Since these polar points of view have been widely discussed for a long period of time, I have found it necessary to include Seventh-day Adventism in this collection as a kind of counter-balance, presenting a different side of Adventism and showing the theological teaching of Adventism that has not been turned into a caricature by most critics.

This fact, of course, can by no means be regarded as a complete endorsement of the theological structure of Seventh-day Adventism, some of whose teaching is apart from the mainstream of historical Christian theology, and which I have taken the liberty of refuting. But I believe that it is just and ethically correct to consider both sides of the extremely complex and provocative poles, which in our time show only a slight tendency towards rapprochement.

In fact, for the past ten years (since the early 1970s), the Seventh-day Adventist movement has experienced turmoil, both in terms of governance and in terms of doctrine itself, which is more painful and widespread than any other disorder in the history of the organization. As for the managerial part of Adventist problems, there are a number of movement leaders who have been removed from their posts due to suspicion

(justified and unjustified) in illegal financial activities, including misappropriation of the organization's funds. At the U.S. government level, the FBI, the Legal Department and other government agencies have launched an investigation into Seventh-day Adventist conference administrators facing fraud charges. In terms of doctrine, there is a great gap between those leaders and members who are firmly evangelical Christian and those who draw on their own experiences of spiritual life and the prophetic teachings of Ellen G. White, and who can lead the organization far away from the Christian camp and even into pure cultism.

Ever since I began to give priority to the importance of the issue of the integrity of the doctrine of the movement in my analysis of religious movements, it seems to me that the fundamental upheaval in the doctrine of Adventism is a matter of special interest. And so, on February 16, 1983, I sent a public and official statement to the general conference of Seventh-day Adventists questioning or even denying the validity of the Adventist book Doctrinal Matters, which is an extensive publication, and on which I based my early evaluation and the previous book. On April 29, 1983, W. Richard Lesher, vice president of the General Conference, replied to me in a personal letter: "First of all, you ask whether Seventh-day Adventists adhere to the answers to your questions that they gave in Doctrinal Questions in 1957. The answer is yes. You note in your letter that some people gave contradictory answers at the time, and that this situation remains to this day. I hasten to assure you that the vast majority of the members of this organization are in agreement with the views expressed in the book Doctrinal Questions.

Second, you ask about the interpretation of Scripture in the writings of Ellen G. White. We have come to trust Mrs. White as the owner of a prophetic gift that has been proven many times in fact, and accordingly we trust the information we receive through Ellen White's revelations. However, we do not believe that Ellen White's writings completely replace the meaning of Scripture. We continue to adhere to Ellen White's positions as set forth in Doctrinal Matters."

On the basis of the above letter, dialogue with some Adventist leaders, and ongoing changes within the organization itself, I have been forced to retract my original assessment of Seventh-day Adventism in my first book on the subject and later in this collection in early editions. Only the future can prove me right. I pray that the false currents of modern Adventism will not prevail and that Adventism will continue to be a Christian and evangelical doctrine, albeit unique in its own way. Dr. Donald Barnhouse said that the mere fact that a person is a representative of a particular creed and expresses certain ideas about that creed cannot be judged of the creed as a whole and whether or not it should be recognized as heretical. Just as it is impossible to recognize all Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, the Episcopal Church, etc., as heretics from individual statements. Thus, in our opinion, Seventh-day Adventism, as a doctrine, is essentially Christian in the sense that all religious movements professing Christ are Christian in essence if they are committed to the basic mission of Christianity as set forth in the Bible, in the Symbol of Faith, and in the decrees of the councils. But this by no means means means means that all Baptists, Methodists, episcopicists, Lutherans, or Adventists are necessarily Christians. The question of religion is exclusively a question of the relationship between each individual and God and should be considered only in the light of the Revelations of the Holy Scriptures and the prophecies of the Holy Spirit.

This work on Seventh-day Adventism is an attempt to present facts that are little known or previously distorted, and to critically evaluate the theological structure of Adventist doctrine with the prayerful hope of being completely objective (under the guidance of the Holy Spirit), even when the results of this study do not correspond to our own positions for this work to be in any way useful and edifying.

The Historical Roots of the Seventh-day Adventist Movement

Seventh-day Adventism originated from the "Great Second Coming Awakening" that shook the entire religious world in the mid-19th century, when the theme of the Second Coming of Jesus Christ took over Britain and continental Europe. Long before, many different interpretations of Bible prophecy from the Old World had made their way into American theological circles.

Largely based on the apocalyptic books of the prophet Daniel and the Revelation of John the Theologian, the theological teaching of the Adventist movement was widely reflected in the pages of theological journals and newspapers. Quotations from the New Testament vied for space on the covers of the leading stock market publications, and "seventy weeks," "two thousand three hundred days," and "the abomination of desolation" (Dan. 8:9) were common topics of conversation. Following the chronology of Archbishop Ussher and interpreting the 2300 days of the prophet Daniel as 2300 years, many theologians of various denominations have come to the conclusion that Christ will come to earth around 1843. Among these theologians was one William Miller, a Baptist minister from Low Hampton, New York. The Great Second Coming campaign, which swept the United States in 1840, began with the activities of William Miller, who already in 1818 secretly taught that in about 25 years (1843) Jesus Christ would come again. As Miller himself stated, "In 1818, as a result of my two years of careful study of the Bible, I came to the conclusion that in about twenty-five years from now all the foundations of our present universe would undergo a major change."1

Miller continues: "I believe that this time is known to all who wish to understand and be prepared for His coming. And I am deeply convinced that on some day between March 21, 1843, and March 21, 1844, according to the Jewish calendar, Christ will come to earth with all the saints, and that then He will reward each man according to his works, as foretold in the Scriptures."