is simple enough heaven be properly understood. It is by no
and comes from the fact that Hebrews 8:5 means a subjectivist or existentialist "de-
describes the Old Testament sanctuary as "a mythologizing" of the language with which
copy [hupodeigma] and shadow [skia] of the we talk about heaven and its sanctuary. It is
heavenly sanctuary." This is a continuation not a "projection" of human feelings or ex-
of the general New Testament understand- perience onto a "cosmic screen." On the con-
ing that salvation inJesus the Messiah is the trary, it explicitly affirms an objective, trans-
fulfillment and thus the ultimate significance cendent reality to which this language refers.
of the ancient ritual. The evident corre- The point of this symbolic language is to
spondence between the Old Testament indicate that, although the exact nature of
sanctuary and the sanctuary in heaven is in this reality is not known (or knowable) by
itself enough to suggest a similarity of func- human beings, the fact of its reality and its
tion. revelatory function are indeed known, and
The negative argument is somewhat more therefore that it is meaningful to us. To use
. complicated. First, the significance of any . the vocabulary of some recent philosophers
element of created reality is not found in the of religion: like God-talk, sanctuary-talk has
nature of its matter or structure, but rather its cognitive significance. Since reality is not
function. Thus, for example, the meaning of identical with empirical specifiability, mean-
the bread and wine of the Lord's Supper de- ing is not limited to literal signification.
rives not from their "breadness" and "wine- As a symbol of the saving activity of God,
ness" but from their function of making the the sanctuary in heaven presumably exists
self-sacrifice and suffering of God in the and functions for someone's benefit. But
death ofJesus newly present to our awareness surely not God's; for salvation is His idea and
and powerful in our lives. Second, we are activity, and the heavenly sanctuary is His
almost wholly ignorant of the nature of way of communicating its meaning. The
heaven; all we know about it is that it is the purpose and function of this sanctuary are
transcendent reality where the presence of thus evidently for the benefit of created be-
God is "centered" or "most readily per- ings; it is a means by which finite intelligence
ceived," and that the difference between can better understand the infinite God's solu-
earthly and heavenly reality is not absolute, tion to the complex problem of sin. What
for that would make it impossible for us to then is its message, its revelation? What can it
understand anything at all about it. So the say that has not been said already - and
revelatory purpose of the various descrip- better - in the historical revelation of the
tions of heaven (such as those in Ezekiel, ministry, death and resurrection ofJesus of
Dan:i~~c.~!l.c!::g~Y:~!~~~21?:}~s no t .!o satisfy . <?ur Nazareth?
46 Spectrum

If part of the total solution of the problem of Christ's intercession in the heavenly
of sin is to "vindicate the character of God sanctuary is that through Him we can have
before the universe,"7 it is certainly plausible immediate, direct access to the God of the
to suppose that the sanctuary in heaven may universe. This is the central thesis of Heb-
have some revelatory function for the benefit rews: Christ is our Mediator. Although God
of nonhuman, moral beings. If this is so, then is the Infinite and Self-Existent One, who is
the sanctuary in heaven is a means by which never less than, and never other than, abso-
the moral universe as a whole is involved in lute holiness and whose majesty is a consum-
the solution of the problem of sin. For this ing fire (Heb. 12:29), there is no barrier, no
solution - which includes not only the di-
vine forgiveness that makes possible the sal- "The ministry of Christ as our
vation of human beings, but also the revela-
tion of the character of God that ensures the High Priest in heaven means
security of the universe - is in fact a solution that His death on the cross is
only ifit is understood to be a solution. (Here utterly unique in that it remains
we may well recall that it is the function of
religious and theological symbols not only to fully and powerfully present."
point to a reality other than themselves, but
also to facilitate the experience of that reali- waiting period. The holiness of deity is not
ty.8 Presumably, this is true for the whole of diminished, and the frailty of humanity is not
the intelligent universe and not only for denied; but the ontological and moral dis-
human beings.) tance between deity and humanity is bridged
But surely there is more to the meaning of by our High Priest, who is Himself the
the biblical language about the heavenly Bridge. 9
sanctuary than its possible revelatory func- We may understand this access to God as
tion for the larger universe. For the refer- comprising three interrelated elements. First,
ences in Hebrews, as well as those in Revela- because our Intercessor is truly human and
tion, quite clearly intend to communicate a has genuinely confronted the temptation,
meaning that is directly and experientially evil and ambiguity of our existence, He is
relevant to their readers - in the first place, "with" us and "belongs" to us. He knows
to the early Christian communities, and, in what our life is, and thus He is "our man in
the second place, to their spiritual descen- heaven."lo Not only was incarnation a neces-
dants. It is the failure of Christianity as a sary qualification for His priesthood, but it
whole to recognize and grasp this meaning also continues to be part of the meaning of
that gives contemporary Adventism the re- that priesthood. Second, through Him we
sponsibility of systematically developing and know what God is; we have access to the
effectively expressing a theology of the inner character of deity. Christ is the
sanctuary. "knowability" of God. l l In Him we recog-
,
nize that it is the nature of God to be self-
giving, suffering love, which takes concrete

I n addition to defin-
ing the meaning of
the heavenly sanctuary, another part of our
form in His concern for the deprived and
despised (Matt. 25:31-46), in His forgiveness
and restoration of sinners Oohn 8:2-11), in
task is identifying and explicating its signifi- His joy over the recovery of the lost (Luke
cance for our understanding ofother subjects 15). And third, in Christ the problem of sin is
such as God, creation and humanity, Christ, entirely and permanently solved; the barrier
salvation, the Christian life, the church and of sin that would otherwise have beenabso-
the end of history . We will explore these lute and eternal is penetrated by His death
implications in relation to the two aspects of and resurrection. In short, the fact that Christ
Christ's ministry in the sanctuary: interces- is our High Priest means that the Wholly
sion and judgment. Other is the Wholly Accessible.
. The fIrst and mosJ.iIl!Po~t~!ltim~lif~t~QP Anotherimplication()f the intercession of
Volume 11, Number 2 47

Christ is that God is still active in our behalf; despair. And if we sin in spite of this assist-
the work of salvation continues. In a certain ance, there is forgiveness: "We have an ad-
sense, atonement is still going on. "Atone- vocate with the Father" (1 John 2:1).
ment" is first of all God's giving of Himself
for us in His Son. This is the great event of
reconciliation (2 Cor. 5:18-19). But the activ-
ity of atonement does not stop there; it is a
present process as well as a past event.
A third implication of
the intercession of
our High Priest is that our salvation is an
This quality of continuation is what makes objective fact. The basis of our confidence is
the death of Jesus different from all other not our own experience. We are notoriously
events in history. Many events have been subject to the influence of our own
important and have changed the course of biochemistry, the actions and attitudes of
history: the death of Socrates, the fall of other people and even the weather. We have
Rome, the Declaration ofIndependence. But struggle with sin; we have questions we
however momentous, their impact inevita- cannot answer, problems we cannot solve,
bly decreases in the course of time, as they doubts we cannot deny. But in spite of all
merge into the totality of historical actuality. this, our assurance remains. For "Jesus as
Like a rock thrown into a lake, they make an High Priest is a fixed, immovable datum. No
initial splash, and their ripples move outward matter what we mayfeel or opponents of our
in an expanding circle; but the ripples also get religion may assert, He remains High Priest
progressively smaller as they expand in di- in heaven for US."'13
ameter. The ministry of Christ as our High The fact that salvation is an objective real-
Priest in heaven means that His death on the ity reminds us also that it is entirely a matter
cross is utterly unique in that it remains fully of grace. On this, the Puritans were right: as
and powerfully present; its importance to long as we have a High Priest in heaven, not
God and to humanity is as great now as it has only is there no room for the mediation of a
ever been. It does not fade away.12 human priesthood, neither is there room for
Significantly, we do not say that Christ the feeling of human achievement. Just as the
was our High Priest; we say that He is our event of atonement at the cross is a gift, so the
High Priest. He not only did something to ongoing process of atonement is a gift. Any-
save us 19 and a half centuries ago; He is thing we may do by way of witness or ser-
active for us now, today, at this very mo- vice, any victory over sin we may experi-
ment. The process of reconciliation, of for- ence, is necessarily preceded by and depen-
giveness, of healing; of restoring broken rela- dent on the ministry of our High Priest.
tionships and shattered lives - all this goes Yet a fourth implication of this interces-
on, because "He always lives to make inter- sory ministry is that human beings have
cession" for "those who draw near to God transcendent significance. This significance,
through Him" (Heb. 7:25). Thus, the this dignity, appears in two respects. On the
atonement made at the cross becomes one hand, the ministry of our High Priest is
atonement for us. (This is, quite obviously, located in heaven itself, which is the heart and
not a suggestion that the atonement at the epitome of created reality; intercession for us
cross was in any way incomplete or insuffi- there signifies the cosmic relevance of our
cient; on the contrary, the fact that we can salvation. And on the other hand, our High
speak of atonement as a continuing process is Priest ministers in our behalf in the im-
a result of the perfect adequacy of the atone- mediate presence of God - literally, "in the
ment as a saving event.) face of God" (to prosopo tou theou, Heb.
God's ongoing activity in our behalf may 9:24). Thus, the shape and meaning of our
be seen in the continuing presence of trans- human lives make a difference to the Ulti-
cendent grace in our lives. The intercession mate Reality that is the reason and ground of
of our High Priest means that there is assist- all reality.
ance to resist the Enemy, who tempts not A fifth implication of Christ's ongoing in-
o~!~:::tc() ~s~!l: b~talso to discouragement and tercession is that the church is thecommu-
48 Spectrum

nity of the great High Priest. That is, His as members of the total reality of human be-
ministry, which is the continuing actualiza- ing, but as individual persons. In the "books"
tion of the atonement made at the cross, is the mentioned in some of the apocalyptic de-
focus of the church's worship and the basis of scriptions ofjudgment, there are "names,"15
its unity. This is the center of its life, the indicating the transcendent significance of
motivation of its mission and the source of its personal identity. We are not merely parts of
power. The church may have plans and pro- a larger whole; the meaning of our existence
grams, and it may "manage by objectives"; is not finally dependent on the communities
but it knows itself to be the community of the (familial, ethnic, religious, national) to
High Priest. It is, therefore, essentially a which we belong, often with little or no •
community that worships, that is concerned choice in the matter. Although we are cer-
more about what He is doing than about tainly influenced by these communities and
what it is doing. 14 our relationships to them and within them,
As the community of the High Priest, it our destiny is finally determined by our own
knows that any kind of human mediation is decisions regarding .the values and ideals with
not only unnecessary, but also impossible; no which we identify our individual selfhood.
earthly authorization is required or adequate And insofar as eschatological judgment in-
to establish the ultimate meaning of one's volves the divine confirmation and disclo-
life. Therefore, we can say that there are no sure of these decisions, our individual lives
priests; there is only the One High Priest. Or have a cosmic impact; they are a testimony to
we can make precisely the same point in the our personal evaluation of the issues of the
opposite way: we can say (with Luther and "great controversy" between ultimate good
Calvin) that we are all priests; for we are all and ultimate evil.
alike incorporated into His transcendent God also takes us seriously as responsible
priesthood, and we are all called to minister persons whose decisions He will respect even
divine grace with Him. Thus, we are a com- if they contradict His intentions for us and
munity with a High Priest as our Head and our destiny. So the nature of our final future
with His preisthood as our vocation. is determined by our own choices, not
To integrate these five implications into a God's.
single idea is to recapitulate the meaning of In the second place, divine judgment
Hebrews in a single powerful word: assur- means that all of our decisions and actions are
ance. "Let us then with confidence draw near important; nothing is irrelevant or inconse-
to the throne of grace, that we may receive quential, and nothing is meaningless or
mercy and find grace to help in time of need" worthless. There is significance even in the
(Heb. 4:16). Because we can have immediate, "idle word" (Matt. 12:36), for our spontane-
direct access to God, because God is still ac- ous, unplanned and un-self-conscious talk is
tive in our behalf, because our salvation is an often a distressingly accurate reflection of our
objective reality, because human being has inner attitudes and our real identity. Fur-
transcendent significance and because we are thermore, most overt actions have some im-
a community that is called to share His pact on others, influencing their lives in one
priesthood - in short, because of the minis- way or another. And finally, every decision
try of our High Priest, we can live in full is potentially determinative of eternal des-
assurance. tiny, since it can function as a turn from
which there is no turning back.

T urning to the other

complementary as-
pect of the high-priestly ministry of Christ,
The total inclusiveness of divine judgment
is also a reminder that there is significance
also in intentions and efforts that seem fruit-
we see equally clear and equally important. less. In a world which, even at its best, is
theological implications of the work of distorted by sin, our most diligent work is
judgment. often unsuccessful and our highest motives
In the first place, the fact of judgment may be misunderstood. The judgment,
means that God takes us serioy:sly, Il()tonly h()'W~\Tet:, affirms the fact that they are not
Volume 11, Number 2 49

wasted and that they do make a difference, judgment and of eschatological plagues
for the whole of our lives has eternal value. (Rev. 14:15; 15:4-5).
In the third place, divine judgment means In the fourth place, the divine judgment
that there is a transcendent moral order, a means that sin is not eternal; it is a temporary
fundamental moral dynamic, in the created distortion of the created order. Sin is not
universe. Thus actions, decisions and choices intrinsic to the nature of reality, and its effi-
have moral as well as physical consequences. cacy and duration are subject to the limits
Without such a moral order, truly human imposed by God. Often it seems that de-
existence would not be possible; for human- monic powers in fact control the world -
ity is characterized by moral sensitivity and that evil is stronger than good, that hostility
moral responsibility, and neither could occur is more effective than love, that selfishness is
apart from a moral order. more prosperous than generosity. Both na-
In this context, it is obvious that a relation ture and history seem to produce more bru-
to Christ is never merely a verbal claim; it tality and tragedy than creativity and happi-
always has behavioral consequences. It may ness, and the distribution of suffering is
be easy to say that Christ is Lord; but what wretchedly uneven. But the judgment means
finally counts is a genuine, and therefore ac- that these appearances do not accurately rep-
tive, commitment to His Father's will (Matt. resent the reality of the universe, and that the
7 :21). This is why "it is the consistent teach- Enemy does not have the last word. That
ing of the New Testament that judgment will word belongs to Christ, the High Priest and
be according to works." 16 It is not, however, Judge who "will appear a second time ... to
what is accomplished that is the basis of di- bring salvation to those who are watching for
vine judgment, but the seriousness of the Him" (Heb. 9:28). The fact of judgment
commitment to act. means the ultimate triumph of love.
So the divine judgment associated with the
ministry of the High Priest in the heavenly
"The fact ofjudgment means sanctuary means, among other things, that
that God takes us seriously, not God takes us seriously as responsible per-
sons, that the totality of our lives is impor-
only as members of the total tant, that there is an eternal moral order in the
reality of human being, but universe and that sin is only temporary in the
as individual persons. " universe. These implications, while sober-
ing, combine to provide a profound sense of
security - the same sense that was the initial
The reality of the moral order means that intention of the apocalyptic documents
sin cannot be ignored or taken lightly, either which bring together the ideas of the
by God or by created moral beings; for sin is sanctuary, divine judgment and the end of
inimical to the future security of the universe. history.
Because sin is rebellion against God, it is
separation from the only Source of being. O u r further thinking
Thus, it may be regarded as inherently self- about the Sanctuary
destructive. Because sin is also a misrepresen- may be clarified by the use of a simple con-
tation of reality and therefore deceptive, it is ceptual model. The purpose of this model is .
intrinsically dangerous to other reality. Sin is to understand the relationship of the two
disastrously contagious. Inasmuch as it is the complementary aspects of Christ's ministry
very nature of God to care for His creation, as High Priest: intercession, as emphasized in
He reacts against sin to destroy it. So we may Hebrews; and judgment, as pictured in the
also regard the end of sin as an act of divine visions of Daniel and John.
judgment which radically rejects the sin that These aspects may be regarded as two sides
has rejected and contradicted God's love. So of the same reality. That is, there is an intrin-
the heavenly temple is appropriately de- sic relationship between them, so that we
scrib~d ·as the sourceof~p~:'>:t!Q~l!f~J!lJ!_1!!~~qf:c_~£;lB!l2!:~P~~~:2feither.()_ne(Wt:hemproperly
 50 Spectrum

and adequately without recognizing the real- ing actualization of the self-giving love ex-
ity of the other. Thus, for example, interces- pressed at the cross.
sion inevitably points to judgment. For in- It is thus understandable that when,
tercession is the availability of the salvation through the operation of the Holy Spirit, a
made possible at the cross; it is a gift of grace, sense of the end of history is dominant in the
an act of God on our behalf that is either religious consciousness, as it was in the bibli-
accepted or rejected, claimed or repudiated, cal apocalyptic visions and again among the
by its intended beneficiary. And the gra- Adventists of the 1840s, the work of the High
ciousness of the gift makes the positive or Priest is viewed primarily and properly in
negative response to it the decisive es- terms ofjudgment . And at the end of history ,
chatological issue. Again, looking at the rela- as the "great controversy" comes to its
tionship from the opposite direction, we see earthly climax - that is, as the Gospel is
that judgment presupposes intercession. preached in its fullness and with unprece-
So we can understand intercession as the dented power and as demonic activity in-
work of the High Priest viewed from the creases in intensity - the awareness of
standpoint of the cross, and judgment as the judgment is more profound than ever. Be-
work of the High Priest viewed from the cause this climax does not "just happen" on
standpoint of the end of history: earth, but is the result of God's own activity
in finishing His work, it is appropriately un-
derstood as the final work of our great High

-
:.....:s MINISTRY ....o
n
0;
OF THE
o
~

S_END OF
Priest. While this is not the whole meaning of
the ministry of Christ in the heavenly
sanctuary, it is a meaning that is both correct
and necessary in an authentically Adventist
CROSS-~
en HIGH ~ HISTORY theology of the sanctuary . Yet it is best un-
.....
en
::s
o PRIEST !:"""'> derstood when its essential relation to the
::s~ L-.._ _ _ _- - - '
intercessory ministry of Christ is kept clearly
in mind. _
There seems to be no question about the
Although the reality will, of course, appear theological or experiential value of our doc-
quite differently when viewed from the two trine of the sanctuary. If we take it as seri-
different standpoints, it remains the same re- ously as we should and study it as thoroughly
ality. From either direction, it is the work of as we should, it will reveal a depth we have
the one great High Priest whose priesthood is only begun to realize. It can become for us as
absolutely unique because His offering was exciting and powerful as it was to the earliest
Himself and whose ministry is the continu- Seventh-day Adventists.

APPENDIX: BIBLICAL AND HISTORICAL

DEVELOPMENT

Although much of the ground is familiar, it will be entire sanctuary ritual with atonement is further con-
useful for us to review the developing understanding firmed in the description of various kinds of temple
of the meaning of the sanctuary, beginning with the offerings (Lev. 1-7). The ritual climax is the annual
biblical materials and continuing through historical, Day of Atonement, which involves a ceremony of
- contemporary and Adventist theology. atonement for the sanctury itself as well as the people
Biblical development. The whole Old Testament cul- (Lev. 16). Later, with the figure of the Suffering Ser-
tic ritual was related to the idea of atonement; that is, it vant who gives himself as a sin offering (Isa. 53), the
was always a response to, and in some sense a remedy idea of sacrifice as the solution to the problem of sin is
for, the human predicament of guilt and alienation transposed into a new key.
resulting from sin. From the very first accounts, this is In the New Testament documents, the understand-
the meaning and function of sacrifice - from Cain ing of the sanctuary is developed in at least two ways.
and Abel through Noah, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob to The first applies the sanctuary symbolism to the mis-
Moses. The first uses of the words for "atonement" sion of Jesus the Messiah. Jesus understands Himself
(Heb. kaphar, kippurim) occur in the instruction re- as giving His life "as a ransom for many" (Mark 10:45;
garding the sacrifices for the consecration of the Matt. 20:88), that is, sacrificing His body and blood
_prt~,SSk()P9f1~:){c',?9:}5..,3?);_~11ci the connection of t}:te (Mark 14:22-24; Matt. _26:26-28). In the-Johannine
Volume 11, Number 2 51

literature, Jesus is introduced as the Lamb of God similar to Calvin's, it adds a "life-giving" element that
(John 1:29, 36), and then symbolized apocalyptically increases its experiential relevance.
as a Lamb that has been sacrificed but is now trium- If the seed of a theology of the high-priestly ministry
phant. The Pauline literature often refers to His death of Christ was planted by Calvin, its most noticeable
in terms of the sanctuary symbolism: He is the Paschal growth occurred in the writings ofhis Puritan descen-
Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7); and redemption comes through dants in seventeenth-century England. 27 For them,
His blood (Eph. 1:7), which is an expiation (Rom. this ministry was essential to human salvation, for it
3:25). was this that made possible the spiritual growth of the
The second way in which the New Testament Christian, especially through forgiveness but also
develops the understanding of the sanctuary is in re- through the guidance and persuasion of grace. In this
gard to the sanctuary in heaven. In contrast to the connection, the Puritans developed a detailed typolog-
ancient shrines, priests and ceremonies, Hebrews as- ical understanding of the Old Testament sanctuary,
serts not only the ontological priority of the "true which for them symbolized both the mission of Christ
tabernacle" made by God Himself, but also the reli- and the sanctuary in heaven. The heavenly sanctuary
gious and theological superiority of the ministry of was thus regarded as certainly real, although not
Christ as our High Priest in heaven (Heb. 8-10). Then necessarily corresponding to its earthly shadow in
Revelation adds yet another dimension, involving the regard to form and material. The Puritans noted the
sanctuary in heaven with history on earth: the importance of the Day of Atonement, which they
heavenly "tabernacle" (skene) is pictured as the object interpreted partly in juridical terms. But most of all,
of human blasphemy (13:6), the source of the seven Christ's ministry as a heavenly high priest meant the
plagues (15:5-6) and a part of the New Jerusalem assurance of God's interest in human lives and the
(21:3); and the "temple" (naos) is described as the place impossibility of any meritorious human work of
of God's throne (7:15) - a place which includes an mediation.
altar (11:2; 14:17-18), an ark (11:19) and worshippers Contemporary theology. In the twentieth century,
(11 :12); and also a place from which comes eschatolog- Karl Barth has written extensively on almost every
icaljudgment (14:15, etc.) and in which the glory of theological topic, including the Sabbath;28 but he dis-
God is evident (15:8). Several other elements also cusses the high priesthood of Christ in heaven only in
recall the Old Testament sanctuary: lampstands two brief passages in his Church Dogmatics. In one, he
(1:12), priestly vestments (1:13) and a censer with its emphasizes the exclusiveness of this priesthood, "for
fire and smoke (9:4-5). which there is no parallel," because Christ "is not only
Historic Protestant theology. In the light of the explicit the One who offers sacrifice but also the sacrifice
New Testament affirmation of a sanctuary in heaven which is offered." Barth notes further that we can
and of the ministry of Christ as High Priest there, it is describe Christ's work either as His "high-priestly
surprising that the subject has received so little work" or as His "judicial work," and that either way
theological attention apart from its incidental consid- "we shall mean and say exactly the same thing."29 In
eration in commentaries on the relevant passages in the other passages, Barth stresses the continuation of
Hebrews and Revelation. 17 It has, in fact, played a Christ's ministry in our behalf: "He not only did but
very small role in the systematic thought of major does stand before God for us," so that "today, now, at
theological figures. this very hour, [He is] our active and effective Repre-
When Calvin introduced into his Institutes oj the sentative and Advocate before God, and therefore the
Christian Religion, and thus into Reformation real basis of our justification and hope."30
thought, the idea of the threefold office (munus triplex) Other contemporary theologians have even less to
of Christ as prophet, priest and king, 18 he understood say about our subject. Emil Brunner, first in his Chris-
the priesthood as having two principal components: tology, The Mediator, and later in The Christian Doc-
(1) Christ's death, which blotted out our guilt 19 and trine if Creation and Redemption, merely translates the
abolished the ceremonies of the Law,zo and (2) His traditional triplex form into the corresponding func-
continuing intercessory ministry, which reconciles us tions of revelation, reconciliation and dominion; he
to God and opens up for us a way into His presence, 21 does not otherwise consider the idea of Christ's
but which is denied by the sacrifice of the Mass. 22 But priestly ministry, much less the idea of a high-
Calvin also saw in Christ's priesthood two additional priesthood in heaven. 31 And when G. C. Berkouwer
implications: (3) His identification with us in our in- devotes a chapter of The Work oj Christ to the threefold
firmities,z3 and (4) the priesthood of believers. 24 Al- office, he is more interested in the significance of
though Calvin recognized the objective reality of the triplicity as such than in the meaning of each ele-
heavenly sanctuary, he interpreted the reference to ment;32 he expounds Christ's priesthood only in terms
"the greater and more perfect tabernacle" (Heb. 9:11) of sacrifice, with no discussion of intercession at all. 33
to be a symbol of the physical body of Christ. 25 To a small extent, however, the lack of systematic
At about the same time, the Lutheran theologian theological reflection on the ministry of Christ as high
Melanchthon offered a summary of Christ's functions priest is reduced by the contribution of theologically
(oJficia) as high priest: inclined commentators on Hebrews, such as Wescott,
(1) He proclaims the gospel. (2) He offers sacrifice Bruce and Cody.34
for us. (3) He always prays for us .... (4) He also Adventist thought. From the preceding brief survey,
has the office of blessing, and He blesses not only we may conclude that there is some significant
by announcing the remission of sins but also by the theological precedent for our interest in the sanctuary
fact that He Himself takes away sin and death, and in heaven and in the ministry of Christ as High Priest
returns life, since He is the living Logos of the and our conviction that this is an important part of the
eternal Father. 26 total activity of God for our salvation. We may also
Wl1ile_thjs~~s<:ril' tioll Qf. Christ's. priestly s.ervice· is conclude thatthefurther .dey<!!opment ofa, theology
52 Spectrum

of the sanctuary is a proper continuation of a long and very center of Christ's work in behalf of men," and
distinguished (if also intermittent) history. that His intercession there is "as essential to the plan of
About a century and a half ago, Adventism inte- salvation as was His death upon the cross. "35 Concern-
grated into its understanding of the sanctuary sym- ing the eschatological "cleansing" of the heavenly
bolism not only the Christological emphasis of the sanctuary, she identified two major elements. On the
Letter to the Hebrews and of Puritan theology, but one hand, it involves "an examination of the books of
. also the historical and eschatological emphases of bib- record"; its purpose is "to determine who, through
lical ayocalyptic, including the prophecies of Daniel repentance of sin and faith in Christ, are entitled to the
as wel as Revelation, interpreted along the lines of the benefits of His atonement"; and it "must be per-
Advent expectation of 1844. Thus, in the light of formed prior to the corning of Christ to redeem His
Leviticus 16, Hebrews 8-10 and Daniel 7-9, two people."36 And on the other hand, the "cleansing" of
further, related ideas emerged. First, the ministry of the heavenly sanctuary is also the ultimate meaning of
Christ in the heavenly sanctuary was seen to involve the ancient ritual of the scapegoat: "the removal of sin
two aspects - intercession and judgment, corre- from the heavenly sanctuary and the placing of those
sponding respectively to the usual, daily ceremonies sins upon Satan," which is involved in "the final
in connection with the Holy Place of the Old Testa- purification of the universe from sin and sinners."37
ment sanctuary, and to the annual Day of Atonement
ceremony in connection with the Most Holy Place. Suggestions subsequently came from various
Second, these two aspects were understood to be dis- others such as W. W. Prescott, who interpreted the
tinguished temporally, with the latter phase identified "cleansing" in terms of a restoration of a correct un-
as an eschatological Day of Atonement or "cleansing derstanding of the gospel after a long period of papal
of the sanctuary" beginning after the prophetic period distortion;38 M. L. Andreasen, who associated the
of 2,300 evenings-mornings understood as historical "cleansing" with a vindication of God in the lives of a
years (Dan. 8:14). generation of people who live without sin;39 and Ed-
In relation to this interpretive development, there ward Heppenstall, who understood the "cleansing" to
was a need to clarify the meaning of the heavenly be "a loving revelation from Christ of the righteous
sanctuary itself and of its "cleansing." Thus, Ellen decisions in favor of those who have trusted in
White explained that "the sanctuary in heaven is the Him."40

NOTES AND REFERENCES

1. Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy (Moun- 11. This is not my own phrase, but I have been
tain View, Calif.: Pacific Press Publ. Assoc., 1950), p. unable to locate the source.
423. Hereafter referred to as Gc. 12. The continuing experiential impact of the cross is
2. Cf. Hiram Edson, untitled manuscript fragment significant evidence of the validity of Christian truth
(Heritage Room, James White Library, Andrews claims. While the evidence of religious experience in
University),pp.8-9. general has often been noted, as by A. E. Taylor, "The
3. GC, 423. Vindication of Religion, " in Essay's Catholic and Criti-
4. Cf. P. Gerard Damsteegt, Foundations of the cal, ed. E. G. Selwyn (London: SPCK, 1926), pp.
Seventh-day Adventist Message and Mission (Grand 70-81, and David Elton Trueblood, Philosophy of Reli-
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977), pp. 103-35; Arthur gion (New York: Harper, 1957), pp. 143-58, this par-
Whitefield Spalding, Origin and History of Seventh-day ticular point has not received the attention it deserves.
Adventists, 4 vols. (Washington: Review and Herald, 13. William G.Johnsson,In Absolute Confidence: The
1961-62),1:97-113. Book of Hebrews Speaks to Our Day (Nashville: South-
5. Cf. Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamen- ern Publ. Assoc., 1979), p. 95.
talism: British and American Millenarianism, 1800-1930 14. Here again, the theological interrelationship be-
(Chicago: University of Chicago, 1970); Edwin S. tween the Sabbath and the sanctuary become evident,
Gaustad, ed., The Rise of Adventism: Religion and Soci- for the Sabbath, too, is a matter of worship and of
ety in Mid-Nineteenth-Century America (New York: attention to the activity of God.
Harper and Row, 1974); Leon Festinger, Henry W. 15. Dan. 7:10; 12:1; Rev. 20:12-15.
Riecken and Stanley Schacter, When Prophecy Fails 16. Leon Morris, The Biblical Doctrine of Judgment
(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota , 1956). (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1960), p. 66. Cf. Matt.
6. E. g.,. books related to judgment, Dan. 7:10; 16:27; Rom. 2:6; 1 Cor. 3:8; Rev. 22:12.
12:1; Rev. 20:12; "book of remembrance," Mal. 17. E. g., Heb. 2:17-18; 4:14-16; 6:19-20; 8:1-6;
3:16; "the book oflife," Phil. 4:3; Rev. 3:5, 13:8, 17:8; 9:11-14,23-38; 10:11-22; and Rev. 7:15, 11:1-2, 19;
20:12, 15; 21:27. 14:15; 15:5-8; 16:1, 17.
7. GC, 489. 18. Calvin, Institutes, lI.xv.l; "The Catechism of the
8. Cf.Jack W. Provonsha, God Is With Us (Wash- Church of Geneva," in Calvin: Theological Treatises,
ington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1974), pp. 29-39. trans. J . K. S. Reid, Library of Christian Classics, vol.
9. Thus there is a relationship between the meaning 22 (Philadephia: Westminster, n.d.), p.95. Calvin
of the high priestly ministry of Christ in the heavenly acknowledged that "the papists use these names,
sanctuary and the meaning of the Sabbath, which also too," and perhaps he was referring to Thomas
symbolizes both the holiness of God and our relation- AquinR-s, Summa Theologiae IIl.xxii.2: "Other men
ship to Him. have this or that grace bestowed on this or that one,
10. Cf. Edward Fudge, Our Man in Heaven: An Ex- but Christ, as being Head of all, has the perfection of
position of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand Rapids: all graces. Wherefore, as to others, one is a lawgiver,
Baker, 1973). another is a priest, another is a king; but all these
Volume 11, Number 2 53

concur in Christ as the fount of all grace." attention to both the Sabbath and the high-priestly
19. Calvin, Institutes, II.xv.6: IV.xiv.21. ministry of Christ.
20. Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews, "Theme"; Cal- 29. Barth, Church Dogmatics, 4/1:275-77.
vin's New Testament Commentaries, vol. 12 (Grand 30. Ibid., pp. 314-16.
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), pp. 1,3. 31. Emil Brunner, The Mediator (Philadelphia:
21. Calvin, Institutes, II.xv.6; III.xx.17-20; IV.vi.2; Westminster, 1934), pp. 399-590; The Christian Doc-
"Catechism," p. 96; Commentary on 1 Timothy 2:6. trine of Creation and Redemption, Dogmatics, vol. 2
Cf. Paul van Buren, Christ in Our Place: The Sub- (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1952), pp. 270-315.
stitutionary Character rif Calvin's Doctrine of Reconcilia- 32. G. C. Berkouwer, The Work of Christ (Grand
tion (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1957), pp. 89-91. Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), pp. 58-87.
22. Calvin, Commentary on the Psalms, 51:9. 33. Ibid., pp. 80-85.
23. Calvin, Commentary on Romans, 9:3; Commentary 34. For the purposes of the enterprise advocated
on Hebrews, 2:17. here, some of the most useful in English are Brooke
24. Calvin, Institutes, II.xv.6: "Catechism," p. 96. Foss Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York:
25. Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews, 9: 11. Macmillan, 1889; reprinted Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
26. Melanchthon, Annotationes in Evangelium Mat- 1977); F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand
taei, caput 16, Corpus Reformatorum 14:889-90; transla- Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964); Aelfred Cody, Heavenly
tion supplied. Sanctuary and Liturgy in the Epistle to the Hebrews (St.
Meinrad, Indiana: Grail Publications, 1960).
27. Cf. Bryan W. Ball, "A High Priest in Heaven," a 35. GC, 488-89.
chapter in a forthcoming book which deals with Puri- 36. GC, 422.
tan antecedents to Adventist theology. The most im- 37. Ellen G. White,Patriarchs and Prophets (Washing-
portant primary source is John Owen, An Exposition of ton, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1958), p. 358.
the Epistle to the Hebrews, With Preliminary Exercita- 38. W. W. Prescott, "Our Time and Work from the
tions, 4 vols. (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, Prophetic Standpoint," Review and Herald, 16 De-
1854),1:512-27; 2:3-259; 3:465-86; cf. also The Works cember 1909.
ofJohn Owen, ed. William H. Goold, 16 vols. (Edin- 39. M. L. Andreasen, The Sanctuary Service, 2nd ed.
burgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1850-53; London: Ban- (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1947), pp.
ner of Truth Trust, 1966), 12:397-411. 299-321; The Book rif Hebrews (Washington, D.C.:
28. Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, 4 vols. in 13 Review and Herald, 1948), pp. 417-70.
(Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1936-69), 3/1 :98-99, 40. Ed ward Heppenstall, Our High Priest: Jesus Christ
213-28; 3/4:47-72. Barth, Puritan theology, and in the Heavenly Sanctuary (Washington, D.C.: Review
Seventh-day Adventism are all distinguished by their and Herald, 1972), p. 179; cf. pp. 157-85.

Interview With
Desmond Ford
by Adrian Z ytkoskee

The following is a shortened interview with word that you were no longer a minister in
Dr. Desmond Ford conducted in his home in New- the Adventist Church?
castle, California, on September 23, 1980. FORD: It did not come as a surprise be-
cause Australia had pledged itself to follow

S
PECTRUM: After
30 years in the minis-
try of the Seventh-day Adventist Church,
the counsel of the General Conference, but I
suppose it is impossible to answer your ques-
tion properly - unless I briefly touch on the
how did you feel when you actually received theology of church ordination. The
Seventh-day Adventist movement is a di-
vinely raised movement to do a special work,
Adrian Zytkoskee is professor of psychology and but the church is a mvch bigger thing. It is
chairman of the Department of Behavioral Science at
Pacific Union College. His M.A. and Ph.D. arefrom composed of all who trust in Jesus Christ and
KIller)' lJn.iver_sity; His_·. -.merits~;~and~.the:::ministqt,:a:c_eMrling~::ro:: . . -
Volume 11, Number 2 53

concur in Christ as the fount of all grace." attention to both the Sabbath and the high-priestly
19. Calvin, Institutes, II.xv.6: IV.xiv.21. ministry of Christ.
20. Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews, "Theme"; Cal- 29. Barth, Church Dogmatics, 4/1:275-77.
vin's New Testament Commentaries, vol. 12 (Grand 30. Ibid., pp. 314-16.
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1963), pp. 1,3. 31. Emil Brunner, The Mediator (Philadelphia:
21. Calvin, Institutes, II.xv.6; III.xx.17-20; IV.vi.2; Westminster, 1934), pp. 399-590; The Christian Doc-
"Catechism," p. 96; Commentary on 1 Timothy 2:6. trine of Creation and Redemption, Dogmatics, vol. 2
Cf. Paul van Buren, Christ in Our Place: The Sub- (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1952), pp. 270-315.
stitutionary Character rif Calvin's Doctrine of Reconcilia- 32. G. C. Berkouwer, The Work of Christ (Grand
tion (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1957), pp. 89-91. Rapids: Eerdmans, 1965), pp. 58-87.
22. Calvin, Commentary on the Psalms, 51:9. 33. Ibid., pp. 80-85.
23. Calvin, Commentary on Romans, 9:3; Commentary 34. For the purposes of the enterprise advocated
on Hebrews, 2:17. here, some of the most useful in English are Brooke
24. Calvin, Institutes, II.xv.6: "Catechism," p. 96. Foss Westcott, The Epistle to the Hebrews (New York:
25. Calvin, Commentary on Hebrews, 9: 11. Macmillan, 1889; reprinted Grand Rapids: Eerdmans,
26. Melanchthon, Annotationes in Evangelium Mat- 1977); F. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Grand
taei, caput 16, Corpus Reformatorum 14:889-90; transla- Rapids: Eerdmans, 1964); Aelfred Cody, Heavenly
tion supplied. Sanctuary and Liturgy in the Epistle to the Hebrews (St.
Meinrad, Indiana: Grail Publications, 1960).
27. Cf. Bryan W. Ball, "A High Priest in Heaven," a 35. GC, 488-89.
chapter in a forthcoming book which deals with Puri- 36. GC, 422.
tan antecedents to Adventist theology. The most im- 37. Ellen G. White,Patriarchs and Prophets (Washing-
portant primary source is John Owen, An Exposition of ton, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1958), p. 358.
the Epistle to the Hebrews, With Preliminary Exercita- 38. W. W. Prescott, "Our Time and Work from the
tions, 4 vols. (Edinburgh: Johnstone and Hunter, Prophetic Standpoint," Review and Herald, 16 De-
1854),1:512-27; 2:3-259; 3:465-86; cf. also The Works cember 1909.
ofJohn Owen, ed. William H. Goold, 16 vols. (Edin- 39. M. L. Andreasen, The Sanctuary Service, 2nd ed.
burgh: Johnstone and Hunter, 1850-53; London: Ban- (Washington, D.C.: Review and Herald, 1947), pp.
ner of Truth Trust, 1966), 12:397-411. 299-321; The Book rif Hebrews (Washington, D.C.:
28. Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, 4 vols. in 13 Review and Herald, 1948), pp. 417-70.
(Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1936-69), 3/1 :98-99, 40. Ed ward Heppenstall, Our High Priest: Jesus Christ
213-28; 3/4:47-72. Barth, Puritan theology, and in the Heavenly Sanctuary (Washington, D.C.: Review
Seventh-day Adventism are all distinguished by their and Herald, 1972), p. 179; cf. pp. 157-85.

Interview With
Desmond Ford
by Adrian Z ytkoskee

The following is a shortened interview with word that you were no longer a minister in
Dr. Desmond Ford conducted in his home in New- the Adventist Church?
castle, California, on September 23, 1980. FORD: It did not come as a surprise be-
cause Australia had pledged itself to follow

S
PECTRUM: After
30 years in the minis-
try of the Seventh-day Adventist Church,
the counsel of the General Conference, but I
suppose it is impossible to answer your ques-
tion properly - unless I briefly touch on the
how did you feel when you actually received theology of church ordination. The
Seventh-day Adventist movement is a di-
vinely raised movement to do a special work,
Adrian Zytkoskee is professor of psychology and but the church is a mvch bigger thing. It is
chairman of the Department of Behavioral Science at
Pacific Union College. His M.A. and Ph.D. arefrom composed of all who trust in Jesus Christ and
KIller)' lJn.iver_sity; His_·. -.merits~;~and~.the:::ministqt,:a:c_eMrling~::ro:: . . -
54 Spectrum

the New Testament, is a priesthood of all source of providing listeners for gospel meet-
believers. While some are delegated to spe- ings that I will hold separately. In addition,
cific tasks ofleadership, the New Testament Dr. Kime hopes that we can start a radio and
knows no such division as between laity and television series on the gospel if the Lord
clergy. That was brought in as a part of the opens the way. Our work will be largely for
great medieval apostasy which resulted in the non-Adventists to offer them the gospel of
blunting of missionary endeavor for hun- the grace ofJesus Christ, though Adventists
dreds of years. A professional elite was given will be welcome.
the task of spreading the gospel. One of the SPECTRUM: Will you have any problem
missing links in twentieth-century as far as a visa is concerned? You are here, I
evangelism is the failure to restore the New assume, on some kind of temporary visa
Testament witness about the nature of the from Australia.
church, the nature of ministry and the stress FORD: Yes, our visa has run out and we
on the priesthood of all believers. do have a problem about securing a perma-
As far as I am concerned, I think of the poet ment visa. As you know, these are not easy to
Whittier's words, "Mine, the mighty ordina- get. An employer has to prove that he cannot
tion of the pierced hands." While there is
definitely a regret, because of the bonds of "As long as we treat the church
fellowship with my brethren in the ministry people as children, they will
these many years, it would be untrue to say
behave like children and not
there had been emotional trauma involved,
because I see the issue of church and ordina- gather to themselves the burden a
tion in terms of New Testament positions, responsible adult should carry. . . .
rather than traditional ones.
SPECTRUM: Let me then ask you a very get a nonalien who could do the job he has in
practical kind of question. You must have mind. This is a difficult matter, but we trust
many things to consider in regard to your the Lord will work it out if He wants us to be
future. For example, are you going to get here.
retirement benefits? What kind of arrange- SPECTR U M: I would like to go back now
ment has been made with you? to that fateful meeting of October 27, 1979,
FORD: I have not yet received any official when you accepted our invitation to speak at
statement on this matter. But the Australian the Forum meeting at Pacific Union College.
way of providing sustentation is quite differ- Do you regret that you accepted our invita-
ent from that in America. In Australia, it is tion?
not inevitable. Sustentation is given at the FORD: I regret that many good people
discretion of the church to those whom it have been hurt by what I have said, but I
considers have remained loyal Adventists could not truthfully say that I regret taking
until they reach retirement age. I think the the meeting. It seems to me this trauma was
brethren plan to make some sort of settle- necessary to lead a Laodicean church to a
ment with me whereby they will give me so deeper biblical study of topics long held as
many months wages as a final settlement, or foundations, but which have received no
a lesser amount with a promise of some type treatment for many years. The subject of the
of sustentation if my behavior until I am sanctuary and the investigative judgment is
sixty-five could be classified by them as not preached in the church, and scholars have
being that of a good Adventist. not written on it for decades, with the sole
SPECTRUM: What are you going to do exception of Dr . Heppenstall, whose presen-
now? tation was hardly traditional. These have be-
FORD: I was invited by Dr. Zane Kime to come dead-letter doctrines in the church, yet
join with his health education center. He we hold them at the masthead when they are
plans very soon to hold public meetings, and threatened. I regret that I have been the cause
'w,echpcpeJhat.Jhese:rneetings· . will . hecome a of bringing sorrOw to many sincere people
Volume 11, Number 2 55

by making it appear that I was disloyal to the truth can be kept in a corner or that even
church, when actually it was a loyalty to the criticisms about truth can be kept in a corner.
church that led me to make the statement. But As long as we treat the church people as
I do not regret taking the meeting, because I children, they will behave like children and
believe it will bring good in the long run as not gather to themselves the burden a re-
men and women are led to study the Scrip- sponsible adult should carry in taking the
tures again on the Bible relationships among gospel to the world.
the themes of the Old Testamental sacrificial SPECTRUM: It sounds as if you do not
system, prophecy and the gospel. regret having spoken as you did on October
27, but let me ask you this question, which is

S PECTRUM: Do
you think that meet-
ing was the reason you have been deprived of
probably not a fair question for anyone: If
you had the last year to live over, thinking
about the Forum meeting, the manuscript,
your ministerial credentials, or were there Glacier View, all of that, would you have
other reasons? done anything differently?
FORD: I think it would be too simplistic . FORD: Most things I do, I do very imper-
to say that the talk was the reason. You and I fectly, and I am conscious of that all the time.
have heard many strange things said in some But as regards conscious volition and
Forum meetings. As a matter offact, I think I choices, I doubt if any major choice would
was told that this was the place to say some- have been different. I have been very grateful
thing that perhaps could not be said that the church has taken the matter serious-
elsewhere. Probably the basic reason is that ly. I think a lesser administrator than Elder
there have been many opposed to my stress Wilson would have swept it under the rug
on the primacy ofjustification , and it has not and ignored it. I was grateful for the oppor-
proved possible to expel me on that basis, tunity the General Conference gave me to j
though many have felt over the years that I write the manuscript. I only have praise for 1
i
should be, because this stress, too, seemed a Elder Wilson's attitude through that time. I
challenge to traditional Adventist thought. am quite grateful for the year, and I would
Over the years, I have had a lot of opposition not consciously have chosen otherwise.
in this area. I think thatthere are some good, SPECTRUM: Time and again during the
earnest Adventists who feel that it was prov- past few weeks, you have expressed your )
-.;-
idential that I spoke as I did in that Forum confidence in our church leaders. Do you
meeting, thus giving a lever for my removal maintain this confidence, or do you feel they
from the ministry. To their mind, that could treated you unjustly?
only be a blessing and a safeguard. FORD: No, I do not feel they treated me
SPECTRUM: One of the criticisms that u~ustly. I have confidence in their well-
has been made quite frequently is that if you meaning intentions. I do not have great con-
had not allowed your sanctuary manuscript fidence in some of their understandings ofthe
to get out, the church would have been able Bible, I must be frank about that. My experi-
to solve this problem in a more quiet and ence in mixing with administrators from the
satisfactory way. How do you respond to top down is that these men mean well, but
this accusation that you are not really playing are tremendously busy. In other words, "the
as a team man? urgent takes the place of the important. An
FORD: I did not leak the document; I had administrator is like a man in a swamp with
never at any time given the document or his rifle raised, picking off the alligators one
sections of it away to anybody. I have been by one as they come toward him, instead of
very, very careful and have very close, inti- being able to get out and drain the swamp. It
mate friends who would have loved to have is the great gulf fixed between administrators
had the document ahead of time, or chapters and scholars that is the root of the problem. I j
of it, but the document did not get out
through me. However, it would seem to me
that"cit-"ls,anIedie:vcaLmentality to think that
see no malice in the men who dealt with me. I
have the highest of regard for the men with
whQm":1,assnciated~==:=::':,=:",:.::. ·• •.·".,··0·
j
1
56 Spectrum

SPECTRUM: To follow up on your anal- place, I might have made a dozen such mis-
ogy of the swamp, I am wondering if there is takes.
not wisdom in getting out of the swamp SPECTRUM: In the months prior to
when there is an opportunity offered. Some Glacier View, I heard you indicate several
have thought that such an opportunity oc- times your belief that the theologians and
curred on Friday morning at Glacier View, biblical scholars in the church were in essen-
when we understand that you had already tial agreement with your position, yet pub-
indicated that you could support and preach lished reports from Glacier View seem to
the consensus statement as you understood it indicate the opposite. Was your assessment
and it was voted by the people there. In your of the scholars' position in error?
judgment, why wasn't the process ended FORD: I would agree with Dr. Ray Cot-
there? Why didn't everyone just go home and trell's appraisal of that situation. He has gone
say, "We have problems that need further on record as saying that 90 percent of the
study, but we have unity on the important
issues"? "I was quite happy with the
FORD: I expressed my willingness to bury
the sanctuary topic. I mentioned to the breth- essence of the consensus state':"
ren in whole assembly there that I had only ntent and could preach it in
spoken publicly on the issue once in 30 years sincerity. This they found
and that by request. On Friday afternoon, I
expressed, to the brethren that met with me, very hard to believe."
a little group of administrators (there were
no scholars there), that I was quite happy with scholars would agree with the main essence
the essence of the consensus statement and of my positions. I know personally, from
could preach it in sincerity. This they found talking to these men over a period of about
very hard to believe. So it seems to me that twenty-five years, where many of them in-
there must have been some other issues. dividually stand. Now I could name men that
do not stand where I stand - for example,

S PECTRUM:
would like to come
to those other factors in a moment, but first
I the men whom I understand had the most to
do with the special issue of Ministry, men·
such as Drs. Shea, Hasel and Damsteegt.
one more question regarding the process at These are diligent scholars whom I person-
Glacier View. How could the brethren have ally respect and who would not agree with
responded differently to the events at Glacier my positions. But they are a minority. I am
View? What do you think you might have quite certain that the majority of theologians
done differently if you had been Elder Neal and biblical scholars do hold the major posi-
Wilson? tions that I hold, and I could name the men
FORD: I suspect I would have made many who have individually told me so. The real
more mistakes than Brother Wilson. I am a problem with Glacier View is that these
very poor administrative type. But I do hope scholars did not feel that in an hour or two a
someone would have said to me, "Des, don't day in the large meetings over four days they
dare make a decision in PREXAD as to had any chance of educating those who had
whether a man is a heretic unless you have not previously been confronting the issues.
biblical scholars present. Don't dare make a The scholars spoke up more freely in the
decision about heresy unless you are sure you small committees, but some of the things··
have the actual data from the men that are they said were not understood. The reaction
involved in it all day, every day. Don't dare of the scholars since Glacier View shows that
do it on the basis of what administrators this assessment of mine is correct. There have
say." I think this, perhaps, is the greatest been letters, as you know, from several of
problem in the situation. Of course, it is our educational institutions and from indi-
easier for me to be critical than correct, and I vidual scholars which have protested that the
can<conlysay,had I been in Neal Wilson's administratQrLd.id::IlDLrighd:}"::int-er-pret· the
Volume 11, Number 2 57

low-keyed protests uttered in the small FORD: This is a sensitive area and prob-
committees. ably a key area as you have suggested. It is true
SPECTR UM: You mention the low- that for a long time I have been under pres-
keyed protests. You suggested that it would sure to speak against Robert Brinsmead pub-
have been ineffective for them to state their licly. I have refused to do this. It is helpful to
positions in the large meetings . Yet, since the know a little bit of the background. I first met
issue of your employment in the church was Robert Brinsmead when the division called
involved, should they have spoken up more me back to Avondale College to complete a
boldly? degree after about seven years in evangelism.
FORD: I cannot really be the judge of that. At that time, Robert, following extreme tra-
I should say, in favor of the scholars, that ditional Adventism, believed that a type of
they did not really think that I was going to perfection somehow had to be reached by the
lose my credentials. I am quite sure the time probation closed; otherwise we would
majority of scholars never thought my cre- never be able to stand without a mediator.
dentials would be involved. It seems to me, For the next ten or eleven years, I fought
from the reaction of scholars who talked to Robert very strongly and we lost hardly any-
me, that no one thought of the Friday after- body from the ministerial working force or
noon meeting as a meeting where an ul- the student body at Avondale, though the
timatum would be given to me and things Brinsmead literature was pouring into the
would be at all finalized. I guess the scholars college over the period of a decade. It should
were influenced by the fact that Elder Wilson be noted that while I engaged in polemics
had said on the back of the Review , "This will with Robert, we were not personally alien-
not be a trial of Desmond Ford," or some- ated. He and I met on various occasions to
thing to that effect. I would like also to say, make sure we understood each other.
on behalf of the scholars, that there were men Some years later, when I was in England,
like Jack Provonsha who spoke out very the brethren called me to be present in Wash-
frankly. For example, he said in the big. ington, D.C., at a week of meetings involv-
committee words to this effect: "I don't agree ing General Conference officials and Robert.
with Des's position on forensic justification, After I got back to England, Robert wrote
but I do agree with most of Des's manu- me and said that he had given up his old
script. I couldn't teach the investigative perfectionistic teachings - the doctrine in
judgment the way I was taught it." which the unconscious mind was the
sanctuary to be cleansed by the latter rain in

S PECTRUM: Many
people, Des, after
reading your response to the letter that you
connection with the investigative judgment.
He had given all that up and I rejoiced. It
should be noted that among the last pub-
received from the Australasian Division, lished statements regarding the church and
have been unable to understand why the Brinsmead was a statement that conversa-
General Conference recommended, despite tions between the church and Brinsmead
your apparent effort to be responsive and were proceeding in an amiable manner. And
conciliatory, that Australasia remove your probably, I was in some sense the most ami-
credentials. Someone said to me that there able. While opposing Bob's old positions, I
must be a missing link somewhere that knew him best and understood his positions
would help him to make sense of this se- best. But then we fell afoul of the Review,
quence of events. I have a feeling that the which seems to have disinterred the perfec-
missing link is best found by looking at the tionistic bone that Robert had buried and was
role and influence of Robert Brinsmead as it flaunting it before the Review readership
relates to our church and its leaders. Is such right throughout the world. While the Re-
an analysis valid? If so, can you clarify for me view in the sixties had opposed perfection,
and for our readers exactly why Brinsmead the Review in the seventies advocated perfec-
and your relations with him seem to be so tion and, also, the sinful nature of Christ. So
. . ?
Ip1portant. these issues _h;ly~_c:;~1,l~~gap'!lph~~y~~rig-b&
 58 Spectrum

round our world field and it seems, to many, misunderstood as though I were trying to
that Bob and I are in collusion to wreck the repudiate his emphasis on righteousness by
church. This has never been true at any time. faith. I can only say I agree wholeheartedly
Bob and I have maintained an open attitude with that emphasis.
and I find he has been most thoughtful in not
trying to embarrass me. We have had almost
no contact during the past year.
He and I do not agree in everything. Bob
S PECTRUM: On the
organizational point,
some of us have heard that Bob Brinsmead is
has taken some positions on apocalyptic that in the process of organizing another church;
I think may only be tentative on his part, but that it will actually be incorporated, and have
with which I wholeheartedly disagree. He a name. Have you heard anything like that?
has taught such things as the white horse in And how would such a development affect
the seals as anti-Christ, and I think that is a anything that you have previously said?
rather pivotal part of prophecy. I retain our FORD: I have heard all kinds of rumors,
traditional position - that the white horse and I have read one statement that Bob has
represents the gospel going forth. It may be written about a call for a new church struc-
that we may differ on some aspects of mil- ture. I heard the rumor that he was going to
announce in Australia a call to a congrega-
"We have a wrong attitude tional system, but when I inquired of one of
his close associates, I was told that he had
toward Ellen White and a made no such announcement to the press. I
wrong attitude toward the do think that Bob was planning to call a
Bible, because we make it meeting in October in southern California to
discuss a congregational church. I was in-
secondary to Ellen White." vited to attend by someone who was plan-
ning to go, but I told them I would not be
lenialism. So while Bob and I may disagree, there because I thought that would be mis-
we have been able to disagree without being understood. I think Bob himself might feel
disagreeable. The brethren find that hard to this is premature. My own attitude is that I
understand. The General Conference asked want to be loyal to the church and do all I can
me years ago to write a book against Bob, to reform it from inside. I do not want to do
which I did. There was one particular point anything that could be construed as a mali-
in the book with which someone on the cious action toward the administors or the or-
committee disagreed, so it was never printed; ganization. When I think of the many young
it was just circulated in xeroxed form. Bob men who have phoned me asking if they
answered that book, but he answered very should pull out - start congregational
courteously. There was no personal an- churches - I have advised all of them,
or
tagonism. But many people have forgotten "Don't do it, stick with the church." But I
this past, and the fact that now I do not find it have to admit they have something of a case,
in my heart to damn Bob is looked upon as a when they say, "Hey, look, we have a hierar-
very heinous thing by administrators. They chical structure in which the place of the laity
would stress the necessity of being loyal to is not given its due weight. We're contrary to
the Church. It seems to me that Bob the New Testament in this thing." In addi-
Brinsmead is still loyal to the truth of the tion, the church has been very, very slow in
church universal as he understands it. The the gospel emphasis and even allowed the
reason he was not re-baptized as Elder Pier- official church paper to give antirighteous-
son recommended, was, because to quote his ness by faith material in issue after issue dur-
own words, "I made many mistakes, did ing the last decade. Some say to me, "How
some things I regret, but I never apostatized can we be true to Christ, who is the truth,
from Christ." And I'm prepared to take that and yet be true to the organization?" My only
statement at face value. I could not find it in plea with them is that Christ has always been
. ~Y:l1.~~~~~<:lg~Pll.b~~IYClgain~tBob ,lest it be patient with His people and He' s been patient
Volume 11, Number 2 59

with us as individuals. I have pled with those think, akin to Ellen White's, if I understand
young men to be patient. So my desire is to her correctly, that prophecy has an im-
do all that I can to help changes come from mediate meaning to the people who receive
within. At this point, I have no plans of start- it, has a continuing application in later ages,
ing some new organization or anything like and has a final application in the future. I have
that. never taken the position that the prophecies
SPECTRUM: What will become of your apply only to the future. So it is that when
sanctuary manuscript now? Ellen White talks about the second advent
FORD: There are people on both the East sermon of Matthew 24, she applied it to 70
Coast and the West Coast who want to print A.D., she applied it to later historical events,
it. I have no certainty that it will be done. and she applied it to the end of time; and that's
Some of these people have inquired of the my own position.
legal situation, and while there hasn't been SPECTR UM: Do you have any prelimi.;..
absolute certainty, the weight of the evidence nary reactions to the issue of the Ministry that
seems to be that the author has the copyright, analyzes the Glacier View meetings?
especially inasmuch as there was no contract FORD: The Ministry is to be congratulated
between me and the General Conference in for acknowledging the importance of the
regard to a copyright and the General Con- present discussions. The editor, an esteemed
ference, itself, did not copyright it. I would friend, has conscientiously done his best in
not be opposed to the printing inasmuch as giving the background, but I wish his picture
all public discussion so far has been on proce- of the pre-Glacier View Committee had re-
dure, rather than on the doctrine. I have lis- vealed that most of the members, most of the
tened to tapes from Australia and tapes from time, did not bother to write the required
America where reports have been given on chapter critiques. Similarly, the majority had
Glacier View and none of those reports ever little or nothing to offer orally. Protests
discuss the doctrinal issues. So, it seems to brought no improvement.
me that the discussion of doctrine has not I am forced to agree with the reaction of
-proceeded very far and, for that reason, I many of our university and college teachers
would not be opposed if the sanctuary manu- who have voiced their dismay at the one-
script appears. sidedness of the anonymous Ministry presen:-
SPECTRUM: I understand you are also tations. There is an. obvious reluctance to
writing a book on Revelation. How is that admit the significant divergence by the con-
book coming, and when can we expect to see sensus statement from the traditional argu-
it? ments, and there is a similar veiling of the
FORD: That book was finished over a year facts as to where most of our scholars stand.
ago, except for a few minor changes. I expect Worst of all, the biblical testimony on the key
that it should be out within six months. F. F. issues is sadly truncated and misused.
Bruce of Manchester University has kindly Furthermore, though I am accused of tak-
written an introduction for this book, as he ing statements out of context, the proffered
did for the Daniel commentary, and I have evidence does not support the oft-repeated
been grateful for that. You may be interested charge. For the main areas, readers should go
to know that for years one of the typical to my manuscript to read the extracted sen-
charges in Australia and America against me tences in their original context. For an exam-
is that I have copied the futurism of Professor ple, notice the top of column three on page 61
Bruce. The truth is, of course, that F. F. of the Ministry. A bald denial is offered
Bruce is not a futurist; he does not believe, ("none of these statements," etc.), and mere
among other things, that in the last few years assertions, but no evidence. As all can verify,
of time, the sacrificial services will be re- and as claimed by my manuscript, the Acts of
sumed in the temple at Jerusalem. Actually, the Apostles (p. 33) does specifically apply the
Bruce's main concentration is on the original Day of Atonement ceremonial to Christ's
meaning of the prophecies to the people who incarnation and death as well as to his coming
first
" .......
_."...
received them.
....
My
..
-.
oWnpo8j,tionjs,
, . . . .......
"-,, ..
J . ag.ain. Th~Signso.fthe Times1905statem~nt
 60 Spectrum

does affirm that Christ's entrance into the its antitrinitarianism! It took the truth on the
most holy took place at his ascension, and the daily 50 years to become established, and
Testimonies (vol. 4, p. 122), by their cleansing there are still some who don't accept it! So we
of the sanctuary reference, do indicate the are really traditionalists despite our boast
same. Similarly, The Desire of Ages (p. 756) over the Sabbath.
applies Hebrews 10:19, 20 (concerning the We have not done what Ellen White re-
high priest's entrance into the most holy peatedly told us to do, make the Bible our
through the veil) to the cross-ascension only foundation of doctrine. She never
event. meant that her writings should be used for
The Ministry perpetrates its own heresy on doctrine. We are guilty of idolatry. We have
Daniel 8 by saying that Antichrist comes into taken a good gift and abused it. We have
the investigative judgment. That is not the given Ellen White a position she never
traditional position, and had the brethren claimed. She certainly did claim that God
forgotten that the little horn applies also to spoke to her in a way He has not spoken
pagan Rome? through us, and I believe that claim. But she
A serious instance of bias is found in the never ever claimed to be the basis of doctrine.
omission of Glacier View documents which We have a wrong attitude toward Ellen
contradict the doctrinal stand of the Ministry White and a wrong attitude toward the Bible,
- namely those by Cottrell and Haloviak. It because we make it secondary to Ellen
is difficult to excuse such obvious partisan- White . We interpret the Bible through Ellen
ship. White, so we make the Bible the lesser light
SPECTRUM: What do you think: is going and, unless the church repents, the next dec-
to happen in the next decade as far as the ade is going to be very dim indeed. We have
church is concerned? become lazy in Bible study. In our lesson
FORD: Well, I am not a prophet or a son of quarterlies, we give a text and then we ex-
a prophet, but it seems to me that everything plain it all through the Spirit of Prophecy.
hinges on whether the church will humbly We forget the clear testimony of history . W.
accept the rebuke of the True Witness to the C. White said that his mother took her doc-
Laodicean people, who think they are in need trinal expositions from denominational liter-
of nothing. It will depend on the church ature. So on the sanctuary, she copied Uriah
whether the church will repent and give the Smith - phrases and paragraphs. I have doc-
gospel its true place - first, last and best in umented that in my thesis. Ellen White did
everything, whether preaching law, not set out as a pioneer in doctrine. She
prophecy, or doctrine. All must be made to changed many doctrinal positions. She
revolve around the cross. It seems to me that changed her view on pork as a food. In Tes-
the church which has fought tradition in timonies, Volume 1, she forbids men to forbid
Roman Catholicism and has avowed by its it to be eaten, while later she says it should
Sabbath position that it is opposed to tradi- not be eaten. She changed her position on the
tion, that this church, itself, has sinned by its observance of Sabbath from 6 p.m. to 6 p.m.
traditionalism. At Glacier View, I mentioned when Bible evidence was shown for sun-
about a dozen key areas where we had down to sundown observance. She changed
changed our doctrinal position over the her position on the law in Galatians. In
. years: areas such as the Trinity, person of Sketchesfrom the Life ofPaul she said it was the
Christ, deity of Christ, personality of the ceremonial law. After 1888, when she was
Holy Spirit, Armageddon, role of Turkey, challenged on her new designation of it as the
interpretation of the daily in Daniel 8, and morallaw, she said, "I'm willing to be taught
many others. Yet, the church always opposes by the humblest of my brethren." She also
change and, today, when a new area is of- changed her position on the covenants.
fered for investigation, we are in danger of These changes show that she did not intend
doing what we have done in all these other her past statements to be used as an im-
areas, taken decades and decades. Do you primatur of doctrine. I believe she does have
JW9:YV:c~1!at it.tQQkth~(:;4prcJl60 years to lose teaching authority , but it is teaching author-
Volume 11, Number 2 61

ity that is supportive of what is clearly laid heads as David did, which brought the wrath
down in Scripture. of God upon him? Statistics have a place but
So here is the future for the next ten years. when statistics are used as the motivation for
What will we do with the relationship be- soul-winning work, instead of the cross of
tween Ellen White and the Bible? What will Christ, God may treat us as He treated
we do with the primacy ofjustification? Will David. So it seems to me that the next decade
we give it primacy even in our evangelistic revolves around our attitude to the cross, the
work? Will we cease from our sin of counting scripture, and to Ellen White.

Ford Dismissal: Reactions

and Response
An Open Letter to President Wtlson
This letter was forwarded to Elder Wilson with firm Dr. Ford's major biblical concerns. For
39 signatures. It was formulated during the sum- instance they concede:
mer break at Andrews University when the
greater part of the student body was on vacation. It 1) The book of Hebrews pictures Christ
therefore represents only a portion of the interested going "within the veil," i.e., into the Most
parties. The letter was prepared in consultation Holy Place (not the holy place) at His as-
with Seminary faculty. cension to be our intercessor. The book of
Hebrews does not teach a two-apartment
or two-phase ministry.
b) The defilement of the sanctuary in
September 10, 1980 Daniel 8 is not caused by our sins but by

D ear Elder Wilson: We

are pastors and
scholars at Andrews Theological Seminary
the desecrating work of the little horn. In
other words, the term "cleansing the
sanctuary" in Daniel 8 does not refer to an
who are deeply concerned for the unity of the investigation of our sins but to God's vic-
church. As Seventh-day Adventists commit- tory over anti christ on our behalf.
ted to the church and its pursuit of truth, we c) The year-day principle is not explicitly
wish to express our appreciation to you for identified as a scriptural rule for interpret-
convening the Glacier View Conference. We ing time prophecies.
have not envied you your difficult task. d) Under inspiration, the New Testament
Nevertheless, because of our love for this writers looked for the second coming of
church we deplore the rending asunder of Christ in their day. They did not expect to
Christ's body by what we consider to be the wait 1900 years.
unjust recommendation that Dr. Desmond e) Our acquittal in the judgment is based
Ford not be employed in denominational solely on the continued decision we make
service. This was improper for these reasons: with respect to Jesus. To have accepted His
1) The two consensus statements unani- death on our behalf is to have passed al-
mously voted at Glacier View by his peers ready from condemnation to salvation.
were accepted by Dr. Ford. He was therefore 3) Church administration has apparently
in harmony with his brethren. rejected Dr. Ford's willingness to cooperate
:-2r'fhese-:consensl1s-:-docl1tnents-'<lCtualiy--af",- in::c:restoring-chl1rch _unity~----W-e~und'erstand
Volume 11, Number 2 61

ity that is supportive of what is clearly laid heads as David did, which brought the wrath
down in Scripture. of God upon him? Statistics have a place but
So here is the future for the next ten years. when statistics are used as the motivation for
What will we do with the relationship be- soul-winning work, instead of the cross of
tween Ellen White and the Bible? What will Christ, God may treat us as He treated
we do with the primacy ofjustification? Will David. So it seems to me that the next decade
we give it primacy even in our evangelistic revolves around our attitude to the cross, the
work? Will we cease from our sin of counting scripture, and to Ellen White.

Ford Dismissal: Reactions

and Response
An Open Letter to President Wtlson
This letter was forwarded to Elder Wilson with firm Dr. Ford's major biblical concerns. For
39 signatures. It was formulated during the sum- instance they concede:
mer break at Andrews University when the
greater part of the student body was on vacation. It 1) The book of Hebrews pictures Christ
therefore represents only a portion of the interested going "within the veil," i.e., into the Most
parties. The letter was prepared in consultation Holy Place (not the holy place) at His as-
with Seminary faculty. cension to be our intercessor. The book of
Hebrews does not teach a two-apartment
or two-phase ministry.
b) The defilement of the sanctuary in
September 10, 1980 Daniel 8 is not caused by our sins but by

D ear Elder Wilson: We

are pastors and
scholars at Andrews Theological Seminary
the desecrating work of the little horn. In
other words, the term "cleansing the
sanctuary" in Daniel 8 does not refer to an
who are deeply concerned for the unity of the investigation of our sins but to God's vic-
church. As Seventh-day Adventists commit- tory over anti christ on our behalf.
ted to the church and its pursuit of truth, we c) The year-day principle is not explicitly
wish to express our appreciation to you for identified as a scriptural rule for interpret-
convening the Glacier View Conference. We ing time prophecies.
have not envied you your difficult task. d) Under inspiration, the New Testament
Nevertheless, because of our love for this writers looked for the second coming of
church we deplore the rending asunder of Christ in their day. They did not expect to
Christ's body by what we consider to be the wait 1900 years.
unjust recommendation that Dr. Desmond e) Our acquittal in the judgment is based
Ford not be employed in denominational solely on the continued decision we make
service. This was improper for these reasons: with respect to Jesus. To have accepted His
1) The two consensus statements unani- death on our behalf is to have passed al-
mously voted at Glacier View by his peers ready from condemnation to salvation.
were accepted by Dr. Ford. He was therefore 3) Church administration has apparently
in harmony with his brethren. rejected Dr. Ford's willingness to cooperate
:-2r'fhese-:consensl1s-:-docl1tnents-'<lCtualiy--af",- in::c:restoring-chl1rch _unity~----W-e~und'erstand
62 Spectrum

you would not accept his assurance to teach edge and explain Dr. Ford's contributions to
only that which was approved at Glacier Adventist sanctuary theology as accepted at
View. Instead the impossible demand has Glacier View in the consensus statement, and
been laid upon him to repudiate his conscien- rectify its prejudicial reporting of denomina-
tious convictions. We find this particularly tional issues.
difficult to accept in view of the fact that no 2) A committee should be formed that in-
explicit scriptural proof has been offered to cludes a wide representation of Dr. Ford's
negate his views. fellow pastors and scholars to review ad-
4) A "ten-point statement" has been used ministrative actions regarding his employ-
in condemning Dr. Ford's ministry both in ment as a pastor in the denomination.
the Review and in recent administrative ac- 3) The General Conference should en-
tions. However, we question its legitimacy courage church administrators to not regard
for this purpose: with suspicion the workers and lay persons
a) It does not represent the consensus of who share Scriptural concerns in common
Dr. Ford's brethren in that it was neither with Dr. Ford.
discussed nor voted by the full group at 4) The administration should seek to be
Glacier View. reconciled with those Adventists who feel
b) It, in fact, contradicts the spirit and let- that excessive concern for denominational
ter of the consensus statement at certain tradition is eclipsing the rightful place of
key points. Christ and the Bible.
c) The authors of the document intended it As you know, some congregations have
to clarify communication at the conference already withdrawn from conference affilia-
and did not know it would be used to tion, others are splitting internally, and large
jeopardize Dr. Ford's ministry. numbers of denominational workers are fear-
5) You assured the church in writing (Re- ful that their present connection with the or-
view, July 9) that the Glacier View conference ganization is in jeopardy. We believe that
would not be a trial of Dr. Ford. Evidence decisive action on your part to redress what
indicates however that it was primarily a trial seems to be injustice can still avert a major
and administrative action was begun there fragmentation of the Seventh-day Adventist
that will apparently deprive him of his cre- Church. "The fruit of righteousness will be
dentials. peace; The effect of righteousness will be
In view of the foregoing facts we must ask, quietness and confidence forever" (Isa.
Is it right to allow a minister to be defrocked 32:17). . .
who is in basic harmony with the theological
consensus of his church? Is it right to con-
demn a man's theology by using a document
Bureaucratic Theology?
(the "ten-point statement") that was not
even discussed, let alone approved by the
body of delegates appointed to judge his ar-
T he beautiful thing
about the General
Conference meeting this May in Dallas was
.
guments? Is it right to ostracize a worker how "the people," God's church in holy
whose major biblical views, while criticized convocation, came together and worked out
by some, have nevertheless been largely ac- a statement of fundamental beliefs. At the
cepted by the body established to evaluate Glacier View Theological Consultation in
their merit? Is it right to ask anyone to give August, administrators, including Elder
up his honest convictions (especially when he Wilson, agreed with the theologians that the
offers to table them while study contiimes church's theology was a task to be shared by
and when no scriptural proof has shown "the people."
them to be wrong)? I am, therefore, having great difficulty trying
Because of our desire that justice be done to understand the recent action of the Presi-
and that reconciliation occur, we earnestly dent's Executive Advisory (PREXAD) in re-
request that the following actions be taken: gard to Dr. Desmond Ford. The
.:J):The:.Re:view-SJ1Q1J1d• •·fr:anklyilQkn9Wl- P~:E)(A-Pa€ti0n.~ff~{;tiv€1Y:lIDd€rIllip.€d·all the
Volume 11, Number 2 63

good that the Glacier View meeting ac- suspected, depending upon the issue of the
complished. According to the Ford letter, pub- moment. There is nearly a schizophrenic at-
lished in the recent special issue ofMinistry mag- titude toward the self-supporting worker.
azine, he is reconciled to the newly approved But what of the layman? For at least a
statement of beliefs and he pledged to support handful of church leaders around the world, a
them. To be perfectly candid, it seems that Dr. layman is to be managed, benevolently for
Ford is being "dealt with" for other than his own good, of course, but certainly pro-
theological reasons. It would appear that the tected from the cares and vagaries of church
appeals to theology are serving the ends of government. This mentality is growing and
church management. intensifying.
This does not come as a complete surprise. I "Souls and goals" cannot become the sole
have observed that in recent years there has been measure of success, or the less definable goals
a growing interest among church leaders in of love, freedom, community and charity
the principles and practices of profes- will fade into the background. When success
sional management. Seminars and work- is measured quantitatively in terms of souls,
shops have been conducted across the country, goals and counties entered, a premium seems
from Takoma Park, Maryland, to Riverside, to be put on the absence of dissent.
California. This is to be applauded. Certainly, But it is an acknowledged rule that free-
all would acknowledge the desirability of dom and exercise are necessary conditions
for physical, mental and spiritual growth. To
"Dr. Ford is being 'dealt deny the saints the challenge of hard
with' for other than theological decision-making stunts their spiritual
growth. We cannot simply do "theology by
reasons. . . . the appeals to objective." Church members must be free to
theology are serving the ends explore and dissent if the church is to be a
of church management." community that flourishes physically, men-
tally and spiritually. We should provide our-
greater efficiency and sounder business prac- selves with occasions within the life of the
tices' being brought into the work of the church when this kind offrank discussion can
church. Like it or not, the church has become a be encouraged.
big business. Lorenzo H. Grant
However, along with this increased interest Division of Religion
in "management by objective," I have noticed Southern Missionary College
an intensified management mentality. An example
is an increased awareness of the distinction be-
tween the various kinds of workers in the
Journalistic Fairness?
church structure.
Administrators are seen as the top power and
influence brokers of our structure.
Departmental directors are considered neces-
T hinking back over
the way in which the
Ford matter has been dealt with since I wrote
sary to keep the machinery running, but ves- the preliminary report for SPECTRUM
tiges of a bygone era, who will soon be phased (Vol. 10, No.4), my question is how well
out. The local pastor is the "foot soldier" lauded our Church handled a painful problem. May
in speech and union papers. He is a necessary I speak without reference to the truth or error
ally at constituency meetings, but is rarely taken of any Ford proposition and without refer-
seriously when it comes to deciding policy or ence to whether or not he has been a difficult
theology. Thus, for the budding theology stu- personality to work with?
dent, the pastoral ministry is viewed with dis- I wonder to what extent the outcome
dain. as only a jumping-off point to "greater" would have been different had the Review
serVIce. (and other guardians of the traditions) really
The other professionals paid by the church felt that Truth could afford to be fair. Did
(such~as . educat9Ts) are.variol1.sly.courtedor theyfea.t;:GOtl-ceould !lotprotectHis-()~~and
 64 Spectrum

that Ford and his questions had to be publicly role as polemical and apologetic and was will-
discredited in advance lest the select gather- ing to sacrifice its credibility as a reporter of
ing at Glacier View be bewitched and suc- news to the more important functions. Even
cumb helplessly to the lure of Error? if the Review position had represented 100
Certainly, the uninformed reader of the percent Truth, the means for shoring it up
Review might suppose that Ford's peers in have been unworthy.
Colorado had refuted his points and found Walter C. Utt
him wanting, unaware that the larger group Department of History
neither discussed nor voted the "Ten Points" Pacific Union College
which identified Ford's points of difference
with Adventist tradition. Some of the schol-
ars who were at Glacier View now express a
rather pathetic naivete, a tardy curiosity
The Bible Alone
about the provenance of those "Ten Points"
and how they were to be used. They say, in
fact, they feel "used." Their protests to this
A t the Glacier View
meeting, it was
stated that Dr. Ford's views had to be "tested
effect, one assumes, are unlikely to be fea- by the Bible and the writings of Ellen G.
tured in the Review or the union papers. White," and be compared with the historic
interpretation of the church. The heavy mass
"The Review saw its role as of material of nearly 2,000 pages filling the
bulging suitcases of committee members
polemical and apologetic and could have been replaced with one book -
was willing to sacrifice its the Bible - as an answer for all their confu-
credibility as a reporter SIon.
One of the participants at Glacier View,
o f news .... " Raymond Cottrell, stated in SPECTRUM
(Vol. 10, No.4) that "it was nothing less than
Though discussions continued for some a miracle that our spiritual forefathers found
time after Glacier View between Ford, the any consensus to unite them on important
General Conference officers and the Austra- points of faith ... that miracle was the active
lians, readers of the Review learned while this presence of the Holy Spirit in the person and
was still going on that it was all over, the ministry of Ellen White . . . her selective
brethren had refuted Ford, and Dr. and Mrs. choice among the resulting alternatives de-
Ford had already slunk away defeated into termined which of the various interpreta-
the night (4 September, p. 7). Reaffirmation tions the infant church should adopt.
is now announced as the equivalent of refuta- Whether or not this selection comported
tion. The widely heralded special issue of with strict exegesis of the Bible is irrelevant. "
Ministry, if one notes the "stacking" of the The only way that theologians like Cot-
contributors, will solve nothing. One can trell, with decades of experience and the
only hope the study committee apparently knowledge that there is no biblical basis for
promised by President Wilson will some day the traditional Adventist interpretation of
be able to address the issues with the time and Daniel 8:14, can hold to the Adventist posi-
tranquility needed for such important schol- tion is to give greater authority to Ellen
arship. White's writings than they do to Scripture.
Not a few suspect that the outcome of To this layman, out position on the
Glacier View was predetermined. However, sanctuary should be based solely upon the
does not the press campaign of the previous Word of God - sola Scriptura.
eight months indicate that the Review feared As late as 1851 , James White himself said in
that it was not? So often through the cen- the Review and Herald that "there is no scrip-
turies when church leaders have sensed a tural foundation for the teaching that the In-
challenge, they proceed to operate as if the vestigative Judgment began in 1843 or 1844
._end,justified::~the~·nteans.The .Rt:vit:w sawits _ or act-any oth~rti-m~subseq{l(mt to tl1eappear-
Volume 11, Number 2 65

ing of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ." Sanctuary Review Committee. We view
The fact is, the traditional Adventist position these consensus statements as a stimulus to
is based on the views of Hiram Edson, O. R. further study, and not as definitive formula-
L. Crosier and the writings of Uriah Smith. tions to end discussion. They were not in-
Ellen White's writings on the sanctuary are tended to be used as a test of loyalty or or-
based on their work. Research shows what I thodoxy.
consider to be indisputable evidence that pas- We wish to express appreciation to the
sages of Patriarchs and Prophets copy and General Conference leadership for conven-
paraphrase Uriah Smith's volume, The ing the Glacier View meeting of the
Sanctuary. The following are particularly per- Sanctuary Review Committee. Our love for
tinent parallels: PP, p. 347 and Sanctuary, pp. the church and our concern for its unity
113, 114; PP, p. 352 and Sanctuary, pp. 202, impel us to do what we can to put to rest
203. After Ellen White endorsed Uriah disruptive rumors about that meeting.
Smith's views, James White also changed his
earlier stand.
Rather than rely on Ellen White's en-
dorsement of others' ideas of the sanctuary,
Wtlson Resrnnds
Adventists should ground their doctrine on The following letter was addressed by President
the Bible and the Bible alone. Adventists Neal Wilson to college and university presidents,
should listen to Ellen White's own admoni- health care corporation presidents, North Ameri-
tion in Gospel Workers, p. 127: "The only can conference presidents, North American union
right way would be to sit down as Christians, presidents, General Conference department di-
and investigate the position presented, in the rectors, division presidents and General Confer-
light of God's word, which will reveal truth ence officers.
and unmask error."
Eryl Cummings
Farmington, New Mexico S ince returning from
the Sanctuary Re-
view Committee at Glacier View, Colorado,
held Aug. 10-15, 1980, I have received many
telexed messages, telephone calls, telegrams,
Theologians' Statement and letters. These have contained a wide
variety of opinions, reactions, questions, in-
At its second annual meeting in Dallas, Texas, accurate assumptions, judgment of leader-
on November 4-5, the Andrews Society for Reli- ship motives, criticisms, expressions of
gious Studies (comprised of the Bible teachers in anger, and vicious verbal attacks, but also
North American colleges and universities) dis- many words of encouragement and deep
cussed Glacier View and its aftermath and au- appreciation.
thorized thefollowing majority statement. Many have sought an explanation of
events that transpired following the Glacier

In view of widely cir-

culated reports con-
cerning the attitude of Adventist scholars re-
View meetings. Almost every question that
has been raised in the various types of com-
munication which I have received, has been
garding the consensus statements of the rather adequately answered, not only in a
Sanctuary Review Committee ("Christ in general way, but in many instances in a spe-
the Heavenly Sanctuary" and "The Role of cific way, in the Adventist Review and the
the Ellen G. White Writings in Doctrinal special 64-page issue of Ministry, which came
Matters"), we wish to make clear that we off the press Sept. 22.
affirm these statements. We view them as As many of you will remember, at the
being in significant continuity with tradi- recent Annual Council I made a statement to
tional understanding, while incorporating the full assembly of leaders with respect to
new understandings, reflecting the contribu- the way things stand at present, and I urged
tipj)s oj:aJl thed,o~uments prepared for-the patiencean4discre-tion,~as w~n asfifffl-ne-ss. j
I
!
66 Spectrum

As a part of my statement, I read a recent think that Dr. Ford's basic view of justifi-
letter I had written to a young minister for cation necessarily leads to divergent doc-
whom I have personal concern and affection. trine. It might be argued by some that we
Many of you attending the Annual Council should restrict or discourage the preaching
requested a copy of this letter. I summarized of the gospel, because Dr. Ford preached
some of my feelings in this way: the gospel and came to what the church
It may be difficult for you to put your- regards as unwarranted conclusions in
self in the place of some of us, and to fully areas related to it. This, however, is not
understand or agree with decisions that our position. I am grateful that righteous-
have been made in good conscience by ness by faith was not the issue at Glacier
administration. You should know that View. It seems to me that the
some of these decisions have caused some beautifully-worded analysis of the gospel
of us considerable pain, and they were not entitled", "The Dynamics of Salvation,"
arrived at hastily nor solely on the ex- which appeared in the July 31, 1980
change of certain letters, nor with any vin- Adventist Review, gives a marvelous basis
for anyone wishing to preach the gospel
and exalt Christ and the cross.
"A pastor's search and study There are incipient plans for further
to find answers to questions study on some of the issues, particularly
that puzzle him is a legitimate those that the Daniel Committee grappled
with. We happen to believe that the Lord
effort and a pardonable acti- has told us the great benefit of studying
vity; his teaching or preach- Daniel and Revelation together. Also, the
ing in fixed opposition to Biblical Research Institute is developing a
study project on Ellen G. White, including
doctrines of the church is not."
the relationship of her writings to interpre-
tation of the Scriptures. We will appoint
dictive feelings, but rather, out of a sense the best qualified people available to study
of duty to the Lord's work. It is essential to these topics. In addition, we would like to
stress the point that in arriving at the coun- encourage a new era of intense personal
sel shared with the Australasian Division, study of the Bible by every member of the
General Conference leadership had taken a Seventh-day Adventist Church.
number of factors into consideration, of I have every reason to believe that the
which the exchange ofletters was but one. administrators of the church will deal pa-
Before I attempt to answer some of the tiently and sympathetically with ministers
questions raised in your letter, I wish to who have questions about some Adventist
point out that a minister's loss of creden- doctrines and are searching for answers in
tials for theological reasons is a relatively the Scriptures. We do not believe it is
rare occurrence in the Seventh-day Christian nor morally just to condemn or
Adventist Church. Further, the last case assign guilt by association. We do not
previous to that of Dr. Ford in which the want individuals to be held suspect simply
..
General Conference was involved, had to because they are friends of or sympathetic
do with a pastor whose theological posi- with someone such as Dr. Ford, or because
tion was very opposite to that of Dr . Ford. an individual might even have similar
Thus, ministers with differing theological concerns.
orientation could also have cause for ask- The Seventh-day Adventist Church
ing questions. does hold very positive and specific doc-
You ask if you can feel free to share the trinal positions, and that the ministers of
gospel as you see it. You did not state what the church must be those who can consci-
your views were, but I would assume from entiously and enthusiastically teach those
your letter that they are somewhat similar doctrines naturally follows. A pastor's
to those expressed by Dr . Ford. Id()not search and study to find answers to ques-
Volume 11, Number 2 67

tions that puzzle him is a legitimate effort himself and engages in schismatic ac-
and a pardonable activity; his teaching or tivities, he should expect to be questioned
preaching in fixed opposition to doctrines in an effort to determine whether it is wise
of the church is not. Neither is it acceptable or possible for him to continue as a minis-
for ministers to remain silent or to be non- ter of the gospel in the Seventh-day Ad-
committal when it comes to doctrines or ventist Church.
teachings of the church which clearly iden- The church is not embarking on a hunt-
tify us as being distinctive from other ing expedition to find pastors who teach
Christian or evangelical groups. variant doctrines. The administrative ac-
If there are significant doctrines of this tions that have followed Gacier View have
church which a minister cannotconscien- not been separated from biblical study and
tiously support, and he "goes public" with evidence. I appeal to you to stay close to
this and challenges the church openly and the Lord, to His Word, to His church, and
indicates that the church is wrong and al- its leaders. Don't permit a rift to develop in
ways has been wrong; when he creates a relation to any of these.
divisive situation and draws disciples after Neal C. Wilson
 Sanctuaty Debate
Documents
Christ in the Heavenly
Sanctuary

T he doctrine of Christ our

High Priest in the
heavenly sanctuary brings us assurance and hope. It
The present paper is an elaboration of the Dallas
statement. It sets forth the consensus of the Sanctuary
Review Committee, which convened August 10-15,
invested the lives of the pioneers of the Seventh-day 1980, at Glacier View, Colorado. The committee
Adventist Church with meaning; it still is a fruitful sought to make a serious and frank appraisal of our
field for our contemplation and spiritual growth. historic positions, evaluating them in the light of criti-
This distinctive teaching was reaffirmed in the cisms and alternative interpretations that have been
Statement of Fundamental Beliefs adopted by the suggested. Such suggestions are beneficial in that they
General Conference session at Dallas in April 1980. drive us to study, force us to clarify our understand-
Our continuing conviction was there expressed as ing, and thereby lead us to sharper insights and a
follows: deeper appreciation of the truths tliat have shaped the
"There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle Advent Movement.
which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ Thus the doctrine of the sanctuary, which meant so
ministers on our behalf, making available to believers much to early Adventists, shines on believers in our
the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all day. To see it more clearly is to see Christ more
on the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High clearly; and this vision will revive Christian life and
Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time give power to our preaching and witness.
of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic
period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last
phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of inves-
tigative judgment which is part of the ultimate dispo-
sition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient
A lthough the sanctuary
symbolism is prominent
throughout Scripture, with Christ as High Priest
Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that being the dominant idea of the Book of Hebrews,
typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the Christian thought has given relatively little attention .
blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are to this subject. In the nineteenth century, however,
purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood ofJesus . there was a sudden flowering of interest in Christ in
The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intel- the heavenly sanctuary. Our pioneers brought to-
ligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and gether the ideas of Leviticus , Daniel, Hebrews, Reve-
therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in lation, and other scriptures in a unique theological
the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who synthesis that combined the high-priesthood of Christ
among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the with the expectation of the end of history . Christ was
commandments of God and the faith ofJesus , and in not merely ministering in the sanctuary above; He had
Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His ever- entered upon the final phase of that ministry, corre-
lasting kingdom. This judgment vindicates the justice sponding to the Day of Atonement of Leviticus 16.
of God in saving those who believe inJesus. It declares For the earliest Seventh-day Adventists this new
that those who have remained loyal to God shall re- doctrine was "the key which unlocked the mystery of
ceive the kingdom. The completion of this ministry of the disappointment of 1844" (The Great Controver-
Christ will mark the close of human probation before sy, p. 423). It was the means by which these firm
t~ S~c()tl{LP1.dvent." . believers in the imminent return ofJesus could come
Volume 11, Number 2 69

to terms with their unfulfilled expectations. It gave death Jesus accomplished what Israel's repeated offer-
them a new sense of religious identity; it filled their ings could never achieve. He is the reality symbolized
lives with meaning, for it "opened to view a complete by the Day of Atonement sacrifices, as by all the
system of truth, connected and harmonious, showing ancient services. Although it has been suggested that
that God's hand had directed the great advent move- these references in Hebrews show that the eschatolog-
ment and revealing present duty as it brought to light ical Day of Atonement began at the cross, Hebrews is
the position and work of His people." -Ibid. Thus not in fact concerned with the question of time; it
they could see that although they had been mistaken, concentrates rather on the all-sufficiency of Calvary.
they had not been utterly deluded; they still had a For answers to our questions regarding the timing of
mission and a message. events in the heavenly sanctuary, we look to the books
The belief that Christ is our High Priest in the of Daniel and Revelation. In particular the "time
heavenly sanctuary is not a relic from our Adventist prophecies" of Daniel 7 to 9 remain crucial for the
past; it illumines all other doctrines; it brings God and Adventist understanding of the sanctuary. They point
His salvation "near" to us in a way that gives us "full beyond the first advent of Christ to God's final work
assurance" (Heb. 10:22); it shows us that God is on our of judgment from the heavenly sanctuary.
side. The precise meaning of the Old Testament
In heaven above there is One who "always lives to prophecies is a matter that calls for ongoing study.
make intercession" for us (Heb. 7:25, R.S.V.). He is This investigation must seek to. be true to the varied
Jesus, our High Priest, who "in the days of his flesh" nature of the individual prophecies, to take account of
(chap. 5:7) suffered, endured the test, and died for us. the differing perspectives of the readers (in Old Tes-
He is able to "sympathize with our weaknesses" tament, New Testament, and modern times), to dis-
(chap. 4:15, R.S.v.) and sends forth timely help from cern the divine intent in the prophecies, and to main-
the throne of grace (chap. 2: 18; 4: 16) . So we may come tain the tension between divine sovereignty and
boldly into the presence of God, knowing that we are human freedom. Furthermore, this study must give
accepted through the merits of our Mediator. due weight to the strong and widespread sense of the
The doctrine of the sanctuary gives us a new view of imminent Second Advent that we find in the New
ourselves. Humanity, despite its frailties and rebel- Testament (e.g., Rom. 13:11-12; 1 Cor. 7:29-31; Rev.
lion, is important to God and is loved supremely by 22:20).
Him. God has shown His regard for us by taking The writings of Ellen White also contain much
human nature upon Himself, and bearing it forever in material dealing with Christ in the heavenly sanctuary
the person of Christ , our heavenly High Priest. We are (e.g., The Great Controversy, pp. 409-432,479-491,
the people of the Priest, the community of God that .582-678). They highlight the significance of the events
lives to worship Him and to bring forth fruit to His of 1844 in the divine plan, and the final events that
glory. proceed from the throne of God. These writings,
This doctrine also opens a new perspective on the however, were not the source of our pioneers' doc-
world. We see it as part of a cosmic struggle, the trine of the sanctuary; rather, they confirmed and
"great controversy" between good and evil. The supplemented the ideas that the early Adventists were
heavenly sanctuary is the divine headquarters in this finding in the Bible itself. Today we recognize the
warfare; it guarantees that eventually evil will be no same relationship: the writings of Ellen White provide
more, and God will be all and in all (1 Cor. 15:28). His confirmation of our doctrine of Christ in the heavenly
work of judgment that issues from the sanctuary re- sanctuary and supplement our understanding of it.
sults in a redeemed people and a re-created world. In the remainder of this paper, we offer a brief
While the sanctuary theme runs throughout Scrip- explanation of this doctrine. The Biblical material on
ture, it is seen most clearly in Leviticus, Daniel, Heb- which the doctrine is based falls into two related
rews, and Revelation. These four books, which at- phases. We turn to the first of these: intercession.
tracted the attention of the first Adventists, remain the
focus of our ongoing study of the sanctuary in heaven.
In terms of emphasis, these books fall into pairs.
Whereas Leviticus and Hebrews are concerned
primarily with the priestly functions associated with
T he Old Testament sacrifi-
cial system was given by
God. It was the way of salvation by faith for those
the sanctuary, Daniel and Revelation relate the divine times, educating the people of God to the dreadful
activity in the sanctuary to the end of the world. Thus character of sin and pointing forward to God's way of
we may say that a major thrust of the first pair is bringing sin to an end.
intercession, while a major thrust of the second is But there was no efficacy in these multiplied sac-
judgment. rifices as such. Sin is a moral offense, not to be re-
The Book of Leviticus describes the various services solved by the slaughter of animals. "It is impossible
of the Old Testament sanctuary. We read of the con- that the blood of bulls and goats should take away
tinual sacrifices, presented every morning and eve- sins" (Heb. 10:4, R.S.V .). InJesus Christ alone can sin
ning, for the people ofIsrael (Lev. 6:8-13). We read be removed. Not only is He our High Priest, He also is
also of several types of individual offerings to express our Sacrifice. He is "the Lamb of God, who takes
confession, thanksgiving, and consecration (chapters away the sin of the world" (John 1:29, R.S.V.), the
1-7) . And the climax of the whole system of sacrifices, Passover Lamb sacrificed for us (1 Cor. 5:7), God's
the Day of Atonement, is described in detail (chapter appointed One whose blood is an expiation for the
16).
The Book of Hebrews compares and contrasts these
sins of all humanity (Rom. 3:21-25).
In the light ofJesus Christ all the services of the Old
j
services with the sacrifice ofJesus Christ on Calvary Testament sanctuary find their true meaning. Now
t€hap, 9:1-10:22). It argues: that by His once-for-all we: know-that .the-Hebrewsanctll~fy-jt~~!f:~.as£l,lp:-,
J
I
70 Spectrum

figure, a symbol of the true sanctuary "which is set up vices He there performs, we are empowered by the
not by man but by the Lord" (Heb. 8:2, R.S.V.; 9:24), Spirit to live holy lives and provide an urgent witness
a far more glorious reality than our minds can com- to the world. We know that it is a fearful thing to
prehend (Patriarchs and Prophets,p. 357). Now we despise the blood that has redeemed us (chaps. 6:4-6;
know that all the Levitical priests and Aaronic high 10:26-31; 12:15-17).
priests were but prefigurations of the One who is the The final phase of Christ's ministry in the heavenly
great High Priest because He is in Himself both God santuary is that ofjudgment, vindication, and cleans-
and man (chap. 5:1-10). Now we know that the blood ing . We should be clear, however, that while Christ is
of animals carefully selected so as to be without Judge, He is still our Intercessor. We look first at the
blemish or spot (e.g., Lev. 1:3, 10), was a symbol of time of the judgment and then at its nature.
the blood of the Son of God, who would, by dying for
us, purify us of sin (1 Peter 1:18-19).
This first phase of the heavenly ministry of Christ is
not a passive one. As our Mediator, Jesus continually
applies the benefits of His sacrifice (or us. He directs
T he prophetic period of
2300 days (Dan. 8:14)
remains a cornerstone of the Adventist understanding
the affairs of the church (Rev. 1:12-20). He sends forth of the final judgment. Although this part of our doc-
the Spirit Oohn 16:7). He is the leader of the forces of trine ofth~ sanctuary is the one most frequently ques-
right in the great conflict with Satan (Rev. 19:11-16). tioned, careful study of the criticisms in thelight of the
He receives the worshipofheaven (chap. 5:11-14). He Scriptures confirms its .importance and validity.
upholds the universe (Heb. 1:3; Rev. 3:21). Three aspects of this prophecy, especially, have
All blessings flow from the continuing efficacy of been called into question: the year-day relationship;
Christ's sacrifice. The Book of Hebrews highlights its the meaning of the word translated "cleansed" (Dan.
two great achievements: it provides unhindered access 8:14, KJ.V.) and its connection with the Day of
to the presence of God, and it thoroughly removes sin. Atonement (Lev. 16); and the context of the prophe-
Despite the importance of the Old Testament cy.
sanctuary, it represented limited access to God. Only The year-day relationship can be Biblically sup-
those born to the priesthood could enter it (Heb. ported, although it is not explicitly identified as a
9:1-7). But in the heavenly sanctuary Christ has principle of prophetic interpretation. It seems obvi-
opened for us the door to the very presence of God; by ous, however, that certain prophetic time periods are,
faith we come boldly to the throne of grace (chap. not meant to be taken literally (e.g., the shortleriods
4:14-16; also 7:19; 10:19-22; 12:18-24). Thus the in Revelation 11:9, 11). Furthermore, the 01 Testa-
privileges of every Christian are greater even than ment provides illustrations of a year-day
those of the high priests of the Old Testament. interchange ability in symbolism (Gen. 29:27; Num.
, There is no intermediate step in our approach to 14:34; Eze. 4:6; Dan. 9:24-27). The year-day relation-
God. Hebrews stresses the fact that our great High ship also is recognizable in the interlocking of Daniel 8
Priest is at the very right hand of God (chap.1 :3), in and 9. Additional support is found from parallel
"heaven itself. .. in the presence of God" (chap. 9:24). prophecies of the 1260 days-years in Daniel and Reve-
The symbolic language of the Most Holy Place, lation (Dan. 7:25; Rev. 12:14; 13:5). Since the
"within the veil," is used to assure us of our full, prophecy of Daniel 8 is parallel to those of chapter~ 2,
direct, and free access to God (chaps. 6:19-20; 9:24-28; 7, and 11-12, all of which culminate in the kingdom of
10:1-4). God at the end of history, it is proper to expect the
And now there is no need for further offerings and period represented by the 2300 days to reach to the end
sacrifices. The Old Testament sacrifices were "imper- time (Dan. 8:17). This is made possible for us by the
fect" - that is, incomplete, unable to make a final end exegetical application of the year-day relationship.
of sin (chap. 9:9). The very repetition of the sacrifices According to many older versions of the Bible, at
signified their inadequacy (chap. 10:1-4). In contrast, the end of the 2300 days the sanctuary is to be
God's appointed Sacrifice accomplished what the old "cleansed." The Hebrew word here is nitsdaq, which
on~s could not, and thus brought them to an end has a broad range of possible meanings. Its basic idea is
(chap. 9:13-14). "Every priest stands daily at his ser- "make right," ''justify,'' "vindicate," or "restore";
vice, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which but "purify" and" cleanse" may be included within its
can never take away sins. But when Christ had offered conceptual range. In Daniel 8:14 it is evident that the
for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the word denotes the reversal of the evil caused by the
right hand of God" (chap. 10:11-12, R.S.V.). power symbolized by the "little horn," and hence
So Calvary is of abiding consequence. Unlike any probably should be translated "restore." While there
other event in history, it is unchanging in its power. It is, therefore, not a strong verbal link between this
is eternally present, because Jesus Christ, who died for verse and the Day of Atonement ritual of Leviticus 16,
us, continues to make intercession for us in the the 'passages are, nevertheless, related by their parallel
heavenly sanctuary (chap. 7:25). ideas of rectifying the sanctuary from the effects of sin.
This is why the New Testament rings with confi- Daniel 8 presents the contextual problem of how to
dence. With such a High Priest, with such a Sacrifice, relate exegetically the cleansing of the sanctuary at the
with such intercession, we have "full assurance" end of the 2300 days with the activities of the "little
(chap. 10:22). Our confidence is not in ourselves - in horn" during the 2300 days. This wicked power casts
what we have done or what we can do - but in Him down the place of the santuary (Dan. 8:11) and thus
and what He has done and still does. occasions the need for its restoration or purification.
This assurance can never take lightly the Sacrifice The "little horn," however, is on earth, whereas we
that has provided it. As we by faith look to Jesus in the understand the sanctuary to be in heaven. But a careful
heavenly sanctuary -'"C:, ol,lrsanctuary - and the ser- study-of Daniel 8:9-26poiI~ts to a- solution of this
Volume 11, Number 2 71

difficulty. It becomes clear that heaven and earth are world. To have accepted His death on our behalf is to
interrelated, so that the attacks of the "little horn" have passed already from death to life, from condem-
have a cosmic, as well as historical, significance. In nation to salvation; to have rejected Him is to be
this way, we may see how the restoration of the self-condemned Gohn 3:17-18). So this end-time
heavenly sanctuary corresponds to - and is a reversal judgment at the close of the 2300-day period reveals
of - the earthly activity of the "little horn." But while our relationship to Christ, disclosed in the totality of
we believe that our historic interpretation of Daniel our decisions. It indicates the outworking of grace in
8:14 is valid, we wish to encourage ongoing study of our lives as we have responded to His gift of salvation;
this important prophecy. it shows that we belong to Him.
Our conviction that the end of the prophetic period The work of judging the saints is part of the final
of2300 days in 1844 marks the beginning of a work of eradication of sin from the universe Ger. 31:34; Dan
judgment in heaven is supported by the parallelism of 12:1; Rev. 3:5; 21:27). At the close of probation, just
Daniel 8 with Daniel 7, which explicitly describes before the final events in the history of our earth, the
such a work, and by the references to heavenly judg- people of God will be confirmed in righteousness
ment in the Book of Revelation (chaps. 6:10; 11:18; (Rev. 22:11). The divine activity from the heavenly
14:7; 20:12-13). sanctuary (chap. 15:1-8) will issue in the sequence of
Thus our study reinforces our belief that we have events that at length will purge the universe of all sin
indeed come to the time of pre-Advent judgment, and Satan, its originator.
which historically we have termed the "investigative
judgment." We hear again God's call to proclaim the For the child of God, knowledge of Christ's inter-
everlasting gospel around the world because "the cession in the judgment brings assurance, not anxiety.
hour of his judgment is come" (chap. 14:6-7). He knows that One stands in his behalf, and that the
The teaching of "judgment to come" has a firm base work of judgment is in the hands of his Intercessor
in Scripture (Eccl. 12:14; John 16:8-11; Acts 24:25; Gohn 5:22-27). In the righteousness of Christ the
Heb. 9:27; etc.). For the believer in Jesus Christ, the Christian is secure in the judgment (Rom. 8:1).
doctrine of judgment is solemn but reassuring, be- Moreover, the judgment heralds the hour of transition
cause the judgment is God's own intervention in the from faith to sight, from earthly care and frustration
course of human history to make all things right. It is to eternal joy and fulfillment in the presence of God.
the unbeliever who finds the teaching a subject of God's judgment, however, is concerned with more
terror. than our personal salvation; it is cosmic in scope. It
The work of divine judgment that issues from the unmasks evil and all evil systems. It exposes hypocrisy
heavenly sanctuary has two .aspects: One centers in and deceit. It restores the rule of right to the universe.
God's people on earth; the other involves the whole Its final word is a new heaven and a new earth, in
universe as God brings to a successful conclusion the which righteousness dwells (2 Peter 3:13), one pure
great struggle between good and evil. song of love from Creation to creation (Ibid., pp.
Scripture tells us that we "must all appear before the 662-678).
judgment seat of Christ" (2 Cor. 5:10), and that we are And in this act of divine judgment, God Himself is
to 'give account for even the "idle word" (Matt. shown to be absolutely just. The universal response to
12:36). This aspect of the end-time events reveals who His final acts from the heavenly santuary is, " 'Great
are God's (see The Great Controversy, pp. 479-491). and wonderful are thy deeds, 0 Lord God the Al-
The overarching question concerns the decision we mighty! Just and true are thy ways, 0 King of the
have made with respect to Jesus, the Saviour of the ages!' " (Rev. 15:3, R.S.V.).

The Role of the Ellen G. White

Writings in Doctrinal Matters
T he Seventh-day Advent-
ist Church from its be-
ginning has recognized the existence of the gifts of the
and was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White.
As the Lord's messenger, her writings are a continu-
ing and authoritative source of truth and provide for
Spirit as promised by our Lord for building up the the church comfort, guidance, instruction, and cor-
bod y of Christ. Among these is the gift of prophecy rection. They also make clear that the Bible is the
(Eph. 4:10-13). The following statement on the gift of standard by which all teaching and experience must be
prophecy was adopted at the General Conference ses- tested."
sion in April, 1980, as part of the Statement of Fund a- The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are
mental Beliefs: divinely inspired. This canon of Scripture is the stand-
"One of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. ard of faith and practice. Ellen G. White was inspired
T-his. gift isanjdentifyinfpnarko£the-relt:lna'l):t~h!Xrch .. .in~ht! •.~Jlmt!·:s~se: a.s::Wt!rt!.·.·~he_~iQkp.r(')13h~~s,jJ~t:1i~r:
 72 Spectrum

ministry and writings were given to exalt the Bible. transcends that of all noninspired interpreters.
Ellen G. White's writings, by her own testimony, We see need for a careful exposition of the Ellen G.
were not intended to give new doctrine, but to direct White writings. Not all her uses of Scripture were
minds to the truths already revealed in Scripture (Tes- designed to provide a strict exposition of the Biblical
timonies, vol. 5, pp. 663-665; Early Writings, p. 78). text. At times she employs Scripture homiletically. At
While the fundamental doctrines of the church are other times she looses passages from their Biblical
structured on the authority of Biblical writers, ex- context for special applications. Again, she may use
panded understanding and insight toward their full Biblical language merely for literary style. Ellen G.
development may be found in Ellen G. White's writ- White's total context and situation in life, with atten-
ings. These writings also confirm Biblical truth, tion to time and place, must always be taken into
without in the least intending to inhibit serious re- consideration.
search built upon sound principles of interpretation. We affirm that the Ellen G. White writings are
Recognizing that the operation of the Holy Spirit in significant for our day as underscored by her state-
the life and writings of Ellen G. White over a period of ment "Whether or not my life is spared, my writings
approximately 70 years resulted in a growth of her will constantly speak, and their work will go forward
. understanding of the Bible and God's activities in as long as time shall last ." - Selected Messages, book 1 ,
behalf of humanity, we believe that her authority p.55.

The Ten-Point Critique

A fter study of Dr. Des-
mond Ford's document
"Daniel 8:14, the Day of Atonement, and the Inves-
1) Methodology. We recognize the enormous
amount of time and energy the author has invested in
his document, which with appendixes constitutes a
tigativeJudgment," the following preliminary report sizable work of nearly 1,000 pages. However, because
regarding the validity of some of the author's views is of the size of the manuscript, with its numerous foot-
submitted: notes and references, which will be impressive if not
First, we express appreciation to Dr. Ford for his coercive to many readers, we feel it imperative to
many years of diligent service for the church. We make a statement on its accuracy.
recognize his talents as a teacher and preacher. His After apreliminary examination of the author's use
ministry has stimulated the minds of thousands of of references and sources, we fmd that in various
students and b~lievers. His wealth of knowledge and instances they have either been taken out of context or
personal life-style have been the source of blessing for used indiscriminately and thus not in harmony with
many. the quoted writers' original intent. This is true of both
We gratefully acknowledge the author's deep con- secular and Spirit of Prophecy statements.
cern that our presentation of the sanctuary doctrine be 2) The Day of Atonement in the Book of Hebrews. In
done in such a manner as to "recommend it to the best his position paper, Dr. Ford asserts emphatically that
minds of non-Adventists, as well as our own people, the Epistle to the Hebrews teaches that the risen
and be able to survive the most searching scrutiny" (p. Christ, by virtue of His own blood or sacrificial death,
5). entered into the heavenly Most Holy Place at His
We further acknowledge that his manuscript has ascension (pp. 187, 195). The cleansing of "the
encouraged a deeper and more careful examination of heavenly things" mentioned in Hebrews 9:23, he also
the Biblical foundation for our traditional view of the believes, applies only to the initial New Testament
sanctuary doctrine. However, while we have gladly period (pp. 169, 191).
and with good intention stated some of the positive The Day of Atonement sacrifice, as well as the other
aspects of the author's ministry, we must in fairness Levitical sacrifices and the high priest's entrance into
state that some of his activities have been neither a the Most Holy Place, fmds fulfillment, according to
source of strength nor in the best interests of our Ford, in Christ's death and ascension into the presence
church. of God (p. 253). Christ, then, as the high priest at
We feel it necessary to state that we cannot agree God's right hand, has opened up a new access and
with certain views set forth in his document, which center of worship for the people of God (p. 244).
we regard as major aspects of his theological position Ford declares that he can find in Hebrews no allu-
on the sanctuary doctrine. These disagreements are as sion to Daniel (p. 169) or any reference to a two-
fellows: ... . phased ministry of the risen· Christ (p. ·163). He does
 Volume 11, Number 2 73

affirm, however, the reality of the heavenly sanctuary belief in the year-day principle as a useful tool of
(p. 240). Biblical interpretation, we regret that he does not see
There is basic agreement that Christ at His ascen- fit to apply the principle to the time prophecies of
sion entered into the very presence of God, as sym- Daniel. He operates with the presupposition that all
bolized by the earthly high priest's entrance on the Old Testament prophecies were to be fulfilled by the
Day of Atonement. There is also general acceptance first century A.D., which prevents him from using
that neither Daniel nor a two-phased ministry are the year-day prinCiple.
referred to in the Epistle to the Hebrews. But we do Dr. Ford believes that the year-day tool became a
deny that His entrance into the presence of God pre- providential discovery "after the Advent hope of the
cludes (1) a first-apartment phase of mi.nistry or (2) early church had faded away" (p. 294). But coupled
marks the beginning of the second phase of His minis- with his uncertainty regarding the use of the year-day
try. principle is his uncertainty regarding the dates for the
Ford believes that the heavenly sanctuary interces- beginning and ending of the time prophecies in Daniel
sion of Christ finds a providential crisis in what he (pp. 320, 321, 344).
understands to be the rediscovery of the gospel Because Ford believes that the year-day principle
through a new appreciation of sanctuary symbolism was not God's original intent for Daniel's time
(p. 260). This rediscovery he relates to the 1844 prophecies, he believes its present use, in harmony
movement and the visions of Ellen G. White (p. 260) . with God's "providential" arrangement, should not
However, Ford denies that Christ's heavenly ministry be with punctiliar precision.
climaxes in the initiation of a judgment-intercession, We believe, however, that the year-day principle is
beginning in 1844 (pp. 595, 261). a valid hermeneutical tool and called for by the context
Ford does believe that the Day of Atonement imag- containing the time prophecies. When the context
ery fmds fulfillment in judgment - even pre-Advent relates to historical narrative with literal people, literal
judgment - in the book of Revelation (pp. 449, 650). time periods are used in Daniel 1, 3, 5, and 6. In the
This latter, however, is a declaration at the close of apocalyptic passages, when time periods accompany
Christ's heavenly intercession just before the Second symbolic figures, it is natural and appropriate to ex-
Advent; it is not a heavenly judicial process beginning pect those time periods also to be symbolic in nature.
in 1844 (p. 595). The proclamation that providentially Numerous other reasons help the prophetic interpre-
began in 1844 refers, in Ford's opinion, only to the ter to distinguish between literal and symbolic time.
believer's present decision of faith and the future, We further believe that all of the apocalyptic
pre-Advent judgment, but not to a present judicial prophecies in which time elements are found have
process in heaven (pp. 652, 260-261). stood the pragmatic test. That is, their predicted
This is an unwarranted reduction of Adventist be- events did occur at the intervals expected, according
lief. to the application of the year-day principle.
3) The Phrase "Within the Veil" as Found in Hebrews In reference to Daniel 8:13, 14, we believe that the
6:19,20. We acknowledge the insights in Dr. Ford's context requires the use of the year-day principle, and
study of the letter to the Hebrews; however, we dis- thus a fulfillment beginning in 457 B. C. and ending in
agree with the theological implications he draws from A.D. 1844.
the phrase "within the veil." We thus reject Dr. Ford's assertion that Daniel 8:14
We do not believe that the phrase was intended to "applies also to every revival of true religion where
mean that from the time of His ascension Christ has the elements of the kingdom of God , mirrored in the
been engaged in a ministry equivalent to that which sanctuary by the stone tablets and the mercy seat, are
the Old Testament high priest performed once a year proclaimed afresh, as at 1844" (p. 356).
in the second apartment of the tabernacle on the Day 5) Apotelesmatic Principle. Dr. Ford uses the
. of Atonement, to the exclusion of the daily phase of apotelesmatic principle to affirm that "a prophecy
the priestly ministry. "Within the veil," we believe, fulfilled, or fulfilled in part, or unfulfllied at the ap-
was intended to convey the conviction that, since pointed time, may have a later or recurring, or con-
Christ's ascension, we have full, free, and direct access summated fulfillment" (p. 485).
to the very presence of God. In short, by his usage of this hermeneutical princi-
The Old Testament believer had limited access to ple, Dr. Ford is able to accept multiple reinterpreta-
that presence by means of the high priest, who entered tions and applications of prophetic symbols and
with fear and with limited effectiveness the Most Holy statements. Almost a corollary to this principle is the
Place of the earthly tabernacle once a year. Since our author's borrowed axiom: "All are right in what they
Lord's ascension the believer has had full and free affirm and wrong in what they deny" (p. 505).
access to the presence of God through Christ. We reject the use of this axiom, whether explicit or
Through His sacrifice on the cross He has opened a implied, because with its use no positively stated as-
new way to the presence of God so that we have sertion could ever contradict another positively stated
continual and confident access to Him. assertion. With this guiding axiom coupled with the
"Within the veil" refers to this symbolic picture of apotelesmatic principle, the author says that all
the presence of God in a first-century application of prophetical interpretations by all four prophetical
the Day of Atonement imagery rather than the an- schools - preterists, historicists, futurists, and
titypical fulfillment of the Old Testament type. This idealists - are correct (ibid.).
way of speaking in no way precludes our understand- When he applies the apotelesmatic principle to
ing of Christ's two-phased mediatorial ministry in the Daniel 8:13, 14, we discover that the original meaning
heavenly sanctuary, which the letter to the Hebrews or purpose of these verses should have been fulfilled
neither teaches nor denies. sometime after the postexilic restoration. If the Jewish
J·Lye£!r- [)ay P!il1:eiple. While Dr. Forciprofessesa nation had been faithful in proclaiming the gospel, and
 74 Spectrum

thus preparing the world for the Messiah, "that Mes- and 8:14 parallel Daniel 7:9-14 (court scene in heaven)
siah would have been confronted at His coming by the (pp.368-376).
eschatological tyrant Antichrist ('little horn'). Anti- While the apocalyptic time prophecy of Daniel 8
christ would have been successful in his initial warfare basically parallels that of Daniel 7 (as well as Daniel 2) ,
against God's people and truth for 2300 days, but then it also amplifies Daniel 7 considerably. The prophecies
Christ would have brought him to his end, with none of Daniel 2, 7, and 8 began with either Babylon or
to help him. Having broken Antichrist 'without hand,' Persia and take the reader to the end of human history
the kingdom of the Rock of Ages would have become (the eschaton).
God's holy mountain filling the whole earth for eter- However, we do not find the argument valid that
nity" (p. 485). Daniel 9:24-27 parallels both Daniel 7 and Daniel 8:14,
In this brief scenario, Dr. Ford has interrreted, by since the time and subject matter of these passages
means of the apotelesmatic principle, Danie 2,7,8,9, differ.
and 11. He could do it only by denying the year-day 8) Antiochus Epiphanes. Regarding the little horn of
principle and the historicist method of interpretation. Daniel 8 and its parallelism in Daniel 11, Dr. Ford
However, though Israel was not faithful, the "main holds that "only Antiochus Epiphanes fulfilled the
idea" of Daniel's prophecies would yet be fulfilled "in chief specifications of Daniel 8's little horn, and the
principle" in later events (ibid.). Thus, the "little vile person of Daniel 11. All other fulfillments, such as
horn," for example, would be fulfilled in Antiochus pagan and papal Rome, are fulfillments in principle
Epiphanes, in pagan Rome, in papal Rome, and in rather than in detail" (p. 469). (
Satan's manifestation just before and after the millen- As far as Rome is concerned, he affirms that "all
nium. Each of these entities would experience judg- attempts to make Rome thefirst and major fulfillment
ment and be destroyed with none to help them, thus of all the specifications of the little horn ignore both
"fulfilling" "in principle" the intent of Daniel's the symbolism and the interpretation" (p. 383, italics
prophecies. "These successive judgments were pre- his). On the contrary, we believe that while Antiochus
dicted by 'then shall the sanctuary bejustified.' Every Epiphanes bears some resemblance to the description
era of revival of the truths symbolized in the sanctuary of the little horn, pagan and papal Rome fulfIll the
may claim to be a fulfillment of Daniel 8:14" (p. 486). specifications of this prophetic symbol.
Although we recognize the possibility of more than 9) Saints in Judgment. In the context of a discussion
one fulfillment (when the context requires it or when a ofthejudgment of Daniel 7 ,Dr. Ford's claim that "the
later inspired writer makes the application), we must Son of Man judges the little horn and delivers the beast
reject Ford's usage of the apotelesmatic principle, be- to the flames" (p. 365), his stress on the judgment of
cause it lacks external control. Any principle of in- the little horn, and his contention that in Daniel 7
terpretation that permits any prophecy to mean many "unbelievers, not believers, are the 'eye' of that storm
things is not a helpful tool. (i.e., the judgment)" (p. 369) are all dubious.
Nowhere in Daniel 7 does the "Son of Man" judge
6) Use oj Sadaq iii Daniel 8: 14. The nip hal use of the either the little horn or the beast. While it is true that
root sadaq in Daniel 8:14 is unique in the Old Testa- the little horn power, which receives punishment as its
ment. Though the basic meaning of the root sadaq is reward, is judged indirectly in Daniel 7, it also is clear
"to be right," "to justify," "to restore," the semantic that God's people, who receive the eternal kingdom
range of this root includes the meaning "to cleanse." after the judgment has sat, are alljudged worthy of the
This is evident from (1) the use ofsadaq with taher ("to ultimate covenant blessings. Both the apocalyptic sec-
cleanse," "to purify"; e.g., in Job 4:17) in synony- tions of Daniel (chaps. 7:21, 22 and 12:1-3) and the
mous parallelism and zakah ("to cleanse," "to purify"; historical chapters depict God's people on trial (e.g.,
e.g., inJob 15:14), (2) the translation ofsadaq in several chapter 1, where the Hebrew worthies are on trial;
versions, and (3) the hithpael use of the root sadaq (the chapter 3, where Daniel's friends are tested; chapter 6,
hithpae1, like the niphal, is passive or reflexive) in where Daniel is tried). The judgment reveals those
Genesis 44:16. who have retained their intimate convenantal relation-
Though Ford, in a number of places in his docu- ship with God. The motif of the judgment of God's
ment, allows for the translation ofsadaq in Daniel 8:14 people is further supported in numerous instances
as "to cleanse" (p. 348), he also remarks categorically within classical prophecy.
in his listing of the church's assumptions for its in- 10) The Role ofEllen White in Doctrinal Understanding.
terpretation of the sanctuary: "That 'cleansed' is an One cannot be a Seventh-day Adventist very long and
accurate translation in Daniel 8:14. (Though this is not recognize that our theology is shaped to a signifi-
certainly not the case)" (p. 290, italics ours). cant degree by the ministry of Ellen G. White. Her
While we agree with Ford that there does not appear philosophy of history as reflected in her "great con-
to be an explicit verbal link between sadaq of Daniel troversy theme" and her concern for the development
8:14 and Leviticus 16, it seems that he does not give of the whole person are but two examples of insights
due weight to the meaning "to cleanse" (which we she has provided that have helped to illuminate the
consider justifiable in the context of Daniel 8:9-14) and Scriptures and to foster serious Bible study within the
the possibility of a relationship with Leviticus 16, church.
particularly in the light of the common ideas between This means that Seventh-day Adventists recognize
the two passages. in Ellen G. White an authority in doctrine and life that
7) The Relationship of Daniel 7, 8, and 9. Dr. Ford is second only to that of the Scriptures. She was not,
claims that Daniel 9:24-27 (the 70-week prophecy) nor ever pretended to be, an expert in biblical lan-
parallels Daniel 8:14 (the 2300-day prophecy) rather guages or in other technical disciplines related to bib-
than being a segment of the 2300-day prophecy (p. lical interpretation of the Holy Spirit. Yet as her un-
403). He further suggests that both chapters 9:24-27 derstandinggrew under the inspiration ()f the Holy
 Volume 11, Number 2 75

Spirit, she provided counsel for the church that has this unique teaching of Seventh-day Adventists, in-
helped it to confirm light found in the Word of God vites earnest study on the part of every believer. Our
and to avoid doctrinal errors that threatened its very pioneers found it by diligent searching of the Word
existence. The Seventh-day Adventist Church holds and became motivated by it. We too must find it for
the writings of Ellen G. White in the highest regard as ourselves and make it our own. We must come to
a source of doctrinal understanding. realize that "the sanctuary in heaven is the very center
For these reasons we believe that some of Dr . Ford's of Christ's work in behalf of men," and that His
statements regarding Ellen G. White's ministry to the ministry there "is as essential to the plan of salvation as
church in doctrinal areas will be misunderstood. Some was His death upon the cross" (The Great Controversy,
Adventists have inferred that in Dr. Ford's view Ellen pp. 488, 489).
White's authority does not extend to doctrinal issues. As we seek to know and understand Christ in the
On this point the Seventh-day Adventist position is heavenly santuary as fervently as did the first Advent-
that a prophet's authority cannot justifiably be limited ists, we shall experience the revival and reform, the
in this way. assurance and hope, that come with a clearer view of
This doctrine of Christ in the heavenly santuary, our great High Priest.

Papers Prepared for

Sanctuary Review CDmmittee

T he following papers were

either sent out to the del-
egates in advance or distributed at Glacier View (indi-
Ford, Desmond. "Daniel 8:14, the Day of Atone-
ment, and the Investigative Judgment" - for a
summary of this manuscript, see pp. 30-36.
cated by asterisk). Guy, Fritz. "The Ministry of Christ as High Priest in
Cottrell, Raymond F. "A Hermeneutic for Daniel Heaven: Some Suggestions Toward a Theology of
8:14" - a comparison of the proof text method and the Sanctuary" - for a version of this manuscript,
the historical method, applying both methods to see pp. 44-53.
Daniel 8:14; the nature of the problems ofinterpret- Holoviak, Bert. "Pioneers, Pantheists, and Progres-
ing Daniel 8:14; the distinction between symbols sives: A. F. Ballenger and the Divergent Paths to
and the ultimate reality they represent. the Sanctuary" - examines contemporary
Cottrell, Raymond F. "Report of a Poll of Adventist sources, tracing the history and interrelationships
Bible Scholars Concerning Daniel 8:14 and He- of the Ballenger case from 1898 to 1911; the rela-
brews 9' '* - a poll taken in May 1980 consisting of tionship of the Ballenger controversy to the 1888
72 questions and 189 possible responses; includes message.and the "daily" debate.
summary of responses to a similar poll conducted Hasel, Gerhard F. "Blood Sacrifice: Cleansing and
in 1958, from which grew the former Committee Defilement by Blood" - an exegetical analysis of
on Problems in the Book of Daniel. relevant Old Testament passages, arguing that the
Damsteegt, P. Gerard. "Relationship of the Ellen G. sanctuary was defiled by accumulated sins and
White Writings to the Bible on the Sanctuary cleansed on the day of atonement.
Issue" - Ellen White's principles of interpretation Jorgensen, Alfred S. "The Fletcher Case: A Report of
related to the sanctuary doctrine; "Father Miller's" the Salient Teachings of W. W. Fletcher and the
hermeneutic compared to Ellen White's; Ellen Administrative Actions Taken by the Australasian
White's use of the Bible text concerning the Union Conference in Dealing with Him" - a brief
sanctuary. biographical sketch and analysis of Fletcher's posi-
Ellen G. White Estate. ''The Integrity of the Sanctuary tion; extensive documentation.
Truth"* - a compilation of Ellen White statements Neall, Beatrice. "An Attempt to Harmonize Daniel
concerning Ballenger's teachings. Manuscript re- with Leviticus on the Cleansing of the Sanctuary"
lease No. 760. - distinguishes between internal and external de-
Farag, Wadie. "Source Material onshabu'im, 'sevens' filement, between defilement by the sins of Israel
or 'weeks' "* - xerox copies of relevant material and by Israel's enemies; the cosmic setting of the
from Bible dictionaries, the Talmud, the Bible, and cleansing of the sanctuary.
Ellen White concerning the time element in the Neall, Beatrice. "The Contextual Problem of Daniel
. propll{l{;~es.Gf~iel.. - -_. -_ -: .:-- .- - .-. .::~:§:~fI:';:~±R-~~fctl~f~~l>:~~I?)p:<l:t:M~1c~~c-R~~~~C_~c::~:_ .
76 Spectrum

argues that the "transgression of desolation" refers Salom, A. P. "Exegesis of Selected Passages of He-
to Israelite apostasy connected with the "abomina- brews 8 and 9" - excellent, detailed exegesis of
tion of desolation," or an apostate form of worship relevant passages.
imposed by the little horn; thus the cleansing of Shea, William H. "Daniel and the Judgment" - for a
Daniel 8:14 includes the sins of God's people. version of this manuscript, see pp. 37-43.
Olson, Robert W. ~'A Historical Survey of Seventh- Strand, Kenneth A. "Apocalyptic Prophecy: A Brief
day Adventist Statements on the Doctrine of the Introduction to Its Nature and Interpretation" -
Cleansing of the Heavenly Sanctuary" - compila- basic characteristics of apocalyptic, with specific
tion of relevant passages from Adventist publica- application to Daniel's apocalyptic prophecies and
tions, arranged chronologically. the apocalyptic message of Revelation.

Desmond Ford Correspondence

Parmenter Sets Conditions
August 15, 1980 you could be in error in some of these problem areas,

D ear Des, It gives me no

pleasure to address this
letter to you. In fact I am deeply grieved to think that
and whether you are willing to yield to the judgment
and counsel of your brethren and hold in suspense
your particular views which are at variance with the
you as a personal friend of mine over many years established "Fundamental Beliefs" of the church as
should find yourself in your present position. I do indicated in the attached document. What we really
have a responsibility, however, which I'm sure you need to know, Des, Is there any shift in your position?
recognize, to place certain matters before you, so that I Are you willing to state clearly and precisely in writ-
can convey your response to the Avondale Board and ten form:
Division Committee. 1. That you are willing to acknowledge that there
Since your lecture to the Forum at PUC in October are several points in your pres{:IJ,t position on the
1979, in which it was considered you took issue with doctrine of the sanctuary and related areas and the role·
certain fundamental beliefs of the church, you have of Ellen White that are out of harmony with the "Fun-
been given more than six months to prepare a care- damental Beliefs" of the church - as indicated in the
fully documented statement of your present doctrinal attached paper - and that in counsel with your breth-
position. This manuscript in which you deal with vital ren you are prepared to suspend these views in har-
areas of the sanctuary truth, the role of Ellen White, mony with Spirit of Prophecy counsel and make a
and related areas has now been completed. You, of public statement to this effect?
course, are aware that a specially appointed committee
of 120 people representing Bible scholars, educators, 2. That from henceforth your teaching and preach-
pastors, administrators and representatives from the ing will be in harmony with the "Fundamental Be-
world church met at Glacier View Camp in Colorado liefs" of the church as voted in session at Dallas in
August 10-15, 1980, to study and evaluate your doc- . April, 1980?
trinal position as revealed in the above document. At 3. That because your special views on the sanctuary
this meeting you were given opportunity to make doctrine and related areas are so widely known you
statements and respond to questions. will indicate your willingness to acknowledge pub-
You are now aware that the above committee has licly that your PUC lecture and recent manuscript do
reached a consensus expressing confidence in the present some areas of doctrine that are out of harmony
"Fundamental Beliefs" held by the Seventh-day Ad- with the pillars of our faith, and these will be held in
ventist Church, believing that they can be adequately abeyance and not discussed unless at some time in the
supported by the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. future they might be found compatible with the posi-
The same committee, however, finds your manu- tions and beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist
script presenting several positions that are at variance Church?
with the presently held fundamental doctrines of the 4. That you are prepared to cooperate with the
church. It would seem to us that you are still challeng- church by pen, voice, and influence to restore confi-
ing the pillars of our faith particularly in the area of the dence in the "Fundamental Beliefs" of the church with
doctrine of the sanctuary and the role of the Spirit of a desire to restore unity in Christ and His church? That
Prophecy. : to this end you will endeavor as a minister of the
()ur realcollct,!ffi now is to)rno"", \Vllether you feel Seventh-day Adventist Church to dQ what you can to
Volume 11, Number 2 77

protect the fundamental beliefs of the church from I take this opportunity to declare that I have pledged
internal and external attack and develop an atmos- myself to seek and to foster, to defend and to preserve
phere of unity, of faith, doctrine, and practice? that unity in the church for which Christ prayed so
Des, I know you are a man of integrity. There is no earnestly. As I have always sought to recognize the
desire on my part to force or coerce you to go against human weaknesses to which I, with all others, am
your conscience. I believe in religious freedom. How- subject, I admit that in the solutions I have offered to
ever, while you are being supported by the tithe of the our sanctuary problems I could be wrong. I therefore
Seventh-day Adventist Church, we do not believe it is accept the counsel of my brethren and God's mes-
too much to ask for an indication from you that you senger (to which counsel I earnestly wish to respond
will henceforth uphold and teach, preach, and write in positively) to keep to myself the views that have
harmony with the fundamental beliefs which repre- brought perplexity. As the brethren continue to
sent the pillars of our faith. study, I will refrain from teaching and preaching on
Our great desire is to see you preserved for the the sanctuary in any area that might bring confusion
ministry. But for us to help you, there must be some and misunderstanding.
cooperation on your part. We earnestly pray that you I have confidence in the leadership of the church and
will be able in all good conscience to find it in your wish to give my brethren loyal and intelligent sup-
heart to respond to this letter positively. We await port. I greatly appreciate the spirit of openness so
your reply with real concern for you, and deep love as manifest at Glacier View and our resolve to continue
your friend and brother in Christ. the study so well begun there. I love this church and
Yours very sincerely, wish to see it fulfill the great purpose for which a
K. S. Parmenter, President divine providence brought it into existence.
Australasian Division If this letter is used in a public way it should be used
in full, or not at all, in order to make two points clear
to all. First, I am set for the defense of the body of
Christ, and I am willing to do all I can to support it in
good conscience and to refrain from causing it any
hurt whatsoever. Secondly, I cannot compromise in
my understanding of the doctrinal issues. Inasmuch as
the_Adventist Review has now published to the church
Ford's First Reply and the world acknowledgments of the accuracy of
certain key points of my sanctuary MS (see post-
script), to withdraw such would be to repudiate the
August 26, 1980 consensus statement and bring confusion con-
founded. May the Lord bless and guide us as we strive
D ear Brother Parmenter, I
deeply appreciate your
letter of August 15 and the graciousness with which it
unitedly for the blessing of His people.
With warmest personal regards,
softens certain conditions verbally expressed by you Sincerely your brother in Christ,
on August 15. In harmony with that spirit I wish to do Desmond Ford
all I can in good conscience to support the church I
love and for which I have labored these thirty years. P.S. The key points referred to from above, which for
I sincerely regret the sorrow I have brought to many the first time have now appeared in our own press,
by acceding to the request of my fellow teachers at include the following:
PUC in speaking on the topic of their choice in their
Forum of October 27, 1979. I realize that both that 1. It is the little horn, and not the sins of the saints,
address and my sanctuary manuscript conflict with which defiles the sanctuary.
our "Fundamental Beliefs" statement on Daniel 8:14 2. The cleansing of Daniel 8:14 has to do with
as commonly understood. restoring the damage done not by the saints but by the
May I state clearly, however, that I am now, and little horn.
always have been, in the fullest harmony with the 3. The meaning of the key verb in Daniel 8:14 is not
main doctrinal positions of our church set forth in the basically "cleanse," but justify, vindicate, restore.
"Statement of Fundamental Beliefs" as voted in Dallas 4. There is no obvious verbal link between Daniel 8
in April this year. The differences to which you refer and Leviticus 16.
relate to accepted sanctuary views in contrast with 5. The year-day principle is not explicit in Scrip-
my sanctuary manuscript and October 27 presenta- ture.
tion. Here, indeed, there is a clear divergence of un- 6. Hebrews 9 does draw on the Day of Atonement
derstanding. to illustrate that which Christ did by His sacrifice.
I -appreciate more than words can express the tre- 7. "Within the veil" applies to the second veil, not
mendous effort the church has made to establish a the first, and points to access to the Most Holy Place.
unity in our understanding of the sanctuary message 8. Hebrews does not teach a two-apartment minis-
entrusted to us by God. The Glacier View meetings try (or two phases).
were marked by earnestness and sweet Christian fel- 9. Christ, not the Father ,is the great Judge in the
lowship. I am greatly encouraged by the consensus fmal judgment.
statement, "Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary," and 10. We should not speak of our Lord's heavenly
the honest, frank acknowledgments it makes. In har- ministry in terms of apartments.
mony with its essence, as I understand it, I can gladly 11. The N.T. viewed the second advent as imminent
teach and preach such to the same extent as the major- in its day.
it-YQfm¥:fdl!:nv:tea1';.h~f$ Pl'~S~tlt at Glacier View. 12. SacrifidalQlQo~lFyrifJS;s.J;~th{:r Jh.anq,efiles.
78 Spectrum

and your service to the church over many years.

Ford's Second Reply However, your stated doctrinal position has created a
divergence of views between you and the church.
As you are aware, the Sanctuary Review Commit-
September 1, 1980 tee studi~d your proposals in detail and their findings
along with the PREXAD recommendations have
D ear Brother Parmenter,
There were two items to
which I should have made reference in last week's
been conveyed to you. Pastors Wilson and Parmenter
and other~ ?ave tal~ed .with youat length concerning
letter - one, my relationship to the Spirit of Prop he- your posItIOn whIch It seems remains unchanged.
cy, and the other - supposed collusion with those These matters were reported to the committee yester-
critical of the church. day and the following action voted:
I believe that E. G. White was entrusted with the "WHEREAS: Doctor Desmond Ford publicly chal-
gift of prophecy, a special messenger to this people. lenged basic doctrines of the church and was sub-
My santuary MS 602-641 summarizes this conviction. sequently given six months leave of absence to enable
See particularly from 631 onwards, which is a polemic him to provide a documented statement of his beliefs
against those who wish to reject E. G. White. How- and this statement, having been studied by th~
ever, from 1887 to the present, our official statements Sanctuary Review Committee (a group of more than
regarding the nature ofher inspiration deny inerrancy one hundred scholars and administrators appointed by
and I fully agree with my brethren on that matter. As the General Conference. committee), was found unac-
an inspired leader she has and does teach the flock, but ceptable on the sanctuary, the investigative judgement
never are her writings to be made the sole basis of and the role of Ellen White, and
doctrine. This she affirmed repeatedly, and I gladly "WHEREAS: Doctor Ford admits that his belief is
concur. no longer in accord with some of the accepted teach-
O~ the ?the~ matt.e~, neithe~ I nor my wife have any ings of the church and that he therefore could not
relat~onshlp wIth cntlCs of this church, which would p.reach or support th~m, and at best could only keep
~e dIsloyalty to the body of Christ. Despite ;tccusa- silent on matters which the church sees as distinctive
nons, we have never been a channel of "in house" doctrine; and in spite of urging from church adminis-
matters to such. We are well aware that much GC trators, theologians, ministers and friends, he is un-
committee material is "leaked" to the outside, but it able to accept the counsel of his brethren to reconsider
has not been through us. The limit of my sharing of his position, and
information with any "outside" has been the state- "WHEREAS: The General Conference, through
ment that the task on which I was working was not a the Presidents' Executive Administrative Committee
novel one, but one engaged upon by other men 'well has counselled that the Australasian Division should
known to us such as W. W. Prescott andL. E. Froom. relieve Doctor Ford of his responsibilities as a minister
In view of the materials circulated by Walter Rea on and teacher and withdraw his credentials it was
Prescott and certain nontraditional presentations to be "VOTED: That with deep regret w~ withdraw
found in Froom - such information was hardly top- Doctor Desmond Ford's ministerial credentials not-
secret. ing that this does not annul his ordination and'
With warmest of regards, "FURTHER: To recommend to the A vo~dale Col-
Sincerely your brother, lege Board that he be relieved of his responsibilities as
Desmond Ford a minister and teacher."
. It is o~r prayer pes that God will be with you and
Jill, and It IS our smcere hope that the day will come
when you. wi~ once again be able to espouse wholly
The Final Dedsion and conSCIentIOusly the full doctrinal position of the
church.
With Christian greetings,
September 19, 1980 Yours sincerely,

D ear Des, It is with heavy

heart that I write this let-
ter in order to convey to you the action of the Aus-
R. W. Taylor
Secretary

tralasian Division Executive Committee. Your breth- P .S. Our Tr~asurer, Brother W. T. Andrews, will be
ren here in this part of the world remember with contactmg you concerning financial and policy
affection and appreciation their fellowship with you matters.
 Theological Consultation
Documents
Recommendations of the
Theological·CDnsultation

T he following recom-
mendations were voted
at the Theological Consultation, Glacier View, Col-
6) that seminary and religion department faculties
seek to make their teaching more readily available to
administrators and to the field through cassette tapes,
orado, August 15-20. It is recommended: intensive seminars, and duplicated materials, and that
1) that if the consent of the individual authors is the Biblical Research Institute be requested to serve as
received, the papers and responses presented at this a clearing house and supply center for series oflecture
consultation be made available on request by the Bi- tapes;
blical Research Institute; 7) that continued study should be given to the
2) that future consultations of this type make use of meaning, value, and legitimacy of the historical and
small group discussions concentrating on lists of study theological methods of biblical interpretation used by
questions and facilitated by short position papers Seventh-day Adventists;
which will not be read at the meetings;
8) that continued study be given to the relationship
3) that such consultations be held every second year of Ellen White's authority to that of the Bible, to the
at the division level, and that on the alternate years,
union level theological consultations be held with proper hermeneutic of the writings of Ellen White,
seminary professors and General Conference repre- and to making her writings more readily and fully
available so that they may be studied in their full
sentatives being invited to these union level meetings literary, historical, and chronological context;
when the topics make their expertise desirable;
4) that administrators should be informed of, and 9) that local and union conference constituencies
invited to, the meetings of the Adventist scholars held consider placing Bible teachers on their committees,
in connection with the sessions of the American or that these committees invite these teachers to attend
Academy of Religion and the Society of Biblical Liter- as observers or consultants;
ature; 10) that special thanks be extended to Neal C. Wil-
5) that when representatives oflocal and union con- son and Arnold Wallenkampf, co-chairmen of this
ferences visit college campuses, they should seek to consultation, and Larry Geraty and Ron Graybill, co-
spend time with the religion department faculties in secretaries, for their roles in the planning of these
their staff meetings or in question-and-answer meetings, and to W. Duncan Eva who perceived the
periods; need and made initial arrangements.
 Papers Prepared for
Theological <bnsultation

T he following papers were

presented at the Theolog-
ical Consultation that met at Glacier View following
Graybill, ~on .. "Ellen W?ite'~ Role in the Resolution
ofConfhcts m AdventIst HIstOry"
Respondent: Donald R. McAdams
the Sanctuary Review Committee (see pp. 26-30). Guy, Fritz. "The Theological Task of the Church:
Observations on the Role of Theology and Theolo-
Andreasen, Niels-Erik. "Royal Authority and gians in the Church"
Prophetic Ministry in the Old Testament" Respondents: Kenneth H. Wood and Lowell Bock
Respondent: jerry A. Gladson Hackett, Willis j. "The Search for Authority and Doc-
Bradford, Charles E. "A Theology of Church Or- trinal Unity in the Church"
ganization and Administration" Respondents: Earl W. Amundson, Robert M.
Respondents: Arnold Kurtz and jack W. Provonsha johnston and W. Larry Richards
Cox,jamesj. C. "Resolution of Conflicts in the Early Rock, C. B. "Structures for Renewal"
Church" Respondent: james Londis
Dederen, Raoul. "Authoritative Teachings Decisions Teel, Charles,jr. "Withdrawing Sect, Accommodat-
in the Seventh-day Adventist Church" ing Church, Prophesying Remnant: Dilemmas in
Respondents: Clifford S. Pitt, Warren C. Tren- the Institutionalization of Adventism"
chard, W. D. Blehm Respondent: H. Ward Hill
Douglas, Walter. "The Theologian as Administrator: Torkelsen, M. C. "The Role of Church Administra-
The Reformation and After" tion"
Respondents: Erwin R. Gane and G. Ralph Veltman, Fred. "The Role of Church Administrators
Tompson . and Theologians"
 Margaret McFarland*
Law
University of Michigan
LaVonne Neff
Author
College Place, Washington
Ronald Numbers
History of Medicine
University of Wisconsin
MeivinK. H. Peters
Old Testament SPECTRUM ADVISORY COUNCIL
Cleveland State University
Edward E. Robinson
Attorney Lucille and Alan Anderson Genevieve and Paul Johnson
Chicago, Illinois Katie and Richard Johnson
BenR. Boice
Gerhard Svrcek-Seiler William King
Psychiatrist LaJean and Allen Botimer
Vienna, Austria Neridah and Bernard Brandstater Claire and Richard Knierim
Betty Stirling Betty and Bruce Branson Ruth and Edward Komarnisk
Provost
University of Baltimore Mary and Floyd Brauer Verla and Alvin K wi ram
Helen Ward Thompson Merrilyn and Ray Brown Karen and Mel Lake
Administration Marilyn and Robert Burman Ewald Lonser
Walla Walla College
Dos and Molleurus Couperus Heidi and Richard Ludders
L. E. Trader
Education Eryl Cummings Thelma and Benjamin McAdo
Marienhoehe Gymnasium, Walter Cummings Irene and Kenneth McGill
W.Germany
Noreen and Paul Damazo lola and Julius Martin
Elsie and Raymond Damazo Jacqueline and Robert Moncri,
Thelma and Lloyd Dayes Lyla Neumann
Columbia Mary and James Dunn Valerie and Glenn Patchen
Charles Bensonha ver Mary and Wildord Eastman Cecilia and Ernest Plata
Physican
Kettering, Ohio Juanita and Richard Engel Verna and Winslow B. Randal
Lake Janine and Wilmer Engevik Martha and Alfredo Rasi
Walter Douglas Carole and Gordon Rick
Church History Nancy Engeset
SDA Theological Seminary Karen and Ronald Fasano Thais and James Sadoyama
ES Berrien Springs, Michigan
Marjorie Scrivner
Beth and Jack Fleming
Northern Pacific
John Brunt Gerry and Joy Fuller Ursula and Donald Shasky
Theology David andJoyce Grauman Claire and Naor Stoehr
Walla Walla College
College Place, Washington Gordon and Nadine Hale Carlene and Leonard Taylor
Southern Deanne and David Hanscom Maredith and Rudy Torres
David Steen Cheryl and Milford Harrison Nancy and Robin Vandermol,
Southern Missionary College
Collegedale, Tennessee Sally and Robert Hasselbrack Nancy and John Vogt
Southern Pacific Helen and Donald Hawley Carol and Bruce Walter
Mike Scofield Karla and Kenneth Walters
Business
Hanna and Hjaltar Helmerson
Monterey Park, California Liv and EugeneJoergenson Vicki and Chuck Woofter

The SPECTRUM Advisory Council is a group of committed SPECTRUM supporters ,\

stability and business and editorial advice to insure the continuation of the journal's open dis
issues. For more information, contact:
1uarterly by the Association of Dr. Raymond S. Damazo, Chairman
editorial correspondence to 855 106th Avenue N.E. (206) 454-2722 Office
llege Place, WA 99324. In mat- Bellevue, WA 98004 (206) 455-4522 Residence
ion, SPECTRUM follows The
I). Manuscripts should be type-
mit the original and two copies,
stamped envelope. Due to limi-
from readers may be shortened

fRUM, send a membership fee

f in Canada and in other foreign
:- Adventist Forums, Box 4330,
1012. Single copies may be pur-
espondence concerning address
s, enclosing address labels. Pay
;sociation of Adventist Forums.
1. litho U.S.A. 29844