For example, how is it that Dan Jones
speaks of the theological subjects as being of no consequence when Ellen
White was claiming that the message that Waggoner and Jones were
presenting was the "third angel's message in verity?"67
True, she had been very strong on the unchristlike spirit but that does
not explain a statement like this, written in 1896,
An unwillingness to yield up
preconceived opinions, and to accept this truth, (the moral law a
schoolmaster) lay at the foundation of a large share of the opposition
manifested at Minneapolis against the Lord's message through Brethren
Waggoner and Jones. By exciting that opposition Satan succeeded in
shutting away from our people, in a great measure, the special power
of the Holy Spirit that God longed to impart to them. The enemy
prevented them from obtaining that efficiency which might have been
theirs in carrying the truth to the world, as the apostles proclaimed
it after the day of Pentecost. The light that is to lighten the whole
earth with its glory was resisted, and by the action of our own
brethren has been in a great degree kept away from the world.68
The description that Dan Jones has
given, even with its confession and re-consecration, fails to show that
the subjects of the law in Galatians and the covenants were not
important. Neither the personal relations between the brethren and the
messengers, nor the theological material discussed was not properly
resolved or explained. Dan Jones's assessment does not match with the
overwhelming statements Mrs. White gives in support of Waggoner's
theological presentation such as the one excerpt above.69
When Ellen White and Elder Waggoner said they did not care about the
doctrinal points and were only interested in a Christian spirit, they
very well could have had other concerns in mind.
In the letter she sent to Uriah Smith
concerning his futile attempts to prove Waggoner wrong on the covenants,
Ellen White compared his actions, and those of like persuasion, to the
Jews of Christ's day. This comparison was extensively used to portray
the opposition to the message of righteousness by faith. The specific
characteristics that she saw in common between the Jews and the
opposition were numerous. She named a critical and unforgiving spirit;70
an intent upon a legal religion;71
despising the messengers of God;72
wresting words, falsely interpreting presentations;73
and exhibiting the same hatred that Cain had for Abel.74
Note that this comparison of Cain's hatred is also used to describe the
spirit of the Jews in crucifying Christ.75
An interesting study for the future would be the complete comparison of
the spirit of opposition to the Minneapolis message and pharisaism;
however, for the present, it is extremely important to point out that
Ellen White regarded pharisaism as being human nature.76
Any judgment of those men who had opposed the message is emphatically
misplaced and very wrong. The real issue in all of this is that
pharisaism is only another name for sinful human nature. The actions and
spirit exhibited against Waggoner and Jones were a revelation of what is
in the heart of every man. What Ellen White sought to impress upon that
meeting in Battle Creek was to direct all to the realization that they
were convinced they were following Christ and doing His will, when they
were not. Their minds were so agitated to defend their position, that
the only way to reach their hearts would be to neutralize their mind set
and create an atmosphere where they could see their true condition.
|