(It is unfortunate but true, that the General Conference placed such a value on the book, "Questions on Doctrines, " that it was not content to merely approve the content of the book and urge that the Review print it, advertise it widely in our denominational journals and place it in Adventist Book and Bible Houses (now called Adventist Book Centers, or "ABCs") around the world;-they decided that they must go a long step farther than that: The 14-man small General Conference committee that had oversight of the "Questions on Doctrine" publication project gave its approval to a plan suggested to it by someone to subsidize from General Conference funds a large-scale free distribution of the book to Protestant leaders, colleges, churches and libraries.

"Many thousands of copies have been placed with clergymen and theology teachers not of our faith-in a few instances thousands in [within the territory of] a single [Adventist local] conference. And they have had their wholesome effect. Its total circulation by 1970 had exceeded 138,000 ... Out of the many thousands of scholars, of many faiths and lands, who have been presented with 'Questions on Doctrine,' many hundreds have cited and quoted it in article or book form, used it in classroom reference and assignment, and in oral public presentation. This their many articles, books, and letters attest. 'Questions on Doctrine' was (by 1965) in several thousand seminary, university, college, and public libraries. Many have been placed overseas. That is a remarkable record for only a decade of distribution."-L.E. Froom, in "Movement of Destiny," pages 489, 492.

Not only were Seventh-day Adventists to be taught the "new view" of the fundamentals of the Third Angel's Message but men were determined that this erroneous version of historic Adventism be the one now to be presented to Protestant, Catholic and Jewish leaders of thought. Talk about stifling the message! This was a systematic blanket-coverage approach intended to revise the message of Adventists-and the non-Adventist understanding of it-in less than a generation: within just ten years of intensive free hook distribution.

How much all this cost the General Conference we do not know. But we do know that the major portion of funds sent on to conferences, unions and the General Conference from the local churches is composed of tithe funds and mission funds. One of these two funds was robbed of a sizable amount in order to place books with error into the bands of religious thought leaders and onto the shelves of their schools and libraries. -And what was the purpose of it all? -To convince the other churches that we are one with them on some of their errors and therefore should receive their band of fellowship. "Okay, boys, your errors are all right after all. It isn't necessary to keep God's Law, and there isn't much to be done on earth or in heaven after Calvary. We've given up our truths so we can come in with you. "

When "Questions on Doctrine" came out in 1957, it was originally advertised at $5.00 per copy, plus shipping. Assuming that only 25,000 copies were distributed in that decade free, this would amount to $125.000 in tithe or overseas mission funds that were diverted from the use that the faithful membership had in mind when they contributed those funds.

The storm of protest came in four waves. The first was the "representative group of leaders, etc." who initially examined the first sheets of the pre-publication book. This storm was not large, and reached Takoma Park during the middle and latter part of 1956 and the first few months of 1957. The second storm came from the Review editorial offices, and this was primarily in the winter and spring of 1956-1957. The third storm came from Adventist workers and laity. This was, of course, decidedly larger, and began in the summer of 1957. But there was a fourth wave of protest, and it was large also, but many of us never knew much about it. This was the Protest of the Protestants, twentieth-century style.

For the truth is that, aside from "Our Hope" and "Eternity" magazine and Martin's "The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism, "-almost no other major Protestant journal, book, writer or thought leader came out publicly with a major statement to the effect that Adventists were somewhat all right after all! And this fact is the more dramatic when we recall that all those tens of thousands of free copies of "Questions oil Doctrine" to the Protestants were not responsible for the suggestions of friendship in the pages of "Our Hope," "Eternity, " and TASDA!

The Protestants decided that the Adventists were still suspect, either because they had not really changed their teachings after all, and were just saying so,-or because if they had genuinely renounced a few of their errors, more renunciations were still needed before the band of welcome could be extended.

The handing out of free copies of truth mixed with error is not the answer to the world's problems. What is needed is the powerful voice of the Third Angel-in the Sanctuary, Sabbath, Obedience by Faith and Second Advent proclamations to the world, as he wings by voice and by tract throughout the nations of mankind.

Here is the Protestant Reaction. As you read it, you may find some of it sadly humorous: many Protestant writers clearly saw that which Anderson and Froom had tried to deny: that the "new views" in "Questions on Doctrine" WERE NOT the genuine article: they were NOT the historic teachings of the Adventist Church-and they were NOT the present teachings of most of its members and clearly-al least not in the 1950's!!

April 1957

"WHY SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM IS NOT EVANGELICAL

by Louis T. Talbot, Chancellor, Bible Institute of Los Angeles, Inc. - The King's Business Magazine.

.. 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 one of these systems, Seventh-day Adventism, declaring it to be an evangelical denomination and insisting therefore that, as a Christian body, it should be received as part of the true Church of Christ. .

"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.

"By methods, I mean this: It is claimed by 'Eternity' magazine editors that Seventh-day Adventism has abandoned many of its old beliefs, and that 'sometime in 1957' a book is to be published by top Seventh-day Adventist leaders, setting forth the 'new Adventism.'. .

"And while these Seventh-day Adventist officials are the proper spokesmen for a new position (if there is actually to be any) these views must be ratified by the hundreds of individual Adventist churches before they can be considered as representative Seventh-day Adventism. One book-or a dozen books-are not going to change the minds of those who have been indoctrinated with their teachings for more than half a century.

" .. Take, for instance, this statement which appeared in the 'Signs of the Times,' an official Adventist publication, for October 2, 1956 under the heading,. 'Adventists Vindicated,' in which the 'Eternity' articles are discussed:

'As to the effect of Dr. Barnhouse's courageous reappraisal of Seventh-day Adventism, we are convinced that it will not only create a sensation in evangelical circles, but will lead thousands of the best people in all denominations to restudy the "message" which Seventh-day Adventists feel called to give to the world in these last days.'

"Please note that it is here claimed that 'Adventists [are] Vindicated' as they are at present, not as they are to be when they make the changes that the leaders have told the 'Eternity' editors they are going to make and these editors in turn have told the Christian public! There is no mention here of any proposed change in their views.

.. The news magazine, 'Time,' in its December 31, 1956 issue, took up this subject of Seventh-day Adventism under the title, 'Peace with the Adventists.' The writer of this piece stated: 'As a result of his researches [that is, those of the editor of "Eternity"], Fundamentalists have stretched out a hand, and Seventh-day Adventists have accepted it gladly.' 'Eternity' does not speak for Fundamentalists. The information furnished 'Time' by 'Eternity's' editors simply represented the interpretation of Seventh-day Adventism by 'Eternity's' editors. I have received letter after letter from Fundamentalists deeply deploring this action.

"Here is one Fundamentalist (and, of course, I speak for our entire Bible Institute of Los Angeles' constituency at home and abroad now numbering in the thousands) who does not extend the hand of fellowship to those whose official textbooks, both new and old at present teach:

1) That the Lord Jesus Christ in His incarnation assumed a sinful, fallen human nature

2) That immortality is conditional

7) That we are not saved by grace alone, apart from works of any kind

8) That the seventh-day Jewish Sabbath is God's test and seal.

"In all fairness to them, they have stated emphatically that they do not believe these heresies I have listed. .

"Leaders of this denomination have persuaded the 'Eternity' editors that some of these statements 'occasionally got into print'; that they were not official; and that some of the writers may be considered as being on the 'lunatic fringe.' I think you will agree with me that the three sources from which I quote are official, impeccable and authoritative; not only that, but it happens that in each case these identical statements have been going into Seventh-day Adventist homes for more than 50 years!

. At least from 1888 to 1944, and maybe longer, the book, 'Bible Readings for the Home Circle' went into Adventist homes to be read to their children, supposedly bearing the true message of the Lord. That is a long time-56 years! Do you think this statement 'just happened to get in'? That is too absurd to consider.

.. Much has been said of their withdrawing certain books from publication and sale but books like Everson's 'Mark of the Beast; Ashton's 'The Bible Sabbath,' and Lickey's 'God Speaks to Modern Man' were all purchased within the month in Adventist bookstores.

"These books are official publications of Adventist Review and Herald Pub. Co., Washington, D.C., and they all contain the teachings I have mentioned. Will the correspondence courses call 'Faith for Today' all be withdrawn? I have a complete up-to-date set filled with the same old heresies. .

"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 'brain-washed' for three generations with such teachings as that of annihilation of the wicked? Will they accept if 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."-"why Seventh-day Adventism is Not Evangelical ",Louis T. Talbot, The King's Business, April, 1957, pp. 23-30.

March 1958

"REVIEW OF CURRENT RELIGIOUS THOUGHT"- by John H. Gerstner- Christianity Today Magazine.

. The most interesting thing presently occurring in the world of churches and sects is the controversy concerning the classification of the Seventh-day Adventists. This group, since it came into being about a century ago, has usually been treated as a sect rather than a church by evangelicals. The Adventists today are contending vigorously that they are truly evangelical. They appear to want to be so regarded. And what is more interesting than this is that many evangelicals are now contending that they ought to be so regarded. But, on the other hand, many believe that the old classification as sect should not be changed. We shall not discuss that matter here, since 'Christianity Today' proposes soon to present an article by Prof. Harold Lindsell on this whole question. Sufficient to note here, by way of anticipation, that Donald Grey Barnhouse, Walter Martin and others (cf. editorial in 'Eternity,' Sept., 1956, and elsewhere) are calling for a re-evaluation of the SDA's, while E.B. Jones and others believe that they are as deserving their sectarian classification as ever (Sword of the Lord, Aug. 2, 1957-. Just this week the new volume, 'Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrines,' has reached my desk. It begins: 'This book came into being to meet a definite need. Interest concerning Seventh-day Adventist belief and work has increased as the movement has grown. But in recent years especially, there seems to be a desire on the part of many non-Adventists for a clearer understanding of our teachings and objectives.' This book is the 720-page Adventist answer to the question whether it ought to be thought of as a sect or a fellow evangelical denomination."-"Review Of Current Religious Thought". John H. Gerstner, Christianity Today, March 3, 1958, p. 39.

"WHAT OF SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISM"-by Harold Lindsell-Christianity Today Magazine.

"In recent months the question, 'Are Seventh-day Adventists evangelical?' has been troubling many Christians. This question has been accentuated by many articles on both sides.

"The recent publication of an important volume by the Seventh-day Adventist leaders gives the discussion added significance (Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine, a commentary on questions addressed to the movement).

"Among The Cults-For many years SDA has been labeled a cult. Conservative Christians, particularly, have said hard things about the group and its doctrines. But this situation is changing. Some voices now lifted in defense of SDA are from theologically conservative ranks. Walter Martin, in several recent magazine articles (expected soon to be expanded into book form) comes to the defense of SDA, declassifying it from the list of false religions, and approving it, for the most part, as evangelical. .

"The SDA book, 'Questions on Doctrine,' does not disclose the names of its authors. They remain anonymous."-"What of Seventh-day Adventism?" Harold Lindsell, Christianity Today, March 31, 1958, pp. 6.

December 1960

"A CLEFT IN SEVENTH-DA Y ADVENTISM?"-Editorial in Christianity Today.

"Since the current controversy over the classification of Seventh-day Adventists (denomination or cult?) was first initiated in 1956, one interesting factor in the conflict has gone largely unnoticed. The Adventists apparently have been faced by growing internal tension and division as a result of the publication of their definitive volume, 'Questions on Doctrine,' and of Walter Martin's new book, 'The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism.'

" .. The editors of the 'Call' point out that some of the old Adventist landmarks have been moved, notably the alleged inerrancy of Ellen White, the vicarious nature of the scapegoat translation of Leviticus 16, and the literal interpretation of the Heavenly Sanctuary doctrine.

.. A. L. Hudson, former elder in a large Adventist church in Oregon, in company with retired yet powerful Adventist leader Dr, M.L.Adreasen, has spearheaded a movement to have those responsible for the publication of 'Questions on Doctrine' censured for 'misrepresenting the historic position' of the Adventist , Church. From as far away as Australia and New Zealand letters have reached us concerning the small but apparently vocal segment of Adventism that still wants to brand Sunday keepers with the mark of the beast,' teach a literalistic sanctuary and scapegoat transaction, and hold Ellen White in esteem as an infallible prophetess.' Dr. Andreasen at one time was professor of theology at the Adventists' seminary in Washington, D.C.

Leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination have, however, discounted this faction as unrepresentative of the views of the major constituency of the Church. This affirmation is apparently underscored by the fact that the book, 'Questions on Doctrine; authorized by the General Conference as the denominational position, has had the widest circulation and general approval of the denomination of any volume of recent years. But the fact remains that there is a segment of Seventh-day Adventists vocal and apparently powerful enough to reverse some of the trends originally undertaken in good faith by the leadership of the denomination in 1956.

"It is significant to note that 'The Signs of the Times' and 'these Times,' major Adventist publications, have identified themselves for the first time as publications of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, only to have the identification rescinded and withdrawn from the masthead. Certain publications which allegedly did not represent the position of the denomination are still widely circulated despite the assurance of the leadership of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination that 'plans were already operative' to dispense with such inconsistencies in Adventist publishing houses. (Adventist spokesmen assert that, in a sense, each of their publishing houses is autonomous, having its own board of control, and that the reasons for masthead changes lie with the editors.)

' .. Martin's book was to be stocked by Adventist publishing houses according to commitments made by top Adventist officials. Authorization to place his book on sale was not forthcoming, however, despite the fact that two non-critical non-Adventist publications were accepted for distribution. .

'The cleft in Seventh-day Adventism seems, however, to be deeper than appears on the surface. Some Seventh-day Adventist officials seem not to welcome any investigation of their views due to their divergence from what the church maintains as its true position.

'One thing, however, is certain. Certain elements in the theology of Seventh-day Adventism are in flux; some of the old landmarks have apparently been moved; and some old errors have been or are being rectified."-'A Cleft In Seventh-day Adventism, Editorial from Christianity Today, December 19, 1960.

CONFRONTING THE CULTS

Gordon R. Lewis
Presbyterian And Reformed Publishing Company
Box 817, Phillipsburg, New Jersey 08865
Copyright 1966

Walter R. Martin and the late Donald Grey Barnhouse for two years probed Adventism's leading spokesmen. In September, 1956, an editorial in "Eternity" magazine stated Dr. Barnhouse's tradition-breaking conclusion. No longer can Seventh-day Adventists be classed as a cult and its adherents non-Christian, he declared. Adventists are "redeemed brethren and members of the body of Christ." And Walter Martin, who had roundly denounced Christian Science and Jehovah's Witnesses as cults, now argued as vehemently that Seventh-day Adventism is Evangelical. In spite of some secondary deviations from orthodox Christian teaching, Martin said, the Adventists "have always as a majority, held to the cardinal, fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith which are necessary to salvation, and to growth in State that characterizes all true Christian believers." (Walter R. ""[in "What Seventh-day Adventists Really Believe," "Eternity,'' VIl November, 1956), p. 43.) [101:4-102:0].

The Adventists' response to Martin appeared in a 700-page Volume called "Questions on Doctrine." "Prepared by a Representative Group of Seventh-day Adventist Leaders, Bible Teachers and Editors," the book came out in 1957 from the Washington, D.C., Review and Herald Publishing Association. Although not an official statement adopted by the General Conference in quadrennial session, "this volume can be viewed as truly representative of the faith and beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." (N Questions on Doctrine" (Washington, D. C.: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1957). p. 9.) (102:1]

Three years and much controversy later, Zondervan Publishing House printed Martin's complete analysis, "The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism." The "Foreword" by Dr. Barnhouse narrowed the previous thesis that the majority of Adventists had always held an evangelical position. He wrote, "let it be understood that we made only one claim; i.e., that those Seventh-day Adventists who follow the Lord in the same way as their leaders who have interpreted for us the doctrinal position of their church, are to be considered true members of the body of Christ." (Walter R. Martin, "The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism" (Grand Rapids: The Zondervan Publishing House, 1960). p. 7.1 In supporting this thesis Martin explicitly assumes: (1) that the Adventist leaders contacted were honest and (2) that "Questions on Doctrine" is "the primary source upon which to ground an evaluation of Adventist theology." ("Ibid.," p. 10.) On this basis Martin concluded the leadership is evangelical, and as we shall see, evangelical with an Arminian system of theology which denies eternal Security. (102:2)

But not all evangelicals were willing to grant these assumptions or, if they did, not all concurred in Martinis conclusion. That conclusion was challenged by Professor Harold Lindsell, then Dean of Fuller Theological Seminary, in "Christianity Today," March 31, 1958. Dr. Lindsell concurred that Seventh-day Adventism is not a cult like Christian Science or Jehovah's Witnesses, since it does not deny the absolute deity of Christ nor reject His atoning sacrifice on Calvary. But, Lindsell suggested, Seventh-day Adventism is not therefore evangelical. Like Romanism, it denies the sufficiency of Christ's death for man's salvation. Mixing works with grace Adventism errs with the legalism Paul disputed in Galatians. Grace simply supports man's will so that through his good works he may obtain eternal life. Works remain the basis of man's hope. (Harold Lindsell, "What of Seventh-day Adventism?" "Christianity Today," April 14, 1958, pp. 13, 15.) This differs from Arminianism, which makes faith as distinct from works the single condition of salvation. [102.3-103:0]

In reviewing Martin's book, "The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism," Dr. Merrill Tenney, Professor of New Testament at Wheaton College, raised a question about Martin's second assumption. "Is the doctrinal platform of Seventh-day Adventism determined by what a few of its scholars define, or by what the majority of its followers believe and practice?" Tenney apparently feels that though Martin did not compromise on the level of the leaders' teaching, he failed to give sufficient consideration to the movement's policies and practices and to the bulk of its teachings. (Merrill C. Tenney, "Review of the Truth About Seventh-day Adventism," "Eternity," May, 1960, p. 40.1(103:3]

Norman F. Douty, in a book entitled "Another Look at Seventh-day Adventism" (Baker Book House, 1962), not limiting himself to "Questions on Doctrine,' found that the movement denied doctrines the church has always declared, and taught doctrines the church as a whole has always denied. In spite of the differences he said, "It is our duty to manifest love and kindness toward those who are in Adventism." (Norman F. Douty, "Another Look at Seventh-day Adventism" (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1962, p. 189.) But Douty concluded, "They who would be loyal to God rather than be swayed by sentiment must avoid any alliance with the Adventist system. No other course is open to them." (-Ibid., "p. 188.) [104:1]

And in 1963 Anthony A. Hoekema, Associate Professor of Systematic Theology at Calvin Theological Seminary, published a book categorizing Seventh-day Adventism as one of "The Four Major Cults."[104:21

[Approximately two years ago I made contact with a Seventh-day Adventist medical doctor who is carrying on a medical practice somewhere in North America. He told me of his meeting with Dr. Barnhouse about twelve months before that individual's death. We briefly noted this recollection in an issue of "Waymarks" at the time. But in preparation for this present documentary I again phoned this physician and obtained a more complete report on the incident, which you will read below.

We cannot know the heart, but it does appear that by 1959 Dr. D. G. Barnhouse (of the Martin and Barnhouse team) was very antagonistic to Seventh-day Adventists, their beliefs and their objectives. Not only antagonistic, but highly suspicious) But remember that Dr. Barnhouse bad been systematically misinformed by certain Adventist leaders about the true beliefs of our Church. He bad been told that we never really had believed in certain concepts that our earlier books - and current books proclaimed. He had been told that all but a few "on the lunatic fringe" within our Church no longer believed such fooleries now.

And it was on the basis of these lying comments, plus his own deep concern to see Adventists somehow pulled out of error, that he was willing to go out on a limb, extend his own hand in fellowship to Anderson, Froom, Unruh, and Reed, and then proclaim in the pages of "Eternity" that the Adventists bad changed from their "unchristian" teachings.

And he experienced a great loss in subscribers to "Eternity" for having done so. But the bitterness of it all was the gradual discovery (from the many letters from Seventh-day Adventists that be was to receive) that "Questions on Doctrine" and the assurances of our leaders in the Evangelical Conferences really weren't true after all! Barnhouse was trying to bring us back to Protestantism, and the shock of it all was difficult to take. Some were saying that Adventists never did think that obedience to God had any relationship to salvation. They were saying that the 'errors found in our books for so many years that Christ did not really take human nature, and that whatever He was now doing within a "Heavenly Sanctuary" wasn't too important after all-.were no lodger accepted by Adventists. It was quite obvious from the reports that Martin brought back to him, month by month, from the Evangelical Conferences-that he was on the verge of seeing an entire denomination possibly coming back to the great mother church of Protestantism. Obviously, with all the cooperation he was receiving in Washington, with the passage of time even more changes should he forthcoming.

By 1959, Donald Grey Barnhouse was no friend of Adventists. Exactly why, and how long he had been no friend of Adventists we may never know in this life.

When Dr. Barnhouse in an unprovoked frenzy of anger cursed the Sabbath, this physicians wife was convinced that be would be dead before long. Deeply convicted of this thought, they learned of his death the next year.

The present section is concluded with an obituary notice of his death that appeared in the December 1960 issue of Eternity. Three months after that, Walter Martin began his own separate "cult research" magazine:]

A MEDICAL MISSIONARY RECALLS DR. BARNHOUSE

The following incident occurred in late 1959, not too long before the death of Dr. Donald Grey Barnhouse.. [Dr. Barnhouse died the following year in November.]

At the time when this took place, my wife and I were Seventh-day Adventist medical missionaries in Peru. (This was a medical doctor who was salaried for this work by the Church).

Dr. Barnhouse came to Lima, Peru, to speak, and the missionaries of the various Protestant churches were notified so that they could hear him. This gathering included interdenominational missionaries, denominational missionaries, and Seventh-day Adventist missionaries. Dr. Barnhouse was well-known in the Protestant world and since his sponsorship of and participation in the Evangelical Conferences with Seventh-day Adventists that took place 4-5 years before, it is understandable that we would all be eager to hear him speak.

I would estimate that 50 or 60 people were gathered in the small meeting house selected for his talk with us. He was very friendly and seemed to be the kind of man able to win friends easily.

But then the question and answer session took place, following his lecture. During it, one of our Adventist missionaries stood up and asked a simple question about justification and sanctification. He had not identified himself as to his religion and he spoke in a kindly manner. Also he had said nothing about the Sabbath. In reply, Barnhouse talked a little while, and then, sensing that it was a Seventh-day Adventist who had asked the question, he suddenly turned a livid red and began speaking loudly. Then he struck the palm of his hand with the clenched fist of the other, making a strong slap, and shouted, "In the name of Jesus Christ, I curse that Seventh-day Sabbath!"

In the diatribe that followed, he clearly showed that he hated us as a people. When he spoke that "I curse the Sabbath" sentence, my wife turned to me and said, "That man is going to die!"

The whole incident was a strange one. For it had otherwise been a very congenial meeting, up to that point. All were friendly to one another. And in the midst of it came Barnhouse's unprovoked verbal torrent and violent remarks.

After the meeting had adjourned and Dr. Barnhouse was about to enter the car waiting for him out front, I stepped up to speak with him briefly. My intention was not to deepen his violent feelings but in some way to assuage them. I said in a kindly way, "I want to thank you, Dr. Barnhouse. We Seventh-day Adventists are thankful you have taken us out of the class of sects and put us into the class of mainstream Protestantism."

I had identified myself as an Adventist medical missionary and I was trying to soothe him to enhance his future contacts with our church. But in response, he turned red again, and shouted at me, "When I get back to the States, I'm going to see your leaders in Washington D.C. about this proselytizing that you Adventists are doing!" And then he went into another tirade. He was terribly angry at the very thought of seeing an Adventist missionary in front of him. (And I must say, I was quite impressed with the apparent authority he seemed to think he had over our leaders in Takoma Park.)

["Proselytizing" means one Protestant converting other Protestants to his own church. It is also called "sheep stealing." The nominal Protestant view is that all the churches are pretty much alike anyway, so conversions among Protestants should not be carried on between them. The Adventist view is that we have a special message to all peoples, for the crisis over the Mark is just ahead and the end of the world, following that.]

My wife and I had been in this mission field for several years and I knew how our work was being carried on, and I replied and told him in a calm, dignified tone that we were mainly working with the heathen natives and with Roman Catholics.

"I can take you right now to Unini [pronounced "oo-nee-nee"] Mission on one of the main tributaries of the Amazon in Peru," I said. "We had brought the natives out of raw heathenism, and we were caring for this station. But when we left, due to restricted funds, we had hoped that the Indians there could maintain themselves in the hope of the Advent Faith. But then another Protestant group came in and took them all away from us. They proselytized; we didn't. I can show you the place."

Now, even hotter with anger, Dr. Barnhouse jumped into the car, slammed the door, and ordered the chauffer to drive off.

It was in January of 1960, not too long after this that my wife and I returned to the States, so I have a pretty good idea of the approximate date when this incident occurred.

"DONALD GREY BARNHOUSE - MARCH 1895 November 1960-Long before this magazine reaches the homes of most readers, the news of the death of its distinguished editor-in-chief and founder will be known. Donald Grey Barnhouse, whose superb gift as an expositor of the Word of God was unparalleled in our generation, completed his earthly assignment November 5 in his home city of Philadelphia.

"He was stricken with a baffling illness in September that physicians finally diagnosed as a massive tumor of the brain. An emergency operation was performed October 8. During the four weeks he lay upon his bed at Temple University Hospital, Dr. Barnhouse indicated that he understood what was going on even though he found it difficult to speak except in halting phrases .."-"Eternity," December 1960, p. 6. [This was a full-page announcement, including a photograph.]

March 1961

"CULT RESEARCH-Editors, Christianity Today.

"A new quarterly devoted to the study of cults made its debut last month under the name 'Religious Research Digest' Editor is Walter R. Martin."-"Cult Research," Editors, Christianity Today, March 13, 1961, p. 31.

[In 1965, Walter Martin published a major analysis of the cults in America. (By "cults," we mean the denominations which Martin considers to be cults. In his estimation, a "cult" is a supposedly Christian church which teaches non-Christian doctrines.) By agreement with Anderson and Froom in 1956, if we would redesign some of our doctrinal points, be would remove us from the list of cults. And in 1956-1957 in his "Eternity" magazine articles and in his 1960 book, "The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism," he did this. Then, in 1965 he came out with another important book on the cults. And again the pressure was on him to include Adventists along with the cults (such as the Mormons, Jehovah's Witnesses, etc.).

What be did was to include a section on Adventists. In it be gave an introductory statement (quoted below) and then, in small print, reprinted a number of pages from his book TASDA.

By 1965 Martin was still remaining true to his pledged word to Anderson and Froom. They had done their part; be was staying by his.]

ADVENTIST THEOLOGY AND CLASSICAL ORTHODOXY

For many years Seventh-day Adventists have been handicapped by the lack of a comprehensive volume which adequately defines their doctrinal position. Many publications clearly set forth certain aspects of Adventism, particularly the writings of F. D. Nichol, L. E. Froom and Ellen G. White, whose role is that of inspired commentator and "messenger" to the Adventist denomination. (369:7]

Except for the brief statement of fundamentals in the Seventh-day Adventist Yearbook the average Adventist has been somewhat at a loss to explain conflicting theological opinions within his denomination, and even expressions in the writings of Ellen G. White were in certain context so ambiguous as to frustrate even the most devout believer. As a result of this in 1957 the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists released the first definitive and comprehensive explanation of their faith, an authoritative volume entitled "Questions on Doctrine." [369:8]

This book truthfully presents the theology and doctrine which the leaders of Seventh-day Adventism affirm they have always held. Members of other denominations will find it a reliable source to consult when seeking to understand what the Adventists themselves describe as "the position of our denomination" in the area of church doctrine and prophetic interpretation. "(Introduction "Questions on Doctrine," Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1956, page 8.) [369:9]

There can be no doubt of the fact that there are conflicting statements in Adventist publications and diverse opinions about certain areas of Adventist theology and interpretation, some of which is quite the opposite of classical orthodox Christianity; but this situation is not peculiar to the Adventist since all Christian denominations have various "wings" in most instances quite vocal, which are a source of constant embarrassment because they represent their own particular interpretations of the denomination's theology as the viewpoint of the denomination itself. [369:101

It is therefore unfair to quote any one Adventist writer or a group of writers as representing "the position of our denomination in the area of church doctrine and prophetic interpretation" even though the writings of such persons may in a large area qualify as Adventist theology. One must consult in good faith what the denomination itself represents as its theology and assume that the Seventh-day Adventist theologians know better than non-Adventists the implications and conclusions which they are willing to admit as representative of their church's theology. [370:0]

This section is divided into several parts, each of which contains statements of the official Adventist position of particular aspects of theology and is thoroughly documented from the primary source material providing questions on doctrine. It is hoped that the reader will weigh carefully the declarations of the Seventh-day Adventist Church as represented by its general conference which alone is empowered to speak for the denomination. They have spoken in "Questions on Doctrine" and their statements should be examined in the light of honest scholarship and Christian ethics. [370:1]

It is unnecessary to document at great length the fact that Seventh-day Adventism adheres tenaciously to the foundational doctrines of Christian theology as these have been held by the Christian church throughout the centuries. Dr. Anthony Hoekema who believes that Seventh-day Adventism is a non-Christian cult makes this interesting admission, and since Dr. Hoekema is no friend of Adventism, his testimony on this point could hardly be called prejudiced:

I am of the conviction that Seventh-day Adventism is a cult and not an evangelical denomination. . It is recognized with gratitude that there are certain soundly Scriptural emphases in the teaching of Seventh-day Adventism. We are thankful for the Adventists' affirmation of the infallibility of the Bible, of the Trinity and of the full deity of Jesus Christ. We gratefully acknowledge their teachings on creation and providence, on the incarnation and resurrection of Christ, on the absolute necessity for regeneration, on sanctification by the Holy Spirit, and on Christ's literal return. ("The Four Major Cults," pages 389 and 403.) [370:3]

It is puzzling to me, as a student of non-Christian cult systems, how any group can hold the above doctrines in their theology and still be a non-Christian cult! However, we shall deal with this aspect of the critics of Adventism at the end of the chapter, therefore, suffice it to say that the Adventists do have a clean bill of health where the major doctrines of Christian theology are involved. [370:4]

Lest there be any doubt on the subject, the following quotations taken from "Questions on Doctrine" forthrightly declare the Seventh-day Adventist position in relation to historic Christianity as well as those areas where Adventism differs from the orthodox Christian position. [370:5]

[The remainder of the section in his book, pertaining to Seventh-day Adventists, is composed of small-print material selected from his earlier "The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism."]

"The Kingdom of the Cults," Walter R. Martin, Bethany Fellowship, Minneapolis, Minnesota, 1965, pages 369-370.