Why You Posting Jones and Waggoner?

Someone contacted me through email asking, "Why do you publish information on A. T. Jones and E. J. Waggoner?" The short answer is, because I love the way that they seek to teach both Gospel and Adventism at the same time. However a little more indepth answer appears below.

Importance of 1888

To answer this question, we must first recognize that many people from the different theological perspectives of Adventism see in their message, or the history of that time, a God given message. Some see in the 1888 messengers and attempt from God to shake the church out of the icy grip of legalism. Others see in it a call to bring Adventism more in line with the gospel that the other churches have taught. Others see in the 1888 message an important call to move to Christianity first before the distinctive teachings of Adventism.

As I think about the 1888 messengers, I remember a few discussions with friends. First there is the friend who said that it was only after reading these messengers that he saw how Adventist doctrines can help him in his understanding of the Gospel. Before Jones and Waggoner he saw the Sabbath as important, but not connected to the Gospel as he does now. He sees in the doctrine of the nature of humanity (state of the dead) the reality that Christ, in his humanity, decided to die a death that would mean eternal death. Some articulate this by saying that "Christ went to hell." In the Sanctuary, my friend now sees one who is looking out and working for humanity right now with a purpose that includes the cleansing of humanity.

Another friend told me that 1888 reminds him that in our "Adventist-ness" we can never lose our "Christian-ness. We are a part of that global body called Christianity and none of our doctrines can separate us from that body.

Why I Like The Messeges

Personally, I think that 1888 allows Adventism to make sense in the context of the Gospel. It emphasizes the Gospel, but it emphasizes that we look at and understand it through our Adventism. Certainly A. T. Jones and E. J. Waggoner are not infallible. I agree with Ellen White, God Alone is infallible. But in these writings, I see two individuals, striving to see and learn more of Jesus in our characteristic doctrines, not in spite of them. Waggoner doesn't teach the sabbath just for the sake of the sabbath. Jones doesn't teach the sanctuary just for the sake of the sanctuary. Everything is taught to gain a greater understanding of Jesus Christ and his mission.

My first attempts at looking at theology came from reading Jones and Waggoner. I will always love these three for that reason. Certainly, I don't agree with everything, but 1888 reminds me that our doctrines and teachings are not an end to themselves, but are there to help us understand Christ. Agree or disagree with them, they tried to just preach Christ and him crucified within the context of Adventism.

1888 and Race

I have heard a lot of talk about 1888 and the 1888 message, but we have heard very little on the issue of Race and these two ministers. I remember Elder Dudley used to say that God was trying to come to earth back in 1888, but many white folks were trying to go without the black folks.

God Tried to Remove the Color Line in 1887

Interestingly I looked in the General Conference Bulletin of 1887, one year before that 1888 Conference. During that year God was trying to remove the color line from the Adventist Church by means of A.T. Jones, E.J. Waggoner, and others. I found this on the "Words of the Pioneers" CD.

The discussion begins:

This matter being thus left, the question of the color line was taken up by Elder A. T. Jones, who took the position that no color line should be recognized. Elder J. M. Rees made a few remarks, stating the situation in Tennessee. There is no trouble in the church, but if a minister should go into a place and have the colored people mingle in the congregation with the whites, he would have no white people to talk to.

Resolved to Remove the Color Line

In response Elder D. H. Lamson offered the following: "Resolved, That this Conference recognize no color line."

The General confernce Bulliten of 1887 then continues

An animated discussion followed, in which the following delegates took part: A. T. Jones, J. O. Corliss, S. H. Lane, E. J. Waggoner, R. A. Underwood, and J. H. Cook. On the one side it was argued that the existence of a color line is a great evil, and that it should not be recognized; that there is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female, but that all are one in Christ Jesus, and that if the people of the South do not want to mingle in a congregation with the colored people, let them stay away. On the other hand, it was argued that the color line does exist, and that nobody can obliterate it, and that inasmuch as this Conference cannot legislate for anybody outside of Seventh-day Adventists, we should take things just as we find them, not arousing any unnecessary prejudice, but preaching the truth to all who come, leaving the Spirit of God to obliterate the color line in the hearts of those who may be converted by the truth.

Waggoner Clarifies the Issue

Elder Waggoner then amended the resolution by substituting the following:

WHEREAS, The Bible says that there is neither Jew nor Greek there is neither bond nor free, but that all are one in Christ Jesus, therefore, Resolved, That it is the decided opinion of this Conference, that when the colored people of the South accept the Third Angel's Message, they should be received into the church on an equality with the white members, no distinction whatever being made between the two races in church relations.

The amendment was carried. Then the conference referred the resolution to a committee to "consider the matter carefully, and recommend proper action to the Conference."

The Reversal

Then at the end of the day we have the following notation in the Bulletin:

As the question pertains to the best methods to be pursued in the presentation of the truth in the South, where persons of African descent are most numerous, and as no one of the committee has had any personal experience in that work, we have deemed it proper to confer with those whose fields of labor have been in that section of the country. As the result of these interviews we find those who are present who have labored in the South unanimous in the opinion that it is easy to pursue a course which will create no disturbance, and do no injustice to the colored people. This being the case, your committee can see no occasion for this Conference to legislate upon the subject, and would, therefore, recommend that no action be taken, and that all reference to this question be omitted from the minutes.

Thus ends God's attempt to use the 1888 messengers to remove the Color line in 1887.