Challenges to the Bible-based, classic Adventist hope of complete character perfection in this life are increasing. That’s fully understandable. This hope stands at the heart of the Seventh-day Adventist message, which according to the book of Revelation embodies a global summons to obey God’s commandments (Rev. 12:17; 14:12). This summons calls forth the ultimate wrath of Satan against God’s end-time remnant (Rev. 12:17). The great adversary of God and humanity has long despised the heavenly standard of character, and has persistently claimed the inability of God’s creatures to perfectly observe it [1].
Thus it shouldn’t surprise us when we encounter this challenge within the remnant church itself.
Confusion?
A recent article in an independent Adventist magazine reported a Global Church Member Survey published by the General Conference which was conducted during 2017-2018 [2]. The article reported “two notable findings” in the survey “with far-reaching implications” [3], these involving Adventist attitudes toward both the conditions of salvation and the role of the health message in salvation. The article explained:
Specifically, findings on the two reveal that 1) Seventh-day Adventists believe that salvation is only through Christ, but many (47%) see the Health Message playing a role in salvation and 2) a large majority (65%) of Seventh-day Adventists believe they must perfectly obey the law to be saved [4].
The survey also noted the contrast in views between North American Adventists and those in the Global South, reporting that while 76% of North American respondents denied that perfect obedience was necessary for salvation, 65% of respondents from the East Africa Division affirmed the necessity of such obedience as a condition of salvation [5].
The author goes on to describe the above survey as “exposing the confusion that prevails on the most basic and important Christian doctrine” [6]. He further explains this alleged confusion as follows:
While generally believing that salvation is by faith in the atonement and intercession of Christ, many Adventists go on to add that perfect obedience of the law is necessary for salvation. This is where the confusion reigns, in that while affirming that people are saved the moment they accept Jesus as their Savior, human effort is also presented as an essential contribution to salvation [7].
But assuming the survey respondents understand that the perfect obedience required for salvation is accomplished solely through the pardon and empowerment made possible through the divine grace bestowed at conversion, the above responses reflect no confusion whatsoever.
Conditions for Biblical Salvation
The confusion in this conversation is not on the part of those who believe in the salvific imperative of divinely-empowered perfection of character. Rather, it is on the part of the article’s author and his fellow travelers in the church. Yes, we are saved by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8), but the Bible describes these forces as primarily active rather than passive. The grace and faith described by Scripture as operative in the saving process provide not only pardon for our past and repented-of sins (Rom. 3:24; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14), but also power to live holy lives (II Cor. 12:9; Titus 2:11-13; Heb. 4:16; 11; 12:28).
Salvation by grace through faith, according to the Bible, is not a substitute for the perfect fulfillment of the law’s demands. Rather, it is the means whereby these demands are in fact fulfilled. Biblical salvation, after all, means to be saved from sin (Matt. 1:21), a process which the Bible describes as including both justifying and sanctifying righteousness (Eph. 1:7; II Thess. 2:13), both Christ’s work for us (II Cor. 5:21) and His work in us (Titus 3:5).
The article in question does a dire disservice to its readers by quoting less than five Bible texts and only one Ellen White statement in its assault on perfection theology [8]. The author introduces his topic as an effort to understand the implications of the reported survey “without wading into the exegetical and theological debates around salvation” [9]. But his paltry attention to the evidence from Scripture and the writings of Ellen White will only serve to heighten confusion among those of his readers who prize the authority of the written counsel of God (Isa. 8:20; Acts 17:11) over the vacillations of personal experience and the negative vignettes of denominational life on which his article focuses.
The belief that obedience to the divine law is the condition of salvation was not invented by the Pharisees of Jesus’ day, nor is it a doctrine fabricated by some pharisaic clique of conservative Adventists. Rather, it is the clear and unabashed teaching of the New Testament. Jesus Himself declared, in closing His Sermon on the Mount:
Not every one that saith unto Me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven, but he that doeth the will of My Father, which is in heaven (Matt. 7:21).
Another such passage is the encounter between Jesus and the rich young ruler, recorded in Matthew 19:
And behold, one came and said unto Him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
And He said unto him, Why callest thou Me good there is none good but one, that is God; but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments (verses 16-17).
When asked the same question by the lawyer to whom He told the Good Samaritan story, Christ gave the same answer:
And behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted Him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto Him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind, and thy neighbor as thyself. And He said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live (Luke 10:25-28).
Jesus is clear, of course, that in man’s own strength such obedience is impossible. When the rich young man went away sorrowful after hearing the conditions of salvation (Matt. 19:22), the disciples asked, “Who then can be saved?” (verse 25). Jesus replied, “With men this is impossible, but with God all things are possible” (verse 26). Elsewhere Christ declared to His disciples, “Without Me ye can do nothing” (John 15:5). But the opposite side of this truth is declared by the apostle Paul when he writes, “I can do all things through Christ which strengtheneth me” (Phil. 4:13).
Paul reaffirms our Lord’s statements on the conditions of salvation in the following passages:
And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God? . . .
Who will render to every man according to his deeds;
To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honor and immortality, eternal life:
But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,
Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of them that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;
But glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile (Rom. 2:3,6-10).
For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die; but if ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live (Rom. 8:13).
And being made perfect He (Christ) became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey Him (Heb. 5:9).
Like Jesus, Paul is clear—especially in Romans 8:13—that only through divine power can the obedience required for salvation be fulfilled. Apart from this power, it is simply not possible.
Ellen White echoes the words of Jesus and Paul in a number of statements. Describing the conditions stated by our Lord to the rich young ruler, she distinguishes the superficial, legal obedience in which the young ruler trusted from the obedience produced by a heart transformed by grace:
In reply to this question Jesus told him that obedience to the commandments of God was necessary if he would obtain eternal life; and He quoted several of the commandments which show man’s duty to his fellow men. . . .
Christ’s dealing with the young man is presented as an object lesson. God has given us the rule of conduct which every one of His servants must follow. It is obedience to His law, not merely a legal obedience, but an obedience which enters into the life and is exemplified in the character. God has set His own standard of character for all who would become subjects of His kingdom [10].
Commenting on the same conditions, as outlined in Luke 10, she writes:
The lawyer asked Jesus what he should do that he might inherit eternal life. Jesus referred him to the commandments of His Father, telling him that obedience to them was necessary for his salvation. Christ told him that he knew the commandments, and that if he obeyed them, he should have life [11].
When the lawyer came to Christ, saying, 'Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?", the Saviour did not say, Believe, only believe, and you will be saved. 'What is written in the law?' He said, 'how readest thou?' . . . Here the false doctrine that man has nothing to do but believe is swept away. Eternal life is given to us on the condition that we obey the commandments of God [12].
Elsewhere she writes:
The keeping of these (ten) commandments comprises the whole duty of man, and presents the conditions of eternal life. Now the question is, Will man comply with the requirements? Will he love God supremely and his neighbor as himself? There is no possible way for man to do this in his own strength. The divine power of Christ must be added to the effort of humanity [13].
The gospel that is to be preached to all nations, kindreds, tongues, and peoples presents the truth in clear lines, showing that obedience is the condition of gaining eternal life. Christ imparts His righteousness to all who consent to let Him take away their sins [14].
Thank God, He attends us every step of the way through, if we are willing to be saved in Christ’s appointed way—through obedience to His requirements [15].
It must be understood that according to the Bible, obedience is not true obedience if it is not perfect. The apostle James writes, “For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all” (James 2:10). All it took was one sin to expel our first parents from Eden, and all it will take is one sin—unconfessed and unforsaken—to keep any of us from returning to Eden. This point is underscored by James when he writes, two verses after the one quoted above: “So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty” (verse 12).
Ellen White is therefore in full harmony with Scripture when she describes the obedience required for salvation as perfect, in such statements as the following:
His (the Christian’s) perfect obedience to all God’s commandments, opens to him the gates of the Holy City [16].
In the day of judgment the course of the man who has retained the frailty and imperfection of humanity will not be vindicated. For him there will be no place in heaven. He could not enjoy the perfection of the saints in light. He who has not sufficient faith in Christ to believe that He can keep him from sinning, has not the faith that will give him an entrance into the kingdom of God [17].
Christ came to this earth and lived a life of perfect obedience, that men and women, through His grace, might also live lives of perfect obedience. This is necessary to their salvation [18].
The article in question cites a single Ellen White statement in support of its claim that perfect obedience isn’t possible for the Christian in this life. But any thoughtful reading of the statement shows that it isn’t saying any such thing. Here is the statement, exactly as the article quotes it:
There are those who have known the pardoning love of Christ and who really desire to be children of God, yet they realize that their character is imperfect, their life faulty, and they are ready to doubt whether their hearts have been renewed by the Holy Spirit. To such I would say, Do not draw back in despair. We shall often have to bow down and weep at the feet of Jesus because of our shortcomings and mistakes, but we are not to be discouraged. Even if we are overcome by the enemy, we are not cast off, not forsaken and rejected of God. No; Christ is at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us [19].
Obviously the above statement says nowhere that the earthly achievement of a perfect character through God’s power is impossible. And when we look at other statements, like the following, such a position is untenable if one is to accept the inspiration, authority, and integrity of the writings of Ellen White:
But many of you say, “How can I help sinning? I have tried to overcome, but I do not make advancement.” You never can in your own strength, you will fail; but help is laid upon One who is mighty. In his strength you may be more than conqueror. You should arise and say, “Through the grace of God, I will be an overcomer.” Put your will on the side of God's will, and with your eye fixed upon Him who is the author and finisher of your faith, you may make straight paths for your feet.… Lay hold upon Him by living faith, and believe the word of God to the letter [20].
The Saviour is wounded afresh and put to open shame when His people pay no heed to His word. He came to this world and lived a sinless life, that in His power His power might also live lives of sinlessness. He desires them by practicing the principles of truth to show to the world that God’s grace has power to sanctify the heart [21].
No public discourse, written or spoken, is helpful to the church when it produces scant inspired evidence that is easily explained and overwhelmed by additional inspired evidence. The author of the article in question appears to believe in the authority of the inspired pen. If so, he should be prepared to consider enough of the inspired evidence to help his readers recognize in the inspired writings the position he advocates. Otherwise, his complaints about the beliefs of his theological opponents amount to little more than experience-driven, subjective allegations.
Perfection, Perfectionism, and “Toxic Spirituality”
The article in question, like other contemporary attacks on perfection theology, attempts to distinguish the perfection Jesus calls for in Matthew 5:48 (“Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect”) from so-called “perfectionism,” which the author defines as “a self-centered and exhausting attempt to please God by flawless law keeping” [22].
But Bible sanctification is accomplished, not by self-focus, but by the crucifixion of self described by the apostle Paul (Gal. 2:20). Christ thus lives out His life in the believer, thus providing the power to bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ (II Cor. 10:4-5). Thus the same author writes:
Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (II Cor. 7:1).
The author of this article seems to have respect for the Spirit of Prophecy writings, so one is curious as to how he regards the following Ellen White comments on the perfection enjoined in Matthew 5:48:
God's ideal for His children is higher than the highest human thought can reach. “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” This command is a promise. The plan of salvation contemplates our complete recovery from the power of Satan. Christ always separates the contrite soul from sin. He came to destroy the works of the devil, and He has made provision that the Holy Spirit shall be imparted to every repentant soul, to keep him from sinning.
The tempter's agency is not to be accounted an excuse for one wrong act. Satan is jubilant when he hears the professed followers of Christ making excuses for their deformity of character. It is these excuses that lead to sin. There is no excuse for sinning. A holy temper, a Christlike life, is accessible to every repenting, believing child of God [23].
[Commenting on Matt. 5:48] The conditions of eternal life, under grace, are just what they were in Eden,--perfect righteousness, harmony with God, perfect conformity to the principles of His law. The standard of character presented in the Old Testament is the same that is presented in the New Testament. This standard is not one to which we cannot attain. In every command or injunction God gives there is a promise, the most positive, underlying the command. God has made provision that we may become like unto Him, and He will accomplish this for all who do not interpose a perverse will and thus frustrate His grace [24].
[From an article commenting on Matt. 5:48, titled, “Be Ye Therefore Perfect.”] Under the discipline of the greatest Teacher the world has ever known, Christians must move onward and upward toward perfection. This is God's command, and no one should say, I can not do it. He should say instead, God requires me to be perfect, and He will give me strength to overcome all that stands in the way of perfection. . . .
The world has set up a standard to suit the inclinations of unsanctified hearts, but this is not the standard for those who love Christ. The Redeemer has chosen them out of the world, and has left them His sinless life as a standard [25].
The article in question seeks to draw a non-existent contrast when it states, regarding the parallel between Luke 6:36 and Matthew 5:48:
In Luke 6:36, instead of the word “perfect,” the use of the word mercy refers not to perfection in law keeping but perfection in love as we grow in loving God supremely and our neighbors as ourselves (Luke 10:27) [26].
But how is “perfection in law keeping” in any sense different from “perfection in love as we grow in loving God supremely and our neighbors as ourselves”? Isn’t supreme love to God and a corresponding love of our neighbor what the Ten Commandments are all about?
More than once, the article in question insists that those seeking sinless perfection are doing so to “impress God” [27]. Perhaps the author doesn’t realize that by alleging such motives, he is indulging the same fault he ascribes to his theological adversaries, whose use of labels he describes as a practice in which “motives are impugned” [28]. But to accuse people of trying to “impress God” is certainly an impugning of motives. What is more, while the author accuses perfection advocates of a “toxic spirituality” in which “labels are thrown at each other” [29], he can’t seem to avoid the use of labels himself when he suggests that today’s Adventists who believe sinless obedience to be attainable in this life through heaven’s power, owe their thinking to “Adventism’s flirtation with fundamentalism in the past” [30].
And then he accuses his theological opponents of “intolerance, bigotry, and hypocrisy” [31]. Does he not consider it hypocritical to denounce the use of derogatory labels by others while indulging the use of such labels himself?
The fact is that the quest for sinless living is not at all about “impressing God,” but is rather focused on such objectives—among others—as keeping the universe safe from another rebellion. (Do we really want the new heavens and new earth rendered vulnerable to racial animus and violent insurrection, as we’ve witnessed of late in the United States of America?) The following Ellen White statements are clear that the security of the universe is a major factor in the perfecting of character by God’s people:
God, in His wisdom and mercy, tests men and women here, to see if they will obey His voice and respect His law, or rebel as Satan did. If they choose the side of Satan, putting his way above God’s, it would not be safe to admit them into heaven; for they would cause another revolt against the government of God in the heavenly courts. He who fulfills the law in every respect, demonstrates that perfect obedience is possible [32].
God will accept nothing less than unreserved surrender. Halfhearted, sinful, professing Christians would spoil heaven, were they permitted to enter. They would stir up a second rebellion there [33].
Without perfection of character no one can enter the pearly gates of the city of God, for if, with all our imperfections, we were permitted to enter that city, there would soon be in heaven a second rebellion. We must first be tried and chosen, and found faithful and true. Upon the purification of our character rests our only hope of eternal life [34].
Without Christ, it is impossible for [man] to render perfect obedience to the law of God; and heaven can never be gained by an imperfect obedience, for this would place all heaven in jeopardy and make possible a second rebellion [35].
Those who accept Christ as their Saviour, becoming partakers of His divine nature, are enabled to follow His example, living in obedience to every precept of the law. Through the merits of Christ, man is to show by his obedience that he could be trusted in heaven, that he would not rebel [36].
Hospitals and Museums
Accusing perfection theology of facilitating “intolerance”—a word that without definition lacks utility in today’s environment, as too many have equated intolerance for sin with intolerance for the sinner—the article in question states:
The intolerance that prevails means that the church, instead of being a refuge or hospital for sinners, becomes a museum of the “sinless” [37].
While the church is indeed a hospital for sinners, some may say it is the only hospital around where a good many patients actually enjoy being sick! People normally go to a hospital to get well, not to develop a comfort level with their illness. And truly sinless people, together with those striving by God’s grace to become sinless, have no interest in becoming mere museum pieces! Yes, they will be “a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men” (I Cor. 4:9), but the museum analogy does them no justice. Witnesses and workers with a passion to exalt their Lord and rescue sinners from bondage is a description far more in tune with what we find in Scripture and the writings of Ellen White. In the latter’s words:
The last rays of merciful light, the last message of mercy to be given to the world, is a revelation of His character of love. The children of God are to manifest His glory. In their own life and character they are to reveal what the grace of God has done for them.
The light of the Sun of Righteousness is to shine forth in good works—in words of truth and deeds of holiness [38].
The Health Message and Salvation
The article in question asserts:
By treating diet and health as a moral issue, it is natural to use the same as a sieve in matters of salvation. Instead of celebrating and echoing the blessedness of adherence to the health message on one’s emotional, physical, and spiritual well-being, emphasis is on how it assures one of a ticket to heaven [39].
Again we encounter the misleading effect of trying to distinguish salvation from regeneration and sanctification, something the New Testament quite strongly forbids, as is evident in such verses as the following:
God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth (II Thess. 2:13).
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Titus 3:5).
As we noted earlier, Biblical salvation is about being saved from sin (Matt. 1:21), and this salvation includes forgiveness, or justification (Rom. 3:24; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14), as well as regeneration and sanctification (II Thess. 2:13; Titus 3:5). Without question the latter processes include deeds of practical piety, such as the preservation and restoration of our physical and emotional health. Readiness for heaven most assuredly encompasses our emotional and physical as well as our spiritual well-being, as these are all interconnected.
Which is why Ellen White, under divine inspiration, writes as follows:
When temperance is presented as a part of the gospel, many will see their need of reform [40].
The Lord has given instruction that the gospel is to be carried forward, and the gospel includes health reform in all its phases [41].
The union of Christlike work for the body and Christlike work for the soul is the true interpretation of the gospel [42].
Notice how, in these statements, the gospel includes temperance, health reform, and Christlike work for the body. These are not depicted as the fruit of the gospel or of a finished salvation. Rather, the inspired pen declares them to be part and parcel thereof.
Ellen White on “Perfectionism”
A subsequent article on the same website, by a different author, attempts to trace the modern Adventist perfection controversy over a period of twenty years—from 1956 and the Questions on Doctrine crisis to the righteousness by faith conference held in 1976 in the town of Palmdale, California [43]. Sadly, the article gets off on the proverbial “wrong foot” by defining “perfectionism” in a manner contrary to what is found in the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy.
The article’s definition of “perfectionism,” taken from an article in the Catholic magazine First Things [44], “assumes the possibility that a Christian can attain and maintain a sinless state in this life” [45]. The author would have done better to consult the writings of Ellen White for a definition of this term, not only because Ellen White’s role as an inspired prophet places her authority beyond that of uninspired scholars (Adventist or otherwise), but because readers and listeners are vulnerable to confusion when they hear a word defined in a manner contrary to what they see in the inspired writings.
Only once does Ellen White use the word perfectionism, and in the following statement:
God will not entrust the care of His precious flock to men whose mind and judgment have been weakened by former errors that they have cherished, such as so-called perfectionism and Spiritualism, and who, by their course while in these errors, have disgraced themselves and brought reproach upon the cause of truth. Although they may now feel free from error and competent to go forth and to teach this last message, God will not accept them. He will not entrust precious souls to their care, for their judgment was perverted while in error, and is now weakened [46].
In her description of those who taught what she describes here as “perfectionism,” it becomes clear that the theory she is describing is far removed from the doctrine of sinless living taught in both Scripture and the consensus of her own writings. A passage which, in another of her books, identifies the misguided “perfectionism” noted in the above statement, is worth quoting in full for the sake of clarity on this point:
During family prayer that night, the Spirit of the Lord rested upon me, and I was shown many things in vision. These men were presented to me as doing great injury to the cause of God. While professing sanctification, they were transgressing the sacred law. They were corrupt at heart, and those in union with them were under a satanic delusion, obeying their carnal instincts instead of the word of God.
They held that those who are sanctified cannot sin. And this naturally led to the belief that the affections and desires of the sanctified ones were always right, and never in danger of leading them into sin. In harmony with these sophistries, they were practicing the worst sins under the garb of sanctification, and through their deceptive, mesmeric influence were gaining a strange power over some of their associates, who did not see the evil of these apparently beautiful but seductive theories.
Terrible was their power over the people, for while holding their attention and winning their confidence through a mesmeric influence, they led the innocent and unsuspecting to believe that this influence was the Spirit of God. Therefore those who followed their teachings were deceived into the belief that they and their associates who claimed to be wholly sanctified, could fulfill all the desires of their hearts without sin.
Clearly the deceptions of these false teachers were laid open before me, and I saw the fearful account that stood against them in the book of records, and the terrible guilt that rested upon them for professing complete holiness while their daily acts were offensive in the sight of God.
Some time after this, the characters of these persons were developed before the people, and the vision given in reference to them was fully vindicated.
“Believe in Christ,” was the cry of these claimants of sanctification. “Only believe; this is all that is required of you. Only have faith in Jesus.”
The words of John come forcibly to my mind. “If we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” I John 1:8. I was shown that those who triumphantly claim to be sinless, show by their very boasting that they are far from being without taint of sin. The more clearly fallen man comprehends the character of Christ, the more distrustful will he be of himself, and the more imperfect will his works appear to him, in contrast with those which marked the life of the spotless Redeemer. But those who are far from Jesus, those whose spiritual perceptions are so clouded by error that they cannot comprehend the character of the great Exemplar, conceive of Him as altogether such a one as themselves, and dare to talk of their own perfection of holiness. But they are far from God; they know little of themselves, and less of Christ [47].
It isn’t difficult for anyone reading the above statement to see the clear difference between the Biblical doctrine of divinely-empowered sinless living here on earth and the false sanctification, or “perfectionism,” condemned in the above statement—and elsewhere [48]—by Ellen White. The three most obvious differences between these two doctrines are as follows:
1. Claiming to be sinless. Both Scripture and Ellen White uphold the divinely-empowered possibility of sinless obedience here on earth [49] and the simultaneous impossibility if any earthly being claiming to have achieved this goal [50]. Unlike the perfectionism condemned in Ellen White’s writings, Last Generation Theology as taught in contemporary Adventism upholds both of these parallel truths.
2. Trusting one’s natural affections and desires. The inspired writings are clear that the affections and desires of the lower nature, though not a source of guilt in themselves, must nevertheless be subdued by the higher nature (I Cor. 9:27) [51]—a victory demonstrated for the Christian in the life and experience of Jesus (Rom. 8:3-4; 15:3). According to the writings of Ellen White, this struggle against the fleshly nature will continue till Jesus comes [52]. By contrast, the “perfectionism” condemned by Ellen White in the above statements promised its adherents a purification of their fleshly urges so that these could be safely trusted. The Bible/Spirit of Prophecy doctrine of Spirit-empowered sinless obedience teaches no such thing.
3. “Only believe” as the condition of salvation. Here again the advocates of the “perfectionism” described above departed from inspired teaching. Both Scripture and the writings of Ellen White are clear that forgiveness for our sinful past as well as obedience accomplished through divine grace are the prescribed conditions for Biblical salvation (Rom. 3:24; Eph. 1:7; Matt. 7:20; 19:16-26; Luke 10:25-28; Rom. 2:6-10; 8:3; Heb. 5:9) [53].
In light of the above, any use of the term “perfectionism” to describe and disparage the Bible/Spirit of Prophecy teaching of divinely-empowered sinless living in the experience of earthly, fallen believers, is both false and confusing. In speaking negatively of perfectionism, Ellen White is describing a teaching fundamentally different from what Scripture, her own writings, and the vast majority of Adventist Last Generation Theology advocates have taught since the start of our church history, and continue to teach today.
The Perfection Debate in Adventist History
The second article under review here, in its effort to trace the history of the Adventist perfection controversy, spends several paragraphs reviewing the period in Adventist history between the founding of the Advent movement and the theological tumult of the 1950s. Much of what the author says tries to create the appearance of conflict within the church during this time over the perfection issue. Yet while the author speaks at one point of “the debate on perfectionism” supposedly subsiding at the time of Ellen White’s death and the First World War [54], nowhere does he offer evidence from this period of any variance over the central issue in the modern Adventist perfection debate; namely, whether or not it is possible for the Christian, through heaven’s power here on earth, to live a sinless life.
This lack of evidence for conflict in the church during the aforesaid period over the possibility of perfection in this life is understandable—because until the emergence of Edward Heppenstall’s anti-perfection theology in the mid-twentieth century, this conflict did not exist in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This doctrinal consensus on the perfection issue was noted by Anglican scholar Geoffrey Paxton in his 1977 book The Shaking of Adventism. Paxton recounted at one point a challenge by Robert Brinsmead in 1969 to the president of what was then the Australasian (now the South Pacific) Division, in which Brinsmead stated:
I challenge Pastor Naden to produce any statement in responsible Seventh-day Adventist literature, written prior to the present Awakening message, which teaches that God’s people will not become morally perfect and sinless until Jesus comes in the clouds of heaven. That is simply not basic Adventist doctrine [55].
Paxton then observed:
It appears that this challenge was never taken up, and this is not surprising. To the knowledge of this writer, it would be impossible to find support for Heppenstall’s position (on perfection) in pre-1950 Adventism [56].
Two more recent scholars—one a former Adventist, the other from an Adventist background but who was never baptized—are equally emphatic on this point:
If Christ had an unfair advantage, how could individuals be expected to follow his example in living a perfect life? The problem was particularly acute since perfection had been suggested by Ellen White as the goal of the Adventist people: “While our great High Priest is making the atonement for us, we should seek to become perfect in Christ.” Her call to perfection was urgent: “Jesus does not change the character at His coming. The work of transformation must be done now.” . . .
Prior to [Edward] Heppenstall, no important Adventist writer denied the possibility of perfection. Ellen White had been unequivocal: “As the Son of Man was perfect in His life, so His followers are to be perfect in their life” [57].
Little wonder that after surveying over a century of Adventist literature, Paxton was constrained to write in The Shaking of Adventism:
The doctrine of the perfecting of the final generation stands near the heart of Adventist theology [58].
The article in question goes on to recount, with a measure of accuracy, the theological and administrative confusion resulting from the struggle during the 1950s and ‘60s over the teachings of Robert Brinsmead. Where the author misleads, unfortunately, is when he describes Brinsmead as “a disciple of [M.L.] Andreasen” [59]. But while the Brinsmead of the 1950s and ‘60s began with Andreasen’s perfection teachings, the theology with which Brinsmead entered denominational history espoused a very different approach to perfection theology than that of Andreasen and the Adventist consensus prior to that time.
Because of his ill-fated effort to blend the historic Protestant doctrine of original sin with the classic Adventist teaching on the perfecting of the final generation of Christians [60], Brinsmead went beyond the teachings of classic Adventism on perfection (as reflected in the beliefs of such as Andreasen) and insisted that the Christian’s fallen nature, not just sinful behavior, would be eradicated before the coming of Jesus [61].
In the end, Brinsmead’s theological journey led him to surrender fully to the original sin doctrine and to thus fully deny the possibility of perfection in this life [62]. In time he would repudiate such classic Adventist doctrines as the investigative judgment [63], the doctrinal authority of Ellen White [64], and the Sabbath [65]. By the 1990s he had become an agnostic, with no religion to speak of [66]. What he professes now, I am not certain.
Those interested in an in-depth analysis of Brinsmead’s first public teachings and their departure from the classic Adventist construct which many today call Last Generation Theology, can read a series by the present writer published several years ago on this website [67].
The historical review presented by the article in question closes with the Palmdale Conference on righteousness by faith and related topics, held in April 1976. An author is quoted who rightly notes how Desmond Ford, the principal figure at this conference, was “criticized for weakening the biblical doctrine of sanctification and discarding the traditional Adventist notion of an eschatological perfection of believers” [68]. If one adheres to the message of both Scripture and the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, these criticisms must be viewed as entirely accurate. Ford’s teaching that righteousness by faith includes justification alone, a key point of Ford’s message at Palmdale [69], is fundamentally at odds with the teachings of the New Testament [70]. And his denial of eschatological perfection on the part of the Last Generation saints is equally out of harmony with the Bible in both Testaments (Zeph. 3:13; I Thess. 5:23; II Peter 3:10-14; I John 3:2-3; Rev. 3:21; 12:17; 14:5,12), not to mention the overwhelming testimony of the writings of Ellen White [71].
Needful Candor
More than three decades ago one Adventist author, who admittedly rejected Ellen White’s authority in doctrinal matters, wrote an analysis of two different Sabbath School Quarterlies holding opposite views on the human nature of Christ. Here he frankly acknowledged which side in the controversy most accurately represented Ellen White’s theology—a theology which, in the context of the article, he clearly disagreed with:
Does it follow, then, that Ellen White did not really have a consistent viewpoint concerning the nature of Christ and the issue of perfection? Probably not, because her entire theology was perfection-oriented. The Sabbath and health reform, two of her great concerns, have their rationale in perfectionism in preparation for translation.… Using some of Ellen White’s statements to prove that perfection is unattainable would seem as futile as using some of her statements to establish that she repudiated the significance of 1844 [72].
The same author admits, earlier in the above article, that a series of “antiperfectionistic” Ellen White statements quoted by another author “are generally not very convincing when read in context” [73]. He goes on, writing of the end-time-perfection theology: “To repudiate it would be to repudiate the very nature of Adventism” [74].
I agree. And the first online comment following the article under review, by an author who apparently prefers to remain anonymous, has offered the church yet another moment of needful candor on the part of those members who reject perfection theology. Despite my disagreement with the views of this respondent, his recognition of what Ellen White in fact taught on the perfection issue is clearly one of honesty, despite his disagreement with Ellen White’s position:
Reading this account (the de Vera article), one might think it a complete mystery why the church hasn’t been able to settle this issue and root out perfectionistic legalism. A more frank analysis of Ellen White’s role should clear up this mystery. Here’s just a few quotes compiled in an article from one of our most prolific proponents of perfection theology (Kevin Paulson, “Assurance of Salvation at the Time of the End,” ADvindicate, April 30, 2018 http://advindicate.com/articles/2018/4/30/assurance-of-salvation-at-the-time-of-the-end).
“The work of gaining salvation is one of copartnership, a joint operation. There is to be co-operation between God and the repentant sinner. This is necessary for the formation of right principles in the character. Man is to make earnest efforts to overcome that which hinders him from attaining to perfection.” (Acts of the Apostles, p. 482, 1911.)
“We are saved by climbing round after round of the ladder, looking to Christ, clinging to Christ, mounting step by step to the height of Christ, so that He is made unto us wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption” (Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 147, 1901).
“We cannot have the assurance and perfect confiding trust in Christ as our Saviour until we acknowledge Him as our King and are obedient to His commandments” (Faith and Works, p. 16 (MS. 36, 1890).
“Obedience to the laws of God develops in man a beautiful character that is in harmony with all that is pure and holy and undefiled. In the life of such a man the message of the gospel of Christ is made clear. Accepting the mercy of Christ and His healing from the power of sin, he is brought into right relation with God. His life, cleansed from vanity and selfishness, is filled with the love of God. His daily obedience to the law of God obtains for him a character that assures him eternal life in the kingdom of God.” (Sons and Daughters of God, p. 42 (MS. 49, 1907, emphasis supplied).
“Now, while our great High Priest is making the atonement for us, we should seek to become perfect in Christ…This is the condition in which those must be found who shall stand in the time of trouble.” (The Great Controversy, p. 623 1911).
As this is getting tedious, I’ll stop there. Note these all come from after 1888. With a “prophet” making such statements, it should be clear why we cannot move past perfection theology. This article’s portrait of EGW being squarely in the anti-perfection righteousness by faith alone camp since 1888 is simply not tenable.
But the evangelical wing of Adventism takes the strategy of telling members that when EGW says salvation is obtained by striving for perfection with the help of God, she doesn’t mean that salvation is obtained by striving for perfection with the help of God. It’s hard to not see this as a form a spiritual gaslighting. Instead of reconsidering the role of Ellen White in the church’s theology, we blame members for deriving a legalistic theology from her writings by reading her to mean what she actually wrote. Mind you, for the most part, I don’t think it’s intentional gaslighting but the effect is the same [75].
As with the earlier observations from the article of thirty-plus years ago, little needs to be said in reply to the above.
A “Muted Christ” or a “Christ-less Theology”?
Like others in contemporary Adventism, the author of the article in question believes that striving for perfection is a “distraction” from Christ. In his words:
By being diverted elsewhere, i.e., the possibility of present sinless life, the result is either a muted Christ in soteriology or a Christ-less theology [76].
One is truly baffled as to how striving through God’s grace to be like Jesus could become a “diversion” from Jesus, or how such an endeavor could produce either a “muted Christ” or a “Christ-less theology.” One can’t deny, to be sure, that the quest for moral rectitude can in fact become destitute of the wholehearted focus on the Savior found in Scripture and the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy. But this isn’t the fault of the inspired writings, which is where our focus exclusively belongs when it comes to defining our faith and practice. And I can honestly say that I know of no prominent advocate of Last Generation Theology in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, past or present, who has not striven mightily to make the Christ portrayed in the inspired writings the heart and soul of their message. (Notice I speak here of the Christ of Scripture, as opposed to the numerous false christs of modern and contemporary thought, many of whom refuse to condemn departures from the written Word in either doctrine or behavior.)
Describing the historical period in the church reviewed by the article in question, the author writes:
Adventists generally believed that we could be saved through our faith in Christ and works wrought by the Spirit. What is not clear is how to keep the intricate balance between the two in addressing the concern on perfectionism [77].
But both Scripture and the writings of Ellen White are pervaded with this balance; we only find this balance knocked askew when theological speculation, personal opinion, the demands of popular culture, and the vagaries of experience are allowed to influence our perspective on the inspired materials. Hebrews chapter 11 depicts the balance of faith and works in breathtaking simplicity. And neither Scripture nor Ellen White teach any rigid “division of labor” between the Members of the Godhead with regard to salvation. Ellen White states it beautifully when she declares, “Our sanctification is the work of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit” [78].
Conclusion: Settling the Issue
Finally, the second of the two articles under review in this essay ends as follows:
And finally, it is time to answer the following: Is the present Church in a position to settle the issue posed by the concept of perfectionism? I am convinced that it is still yet to happen. Are we ready to develop our soteriology as a result of the theological debates within the church? I am also convinced that we are [79].
First and foremost, we should never develop any doctrine as a result of debates, within the church or elsewhere. The written counsel of God must ever remain the church’s supreme authority in all things spiritual (Isa. 8:20; Acts 17:11). But I agree that Seventh-day Adventists are very much in a position to allow the perfection controversy to be settled, provided we return without qualification to Scripture and the Spirit of Prophecy writings as the ultimate definer of what we believe and how we live.
The fact is that Number 13 of our SDA Fundamental Beliefs offers the foundation and rationale for the settling of this issue:
The universal church is composed of all who truly believe in Christ, but in the last days, a time of widespread apostasy, a remnant has been called out to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus. The remnant announces the arrival of the judgment hour, proclaims salvation through Christ, and heralds the approach of His second advent. This proclamation is symbolized by the three angels of Revelation 14; it coincides with the work of judgment in heaven and results in a work of repentance and reform on earth. Every believer is called to have a personal part in this worldwide witness (Dan. 7:9-14; Isa. 1:9; 11:11; Jer. 23:3; Micah 2:12; II Cor. 5:10; I Peter 1:16-19; 4:17; II Peter 3:10-14; Jude 3,14; Rev. 12:17; 14:6-12; 18:1-4) [80].
Herein, simply stated, lies the heart of Last Generation Theology. The reason for the existence of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is encapsulated in the following two verses—noted in the above belief statement—from the book of Revelation:
And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ (Rev. 12:17).
Here is the patience of the saints. Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus (Rev. 14:12).
The vision of a faithful, obedient, and victorious remnant among God’s professed people is first articulated in the prophetic writings of the Old Testament (e.g. Isa. 11:11; Joel 2:32; Micah 2:12; 4:7; 5:3,7-8; Zeph. 3:13). A number of these verses explicitly foresee this remnant within the context of the Messiah’s first and second advents. This is especially clear in the passage from Zephaniah:
The remnant of Israel shall not do iniquity, nor speak lies, neither shall a deceitful tongue be found in their mouth; for they shall feed and lie down, and none shall make them afraid (Zeph. 3:13; see also Rev. 14:5).
Like the remnant described in the above verse, the remnant depicted in Revelation are also portrayed as faithful commandment-keepers, faultless through the power of God’s transforming grace (Rev. 12:17; 14:5,12). Indeed, it is through the faith of Jesus, as described in Revelation 14:12, that this faultless commandment-keeping is produced. And we must remember that unless this commandment-keeping is faultless, it is unacceptable in God’s judgment. Again, in the words of the apostle James:
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. . . . So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty (James 2:10,12).
Whenever I see that bumper sticker that reads, “Christians aren’t perfect, just forgiven,” I cringe! Christians may take great comfort from this, but I doubt anyone else does! For indeed, the past two millennia have witnessed an incessant, nauseating parade of Christian imperfection. The litany is long and grotesque. Racism. Slavery. Inquisition. Industrial brutality. Ethnic cleansing. Monks beaming while heretics burn. Business tycoons declaring it their Christian right to let workers starve. Men in bedsheets setting fire to two sticks of wood, claiming to glorify Jesus. Churchmen turning a blind eye as trainloads of a despised race chug endlessly toward the Final Solution.
And the list goes on. The record of Christian history both past and present gives painful meaning to Mahatma Gandhi’s statement, “I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ” [81].
This is not, in other words, some arcane, theoretical dispute, like arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin! It is intensely, profoundly practical, which more than any other reason accounts for its staying power in the church.
I often wonder whether those who adhere to the anti-perfection doctrine have truly considered its practical implications. One wishes to honor their integrity and good faith when they insist they believe as strongly as anyone that godly living and obedience to the divine requirements are essential to the Christian experience. The problem arises when one considers what less-than-perfect obedience is supposed to look like. The timeworn mantra of “tolerance” heard so often these days—that everyone’s spirituality is unique and that Christians should simply stop “judging” each other—is no help here. Christians might conceivably learn to stop criticizing or judging one another, but that won’t stop the world from criticizing and judging Christians! What moral credibility can Christians possibly maintain before humanity if the sins they so glibly condemn—whether in the church or society—are held by the same Christians to be inevitable, even for the most sanctified believers?
To close this essay, perhaps the following two inspired statements—one from the Bible, the other from Ellen White—are most fitting:
Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God (II Cor. 7:1).
We can overcome. Yes: fully, entirely. Jesus died to make a way of escape for us, that we might overcome every evil temper, every sin, every temptation, and sit down at last with Him [82].
REFERENCES
1. Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, pp. 24,29,117,309,761; Signs of the Times, Jan. 16, 1896; July 23, 1902; Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 252; Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 314; That I May Know Him, p. 292.
3. Admiral Ncube, “How Are We Saved?” Spectrum, March 1, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/how-are-we-saved
4. Ibid.
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Ellen G. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 523.
11. ----Testimonies, vol. 2, p. 679.
12. ----Review and Herald, June 26, 1900.
13. ----Signs of the Times, Nov. 24, 1887.
14. ----SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 972.
15. ----This Day With God, p. 72.
16. ----SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 920.
17. ----Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 360.
18. ----Review and Herald, March 15, 1906 (italics supplied).
19. ----Steps to Christ, p. 64.
20. ----Review and Herald, Sept. 20, 1892.
21. Ibid, April 1, 1902.
22. Ncube, “How Are We Saved?” Spectrum, March 1, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/how-are-we-saved
23. White, The Desire of Ages, p. 311 (italics supplied).
24. ----Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing, p. 76 (italics supplied).
25. ----Signs of the Times, July 17, 1901 (italics supplied).
26. Ncube, “How Are We Saved?” Spectrum, March 1, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/how-are-we-saved
27. Ibid.
28. Ibid.
29. Ibid.
30. Ibid.
31. Ibid.
32. White, Review and Herald, July 21, 1891.
33. ----The Upward Look, p. 197.
34. ----Sermons and Talks, vol. 2, p. 294.
35. ----Signs of the Times, Dec. 30, 1889.
36. ----That I May Know Him, p. 292.
37. Ncube, “How Are We Saved?” Spectrum, March 1, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/how-are-we-saved
38. White, Christ’s Object Lessons, pp. 415-416.
39. Ncube, “How Are We Saved?” Spectrum, March 1, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/how-are-we-saved
40. White, Testimonies, vol. 7, p. 75.
41. ----Medical Ministry, p. 159.
42. ----My Life Today, p. 224.
43. Nixon de Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
44. Dale Coulter, “The Rise of Protestant Perfectionism,” First Things, July 3, 2014 https://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2014/07/the-rise-of-protestant-perfectionism
45. De Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
46. White, Early Writings, pp. 101-102.
47. ----Life Sketches, pp. 83-84.
48. ----The Sanctified Life, pp. 7-17; Review and Herald, June 6, 1878.
49. See Psalm 4:4; 119:1-3,11; Zeph. 3:13; Rom. 6:14; 8:4; I Cor. 15:34; II Cor. 7:1; Eph. 5:27; Phil. 4:13; I Thess. 5:23; I Peter 2:21-22; 4:1; II Peter 3:10-14; I John 1:7,9; 3:2-3,7; Jude 24; Rev. 3:21; 14:5; White, The Desire of Ages, p. 311; Steps to Christ, p. 34; Christ’s Object Lessons, pp. 419-420; Evangelism, p. 385; Testimonies, vol. 3, p. 83; Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 260; Review and Herald, Sept. 25, 1900; April 1, 1902; Sept. 27, 1906; Signs of the Times, June 10, 1903; June 17, 1903; Aug. 9, 1905; Youth’s Instructor, April 16, 1903.
50. See I Kings 8:39; Job 9:20-21; Acts of the Apostles, pp. 560-561; Selected Messages, vol. 3, pp. 355,356; Signs of the Times, May 16, 1895.
51. ----Ministry of Healing, p. 130; Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 114; The Adventist Home, p. 127-128; Messages to Young People, p. 237; Review and Herald, Aug. 11, 1887.
52. ----Acts of the Apostles, pp. 560-561; Prophets and Kings, p. 84; Counsels to Teachers, p. 20; Selected Messages, vol. 2, p. 33.
53. ----The Desire of Ages, p. 523; Testimonies, vol. 2, pp. 561,679,694; Signs of the Times, Nov. 24, 1887; Dec. 15, 1887; Nov. 15, 1899; Review and Herald, June 22, 1890; Oct. 26, 1897; June 26, 1900; SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, pp. 920,972; This Day With God, p. 72; From the Heart, p. 181; Manuscript Releases, vol. 18, pp. 73-74.
54. De Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
55. Geoffrey J. Paxton, The Shaking of Adventism (Wilmington, DE: Zenith Publishing Co, 1977), p. 113.
56. Ibid.
57. Malcolm Bull and Keith Lockhart, Seeking a Sanctuary: Seventh-day Adventists and the American Dream (Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, 2007), pp. 86-87 (italics supplied).
58. Paxton, The Shaking of Adventism, p. 114.
59. De Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
60. Paxton, The Shaking of Adventism, pp. 98-100.
61. Robert D. Brinsmead, A Review of the Awakening Message, Part 1, p. 4; quoted by Paxton, The Shaking of Adventism, pp. 101-102; Richard W. Schwartz, Light-Bearers to the Remnant (Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing Assn, 1979), p. 458.
62. Paxton, The Shaking of Adventism, pp. 103-104,121-124.
63. Brinsmead, Judged by the Gospel: A Review of Adventism (Fallbrook, CA: Verdict Publications, 1980), pp. 33-116.
64. Ibid, pp. 119-200.
65. ----“Sabbatarianism Re-Examined,” Verdict, June 1981, pp. 6-66.
66. Larry Pahl, “Where is Robert Brinsmead?” Adventist Today, May-June 1999, pp. 14-15.
67. Kevin D. Paulson, “The Brinsmead Heresy and Last Generation Theology, Part 1” ADvindicate, Nov. 11, 2016 http://advindicate.com/articles/2016/11/11/the-brinsmead-heresy-and-last-generation-theology; “The Brinsmead Heresy and Last Generation Theology, Part 2,” ADvindicate, Nov. 18, 2016 http://advindicate.com/articles/2016/11/18/the-brinsmead-heresy-and-last-generation-theology-part-2; “The Brinsmead Heresy and Last Generation Theology, Part 3,” ADvindicate, Nov. 25, 2016 http://advindicate.com/articles/2016/11/25/the-brinsmead-heresy-and-last-generation-theology-part-3
68. De Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
69. See Paulson, “The Biblical Scope of Righteousness by Faith,” ADvindicate, July 6, 2019 http://advindicate.com/articles/2019/7/3/the-biblical-scope-of-righteousness-by-faith
70. Ibid.
71. See White, Early Writings, p. 71; The Great Controversy, pp. 425,623; Christ’s Object Lessons, p. 69; Testimonies, vol. 1, pp. 187,340,619; vol. 2, p. 355,505; vol. 3, p. 472; vol. 5, pp. 214,216; Testimonies to Ministers, pp. 18-19,506-507; SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 6, pp. 1118,1055; vol. 7, p. 978; Evangelism, p. 702; Selected Messages, vol. 3, p. 427; Review and Herald, May 30, 1882; Signs of the Times, Oct. 22, 1885.
72. Dennis Hokama, “Wallowing in the Gulley of Indecision—Christ’s All-Atoning Sacrifice versus Jesus the Model Man: An Analysis” Adventist Currents, July 1983, p. 14.
73. Ibid.
74. Ibid.
75. Comment of Jmark in discussion following de Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
76. De Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
77. Ibid.
78. White, SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 7, p. 908.
79. De Vera, “Perfectionism in Adventist History,” Spectrum, March 8, 2021 https://spectrummagazine.org/views/2021/perfectionism-adventist-history
80. Seventh-day Adventist Church Manual, 2015 edition, pp. 166-167.
81. Mahatma Gandhi, quoted by Bill Wilson, Christianity in the Crosshairs (Shippensburg, PA: Destiny Image Publishers, 2004), p. 74.
82. White, Testimonies, vol. 1, p. 144.
Pastor Kevin Paulson holds a Bachelor’s degree in theology from Pacific Union College, a Master of Arts in systematic theology from Loma Linda University, and a Master of Divinity from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University. He served the Greater New York Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for ten years as a Bible instructor, evangelist, and local pastor. He writes regularly for Liberty magazine and does script writing for various evangelistic ministries within the denomination. He continues to hold evangelistic and revival meetings throughout the North American Division and beyond, and is a sought-after seminar speaker relative to current issues in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He presently resides in Berrien Springs, Michigan