THE 1844 INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT DOCTRINE: COMMENTS AND COMMENTARIES—PART 8
Ervin Taylor, Series Editor

“The Gospel, 1844, and Judgment” is the topic of the Seventh-day Adventist Church Third Quarter Adult Bible Study Guide, published by the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The study guide states that one purpose of this series of lessons is to “establish the biblical basis for the 1844 judgment [doctrine].” This doctrine teaches that a pre-Advent judgment—the investigative judgment—was begun by God in 1844.

The Adventist Today web site, www.atoday.org is hosting a series of varied and contrasting commentaries and discussions designed to illuminate the nature of the arguments supporting and opposing the only unique doctrinal position taught by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Some Adventist scholars and pastors understand and teach that this doctrine constitutes the central core of Adventism. Other Adventist scholars and pastors believe that this doctrine, as traditionally taught, has no unambiguous biblical support. And still others view this doctrine as fundamentally flawed

To clarify questions raised by some readers, Adventist Today wishes to state that the opinions and points of view expressed in the materials presented in ATNewsbreak are those of the individual authors and may or may not be shared by any member of the Adventist Today board or editorial staff. The purpose of ATNewsbreak is to advance one of the goals of Adventist Today which is to promote a sense of connection among people who treasure both their Adventist heritage and the continuing quest for “present truth” by fostering creative conversations about how to preserve and promote the best of Adventism.

Another source of constructive commentaries on these lessons can be found at the web site of the PROBE comments from the School of Theology at Walla Walla College edited by Dr. Alden Thompson. They can be found at www.wwc.edu/probe. Other interesting commentaries and blogs on this topic can be found at the Spectrum web site, www.spectrummagazine.org. The web site, www.ATomorrow.com also contains some interesting comments on this topic.

Excerpts from Week 8 Comments and Commentaries
Title: 1844 Made Simple

Comments on Lesson Eight: 1844 Made Simple          Desmond Ford

Here is an exciting title for any earnest Adventist—“1844 Made Simple.” I would like to be a fly on the wall in families where the current Lesson Quarterly is opened to this lesson. I would hear things like this: “Simple! That’s good! I’ve never been able to understand it.” I remember the former editor of the Adventist Review saying that where he had worked (India), people could not even count to 2300, let alone work out this prophecy. So just how simple is this series of calculations?

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

The Sanctuary Doctrine – Asset or Liability? Part 8          Raymond F. Cottrell

8. "Rightly Explaining" Daniel 8:14

The first imperative for comprehending the prophecies of Daniel in the sense Inspiration intended is an objective frame of mind divested of every personal, subjective, modern presupposition with respect to their import. The second imperative is to identify the circumstances set forth in Daniel 1 to 6 and 9:1-23, which provide the historical background within which Inspiration set its five prophetic passages and from which it intended Daniel and his intended readers to understand them.

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

2300 days, 70 weeks – How Can We Make Sense of it All?          Dorothee Cole

The prophecy of the 70 weeks was a direct answer to Daniel’s question about the vision of the 2300 days which promised the restoration of the temple. “Restore your Temple, which has been destroyed; restore it so that everyone will know that you are God” was the reason that Daniel humbled himself and prayed to God (Dan 9:17). Daniel hoped that the physical temple would be restored after 70 years of Babylonian captivity in fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy.

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Significance of 1844 and the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment: A Response
Jim Benko

Adventist Today Comment: A statement entitled “Arguments Opposing the Traditional Adventist Understanding of the Significance of 1844 and the Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment” had been previously posted in this series. Several responses have been received providing responses to that statement. Here is the first response.  

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Comments from Readers

Adventist Today Comment: We have received a number of comments, both supporting and disagreeing with earlier postings. Adventist Today will attempt to post at various times throughout the quarter as many of these comments as possible, subject to editing for length and appropriate language. The date of receipt of a reader comment and the posting may be from one to five weeks apart.

The tyranny of coerced belief

Dear Editor,

A contributor wrote, "…conservatives are more concerned with being right and liberals are more concerned with being smart". I would suggest, rather that "conservatives" want to believe that every tenet that they were taught is necessarily correct, while "liberals" want to correct their beliefs to conform to appropriate evidence.

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Dialogue?

Dear Editor:
There is little that is redemptive about how the SDA church works (deals) with people today.  My church permits no real dialogue about anything.  I expect that has a lot to do with its Calvinistic origin and history and why it is experiencing no real growth in North America. 

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Confusion

Dear Editor:

A friend e-mailed this site to me explaining how informative and open it was supposed to be…frankly I’m confused at just what you are trying to get across with this site.

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Twisting Texts?

Dear Editor:
A comment found on the site on July 14 states: “Talk about twisting the texts and isogesis (sic.)…the Gospel equals a revelation of God’s character of love…”  

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Lingering Thought Process

Dear Editor:

After reading Pastor Kevin James' comments on week two concerning the SS lessons, I felt that I would be remiss if I did not respond to this "lingering thought process." Respectfully, Kevin probably shares the sentiments of many SDA members who would also say, "the 1844 teaching is either solid or spoiled…It will either prove EGW a true or false spokesperson for God…those who don't believe that 1844 is even supported by scripture need to be honest and get out of Adventism. There is no middle ground." This view ultimately prevailed at Glacier View.

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Prophecies are Eschatological

Dear Editor:
Though I wouldn't go so far as Pastor James in your last reader's postings as to tell those who don't subscribe to the Sanctuary Doctrine to leave the church, I am none-the-less puzzled as to why they are Adventists. The doctrine is after all the reason for our being and the foundation to our mission and message. Without it, we might as well stop playing church and go and join the Seventh Day Baptists or whatever.

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]

Receipt and Web Site Posting Schedule

The dates for the receipt of comments and commentaries and posting target dates on the Adventist Today web site for the Adult Sabbath School Bible Study for July-August-September 2006, “The Gospel, 1844, and Judgment”

[Please go to www.atoday.org for the complete text]