There are no extant documents
from W.L.H. Baker. We have historical information on his personal life and
his work in the Australasian missionary fields, but evidently he did not
do much, if any, writing. He was connected with the publishing and
evangelism work, and in teaching, but evidently did not care to write for
our publications.
So, how can we claim that he was teaching
"adoptionism"? We may not have any documents from his hand, but
Ellen White must have heard him preach and/or heard about his teaching
while he was working in the Tasmanian missionary field about 1895-1896.
Definition of Adoptionism
Adoptionism is an error in understanding
who Christ was. It is more than just a discussion about what nature Christ
assumed in the incarnation. It goes beyond that into a deeper heresy.
Adoptionism is founded in Nestorianism, which surfaced in Spain during the
8th century. It taught that Christ was fully and completely a
man, born on this earth without any divine intervention attendant in His
conception. He was born as a son of man, not as the Son of God. He
was a normal human being with exalted concepts of purity and holiness, and
lived an heroic lifestyle in overcoming his "evil propensities."
Then, after He showed Himself to be morally in tune with God’s will—the
"perfect human being"—He was adopted by God as His son, and
thus became "the Son of God." In this capacity, God used this
"perfect human being" to work out the necessary interventions to
become humanity’s savior—the "perfect sacrifice."
During the first phase of this
"Christ’s" earthly existence, he would have been "altogether
such an one as ourselves." He would have had the same "propensities
of sin" as all of us have. After his adoption, this
"Christ" would have been a blending of the divine and human
natures as God infused him with His divine nature. The "exact time
when humanity was blended with divinity" in this "Christ"
was taught, by adoptionism, as being around his 30th year of
earthly existence.
From this definition of adoptionism, we
can now pick out the things which Mrs. White addressed in her cautions to
Elder Baker. Those phrases which are in italics are the very same words
which Mrs. White used in her letter. I chose them to emphasize them for
clarity in this discussion.
Historical Context of the Baker Letter
We can now turn to an analysis of the
content of the letter Mrs. White wrote to Elder Baker. To understand her
comments in the "Baker Letter" which was written to both Elder
Baker and his wife, we must consider the total historical context of the
letter.
The overall tone of the letter to Elder
Baker, which was probably written at the end of 1895, was very positive.
Mrs. White commended him for his work, encouraged him in his
"depression," and in general supported him personally. Then why
has there been such a furor about this particular letter from the pen of
Mrs. White? What did she say which got the attention of our theologians
and which caused the extensive discussions that have continued for some 50
years?
There are only a few sentences from the
entire 19 page letter which have come under intense scrutiny and
contentious discussion (for the full letter, please see Manuscript
Releases; Volume Thirteen, page 13).
"Be careful, exceedingly careful as
to how you dwell upon the human nature of Christ. Do not set Him before
the people as a man with the propensities of sin. He is the second Adam.
The first Adam was created a pure, sinless being, without a taint of sin
upon him; he was in the image of God. He could fall, and he did fall
through transgressing. Because of sin, his posterity was born with
inherent propensities of disobedience. But Jesus Christ was the only
begotten Son of God. He took upon Himself human nature, and was tempted in
all points as human nature is tempted. He could have sinned; He could have
fallen, but not for one moment was there in Him an evil propensity. He was
assailed with temptations in the wilderness, as Adam was assailed with
temptations in Eden."
"Logical" Conclusions Reached
From this short paragraph, some have
selected out the first two sentences as their main rallying point in
making a position for their Christological understanding. "Be
careful, exceedingly careful" they say, when discussing the nature
which Christ assumed in the incarnation. Then they skip down to the next
to last sentence and argue that Christ did not "have an evil
propensity." From this, using a type of logic, they come to the
following conclusions:
-
Ellen White
wrote a letter to Baker in which she cautioned him about how to
present before the people, the nature which Christ assumed in His
incarnation.
-
Mrs. White
used particular phrases in regard to Christ’s nature which give
clues as to what she understood the truth to be concerning Christ’s
human nature.
-
One phrase
which must be important and considered carefully is: "evil
propensity," which she says Christ did not have "for one
moment."
-
Since man’s
nature is "evil" (i.e. "sinful") then Christ must
not have had any of the "natural" propensities which fallen
mankind has.
-
If Christ
did not have the natural propensities which fallen men have, then He
could not have had the same nature that fallen men have.
-
THEREFORE
(the conclusion is made from this logical progression in thought):
what Ellen White was telling Baker in her letter to him was that
Christ took the UNfallen nature of Adam at His incarnation.
Remember, the letter to Elder Baker was
written at the end of 1895 or early 1896. Keeping our focus on the
historical context of this letter and Mrs. White’s comments, we find
that during that same time period there were extensive articles, sermons,
books, and other statements from the pens of persons such as A.T. Jones,
W.W. Prescott, S.N. Haskell, J.E. Evans, J.H. Durland, and Ellen White
herself which plainly state that Christ, in His incarnation, assumed the
nature of Adam after the fall. During this very time, Ellen White was
writing Desire of Ages which contains these statements:
"Satan had pointed to Adam's sin as
proof that God's law was unjust, and could not be obeyed. In our
humanity, Christ was to redeem Adam's failure. But when Adam was
assailed by the tempter, none of the effects of sin were upon him. He
stood in the strength of perfect manhood, possessing the full vigor of
mind and body. He was surrounded with the glories of Eden, and was in
daily communion with heavenly beings. It was not thus with Jesus when He
entered the wilderness to cope with Satan. For four thousand years the
race had been decreasing in physical strength, in mental power, and in
moral worth; and Christ took upon Him the infirmities of degenerate
humanity. Only thus could He rescue man from the lowest depths of his
degradation." DA p 117.
And: "This was but the beginning of
His wonderful condescension. It would have been an almost infinite
humiliation for the Son of God to take man's nature, even when Adam stood
in his innocence
in Eden. But Jesus accepted humanity
when the race had been weakened by four thousand years of sin. Like every
child of Adam He accepted the results of the working of the great law of
heredity. What these results were is shown in the history of His
earthly ancestors. He came with such a heredity to share our sorrows and
temptations, and to give us the example of a sinless life." DA p 49.
From this historical context it is
evident that Mrs. White was not attempting to correct Baker’s position
that Christ assumed the fallen nature of Adam, otherwise she would also
have written letters to the men who were widely promoting this truth
around the world in our publications and at the conference sessions which
took place at this time (Jones at the 1895 GC session; Prescott at the
1895 Armadale campmeeting). Since the historical context of the letter
proves that her comments were NOT concerning the fact that Christ took
upon Himself our fallen nature, then what Ellen White was cautioning Baker
about must have been some other, more covert and dangerous concept.
What Mrs. White Did Write
Again, to understand what Mrs. White was
saying we must let her own record speak for itself—it’s internal
context must determine how we comprehend what she was saying to Baker.
-
The
paragraphs dealing with the nature of Christ were intended as a
warning.
-
The warning
included, not only Elder Baker, but "every human being" who
would speak and write on the nature of Christ (MR 13, page 19).
-
The warning
concerned the doctrine of Christology.
-
The warning
was not limited to Christ’s human nature, but also included His
divine nature.
-
The warning
cautioned Elder Baker not to present Christ as one who "was
altogether human" or one who was "altogether such an one as
ourselves."
-
The
incarnation—combining divine nature with human nature—"is a
mystery that is left unexplained to mortals." We cannot
understand how divinity and humanity were blended into the one Man
Christ Jesus.
"It is a mystery that is left
unexplained to mortals that Christ could be tempted in all points like as
we are, and yet be without sin. The incarnation of Christ has ever been,
and will ever remain a mystery. That which is revealed, is for us and for
our children, but let every human being be warned from the ground of
making Christ altogether human, such an one as ourselves: for it cannot
be. The exact time when humanity blended with divinity, it is not
necessary for us to know. We are to keep our feet on the rock, Christ
Jesus, as God revealed in humanity." (Baker Letter).
In essence, her warning to Baker was for
him to not place too great a stress on the humanity of Christ at the
expense of Christ’s divinity, which was equally as important in the
salvation process. Her emphasis was that Christ did not sin, not even
once, not even by a thought. We must clarify that there is a major
difference in the three "natures" in the discussion about sin.
Clarifying Basic Concepts
Sinless nature = a nature
completely without sin in any form, such as Adam had when he came from
the Creator’s hand, such as the unfallen angels and God Himself
possess.
Sinful nature = the corrupted
nature, which is influenced and tempted by Satan to do those things
which are contrary to God’s will, but it does NOT have to yield to
Satan’s attacks (this is an essential element in the Cleansing of the
Sanctuary doctrine).
Sinning nature = the nature
which continues to indulge in those things which are contrary to God’s
will; this is an active, willful behavior from a character which is in
rebellion to God.
From this we see that Christ, in His
incarnation, could step down from His "sinless nature" and, in
His humanity, assume a "sinful nature" (Philippians 2:5-8). By
faith He kept that "sinful nature" from becoming a "sinning
nature," proving to the universe that fallen, sinful man COULD keep
the law of God. Therefore, Mrs. White could say that "not even by a
thought" did Christ consent to sin. "For we have not an high
priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but
was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin. Let us
therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy,
and find grace to help in time of need" (Hebrews 4:15, 16). This is
indeed GOOD NEWS for sinners! Christ is our example in all things and has
proved that overcoming sin in this life is possible.
This concept on the nature of Christ,
which Jones and Waggoner stressed in their sermons and writings, was one
of the foundation pillars of the 1888 message. Mrs. White called their
message the "most precious message" of "Christ and His
righteousness" (Testimonies to Ministers pp 91 and 92). The
nature of Christ has become a strong point of contention during the last
50 years’ discussion regarding the 1888 message and it content.
One more point worth clarifying is the
phrase "evil propensity." A propensity is "an intense
inclination" or "leaning toward" (Webster’s). In and of
itself, a propensity is not automatically "bad" or
"evil." But once an inclination is "indulged" it
becomes much stronger in it’s pull upon us. For example, most people who
have never smoked a cigarette have no strong desire to ever smoke. But,
persons who have indulged in the smoking habit, find it very hard to avoid
using them again. Staying "smoke free" is difficult, and
requires a constant battle against the body’s strong desire for the
nicotine rush. Habits formed which revolved around the use of cigarettes
may continue to haunt the individual for many years—like absentmindedly
reaching into their pocket for a cigarette during stressful moments.
Christ came to this earth and took upon
His sinless nature our sinful nature, with all of its weaknesses,
liabilities, and inclinations, but He never developed an "evil
propensity" because He never indulged in any sin, not even in His
thoughts. He took our fallen equipment and in that defective equipment, He
wrought out the perfect performance. He kept every commandment of God,
thus proving that mankind CAN be an overcomer and vindicate God’s
character against the claims of Satan. Unless Christ took our nature, He
could not be our example in "all things." |