From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Part of a series on Seventh-day Adventism

Background and history Christianity · Protestantism Anabaptists · Restorationism Pietism · Millerites Great Disappointment Fundamentalism · Evangelicalism

People Ellen G. White Joseph Bates · Uriah Smith J. N. Andrews · James White

Distinctive teachings Sabbath · Conditional Immortality Historicism · Premillennialism Investigative judgment · Remnant Three Angels' Messages Eschatology

Criticism

Other Adventists Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement Davidian SDA (Shepherd's Rod) Advent Christian Church Church of God General Conference This box: view • talk • edit

It has been suggested that Last Generation Theology be merged into this article or section. (Discuss)

"Historic Adventist" is a self-designation used by some within the Seventh-day Adventist Church who regard themselves as upholding the traditional theological positions of the church. They are also known as "traditional Adventists".

As a general rule, historic Adventists feel that the church leadership has departed from key doctrinal "pillars" ever since the second half of the 20th century. Specifically, they point to the publication in 1957 of a book entitled Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine; this book is considered to undermine historic Adventist theology in favour of theology more compatible with evangelicalism.^[1]

Prominent figures in historic Adventism include M. L. Andreasen, Herbert Douglass, and Colin and Russell Standish. Hope International and the Hartland Institute are expressions of historic Adventism. "Last Generation Theology" shares some elements with Historic Adventism, yet considers itself to have "expanded" the beliefs of Historic Adventism to their logical conclusion.^[2]

While historic Adventists have generally not broken away from the Adventist denomination to form their own church, believing that the Adventist church is still God’s chosen instrument, many historic Adventists feel that the wider church has apostatized and some even argue that the denominational leadership is presently in apostasy. There is thus a tendency for historic Adventists to promote their message through independent ministries, which may have a strained relationship with the official church.

Historic Adventists lie at the opposite end of the Adventist theological spectrum from progressive Adventists.

Definitions of "historic Adventism" vary somewhat, depending on the author.

Contents 1 History 1.1 Adventist-Evangelical dialogues 1.2 1970s 2 Theology 3 Publications 4 Criticism 4.1 Anti-Catholicism 4.2 Responses to criticism 5 Official church reaction 6 Organizations and people 6.1 Organizations and publishers 6.2 Notable historic Adventist people 6.3 Former historic Adventists 6.3.1 Transition to non-Adventist 6.3.2 Transition to mainstream Adventist 7 See also 8 References 9 External links

See also: History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church

See also: Questions on Doctrine

It is widely recognised that historic Adventism emerged as a protest movement against Adventist-Evangelical conversations which occurred in the 1950s. These dialogues were initiated by evangelicals Donald Barnhouse and Walter Martin, who sought clarification on what Adventists believed. The evangelicals specifically took issue with a number of heterodox teachings which at the time were generally thought to characterise Adventist theology. The most significant of these were: Arianism, a sinful nature of Christ, an incomplete atonement, salvation by law keeping, and extreme sectarianism.^[3]

The Adventist leaders who met with Walter Martin described these as not representative of mainstream Adventist theology, but merely the beliefs of a few. (Le Roy Edwin Froom described them as the "lunatic fringe".) In particular, the Adventists asserted that the sinful nature of Christ and an incomplete atonement were not part of mainstream Adventist doctrine. Adventist historian George Knight claims that Froom and his party misled the evangelicals on this matter, because the majority of Adventists prior to 1950 had in fact held to these teachings concerning the nature of Christ and the atonement.^[4]

Martin and Barnhouse were satisfied with the responses given by the Adventist delegation, and concluded that the Adventist church was a legitimate Christian body. Meanwhile, Adventist theologian M. L. Andreasen became aware of these proceedings and opposed them vehemently. Andreasen represented the many Adventists at the time who believed in Christ's fallen nature and an incomplete atonement, and as such felt betrayed by the denomination's leaders. (Those Adventists who believed Christ had a fallen nature still believe that Jesus committed no actual sins). These Adventists continued to oppose the theological direction taken by the church leadership and eventually became known as the "Historic Adventists" of today.

Herbert Douglass has stated,

"most, if not all, of the so-called 'dissident' or 'independent' groups of the last 45 years are direct results of the explicit and implicit positions espoused by [Questions on Doctrine] on the atonement and the Incarnation."^[5]

According to historian George Knight,

"Official Adventism may have gained recognition as being Christian from the evangelical world, but in the process a breach had been opened which has not healed in the last 50 years and may never heal."^[6]

Desmond Ford convinced Robert Brinsmead his perfectionism was incorrect in about 1970.^[7] During the 1970s, what is now the Adventist Review carried articles by editor Kenneth Wood and associate editor Herbert Douglass rejecting Questions on Doctrine and arguing for a final perfect generation.^[7]

The General Conference addressed this controversy over "righteousness by faith" by holding a conference in Palmdale, California in 1976.^[7] Ford was the "center of attention", and the resulting document known as the "Palmdale statement".^[8][9] However the controversy increased, and critics of the "new theology" of Ford and others formed their own institutions.^[7]

Julius Nam has written,

"However, the theological heirs of Andreasen have found such developments deeply troubling. Since 1971, several independent ministry groups have arisen within the Adventist church that have self-consciously embraced Andreasen’s postlapsarian views and the accompanying theology of the final generation, which they believe is supported by the writings of Ellen White. Since their inception, these groups have warned against the evangelicalization of Adventism and have issued calls to the church at large to return to the Adventism of the pre-Questions on Doctrine era. Like Andreasen, they have seen the Adventist-evangelical conferences and the publication of Questions on Doctrine as the beginning of the end-time apostasy. From the perspective of these groups, the prelapsarian view advocated by Questions on Doctrine and embraced by many Adventists is another sign of the apostasy that continues in the church. They view Adventism as a movement that is to be deliberately separate from other groups such as evangelicals. Their vision of Adventism is a movement that is preparing the final generation of Christians who will ultimately overcome sin."^[10]

The 1975 book Perfection: The Impossible Possibility (Nashville: Southern Publishing Association, 1975) edited by Douglass, contained essays by Douglass and C. Mervyn Maxwell supporting historic views, and Edward Heppenstall and Hans LaRondelle supporting the evangelical view.

Historic Adventist theology differs from mainstream Adventist theology in the areas of Christology, hamartiology (sin), soteriology (salvation) and eschatology (end times). They often use the term "new theology" as a pejorative term for perceived doctrinal shifts in the church.^[11]

With regards to Christology, Historic Adventists believe that Jesus Christ possessed a fallen nature in common with all the children of Adam. This view of Jesus' nature was prevalent in Adventism prior to the 1950s, but is now a minority position among theologians.^[12]

Sin is typically defined as acts which break the commandments, rather than an inherent corruption of the human nature. The traditional Protestant concept of original sin is thus rejected. Woodrow Whidden, a former historic Adventist, has commented that this traditional understanding is based on a "woefully superficial" interpretation of 1 John 3:4.^[13]

Historic Adventists tend to place more emphasis on sanctification than justification, believing that both are necessary for salvation. They define the atonement in terms of God’s work to cleanse our character from sin as well as payment of the penalty for sin. The work of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary is regarded as a continuation of the work of atonement begun on the cross, rather than the application of the benefits of an already completed atonement.

"Eschatological perfectionism" is the teaching that a final generation of believers must achieve a state of complete sinlessness (or Christlikeness) in the final period just before the second coming of Jesus (see Last Generation Theology). Historic Adventists consider the life and character of Christ as a perfect example that all must imitate. Accordingly, the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, or investigative judgment, is thought to also involve the cleansing of the lives of believers on earth. This belief in sinlessness arose particularly from M. L. Andreasen's interpretation of the investigative judgment doctrine, itself an expansion on concepts found in The Great Controversy by Ellen G. White.^[3][14]

Historic Adventists generally place more emphasis on the writings of Ellen G. White as a doctrinal authority compared to other Adventists, often considering her writings as infallible and having near-equivalent status to the Bible.^[1]

A unique perspective on the 1888 Minneapolis General Conference is usually promoted. Historic Adventists argue that Ellen White supported the perfectionistic theology of Jones and Waggoner.^[15]

Ron Corson defines traditional/historic Adventist beliefs as being characterized by the following four beliefs in particular:

• investigative judgment and heavenly sanctuary
• the Adventist church is the "remnant"
• Ellen White as a prophet for the church, and the "Spirit of Prophecy"
• the Sabbath as God's seal, with Sunday as a false day of worship (including concepts of Babylon and the Mark of the Beast).

Corson adds, they see Scripture as infallible or inerrant. They reject the major book Questions on Doctrine. They reject contemporary Christian music and drama in church as "worldly". They use Ellen White as an "inspired commentator" on the Bible. He claims her writings are often taken as having equal authority with the Bible. He also comments there is tension on doctrines such as the atonement and the nature of Christ.^[1]

Many historic Adventists are advocates of the "King James Only" movement.

Historic Adventists have a strong commitment to publishing (usually without official denominational sanction), and often disseminate free literature to promote their views to the wider public. Historic Adventist publishers have been criticized for using misleading titles and concealing their links with Seventh-day Adventism.^[16]

Historic Adventist periodicals include:

• Our Firm Foundation is a monthly magazine produced by Hope International, an independent organisation committed to historic Adventism.
• Land Marks[1] is a monthly magazine produced by Steps to Life, an independent organisation committed to historic Adventism.

Ervin Taylor described the book A Remnant in Crisis by Jack Provonsha as "an apologetic for historic Adventism."^[17]

Mainstream and progressive Adventists have criticised the use of the term "historic". It is observed that numerous doctrinal positions that were common among the Adventist pioneers are generally not held by those who profess to be "historic Adventists", such as semi-Arianism, which time of day the Sabbath should begin, certain understandings of Systematic Benevolence, the "shut door", and the personhood of the Holy Spirit.^[15] It is argued that the over-valuing of "historic" beliefs leads to an unhelpful neglect of "new light" and "present truth", which Adventists have always held as defining beliefs.

Walter Martin labeled most of the historic Adventists he encountered as "legalists," "worshippers of Ellen White" and the "lunatic fringe."^[18] The term was earlier used by LeRoy Edwin Froom when Adventist leaders met with Martin.^[19]

Historic Adventists have spent large amounts of money for special literature and billboard and newspaper advertising around the country, with a message declaring that the pope is the antichrist.^{[20][21][22][23][24][25][26]} This has caused embarrassment for the Seventh-day Adventist denomination.^[27][28]

In response, some historic Adventists have claimed that they are loving in their evangelism and deny that the charge of fanaticism applies to them. They quote statements by Ellen White to support their view. For instance:

"Men will misrepresent the doctrines we believe and teach as Bible truth, and it is necessary that wise plans should be laid to secure the privilege of inserting articles into the secular papers; for this will be a means of awakening souls to see the truth. God will raise up men who will be qualified to sow beside all waters. God has given great light upon important truths, and it must come to the world."^[29]

"We must take every justifiable means of bringing the light before the people. Let the press be utilized, and let every advertising agency be employed that will call attention to the work. This should not be regarded as nonessential. On every street corner you may see placards and notices calling attention to various things that are going on, some of them of the most objectionable character; and shall those who have the light of life be satisfied with feeble efforts to call the attention of the masses to the truth?"^[30]

The Seventh-day Adventist Church has officially reacted to certain organisations which espouse "historic Adventist" theology. In 1998, the General Conference established a committee to evaluate the beliefs and activities of Hope International, the Hartland Institute (USA) and Remnant Ministries (Australia). The committee produced a report expressing "serious concerns with respect to the nature and purpose of Hope International and associates."^[31]

The conclusion of the report stated that "by rejecting the authority of the world church in session when their interpretation of Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy differs from that of the church, [Hope International and associates] have set their authority above that of the world church and operate in a manner that is consistent with offshoot movements." The report also contained a significant threat: "If Hope International and associates cannot bring themselves into harmony with the body of the world church, clearly evidenced within 12 months, the Seventh-day Adventist Church may need to consider whether there exists a “persistent refusal to recognize properly constituted church authority or to submit to the order and discipline of the church” (Church Manual, p. 169)."^[31]

The church has officially reacted to certain organisations which espouse "historic Adventist" theology by filing law suits against them for their use of the church name.^{[citation needed]}

According to one article, the policy of the Adventist church in North America is that members of Hartland or Hope International may not hold any church office.^[32]

In 2003, the Adventist church republished an annotated version of Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine, the book which originally drew heavy criticism from historic Adventist groups and was taken out of print as a result.

• Hope International, led by Ron Spear^[33]
• Hartland Institute^[34]
• Amazing Truth Publications^{[citation needed]}
• Remnant Ministries^[35]
• Remnant Publications[2]^{[citation needed]}
• Leaves of Autumn (publisher) [3]^{[citation needed]}
• Maranatha ministries^{[citation needed]}
• Patriotic Christian Distributors^{[citation needed]}
• Steps to Life[4]^{[citation needed]}

• M. L. Andreasen — author of The Sanctuary Service (Review and Herald, 1947), and credited with developing Last Generation Theology.
• Herbert E. Douglass
• Ralph Larson^[36]
• Standish brothers Colin (founder of the Hartland Institute) and Russell^{[citation needed]}
• Mervyn Maxwell (d. 21 July 1999)^{[citation needed]}

Others:

• Robert Brinsmead during the 1960s^[37]
• A. Jan Marcussen^{[citation needed]}
• Dennis Priebe[5]^{[citation needed]}

• Australian Robert Brinsmead promoted the perfectionistic "Awakening Movement" in the 1960s before transitioning to a strong evangelical Adventist focus, and then later rejecting many Adventist and orthodox Christian beliefs.^[7][38]
• Dirk Anderson[6], founder of the website The Ellen White Research Project (EllenWhiteExposed.com, formerly EllenWhite.org), which is critical of Ellen White's inspiration. Initially a mainstream Adventist, he became a historic Adventist and is now a member of the Church of God (Seventh-Day).

• George R. Knight was once a perfectionist.
• Woodrow W. Whidden II, who has described himself as "a self-confessed former post-Fall perfectionist".^[39] See his interview by Julius Nam, in which he describes historic Adventists and his relationship with them.

• Seventh-day Adventist theology
• Progressive Adventism
• Last Generation Theology
• Independent ministries of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, some of which are "historic"

Other books:

• Weber, Martin. Who's got the truth: Making sense out of five different Adventist gospels. Columbia, MD: Calvary Connections, 1994. A valuation of the views of Morris Venden, George Knight, Jack Squeira, Ralph Larson, and Graham Maxwell about the gospel

Supportive:

• Historic Adventism: Remembering to Trust and Obey by Ralph Larson in Jan/Feb 1994 edition of Adventist Today
• Colin Standish. "Historic Adventism: Part 1". Our Firm Foundation v18 May 2003, p.21-23, 30; "Historic Adventism: Part 2". Our Firm Foundation v18 June 2003, p.16-19, 27
• Is Historic Adventism Doomed to Fail by the Eternal Gospel Church.
• Hope International and Associates — Another Perspective by C. Mervyn Maxwell, previously published on the site at the "Four Legitimate Hungers" Letter. A response to the report below
• Why We See the Nature of Christ as a Life-or-Death Issue by Robert Wieland

Neutral or critical:

• "Report on Hope International and Associated Groups", a statement of concern by the General Conference about Hope International, the Hartland Institute, and Remnant Ministries. Published in the Adventist Review in August 31, 2000, Ministry in August 2000, and by the Biblical Research Institute on their website
• Ellen White on the Humanity of Christ, a chronological study by Woodrow W. Whidden II. Chapter 10, To "Historic Adventism": A Proposal for Dialogue and Reconciliation.
• Primacy of the Gospel Committee - Report from the Biblical Research Institute, regarding the 1888 Message Study Committee
• "Essential Adventism or historic Adventism?" by Woodrow Whidden in Ministry October 1993
• Progressive and Traditional Adventists Examined by Ron Corson in Adventist Today.
• The Shaking of Adventism book by Australian Anglican Geoffrey J. Paxton
• "A Review of the Awakening Message" (Part I first published May 1972, Part II first published April 1973), Robert Brinsmead's assessment of his earlier historic views
• "From Controversy to Crisis: An Updated Assessment of Seventh-day Adventism" by Kenneth R. Samples. Christian Research Journal 11:1 (Summer 1988), p. 9
• Crosscurrents in Adventist Christology by Claude Webster (Peter Lang Publishing, 1984; Andrews University Press, 1992) ISBN 0820401579