Adventist Today truth mixed with lies

 Adventist Today once again strives to rewrite the beliefs of the Adventist church. The article Three ways to misuse Ellen White's writings Here are the three ways that Ron Hessel suggests are misuses:

Many take Ellen White to be a divinely inspired infallible biblical interpreter. She never claimed that. She refused to take that role.

I have yet to meet anyone who has claimed that Ellen White was a "divinely inspired, infallible biblical interpreter." In fact, while I would agree that she refused that role, I know of no one in history who would have accepted it.  Once you set infallible into anything, it nullifies the rest of the sentence. Infallible is simply too high a bar for any human to achieve. So the first suggested misuse of Ellen White's writings is not accurate and meaningless.

So why use a rather deceptive suggestion? The answer is that Hessel is attempting to make a straw man argument. It is not uncommon for Adventists to say that Ellen White is an inspired commentator. This is what Morris Venden did in his book from 1980 where he wrote:

“We have an inspired commentary that was given for the purpose of settling the disagreements among the uninspired commentaries. What do you do when the scholars disagree? Do you have to become a better scholar than the best in order to settle the disagreement in your own mind? No.”

Dealing with a straw man is much easier than dealing with what the Adventist church actually says. If you can accept the straw man accusations, you can accept the rationalizations against the straw man and come to the conclusions that Hessel thinks are meaningful yet they are not.

He then says:

I can’t say this strongly enough: Ellen White is not to be used as the interpreter of the Bible. The Bible interprets Ellen White. If Ellen White were the final say on the Bible, it would mean that she had authority over the Bible. She does not.

He puts this forth as simply something that is true. But every Adventist knows it is not true. And it is easily demonstrated. The Adventist church holds something they call the Great Controversy view. It revolves around things done in heaven before the creation of earth. None of it is found in the Bible but it is the central core of Adventist teaching, and it is solely because of the writings of Ellen White. Review the above Great Controversy view article by Herbert Douglas and see if it is originated in the Bible or not. It is in fact stated in brief in Fundamental Belief #8:

Belief 8: The Great Controversy

All humanity is now involved in a great controversy between Christ and Satan regarding the character of God, His law, and His sovereignty over the universe. This conflict originated in heaven when a created being, endowed with freedom of choice, in self-exaltation became Satan, God’s adversary, and led into rebellion a portion of the angels...

See the Lucifer Myth for more details

Hessel's second misuse rests on the assumption of perfection.

Isn’t a prophet supposed to always get things right? Be absolutely perfect in every word? Some people treat Ellen White’s writings that way. 

Let me say this clearly: Ellen White got stuff wrong.

Setting up that some people expect perfection is once again a straw man. Does the Adventist church say that Ellen White was perfect, if so give the quote. We can give a quote from Ellen White on her writings, but while it seems incredibly exaggerated, it does not claim perfection. 

"God is either teaching His church, reproving their wrongs and strengthening their faith, or He is not. This work is of God, or it is not. God does nothing in partnership with Satan. My work... bears the stamp of God or the stamp of the enemy. There is no halfway work in the matter. The Testimonies are of the Spirit of God, or of the devil." (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 4, p. 230; also cited in Vol. 5, p. 671).

She invites her readers to make the choice when they find that she is wrong, but it was not perfection that she was asserting. Perfection is too high a bar for any writer. Language is a tremendous thing that has advanced societies all over the world, but it is not something that depends on the perfection of ideas presented or perceived by the reader. 

Like the first and second straw man, Hessel's third suggestion of misuse is this:

Another way in which Ellen White gets misused is by trying to apply everything she said to today. You can’t do that. Don’t try to apply everything Ellen White says to your life. You can’t do it. Nobody can. It will drive you insane. Consider this instruction from the 1860s:

Hopefully, people have learned by now that when you see words like "everything," "always," and other generalization those are often logical fallacies. Applying everything someone wrote to today is another impossible idea. So it is easy to say. You can't apply her statements about eggs today the way you could have applied them in 1860. Though you will notice he never tells the reader how it applied in 1860. He even tries to guess at a reason, thinking it is something about refrigeration, when in 1860, people traveled very short distances, and refrigeration would have little effect, especially on eggs. In 1860 unless a farm was close to a rail line or riverboat, the distance of eggs to their destination was a radius of 30 miles. In short, the majority of eggs were sold in less than a day's journey from the farm that produced them.

While it is tempting to want to believe his conclusion, it, like his other statements, is simply wrong:

And if you have a problem believing Ellen White’s prophetic gift, that’s okay. Lots of people did, all through the church’s history—even in her own time. It is not a reason to leave the church. It is not a requirement to believe that Ellen White was a prophet to belong to the Adventist Church. Use your common sense, and the Bible as a filter when trying to figure out what parts of her writings are applicable to any situation.

 It is not in fact Okay because while Hessel links to another article he had written on Adventist Today, which was titled You Don't Have to Believe Ellen White is a Prophet to Be an Adventist. Which, sadly, is just another demonstration of deceptive information. You can read my response to that article here. 

Another Adventist Today Lie Baptismal vows

The Baptismal vows call the member to   Affirm that "I know and understand the fundamental Bible principles as taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church..." That is from Baptismal vow number 11, which Hessel somehow managed to miss in his article. 

I wish Adventist Today luck in changing the Adventist church, but you will never get there by deceiving and ignoring the real positions of the Adventist church. This pretending needs to stop. Deal with the problems, deal with the issues, be honest. Yes, you can reject Ellen White as a prophet and be part of the Adventist church, but they will get rid of you when you become a problem to them, and if you don't believe their prophet is a prophet, they remove you from any position of responsibility sooner or later. If you feel God is leading you to change the Adventist church than follow God's leading but I suggest just take the one precaution of not working for the Adventist church for you salary. We have seen too many of our scholars who did that and only after they retired could they be honest about what they really thought of Ellen White. The Adventist church needs more young people standing up for truth and not waiting until they retire to stand for truth.

 

 

Another Adventist Today Lie Baptismal vows

 Occasionally, I wander back on Adventist Today to see what the current Progressive propaganda is and imagine my surprise to see this article. 

You Don’t Have to Believe Ellen White Is a Prophet to Be an Adventist

Commentary Ellen White, spirit of prophecy, test of fellowship  By Ron Hessel  14 November 2025 

Here we read:

 And you don’t have to

There is some confusion on this, so let’s just set the record straight: you do not need to believe in Ellen White as a prophet in order to be a Seventh-day Adventist in good standing. Here is what it says in the Baptismal Vows I copied from the official church website.

“8. Do you accept the biblical teaching of spiritual gifts and believe that the gift of prophecy is one of the identifying marks of the remnant church?”

Notice that it does not say anything about Ellen White. Also notice that gift of prophecy is all in lower case—it is not capitalized. When, within our tribe, Ellen White and her work is referred to, “the Gift of Prophecy” is capitalized like a title. Otherwise, the gift of prophecy, all lower case, refers to one of the gifts of the Spirit as outlined in scripture.

The Baptismal Vows do not make us pledge allegiance to Ellen White, contrary to what some assert.

That is great, right? He has told us that the gift of prophecy is one of the marks of the remnant church and that it does not refer to Ellen White; it is just one of the many spiritual gifts! 

But what if he read further in the baptismal vows:

11. I know and understand the fundamental Bible principles as taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. I purpose, by the grace of God, to fulfill His will by ordering my life in harmony with these principles. 

What do you think those "fundamental Bible principles as taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church" may be? If only there were a list or a book of the Adventist Fundamental Beliefs. Maybe they are even enumerated for convenience.

Let's see what one of the Fundamental SDA beliefs is:

The Gift of Prophecy  Z18 The Scriptures testify that one of the gifts of the Holy Spirit is prophecy. This gift is an identifying mark of the remnant church and we believe it was manifested in the ministry of Ellen G. White. Her writings speak with prophetic authority and provide comfort, guidance, instruction, and correction to the church. They also make clear that the Bible is the standard by which all teaching and experience must be tested. (Num. 12:6; 2 Chron. 20:20; Amos 3:7; Joel 2:28, 29; Acts 2:14-21; 2 Tim. 3:16, 17; Heb. 1:1-3; Rev. 12:17; 19:10; 22:8, 9.)

There seems to be one more baptismal vow that seems to be related to this gift of prophecy to the remnant church, and that is the final vow:

13. I accept and believe that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the remnant church of Bible prophecy and that people of every nation, race, and language are invited and accepted into its fellowship. I desire to be a member of this local congregation of the world church. 

I wonder where they get the idea that the SDA church is the remnant church of Bible prophecy. Does it perhaps come from the gift of prophecy, which they believe is manifested in the ministry of Ellen White? Pretty sure that is the case.

But anyway, according to this article on Adventist Today, if we don't look too hard, we can say that Adventists don't have to believe in Ellen White as a prophet. 

Good to know. But you say, the first instance said fundamental principles, not fundamental beliefs. Okay, but are you sure you want to go there you can read the following articles and include the 1872 Fundamental Principles and of course the articles that oppose the transition from principles to beliefs such as: FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES vs BELIEFS - also referred to as THE TRANS-FUNDAMENTAL SOCIAL ENGINEERING OF ADVENTISM Go ahead at your own risk:)

A DECLARATION OF THE Fundamental Principles TAUGHT AND PRACTICED -BY-THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS. STEAM PRESS OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST PUBLISHING ASSOCIATION, BATTLE CREEK, MICH.: 1872.

Fundamental Principles

In presenting to the public this synopsis of our faith, we wish to have it distinctly understood that we have no articles of faith, creed, or discipline, aside from the Bible. We do not put forth this as having any authority with our people, nor is it designed to secure uniformity among them, as a system of faith, but is a brief statement of what is, and has been, with great unanimity, held by them. We often find it necessary to meet inquiries on this subject, and sometimes to correct false statements circulated against us, and to remove erroneous impressions which have obtained with those who have not had an opportunity to become acquainted with our faith and practice. Our only object is to meet this necessity. 

As Seventh-day Adventists we desire simply that our position shall be understood; and we are the more solicitous for this because there are many who call themselves Adventists who hold views with which we can have no sympathy, some of which, we think, are subversive of the plainest and most important principles set forth in the word of God. 

As compared with other Adventists, Seventh-day Adventists differ from one class in believing in the unconscious state of the dead, and the final destruction of the unrepentant wicked; from another, in believing in the perpetuity of the law of God as summarily contained in the ten commandments, in the operation of the Holy Spirit in the church, and in setting no times for the advent to occur; from all, in the observance of the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath of the Lord, and in many applications of the prophetic scriptures. 

With these remarks, we ask the attention of the reader to the following propositions, which aim to be a concise statement of the more prominent features of our faith. 

—I—

That there is one God, a personal, spiritual being, the creator of all things, omnipotent, omniscient, and eternal, infinite in wisdom, holiness, justice, goodness, truth, and mercy; unchangeable, and everywhere present by his representative, the Holy Spirit. Psalm 139:7. 

—II—

That there is one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, the one by whom God created all things, and by whom they do consist; that he took on him the nature of the seed of Abraham for the redemption of our fallen race; that he dwelt among men full of grace and truth, lived our example, died our sacrifice, was raised for our justification, ascended on high to be our only mediator in the sanctuary in Heaven, where, with his own blood he makes atonement for our sins; which atonement so far from being made on the cross, which was but the offering of the sacrifice, is the very last portion of his work as priest, according to the example of the Levitical priesthood, which foreshadowed and prefigured the ministry of our Lord in Heaven. See Leviticus 16; Hebrews 8:4, 5; 9:6, 7; etc. 

—III—

That the Holy Scriptures, of the Old and New Testaments, were given by inspiration of God, contain a full revelation of his will to man, and are the only infallible rule of faith and practice. 

—IV—

That Baptism is an ordinance of the Christian church, to follow faith and repentance, an ordinance by which we commemorate the resurrection of Christ, as by this act we show our faith in his burial and resurrection, and through that, of the resurrection of all the saints at the last day; and that no other mode fitly represents these facts than that which the Scriptures prescribe, namely, immersion. Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2:12. 

-V-

That the new birth comprises the entire change necessary to fit us for the kingdom of God, and consists of two parts: first, a moral change, wrought by conversion and a Christian life; second, a physical change at the second coming of Christ, whereby, if dead, we are raised incorruptible, and if living, are changed to immortality in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye. John 3:3, 5; Luke 20:36. 

-VI-

We believe that prophecy is a part of God’s revelation to man; that it is included in that scripture which is profitable for instruction, 2 Timothy 3:16; that it is designed for us and our children. Deuteronomy 29:29; that so far from being enshrouded in impenetrable mystery, it is that which especially constitutes the word of God a lamp to our feet and a light to our path, Psalm 119:105, 2 Peter 2:19; that a blessing is pronounced upon those who study it, Revelation 1:1-3; and that, consequently, it is to be understood by the people of God sufficiently to show them their position in the world’s history, and the special duties required at their hands. 

-VII-

That the world’s history from specified dates in the past, the rise and fall of empires, and chronological succession of events down to the setting up of God’s everlasting kingdom, are outlined in numerous great chains of prophecy; and that these prophecies are now all fulfilled except the closing scenes. 

-VIII-

That the doctrine of the world’s conversion and temporal millennium is a fable of these last days, calculated to lull men into a state of carnal security, and cause them to be overtaken by the great day of the Lord as by a thief in the night; that the second coming of Christ is to precede, not follow, the millennium; for until the Lord appears the papal power, with all its abominations, is to continue, the wheat and tares grow together, and evil men and seducers wax worse and worse, as the word of God declares. 

-IX-

That the mistake of Adventists in 1844 pertained to the nature of the event then to transpire, not to the time; that no prophetic period is given to reach to the second advent, but that the longest one, the two thousand and three hundred days of Daniel 8:14, terminated in that year, and brought us to an event called the cleansing of the sanctuary. 

-X-

That the sanctuary of the new covenant is the tabernacle of God in Heaven, of which Paul speaks in Hebrews 8, and onward, of which our Lord, as great High Priest, is minister; that this sanctuary is the antitype of the Mosaic tabernacle, and that the priestly work of our Lord, connected therewith, is the antitype of the work of the Jewish priests of the former dispensation. Hebrews 8:1-5, etc.; that this is the sanctuary to be cleansed at the end of the 2300 days, what is termed its cleansing being in this case, as in the type, simply the entrance of the high priest into the most holy place, to finish the round of service connected therewith, by blotting out and removing from the sanctuary the sins which had been transferred to it by means of the ministration in the first apartment, Hebrews 9:22, 23; and that this work, in the antitype, commencing in 1844, occupies a brief but indefinite space, at the conclusion of which the work of mercy for the world is finished. 

-XI-

That God’s moral requirements are the same upon all men in all dispensations; that these are summarily contained in the commandments spoken by Jehovah from Sinai, engraven on the tables of stone, and deposited in the ark, which was in consequence called the “ark of the covenant,” or testament. Numbers 10:33, Hebrews 9:4, etc.; that this law is immutable and perpetual, being a transcript of the tables deposited in the ark in the true sanctuary on high, which is also, for the same reason, called the ark of God’s testament; for under the sounding of the seventh trumpet we are told that “the temple of God was opened in Heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament.” Revelation 11:19. 

-XII-

That the fourth commandment of this law requires that we devote the seventh day of each week, commonly called Saturday, to abstinence from our own labor, and to the performance of sacred and religious duties; that this is the only weekly Sabbath known to the Bible, being the day that was set apart before paradise was lost, Genesis 2:2, 3, and which will be observed in paradise restored, Isaiah 66:22, 23; that the facts upon which the Sabbath institution is based confine it to the seventh day, as they are not true of any other day; and that the terms, Jewish Sabbath and Christian Sabbath, as applied to the weekly rest-day, are names of human invention, unscriptural in fact, and false in meaning. 

-XIII-

That as the man of sin, the papacy, has thought to change times and laws (the laws of God), Daniel 7:25, and has misled almost all Christendom in regard to the fourth commandment, we find a prophecy of a reform in this respect to be wrought among believers just before the coming of Christ. Isaiah 56:1, 2; 1 Peter 1:5, Revelation 14:12, etc. 

-XIV-

That as the natural or carnal heart is at enmity with God and his law, this enmity can be subdued only by a radical transformation of the affections, the exchange of unholy for holy principles; that this transformation follows repentance and faith, is the special work of the Holy Spirit, and constitutes regeneration or conversion. 

-XV-

That as all have violated the law of God, and cannot of themselves render obedience to his just requirements, we are dependent on Christ, first, for justification from our past offences, and, secondly, for grace whereby to render acceptable obedience to his holy law in time to come. 

-XVI-

That the Spirit of God was promised to manifest itself in the church through certain gifts, enumerated especially in 1 Corinthians 12 and Ephesians 4; that these gifts are not designed to supersede, or take the place of, the Bible, which is sufficient to make us wise unto salvation, any more than the Bible can take the place of the Holy Spirit; that in specifying the various channels of its operation, that Spirit has simply made provision for its own existence and presence with the people of God to the end of time, to lead to an understanding of that word which it had inspired, to convince of sin, and work a transformation in the heart and life; and that those who deny to the Spirit its place and operation, do plainly deny that part of the Bible which assigns to it this work and position. 

-XVII-

That God, in accordance with his uniform dealings with the race, sends forth a proclamation of the approach of the second advent of Christ; that this work is symbolized by the three messages of Revelation 14, the last one bringing to view the work of reform on the law of God, that his people may acquire a complete readiness for that event. 

-XVIII-

That the time of the cleansing of the sanctuary (see proposition X), synchronizing with the time of the proclamation of the third message, is a time of investigative judgment, first with reference to the dead, and at the close of probation with reference to the living, to determine who of the myriads now sleeping in the dust of the earth are worthy of a part in the first resurrection, and who of its living multitudes are worthy of translation-points which must be determined before the Lord appears. 

-XIX-

That the grave, whither we all tend, expressed by the Hebrew sheol, and the Greek hades, is a place of darkness in which there is no work, device, wisdom, or knowledge. Ecclesiastes 9:10. 

-XX-

That the state to which we are reduced by death is one of silence, inactivity, and entire unconsciousness. Psalm 146:4; Ecclesiastes 9:5, 6; Daniel 12:2, etc. 

-XXI-

That out of this prison house of the grave mankind are to be brought by a bodily resurrection; the righteous having part in the first resurrection, which takes place at the second advent of Christ, the wicked in the second resurrection, which takes place a thousand years thereafter. Revelation 20:4-6. 

-XXII-

That at the last trump, the living righteous are to be changed in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, and with the resurrected righteous are to be caught up to meet the Lord in the air, so forever to be with the Lord. 

-XXIII-

That these immortalized ones are then taken to Heaven, to the New Jerusalem, the Father’s house in which there are many mansions, John 14:1-3, where they reign with Christ a thousand years, judging the world and fallen angels, that is, apportioning the punishment to be executed upon them at the close of the one thousand years; Revelation 20:4; 1 Corinthians 6:2, 3; that during this time the earth lies in a desolate and chaotic condition, Jeremiah 4:20-27, described, as in the beginning by the Greek term abussos (õóó ïò) bottomless pit (Septuagint of Genesis 1:2); and that here Satan is confined during the thousand years, Revelation 20:1, 2, and here finally destroyed, Revelation 20:10; Malachi 4:1; the theater of the ruin he has wrought in the universe, being appropriately made for a time his gloomy prison house, and then the place of his final execution. 

-XXIV-

That at the end of the thousand years, the Lord descends with his people and the New Jerusalem, Revelation 21:2, the wicked dead are raised and come up upon the surface of the yet unrenewed earth, and gather about the city, the camp of the saints, Revelation 20:9, and fire comes down from God out of heaven and devours them. They are then consumed root and branch, Malachi 4:1, becoming as though they had not been. Obadiah 15, 16. In this everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, 2 Thessalonians 1:9, the wicked meet the everlasting punishment threatened against them, Matthew 25:46. This is the perdition of ungodly men, the fire which consumes them being the fire for which “the heavens and the earth which are now” are kept in store, which shall melt even the elements with its intensity, and purge the earth from the deepest stains of the curse of sin. 2 Peter 3:7-12. 

-XXV-

That a new heavens and earth shall spring by the power of God from the ashes of the old, to be, with the New Jerusalem for its metropolis and capital, the eternal inheritance of the saints, the place where the righteous shall evermore dwell. 2 Peter 3:13; Psalm 37:11, 29; Matthew 5:5. 

PreviousNext

Interface Language 

English

Copyright © 2025 by Ellen G. White. All Rights Reserved.

They mystery of reclaiming a prophet

Adventist Today recently offered this program 

Eric Anderson, “What Would Adventism Be Without a Prophet?”
Here is a 60-second snipped clip:

Well, I keep thinking about how we're defining prophet and I found that the definition that I offered in reclaiming the prophet was for some people a a tremendous watering down uh an evasion. 

Maybe I should quote that. Um, and I'm a little mystified. I still don't understand this. Why this is a bad way to define the term prophet. I wrote the authors of reclaiming the prophet will often employ the term  prophet to describe Ellen White. The point is not to mystify readers nor to hide ordinary thoughts or central historical context. Using non-technical layman's language is a prophet is a person who in God's name persuades a leader who changes people's behavior. And I went on to talk about her achievements and the ways in which uh we need to take those into account. That bothered some people and they thought that was um explaining away a prophet. That was a a bad definition of a prophet. I still don't quite get that a leader is a person who in God's name persuades. That sounds like a prophet to me. Quite quite an interesting approach 1:15:38

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JLxn2k3WcoM 

I am unsure why he is mystified because, in fact, his definition is simply a slightly obscured meaning of prophet, but certainly covers what prophet means. A prophet in the Bible is someone chosen by God to speak for God, acting as a messenger to convey the message God wants to the people. So why do I say his definition uses an obscuring meaning? Because in his definition, the most important part seems to be glossed over. "prophet is a person who in God's name". 

So before anyone listens to "the persuades a leader to change other people," they would have to accept that the prophet is speaking in God's name, which parts are really the parts God wants to convey. That is the entire problem with Ellen White, someone with numerous false prophecies and a known serial plagiarist speaking in God's name at all. There is also the second problem with the redefinition in that it is addressed to leaders; it is up to the leaders to change people's behavior. If you had a prophet, should the information be limited to leaders? Why would that be?

The more I hear from these writers of Reclaiming the Prophet the more I think that what they really want is to be the academic leaders who explain Ellen White to the Adventist Church. They want to have the historical context to interpret Ellen White. So that the people in higher education, the Ellen White Scholars and the Adventist historians can tell the rest of us what Ellen White meant and did not mean. So they can tell us when Ellen White contradicts herself which principle will rule. Some will even say to take her only in a pastoral role. That may sound good, but if your pastor was plagiarizing others' sermons and using false history and numerous pieces of Biblical fiction, that is things that are not in the Bible but pretended to be part of the Bible. Would you really even take that person in a pastoral role? At best, you might see them as having some sort of devotional material that, if you can avoid all the problems, might be encouraging in some way. This seems to be the great hope of Progressive Adventists, but I don't see it as much to be hoped for, I think it is an attempt at church control, which I have for quite some time said is what Progressive Adventists have really wanted. But I don't think that a change in bureaucracy is really a cure for Adventists problems.

The internet's death blow on Adventism

 Today I watched the video of Ian Reyes interview the recently removed Adventist Pastor Chris Mindanao, who got in trouble with the denominations leadership of say the radical idea found in the Bible that the seal of God is the Holy Spirit. In this part 2 of the interview maybe a month after Minanao's resignation he presents a much deeper examination of the problems in the Adventist Church. 

This should be watched by every Adventist, whether traditional or progressive. Something I had never considered before was why the Millerites and those who became SDAs accepted Hiram Edson's cornfield vision. The following quotes are from the Encylcopedia of Seventh-Day Adventists:

Although no information exists regarding Edson’s schooling, his mastery of grammar and style, evident in his later articles (see below), reveals that he had at least an elementary education. Likewise, while the date and place of his conversion are unknown, from birth he had been reared in a Christian family. Around 1839, he became a steward in the Port Gibson Methodist Episcopal Church, responsible for the use of funds and literature donated by the congregation. He was widely respected as an earnest, soul-winning layman.¹¹

When the Methodists rejected the Millerite teaching of Christ’s imminent second advent and expelled members who accepted it, Hiram and Esther began holding meetings in their home, and many attendees experienced conversion.¹⁵ Also during 1843-44, Edson began having “presentments,” which he defined as supernatural experiences that brought him new understandings, often through visual images of events that soon came to pass.¹⁶ These presentments told him about a revival service yet to occur;¹⁷ instructed him to lay hands on a sick friend and heal him;¹⁸ and told him to plead with a neighbor until he converted.¹⁹ Edson also witnessed incidents of faith healings following prayer and laying on of hands.²⁰ While believers accepted Edson’s presentments as indications of God’s guidance, others, who opposed any manifestations of supernatural phenomena, whether Mormon or Millerite, sometimes reacted violently. Forty hostile men broke up one of his cottage meetings and some neighbors issued death threats. For their safety, the Edson family moved to a rented farm near Centerport.²¹

Following the “Great Disappointment” of October 22, 1844, Edson was devastated. “Our fondest hopes and expectations were blasted,” he wrote, “and such a spirit of weeping came over us as I never experienced before. It seemed that the loss of all earthly friends could have been no comparison. We wept, and wept, till the day dawn.”²² On October 23, after praying with friends in his granary for understanding, Edson and Owen Crosier, a Millerite friend, cut through a cornfield to comfort their disappointed friends. Midway across the field, Edson related, “I was stopped…Heaven seemed open to my view, and I saw distinctly and clearly that instead of our High Priest coming out of the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary to this earth on [October 22, 1844]…He, for the first time, entered on that day into the second apartment of that sanctuary.”²³ Edson’s words, “I saw distinctly and clearly,” have led to various interpretations as to whether he had a vision, saw a flash of light, or received an impression.²⁴

After five months of Bible study, Edson, Crosier, and Franklin Hahn shared their discoveries in the March 1845 issue of the Day Dawn, a private paper edited by Hahn and Edson in Canandaigua, New York,²⁵ and in the February 7, 1846, issue of the Millerite paper the Day-Star Extra.²⁶ These articles (written by Crosier) stated that a literal sanctuary existed in heaven; that the earthly tabernacle services were modeled on the heavenly; that the heavenly sanctuary contained two chambers, a Holy Place and a Most Holy Place, representing two phases of priestly ministry; that Jesus, the High Priest, had entered into the latter on October 22, 1844, to cleanse it by the blotting out of sins by His blood; and that Christ would return to earth after this second phase of His ministry was completed.²⁷

In May 1845, Edson sent a letter to the Jubilee Standard, a Millerite paper published in NYC, in which he argued that while the 2300-day prophecy (Daniel 8:14) ended on October 22, 1844, the 1335-day prophecy (Daniel 12:12) would end in August 1845 with God’s final judgment and Christ’s second coming.²⁸

He later joined the Sabbatarian movement and then the SDA movement. Edson and Crosier wrote the article that established the belief in a two apartment ministry in a heavenly sanctuary. A PDF of the articles is found here.

This article and subsequent reiteration by Ellen White is the basis for the Investigative Judgement of Adventism. It is developed by a convoluted belief that Crosier had about the Old Testament sanctuary service which he assumed was what Jesus was doing in heaven. Most all other Christians believe in the atonement being completed by the death and resurrection and assertion of Christ back to heaven. As Hebrews says:

 11 But when Christ appeared as a high priest of the good things that have come, then through the greater and more perfect tent (not made with hands, that is, not of this creation) 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption. 13 For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, 14 how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Hebrews 9:11-14 ESV

To arrive at this supposed two-apartment ministry Crosier says this.

Hebrews 6:19,20, is supposed to prove that Christ entered the Holy of Holies at his ascension, because Paul said he had entered within the veil. But the veil which divides between the Holy and the Holy of Holies is "the second veil," Hebrews 9:3; hence there are two veils, and that in Hebrews 6, being the first of which he speaks, must be the first veil, which hung before the Holy, and in Exodus was called a curtain. When he entered within the veil, he entered his tabernacle, of course the Holy, as that was the first apartment; and our hope, as an anchor of the soul, enters within the veil, i.e. the atonement of both apartments, including both the forgiveness and the blotting out of sins.

19 We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain, 20 where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek. Hebrews 6:19-20 ESV

We see how certain Crosier is about his understanding of the Old Testament sanctuary service as he writes: 

Those who hold that Christ entered the Holy of Holies [2nd apartment] at, and has been ministering therein ever since his ascension, also believe, as of course they must, that the atonement of the Gospel Dispensation is the antitype of the atonement made on the tenth day of the seventh month under the law. If this is so, the events of the legal tenth day, have had their antitypes during the Gospel Dispensation. The first event in the atonement service of that day, was the cleansing of the Sanctuary, as we have seen from Leviticus 16. Then, upon their theory, the Sanctuary of the new covenant was cleansed in the early part of the Gospel Dispensation.  

In reality, I know of no Christians who believe Christ is ministering in the 2nd apartment. 

³ He is the radiance of the glory of God and the exact imprint of his nature, and he upholds the universe by the word of his power. After making purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, Hebrews 1:3 ESV

¹¹ And every priest stands daily at his service, offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. ¹² But when Christ had offered for all time a single sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God, ¹³ waiting from that time until his enemies should be made a footstool for his feet. ¹⁴ For by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are being sanctified. Hebrews 10:11-14 ESV

²¹ Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, ²² who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. 1 Peter 3:21-22 ESV

 Crosier says there is no evidence of any earthly new covenant sanctuary being cleansed after the 2300 days. Of course, there is equally no evidence of a heavenly sanctuary being cleansed either but all of this is based on his specious thinking that he understands the Old Testament sanctuary system as it relates to Jesus Christ and the new covenant.

He then incorrectly asserts there are now only two options. 

One of these two conclusions is inevitable on the hypotheses that the Gospel Dispensation and the atonement made in it, is the antitype of the legal tenth day, and the atonement made in it. Upon which of these horns will they hang? If on the former, the declaration, "I came not to destroy the law," pierces them; but if they choose the latter, it then becomes them to prove that the law, which had a shadow of good things to come, was fulfilled within itself, that the shadow and substance filled the same place and time; also they will need to prove that the entire atonement for the forgiveness of sins was made before the Lamb was slain with whose blood the atonement was to be made.  

My new realization today was how did anyone in of the Adventist pioneers ever came to accept these ideas? It makes little sense and it depends upon very questionable concepts that are brought from the Old Testament types and symbols to the reality of Jesus Christ who clearly offered forgiveness even before His death, because God can forgive he never needed the blood of animals to grant forgiveness. But Crosier's second problem posed was that the law was fulfilled. Though he does not stop with fulfilled he adds that the law was fulfilled within itself. Again no one thinks that but him! 

¹⁷ “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. ¹⁸ For truly, I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Matthew 5:17-18 ESV

⁴ For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. Romans 10:4 ESV

⁸ By this the Holy Spirit indicates that the way into the holy places is not yet opened as long as the first section is still standing ⁹ (which is symbolic for the present age). According to this arrangement, gifts and sacrifices are offered that cannot perfect the conscience of the worshiper, ¹⁰ but deal only with food and drink and various washings, regulations for the body imposed until the time of reformation. Hebrews 9:8-11

¹³ For if the blood of goats and bulls, and the sprinkling of defiled persons with the ashes of a heifer, sanctify for the purification of the flesh, ¹⁴ how much more will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without blemish to God, purify our conscience from dead works to serve the living God. Hebrews 9:13-14 ESV

¹⁵ Therefore he is the mediator of a new covenant, so that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance, since a death has occurred that redeems them from the transgressions committed under the first covenant. Hebrews 9:15

The only reason I can think of that would lead to accepting the whole Crosier and Edson explanation is to try and save face after the second great disappointment of Oct 22 1844, though Edson as well as other early Adventists had multiple great disappointments along with periods when they thought the door to salvation had been shut. That the Adventist church has not outgrown this is kind of amazing. I do think that with the internet age either have to change or they will simply lose all theologians and the seminaries will be attended only by people who only want to follow Adventist traditions and frankly give up on studying the Bible and Hermeneutics.