Cognitive maturation is a process of mental growth from a primitive, subjective, piecemeal collage of facts and supposed facts, hopefully toward an ever more accurate, symmetrical understanding of objective reality. During this process additional relevant facts are discovered, irrelevant opinions are discarded, and a wise person learns to monitor his/her thought processes and to base conclusions on the weight of evidence.

At each stage of this process a wise person will recognize his/her immature understanding and be modest with respect to his/her opinions. That spirit of modesty will remain even when a person has attained to an objective, symmetrical, and reasonably complete understanding. Humility with respect to a person’s opinions is one evidence of a mature mind; dogmatic insistence that his/her opinions constitute ultimate reality is unmistakable evidence of immaturity.

Robert Brinsmead’s repeated and mutually contradictory positions over the years, together with his dogmatic public insistence on each of them successively, is clear evidence of immaturity. One cannot help but wonder if the present one is final, or if it is—like the others—ephemeral and will be followed by others.

Brinsmead first came to the attention of the church in North America in the early spring of 1961, when he submitted several documents he had written to the General Conference for consideration. These documents came to the desk of W. R. Beach, then Secretary of the General Conference, who asked me to evaluate them. Having served as a teacher in the religion department of Pacific Union College for several years, as a writer and editor of the SDA Bible Commentary, as currently an associate editor of the Adventist Review and a member of the General Conference Biblical Research Committee, that was not altogether an illogical assignment.

With a desire to be completely objective and to evaluate the documents on their merits, I devoted careful consideration to each of them and drew up a critique of each, which I submitted to Elder Beach some three weeks later.

A few weeks after that Robert and his brother John appeared in person at the General Conference and requested a hearing. A representative committee, of which I served as a member, was appointed and met with them for two days in the General Conference board room. A cordial atmosphere prevailed. Most of the time was devoted to listening to Robert and John present their opinions, with an occasional request for clarification. At the close we commented on things to which we suggested that they give further study. We parted as friends.

On a return visit to North America years later Robert Brinsmead was accorded an opportunity to speak one Sabbath afternoon in the Campus Chapel of the University Church in Loma Linda, for which I was present. By that time he had repudiated his former perfectionist concept of salvation and was advocating Reformation-style forensic justification with equal vigor. An evangelical background with respect to justification and sanctification led me to conclude that he had made progress from his former legalistic perfectionism, but that his view of salvation still fell short of that presented by the Apostle Paul.

As Robert Brinsmead has moved farther and farther away from the orbit of Adventism and seems to be immune to further rational dialogue, I have felt constrained to let him go his own way and do his own thing. I do agree with him, however, that some of our concepts related to Christ’s ministry in the heavenly sanctuary need further study, clarification, and probably revision.