The late Donald G. Barnhouse read a copy of that Seventh day Adventist classic, Steps to Christ. This book has led innumerable people to accept the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour. Many servicemen during two world wars treasured its precious message which brought hope and comfort to their uncertain existence. It made quite an impression on Dr. Barnhouse; so much so that he gave the book prominent mention in his evangelical magazine Eternity, June 1950. Under the heading "How to Read Religious Books," he claimed that reading such a book with its "half-truths and satanic error" was akin to a worm on a hook, "the first bite is all worm, the second bite is all hook, that is the way the Devil works." It is not surprising then, that he referred to its author, Mrs. E. G. White, as "the founder of a cult."

Apparently, such a vicious attack on a church which claimed to be Christian provided no impediment to the growth of one of Protestantism's most popular magazines.* Such pronouncements evidently accorded with acceptable Christianity. For, were not Seventh-day Adventists just another cult? They were credited with believing that Jesus Christ was a sinner, and denying His completed work of salvation at the cross. They were legalists who believed in salvation by works, part of which was the keeping of the biblical Sabbath day. And, to cap it off, they had the temerity to claim that they were God's remnant church on whom God had bestowed the gift of prophecy! Yet, within six years, Dr. Barnhouse was able to declare:

"I should like to say that we are delighted to do justice to a much-maligned group of sincere believers, and in our minds and hearts take them out of a group of utter heretics to acknowledge them as redeemed brethren and members of the body of Christ." (Eternity, September 15, 1956).

* Eternity magazine ceased publication while this book was being written. Shortly after, its one-time editor, Dr. Walter Martin, passed away.

Yes, he was referring to the Seventh-day Adventist Church! Our leaders were ecstatic. Adventists could now hold their heads high as Christendom extended their brotherly arms to welcome them into the fold.

What had brought about this dramatic change? Had Barnhouse seen the light, or had Adventism changed its "unchristian" views? Let Dr. Barnhouse provide some clues. On the 16th May 1958, while in conversation with Adventist layman Al Hudson, Barnhouse said:

"I hate Saturday as a Sabbath religious day. I hate it because God hates it." (as reported in Pilgrims Rest DH 115, p. 1).

On Adventists' belief that they are the remnant church, Barnhouse said:

"If you believe that, you are a megalomaniac." (ibid.).

He went on to comment on the prolific pen of Mrs. White:

"That's too much, you know. She was running off at the mouth, and the Holy Spirit certainly was not doing it." (ibid., p. 2).

And again,

"God Almighty never spoke through a woman." (Pilgrims Rest DH 114, p. 1).

"You [SDAs] were founded on a lie." (ibid., p. 2).

The editor of Barnhouse's Eternity magazine was Dr. Walter Martin. While lecturing in the Christian Mission Church, Napa, California, as recently as 22 February 1983, on the subject of Seventh-day Adventist beliefs, he declared:

"There is no need for any investigative judgment at any time because Jesus took care of it all at the cross."

Obviously, the three angels of Revelation fourteen had failed to impress Messrs. Barnhouse and Martin. During the late 1950s, as a result of some eighteen months of intense dialogue with highranking representatives of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Barnhouse had insisted that Adventists publish their doctrinal beliefs. They did so under the title Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine [QOD], Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1957.

This book became our passport to Christendom, and enabled Dr. Barnhouse to boast that he and Martin had changed the theology of a whole denomination (see Eternity, September 1956, pages 6, 7, 43, 45). Repeatedly we are told by Adventist leadership that we have not deviated from historical Adventism. In the Introduction to Questions on Doctrine we read: "This was not to be a new statement of faith." The writers, counsellors and editors "have labored conscientiously to state accurately the beliefs of Seventhday Adventists" (p. 8).

But shortly after proclaiming Adventists as part of the Christian community, Barnhouse, in commenting on Questions on Doctrine, was led to observe:

"Let's face it, in a very nice way, the leaders who have written this book, have moved from the traditional position of the S.D.A. movement. They've come back toward the Bible." (Pilgrims Rest DH 114, p. 3).

Here is a serious anomaly which questions the integrity of our leadership. Seventh-day Adventists have been welcomed into the fraternity of Christendom on the basis of change. Our leaders claim that we have not changed. Has Christendom been duped? Have members of the S.D.A. Church become victims of the greatest confidence trick since Jacob awoke to find himself in bed with Leah?

After Questions on Doctrine was published by the Review and Herald Publishing Association in late 1957, General Conference president Reuben R. Figuhr was so proud of it that he claimed it to be the most significant achievement during his term of office.

* On January 14, 1985, evangelist Mike Clute recorded an interview with a friend of the Wilkinson family. Says Clute: "Of course, the gentleman whom I interviewed does not want his name disclosed or else he would have done so at the time of the interview." (letter to Author, July 8, 1989).

The General Conference subsidized the cost of this book in order to ensure it would be widely distributed among non-Adventists. However, when it was offered to Adventists in Ministry magazine as "750 pages full of wonderful truth," the price was US $5.00.

But surprisingly, no one wanted his name connected with QOD, for we are told only that it was "prepared by a representative group of Seventh-day Adventist leaders, Bible teachers and editors." We are also told that the book "came into being to meet a definite need" (QOD p. 7), that a large Protestant publisher in the United States wanted to publish a book in which would be presented a general view of our history and beliefs, that the publishers approached the General Conference for information which resulted in an extensive search of our denominational literature and that there followed a series of meetings drawn out for over a year with the unnamed members of the committee (ibid.).

What we are not told is that the publisher was Dr. Donald Barnhouse, a champion of popular evangelical thought. Neither are we told that he had absolutely no time for Seventh-day Adventism. He had commissioned fellow evangelical Dr. Walter Martin, to expose our denomination as a cult. It was Martin who insisted that he research his subject thoroughly by requesting dialogue with General Conference officers and that he have access to our literature.

Subsequent to the ensuing meetings and publication of QOD, some participants have revealed the names of the GC conferees. They were elders:

T. E. Unruh, president of East Pennsylvania Conference

L. E. Froom, General Conference field secretary

R. A. Anderson, ministerial secretary and editor of Ministry

W. E. Reed, General Conference field secretary

(reported by T. E. Unruh, Pilgrims Rest DH 101, 102)

These gentlemen were so amiable to their would-be inquisitors that the evangelicals were soon disarmed and within a very short time were on their knees praying for Christian unity.

As a result of these meetings, Barnhouse and Martin were assured that Seventh-day Adventists were now sufficiently theologically tuned to popular evangelicalism to be regarded as Christians. So a deal was struck. If Adventists would publish satisfactory answers to some forty-eight questions, Eternity magazine would not expose us as a cult, but would instead, declare us to be a part of the Christian community. Barnhouse and Martin even offered to help out where we had difficulty in translating our "quaint" theological terminology into understandable Christian language.

The book, Questions on Doctrine, was the result. We were declared to be truly Christian, by people whom president Figuhr obviously admired as exponents of Christianity and as authorities on cultism. Was his confidence misplaced? We shall see.

When Walter Martin was later questioned about Roman Catholicism's standing in the cultist world, he replied: "Roman Catholicism is not a cult." Then he sought to preserve some credibility by adding, "But within the Roman Church there are cults, such as the cult of Mary. But the basic doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church are Christ's Catholic theology to which most Protestants subscribe."

Do evangelicals no longer subscribe to the basic Christian belief that there is "one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus"? (1 Timothy 2:5.)

To faithful Seventh-day Adventists back in the mid-fifties it was a fearful doctrinal crisis in our Church. But to the believers in our day it is now seen to have marked the beginning of the end.

For the errors that the so-called "Evangelical Conferences" brought into our denomination grew throughout the sixties and seventies and were used by modernists in our Church, such as Desmond Ford, to lay a solid foundation for what is now called the "new theology".

At that time, certain evangelical Protestants asked a small group of our leaders to reconsider the stated beliefs of our denomination-and, if possible, to restate them in "theological terms" that would be acceptable to the Protestant world around us. That seemed but a small concession in view of the golden opportunity held out before us: unity and fellowship with the other Protestant churches is not one of the objectives of the second angel's message of Revelation 14:8, much less that of the third angel which follows it.

Vance Ferrell

"The Beginning of the End," DH 101.

The casual reader of Questions on Doctrine could be excused for not noticing any startling change in Adventist doctrine. Indeed, we are assured in the introduction that "this volume can be viewed as truly representative of the faith and beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church" (pp 8, 9).

But some who were in a position to know claim that the original manuscript contained a great deal of error. It had to be toned down before those concerned with its printing would accept it. As one observer put it:

"The book editors at Review and Herald could not swallow it. And so it went back to the General Conference for further revisions. This is why the book is so mixed up. . . . The heresy was then more carefully worded to slip by the Review book editors." (Pilgrims Rest DH104).

This is probably why it became acceptable to Martin and Barnhouse and yet did not immediately raise too great a storm among Adventists, especially among the ministry, the majority of whom were working long hours while conscientiously carrying out their chosen task of spreading the everlasting gospel.

We have already mentioned Dr. B. G. Wilkinson's reaction. Unfortunately we do not have a record of his thoughts in writing. But one retired veteran of the ministry, also a scholar, teacher and author, has recorded his opinion of Questions on Doctrine. He is Elder M. L. Andreasen, described in the SDA Encyclopedia as an authority on our message.*

* Andreasen gave special study to the doctrine of the sanctuary and was considered an authority in that field (SDA Encyclopedia, 1976, p. 43)

Having read the manuscript of QOD, he repeatedly protested to General Conference president Figuhr concerning changes to our doctrines. After being curtly rebuffed, he wrote and circulated several open letters which were subsequently gathered together and published under the title of `Letters to the Churches. "* Andreasen warned,

"We have reached a crisis in this denomination when leaders are attempting to enforce false doctrine and threaten those who object. The whole program is unbelievable. Men are now attempting to remove the foundation of many generations, and think they can succeed. If we did not have the Spirit of Prophecy, we would not know of the departure from sound doctrine which is now threatening us and the coming of the Omega which will decimate our ranks and cause grievous wounds. The present situation has been clearly outlined. We are nearing the climax." (Letters to the Churches No. 3).

* Letters to the Churches is available from Hartland Publications, P 0 Box 1, Rapidan, VA, 22733, USA.

As a reward for his pains, the Conference rescinded Elder Andreasen's ministerial credentials and deprived him of his sustentation. When the poor man applied to the government for relief money, the Social Welfare men contacted our administrators who were shamed into restoring his allowance.

Elder Andreasen was an elderly man. As this champion of the faith lay broken-hearted on his deathbed, rejected and punished by the leadership of his beloved church, we can only imagine his anguish as he contemplated the fulfillment of Mrs. White's prophecy:

"Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced.... Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement." (Special Testimonies Series B, No. 2, pp. 54, 55).

Or perhaps he would attempt to answer Mrs. White's rhetorical question pertaining to the Alpha of apostasy and apply it to the beginning of the Omega:**

** Referring to Sister White's remarks on books of a new order and the underhanded tearing down of the foundations of our faith, Andreasen said: "All this was written to meet the apostasy in the Alpha period. We are now in the Omega period which Sister White said would come." (Letters to the Churches No. 6).

What influence is it that would lead men at this stage of our history to work in an underhanded, powerful way to tear down the foundations of our faith-the foundation that was laid down in the beginning of our work by prayerful study of the Word and by revelation? (Ibid.)

As we proceed, we shall seek to discover the answer to this question. We shall reveal the "underhanded" way in which a mere handful of men set themselves up as expositors of our faith and interpreters of the Spirit of Prophecy. We shall see how, under the protection of sympathetic presidents, they have literally "torn down the foundations of our faith."

Important truths concerning the atonement are taught by the typical service. A substitute was accepted in the sinner's stead; but the sin was not cancelled by the blood of the victim. A means was thus provided by which it was transferred to the sanctuary. By the offering of blood, the sinner acknowledged the authority of the law, confessed his guilt in transgression, and expressed his desire for pardon through faith in a Redeemer to come; but he was not yet entirely released from the condemnation of the law. On the Day of Atonement the high priest, having taken an offering from the congregation, went into the most holy place with the blood of this offering, and sprinkled it upon the mercy-seat, directly over the law, to make satisfaction for its claims. Then, in his character of mediator, he took the sins upon himself and bore them from the sanctuary. Placing his hands upon the head of the scapegoat, he confessed over him all these sins, thus in figure transferring them from himself to the goat. The goat then bore them away, and they were regarded as forever separated from the people.

Such was the service performed "unto the example and shadow of heavenly things."

Ellen G. White

The Great Controversy, p. 420

Few Seventh-day Adventists in 1956 knew of the events which have since come to be known as the Evangelical meetings. They were cloaked in official secrecy. It was left to Dr. Barnhouse to drop what he called a bombshell, in September of that year. He published an article in Eternity magazine titled, "Are Seventh-day Adventists Christians?" (At the following General Conference session in 1958, the meetings were officially ignored.)

Speaking of the second meeting with the G. C. conferees, Barnhouse wrote:

"It was perceived that the Adventists were strenuously denying certain doctrinal positions which had previously been attributed to them. For instance, they stated that "they repudiated absolutely the thought that Seventh-day Sabbathkeeping was a basis for salvation," and later in his report, "that Sabbathkeeping is in any way a means of salvation" (Eternity, September 1956).

When Walter Martin pointed out to them that we had published teachings considered by Christendom to be anti-Christian, they professed surprise and "immediately brought the fact to the attention of the General Conference officers, that this situation might be remedied and such publications be corrected" (Eternity, September 1956, p. 6).

Barnhouse then reveals that the "same procedure was repeated regarding the nature of Christ while in the flesh, which the majority of the denomination has always held to be sinless, holy, and perfect, despite the fact that certain of their writers have occasionally gotten into print with contrary views completely repugnant to the church at large."* They further explained to Mr. Martin that they had among their number, members of the "lunatic fringe" even as there are similar wild-eyed irresponsibles in every field of fundamental Christianity (ibid., p. 7).

* It is interesting that Larson does not appear to find one written statement by Figuhr, Froom, Anderson or Unruh, expressing their views on the nature of Christ prior to the Evangelical meetings. Apparently it was they who regarded our official view as repugnant, but, sensing their isolated position, they were not courageous enough to express their views publicly.

Of the sanctuary belief Barnhouse reported,

"They [the G. C. conferees] do not believe as some of their earlier teachers taught, that Jesus' atoning work was not completed on Calvary but instead, that He was still carrying on a second ministering work since 1844.* This idea is absolutely repudiated. They believe that since His ascension, Christ has been ministering the benefits of the atonement which He completed on Calvary." (ibid.).

* It is interesting to note that, although the conferees did not fool their inquisitors, Questions on Doctrine was able to claim that it was not a "new statement of faith" (QOD p. 8) without any apparent objection from Barnhouse and Martin.

So this is how Christendom at large and some SDA church members came to know of the historic meetings. Certainly, few Adventists realized that the doctrinal pillars of our faith were being traded for the smile of Christendom. Let us just summarize the understanding given by our leaders to Barnhouse and Martin and square it off with sound Adventist teaching.

It is quite true that Sabbath observance is no guarantee of salvation. But it is equally true that those who have a knowledge of Sabbath truth and ignore it, will not be saved:

The keeping of the Sabbath is a sign of loyalty to the true God.... It follows that the message which commands men to worship God and keep His commandments, will especially call upon them to keep the fourth commandment (GC 438).

Sabbath observance is eternal:

And it shall come to pass, that from one new moon to another, and from one Sabbath to another, shall all flesh come to worship before Me, saith the Lord (Isaiah 66:23).

So we see that the conferees failed to uphold the message of the first angel of Revelation fourteen, and showed a reckless disregard for the dire warning of the third angel (Revelation 14:7, 9, 10).

Here we come face to face with a statement which can only be resolved by arriving at one of two conclusions. Either these men had very short memories or they were deliberately deceiving the evangelicals. Either way, they disqualified themselves as competent representatives of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Here are a few pertinent facts which will help readers to reach their own conclusions.

Just five years prior to the Evangelical meetings, Elder W. E. Read (one of the conferees) had quoted Sister White in a G. C. Bulletin, 1950, p. 154:

"Jesus was in all things made like unto His brethren. He became flesh even as we are."

This was just one of a plethora of statements in Adventist literature upholding the biblical concept of a Saviour who came to this earth through the seed of Abraham and "was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin" (Hebrews 4:15).

Dr. Ralph Larson, in his monumental thesis, The Word Was Made Flesh, details some four hundred written statements by Mrs. E. G. White, and approximately eight hundred statements by other SDA writers on Christ's earthly nature. Over a period of one hundred years of SDA writers, Dr. Larson was able to find no statement that Christ received the sinless nature of unfallen Adam, as claimed by Bamhouse. Our leading doctrinal book, Bible Readings for the Home Circle, published in the year of Mrs. White's death (1915), had sold by the million. It stated,

"In His humanity, Christ partook of our sinful human nature. If not, then He was not made "like unto His brethren," was not "in all points tempted like as we are," did not overcome as we have to overcome.... Christ inherited just what every child of Adam inherits-a sinful nature." (p. 174).

And on page 236 we read:

"By the very dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the Virgin Mary ... Babylon teaches that God, in the person of His Son, did not take the same flesh with us; that is, sinful flesh."

Yet it is inconceivable that these conferees were not aware that in the 1949 edition of Bible Readings, the "sinful nature" of Christ had been quietly deleted. How then could these men honestly claim to represent historic Seventh-day Adventist beliefs? As for Read, he had to do a complete somersault by refuting his previous position, in order to get out of the "lunatic fringe" and be eligible to join that elite Washington club of "sane leadership."

As we have seen, these conferees did not represent a majority group. They were a mere handful of men from the General Conference who were handpicked by a sympathetic G. C. president. As to whether or not they represented sane leadership, it is debatable. One thing we do know: they considered themselves sufficiently sane to judge Mrs. E. G. White, along with the vast majority of past and contemporary Adventists writers, as part of the "wild-eyed, lunatic fringe."

It was not just "some of our earlier teachers" that believed in Christ's continuing atonement. It had been consistently taught since pioneer days and was backed solidly by our leaders and the Spirit of Prophecy.

Elder A. G. Daniells was General Conference president during the years 1901-1922, and under his leadership, Bible Readings for the Home Circle was offered extensively to the public as representative of Adventist belief Of the atonement in type and antitype it stated:

"In the heavenly sanctuary the sacrifice is offered but once; and but one atonement or cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary can be made, which must take place at the time assigned by God for it. And when the great atonement, or cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary has been made, God's people will be forever free from sin and the fate of all will be forever sealed (see Revelation 22:11). This, as in the type, will be a day of judgment." (p. 243). [Note: This great truth has been deleted from the revised 1963 paperback edition of Bible Readings. So also has the key reference text of Daniel 8:14 and the year 1844 been deleted.]

While president of the General Conference, Elder C. H. Watson wrote a book, The Atoning Work of Christ, (Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1934). The contents were accurately described by its title. He made it quite clear that Christ's work in heaven is a continuation of His atonement which was begun with

His sacrifice:

"Most certainly by the great work of atonement, which by the sacrifice of Himself began at the cross, and was continued by His priestly ministry in the heavenly sanctuary until, in the judgment, sin's reign is ended." (p. 175).

To this could be added the supporting testimony of Elder M. L. Andreasen, and F. C. Gilbert's Messiah In His Sanctuary (Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1937). This concurs with the Spirit of Prophecy:

"Instead of the prophecy of Daniel 8:14 referring to the purifying of the earth, it was now plain that it pointed to the closing work of our High Priest in heaven, the finishing of the atonement, and the preparing of the people to abide the day of His coming." (Life Sketches of E. G. White, p. 63).

So this is how the "experts" on Christianity and cults gave the world a grossly erroneous picture of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and its beliefs. Their aim was to show that we had changed our doctrines sufficiently to enable us to fit their concept of Christianity.

Had the General Conference succeeded in fooling Barnhouse and Martin, or had we indeed changed our beliefs?

The hitherto highly regarded Eternity magazine devoted much of its space in its September, October, November 1956 and January 1957 issues to a defense of Seventh-day Adventism.

Let me state first, without equivocation, that I believe these editors who are thus interpreting present-day Seventh-day Adventism as "evangelical" and advocating that the Christian church should receive its adherents with all of their heresies as "brethren beloved," are utterly wrong, both in their methods and in their conclusions....

Keep in mind that Seventh-day Adventism is not just a few "big shots," but is composed of hundreds of churches and individual members. Even if these leaders were to repudiate some of their heresies, how about the local churches and their membership who have been "brainwashed" for three generations with such teachings as that of annihilation of the wicked? Will they accept it from stem to circumference of the denomination because these leaders say it is not so any more?

Now the question is: Will Mrs. White have to go? Will the "keystone of the arch" be removed and thus all the superstructure fall in a heap? This will have to be done if the heresies are abandoned, as Eternity claims.

Louis T. Talbot

"Why Seventh-day Adventism is Not Evangelical" The King's Business, April 1957, pp. 23-30