What is the message for God for us at this time?

I would like to pose some questions as to the direction of the 1888 movement.

The end time message, the Loud Cry, will certainly focus on Righteousness by Faith. This was the message of Waggoner and Jones in 1888. Do we still need exactly the same message today? Waggoner and Jones had a precious message, a message from God. But was it the complete message? Was their message for that time the same that we need for this time?

Assuming that their message is the Loud Cry of Revelation 18, is it correct to say that it was not accepted at the time of 1888 to 1905? From what I read Waggoner and Jones were given free reign to speak in the churches, the camp meetings, and for ministerial institutes. It is true that Butler and Smith did not accept it for a long time, and they had a negative influence which no doubt slowed acceptance of the message.

But maybe, just maybe the end time message will be a little different. The term "1888 Message" has accumulated some baggage. Maybe we need to study Righteousness by Faith anew, and make it a new message for our day. Give it a new name. Inject some fire into it. Let's face it, most people will not take the time to read books written 120 years ago, unless it is written by Ellen White.

And another factor: The end time message will strongly advocate the place of the law and the Sabbath. I don't mean that this needs to be the focus, but that the place of Law in the message of Righteousness by Faith must be taught. We need to examine anew the place Christians take in overcoming sin, right use of the will, consent, making the decision. This must be fully integrated into the message of Righteousness by Faith.

What contribution does the 1888 Message Study Committee make in this? I believe a very important place. It is a group that promotes deep Bible study, and is available to laymen. If you excuse the analogy, it was this factor that led to the deep interest in Brinsmead's message in the 1960's. A message that attracted Bible students. The Ford message that came later attracted the liberal element, and I believe, made no contribution to preparing for the Loud Cry.

These are some thoughts and questions I have had. For any movement to succeed, it must constantly renew itself, or fade away.

"The Lord in his great mercy sent a most precious message to his people through Elders Waggoner and Jones. This message was to bring more prominently before the world the uplifted Saviour, the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. It presented justification through faith in the Surety; it invited the people to receive the righteousness of Christ, which is made manifest in obedience to all the commandments of God. Many had lost sight of Jesus. They needed to have their eyes directed to his divine person, his merits, and his changeless love for the human family. All power is given into his hands, that he may dispense rich gifts unto men, imparting the priceless gift of his own righteousness to the helpless human agent. This is the message that God commanded to be given to the world. It is the third angel's message, which is to be proclaimed with a loud voice, and attended with the outpouring of his Spirit in a large measure.
The uplifted Saviour is to appear . . . sitting upon the throne, to dispense the priceless covenant blessings. . . . Christ is pleading for the church in the heavenly courts above. . . .
Notwithstanding our unworthiness, we are ever to bear in mind that there is One that can take away sin and save the sinner. . . .
God gave to His servants a testimony that presented the truth as it is in Jesus, which is the third angels message, in clear, distinct lines. . . .
This . . . testimony . . . presents the law and the gospel, binding up the two in a perfect whole. (See Romans 5 and 1 John 3:9. . . .)
This is the very work which the Lord designs that the message He has given His servant shall perform in the heart and mind of every human agent. It is the perpetual life of the church to love God supremely and to love others as they love themselves. . . .
Neglect this great salvation, kept before you for years, despise this glorious offer of justification through the blood of Christ, and sanctification through the cleansing power of the Holy Spirit, and there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, but a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation." (TM 92-98).


Notice EGW's summary of the message, which includes the heart and mind work that is necessary for us as individuals, combining the law and the gospel.



EGW describes elsewhere the message as old truth in a new framework, so there is a bit of both. The truth advances by becoming more clearly seen (like those jewels in William Miller's jewel box). New presentations of the eternal truths brought to light in the 1888 era are thus encouraged and welcomed.

Dear Todd,
Thank you for your response. That was an excellent quote from Ellen White. I liked your statement too:

Quote: . . . "New presentations of the eternal truths brought to light in the 1888 era are thus encouraged and welcomed."

Messages are always given in a context, and in the context of 1888, the message of Waggoner and Jones was just what was needed. Would it be reasonable to say that the context today is different? After 50 years of permissiveness, I think we need to talk of the law again -- though balanced with the message of justification and sanctification by faith.

Also, it needs to be clarified -- made plain. The language and the terms of 1888 are now almost as archaic as the King James Version. A good example is the recent issue of Gland Tidings, and the Articles on "Christ Our Righteousness" by J.W. Lehman. I read through the first article (7 pages) and found the message excellent and much needed. But who has the patience to go through all that "turgid prose" (7 plus 5 pages total) well laced with Adventist jargon? Here is what the Bible says:

Quote: . . . "And the LORD answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it" (Habakkuk 2:2, KJV).

I must apologize and beg forgiveness if I sound judgmental and critical. But the ultimate critic and judge is the reader -- and if the reader is turned off, the writer has failed to communicate his message.

I understand the frustrations of the editors and publishers. "Where are the writers?" The only way they can function is if they have so many articles to choose from that they can publish only 10% of the offerings. So . . . Constituency of the 1888 MSC, man your stations, take out pen and paper, and write!"

Well, I've said too much already.

I would tend to agree, Hubert. It probably wouldn't hurt us to update our language a bit!

(03-27-2010 11:43 AM)hfsturges Wrote:  Messages are always given in a context, and in the context of 1888, the message of Waggoner and Jones was just what was needed. Would it be reasonable to say that the context today is different? After 50 years of permissiveness, I think we need to talk of the law again -- though balanced with the message of justification and sanctification by faith.

Doesn't the phrase from the paragraph Todd posted, "This message...invited the people to receive the righteousness of Christ, which is made manifest in obedience to all the commandments of God," answer your desire to preach the law? Let's put it in more modern language.

The 1888 message gives us Jesus' own goodness. It was perfect according to God's standards, so when we take it, we just start keeping all the commandments perfectly. It's a trip!

That's pretty close to what she says, Hubert. Doesn't that do it for you?

George.

George,

What you say is true. I might point out though, that a long article on faith and grace, with just one or a few statements on keeping the law may be a bit unbalanced. In saying that, in the context of 1888 it was what was needed.

Quote: . . . "The 1888 message gives us Jesus' own goodness. It was perfect according to God's standards, so when we take it (Jesus' own goodness?), we just start keeping all the commandments perfectly. It's a trip!"

Well, let's see now . . . . I read the Bible and pray, and have worship with my wife every day. I pray to reflect the image of Jesus in my life.

But, . . . . If my tax man is too generous on the deductions, I don't object. As I walk out the check-out line at the grocery store, I sneak a peak at the scantily clad women on the tabloids. When I pick out the grapefruit at the store, I always pick out the biggest and the best. A friend came to see me today driving a new Hyundai van. Wish I could have a new van!

Seems that I am coming short here somehow. Help !!!

(04-07-2010 06:09 AM)Hubert Wrote:  Seems that I am coming short here somehow. Help !!!

Is that really a fair test? Have you and I really believed wholeheartedly in the power of Christ's Righteousness yet, if we are still arguing if it works or not? It's time to believe.

My daughter is hosting a student bible study group based on Herb Montgomery's new book, Finding the Father. One of her kids noted last week that he had just started being nicer to people since he had been in the group. Maybe that's a better test.

George.

George,

My last post was really not good reasoning. Here are two statements from your recent post. I need to compare them:

Quote: . . . "Doesn't the phrase from the paragraph Todd posted, "This message...invited the people to receive the righteousness of Christ, which is made manifest in obedience to all the commandments of God," answer your desire to preach the law? Let's put it in more modern language.

. . . "The 1888 message gives us Jesus' own goodness. It was perfect according to God's standards, so when we take it, we just start keeping all the commandments perfectly. It's a trip!"

Todd posted that the 1888 message "invited the people to receive" which requires that the people take an active part in receiving Christ's righteousness and in their obedience to the commandments.

Your statement was that when we take the goodness of Jesus, "we just start keeping all the commandments perfectly." I am not sure what you meant when you said "when we take it." Is that an active "taking" or a passive "lack of refusal?" And what is "a trip?" Is it a passive ride, or an active walk?

(04-08-2010 01:48 PM)Hubert Wrote:  My last post was really not good reasoning. Here are two statements from your recent post. I need to compare them:

George Wrote:. . . "Doesn't the phrase from the paragraph Todd posted, "This message...invited the people to receive the righteousness of Christ, which is made manifest in obedience to all the commandments of God," answer your desire to preach the law? Let's put it in more modern language.

. . . "The 1888 message gives us Jesus' own goodness. It was perfect according to God's standards, so when we take it, we just start keeping all the commandments perfectly. It's a trip!"

...I am not sure what you meant when you said "when we take it." Is that an active "taking" or a passive "lack of refusal?"...

Wow, we are getting down to the nitty gritty, aren't we. I wrote the active "take it" and sometimes I prefer the active "put on Christ." I just think it's silly to claim that that action is an important part of the process. If my rich uncle gave me a Ferrari for my birthday, I don't think you would hear me say, "But I never would have gotten it if I hadn't taken the keys he tossed to me."

Hubert Wrote:  ...And what is "a trip?" Is it a passive ride, or an active walk?

The phrase is just a modern expletive which roughly means "It's amazing." I was trying my hand at youthful lingo.

George.

George,

The 1888 MSC includes in their teaching that the "free gift" is "put into our hands" regardless of any action on our part. The analogy of the Emancipation Proclamation is used as an illustration. The concept of actively accepting the gift is in question. When you got that gift of a Ferrari, you actively accepted the keys. You did not let them lie on the dresser while you continued to drive that old 1952 Plymouth!

I might just pose one question: We often refer to the gift from God of "free will" or the power to choose. How, and in what way do we EVER truly use the power of choice?