A. F. Ballenger’s powerful preaching brought many souls to the truth, as well as encouragement to the church members. For instance, his revival meetings held at Battle Creek, November through December of 1897, centered on “Receive Ye the Holy Ghost,” where holiness and putting away sin was the main emphasis, caused many of the students and church members to rededicate their lives to Christ.1 Soon he began working on a book based on some of his sermons, entitled Power for Witnessing, which came off the press in 1900—the same year he accepted a call to the British Isles.
While in the British Isles, he “first worked in several of the big English cities, then in Wales, and finally as president of the Irish Mission.”2 About this same time, shortly after the year 1900, Elder Ballenger started teaching a “new theology” on salvation in Christ, which effected his views regarding the heavenly sanctuary and the atonement. These ideas began to raise the eyebrows of many of his colleagues, to say the least.
The Proclamation of Liberty
Ballenger was called to clarify his views before the British Union Conference Committee sometime before the 1905 General Conference Session. After three hours of discussion with a special committee, his positions were rejected and the Conference relieved him of his post as president of the Irish Mission.3
While returning by ship to Ireland from England, he was caught in a terrible storm on the Irish Sea. It was at this time that he was impressed to write the manuscript for a book that would clearly proclaim his new views on salvation. His book would be entitled—The Proclamation of Liberty and the Unpardonable Sin. He later submitted the manuscript to the brethren for publication, but it, too, was rejected. He set out to publish it himself, and the book finally came off the press some ten years later in 1915.4
This is conclusive proof that it was the content of this book that presented the “clearer light for which he was cast of the denomination he loved.” Most people think it was the Sanctuary doctrine that lead him out of the church, but the reality is, it was his new light on salvation that caused him to change his views on the sanctuary.
The content of this book is summed up by the author: “If the reader would know at once what is the central thought,—the all-absorbing theme,—the body, soul and spirit of this book, it is summed up in the final words of our dying Lord, ‘It is finished.’. . . The author prays that it may reveal to some waiting soul the gospel truth that he need no longer wait for full salvation, but may now, by faith, take this gift already given through that work of Christ of which He declared with His final breath.” 5
The main thrust of Ballenger’s book was to prove that legal justification—universal forgiveness—has already been given to all men. Legal justification meant that one had been declared righteous, or innocent, as a judge forgives a criminal condemned to prison. Pardon and legal justification are one and the same thing. Anyone who has been involved in a court system understands the application that Ballenger was making. This now became the heart of Ballenger’s “new light” on salvation in Christ.
Before the 1905 Committee
Elder Ballenger was sent as a delegate to the 36th General Conference Session held outside of Washington D. C. in Takoma Park, where the general leadership of the church could examine his views.6 The Session ran from May 11th to the 30th, 1905. Ellen White had come from California especially for this Session. On May 18th she opened the meeting, “emphasizing the need of repentance and humiliation before God and one another.” She stated, “In this last day of the great Day of Atonement, it is time to make sure that every sin is confessed and forgiven.”7 The significance of this statement must have struck home to the delegates who would be later discussing Ballenger’s theology. His views were examined for three days by a specially appointed committee, once again to be rejected.
While attending this conference, Ellen White wrote in her diary, on May 20th: “Brother Ballenger is presenting theories that can not be substantiated by the Word of God. It will be one of the great evils that will come to our people to have the Scriptures taken out of their true place and so interpreted as to substantiate error that contradicts the light and the testimonies that God has been giving us for the past half century. I declare in the name of the Lord that the most dangerous heresies are seeking to find entrance among us as a people, and Elder Ballenger is making spoil of his own soul. . . . We must not give countenance to his reasoning. He is not led of God.”8
Four days later, a manuscript was written for the delegates at the conference which came straight to the point: “In clear, plain language I am to say to those in attendance at this conference that Brother Ballenger has been allowing his mind to receive and believe specious error. He has been misinterpreting and misapplying the Scriptures upon which he has fastened his mind. He is building up theories that are not founded in truth.”9
At the end of the session, a general report was issued on June 1st, which in part, stated: “It is clear that the delegates to this conference do not look with favor upon any phase of the so-called ‘New Theology,’. . . it does forbid the acceptance of such interpretations of old truths as will make it impossible to distinguish between substance and shadow. . . . This message will not be corrupted by false teaching. . . . The third angel’s message will preserve its original individuality. . . . Some questions have been settled at this conference.”10
Reflecting back on the conference, some four months later, Ellen White again wrote in her diary: “There are many today who present strange doctrines, giving the Scriptures a wrong meaning. Elder Ballenger thinks that he has new light, and is burdened to give it to the people; but the Lord has instructed me that he has misapplied the texts of Scripture, and given them a wrong application. The word of God is always the truth, but the doctrines that Elder Ballenger advances, if received, would unsettle our faith in the sanctuary question.”11
It is important to understand that Ellen White is stating that Elder Ballenger’s “new light” would lead to an unsettling of “our faith in the sanctuary question.” It was not only his new views on the sanctuary message itself that were brought into question, but rather that his “new light,” centered in universal justification, would lead to an unsettling of faith in the sanctuary message. This is evident by tracing the events that his book, The Proclamation of Liberty and the Unpardonable Sin was the heart of Ballenger’s “new light.”
As a result of these meetings was finally removed from the ministry and eventually from the membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Shortly after being disfellowshipped he wrote a book entitled Cast Out for the Cross of Christ, to explain why he was disfellowshipped and to further clarify his views. It was apparent that he rejected the idea of a literal sanctuary in heaven, and now believed that Christ had entered the Holiest of Holies (heaven itself) after His resurrection; he also modified how the type and anti-type fit together regarding the daily and yearly services, especially the Day of Atonement—all based on his concept of a universal atonement for all men.
Changing the Sanctuary Teachings
Ballenger’s teachings regarding the typical sanctuary services were not based on truth. My observation is that instead of using the clear evidence in the Old Testament regarding the sanctuary service to help define related points in the New Testament, he took texts in the New Testament out of context and used them to explain what he thought happened in the Old Testament. Most Bible students who have spent time studying the Old Testament sanctuary see clearly how the typical service worked. We will here compare Bible truth to some of Ballenger’s views:
QUESTION: How was sin symbolically transferred into the sanctuary in the Old Testament?
ANSWER: God, in His compassion and mercy, made a provision for dealing with sin. When a person in the camp of Israel was guilty of sin they brought an appropriate sacrifice to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.12 The sinner confessed his sins over the victim and then took its life with his own hand. This all prefigured what Christ was going to do for us in paying the penalty of sin.13 The priest then took the blood into the sanctuary and applied it in the ways prescribed by God.14 Thus the sin of that individual was transferred symbolically into the sanctuary by the blood of the victim, and the record of that sin was held there by virtue of that blood being present in the sanctuary.
SUMMARY: The only sins atoned for in the daily service were those that were confessed by indiviuals who followed the ceremony God had commanded. These sins alone defiled the sanctuary.
BALLENGER’S POSITION: To Ballenger’s reasoning, any sin committed by Israel defiled the sanctuary—confessed or unconfessed—regardless of the sacrificial offerings or the transferring of blood. According to Ballenger, the daily ceremonies only pointed forward to Christ. He reasoned that the blood of the sacrifices could never defile the sanctuary!15 He stated that it was an error to believe that “only confessed sins, or the sins of the saved go into the sanctuary.”16 The reasoning he uses is circular to say the least, and not worth devoting time to. It was necessary for him to depart from the Old Testament type to defend his views on universal justification.
QUESTION: What is the work of atonement?
ANSWER: The work of atonement is that of bringing the sinner into “at one ment” with God through Christ—to be reconciled. This was seen in the Old Testament type:
1) The daily atonements took place as individuals confessed their sin over the appropriate sacrifice, and transferred that sin, symbolically, into the sanctuary, thus atoning for that sin and receiving forgiveness.17 The typical service taught that a life was required to give life.
2) The yearly atonement was seen on the Day of Atonement when all of Israel searched their hearts to make sure there was no unconfessed sin. All the sins that had been transferred to the sanctuary were, on this day of judgment, finally removed, thus cleansing the sanctuary of all the records of sins symbolically put there through the year by the transference of blood.18
It is seen in the type that the atonement has two phases to it. This follows the Old Testament model perfectly as seen in the daily and yearly services which prefigured the life, death, and mediation of Jesus Christ:
1) The sacrificial atonement made at the cross made a full provision for all the sins of the whole world.19 There is no sin too big or small, which, confessed, cannot be forgiven through the cross of Christ. His death secured eternal life for the saved.
2) The final atonement will be made in the heavenly sanctuary where the righteousness of Christ is applied to individuals by the application of that atonement to individual sins as they are confessed. “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness,” 1 John 1:9. Christ’s work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary will end in judgment on the life of every person in the world. When human probation closes He will declare: “He that is unjust, let him be unjust still: and he which is filthy, let him be filthy still: and he that is righteous, let him be righteous still: and he that is holy, let him be holy still,” Revelation 22:11. Probation will close and the record of every confessed sin will be forever removed.20
SUMMARY: The work of atonement is two fold. It started on the cross and ends in the heavenly sanctuary. Type meets anti-type as seen in the Old Testament services.
BALLENGER’S POSITION: Here is the heart of Ballenger’s teachings. In his thinking, the daily services only prefigure Christ’s death. The Day of Atonement was seen as a “universal atonement” for all of Israel’s sins—confessed or unconfessed—which prefigured Christ’s complete and finished atonement on the cross for all sin—past, present, and future, which embraced the whole world. To him, every human being now stood in the same position as Adam before the fall—justified in the sight of God as if they had never sinned!21
Using the argument of Romans 5, verses 12-19, he tried to prove that sin and condemnation came to all men through Adam and thus justification, redemption, and innocency have already come to all men through Christ. Ballenger said, “All men were ruined without their will or cooperation, and therefore all men could be redeemed without their will or cooperation. What! Save a man without his will? Yes.”22
To him the Gospel was to tell men that they were already reconciled to Christ, and then faith in this reconcilation would bring forth works of righteousness.23 Faith did not reconcile us to God since it was already an accomplished fact at the cross. Faith was to simply bring about good works.
The Heart of the Problem
As I see people today buying into this idea that all men are already justified, I don’t think they realize where this teaching leads. The end result will be the same—the rejection of the Biblical teachings on the sanctuary.
In the Old Testament the work of reconciling the sinner to God was an individual matter; not universally applied to everyone. On the Day of Atonement, the only sins atoned for were those which had been confessed and had gone beforehand into the sanctuary; not as Ballenger assumed, a universal atonement. It is the work of the Holy Spirit, both today as well as in Old Testament times, that leads a person to true repentance and confession. These do not merit salvation, but rather, they are part of the process that God has given to bring a sinner into right standing before Him.
Ellen White beautifully portrays Christ’s work of reconciling, or justifying, the sinner to Himself: “Looking upon the sinner's Substitute and Surety, the Lord Jehovah can be just, and yet be the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. To him who accepts Christ as his righteousness, as his only hope, pardon is pronounced; for God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself. The justice, truth, and holiness of Christ, which are approved by the law of God, form a channel through which mercy may be communicated to the repenting, believing sinner. Those who do not believe in Christ are not reconciled to God; but those who have faith in Him are hid with Christ in God.”24
“Those who do not believe in Christ are not reconciled to God.” These words are clear and to the point. When is a sinner justified? Here is an easy to understand answer:
“Here the truth is laid out in plain lines. This mercy and goodness is wholly undeserved. The grace of Christ is freely to justify the sinner without merit or claim on his part. Justification is a full, complete pardon of sin. The moment a sinner accepts Christ by faith, that moment he is pardoned. The righteousness of Christ is imputed to him, and he is no more to doubt God's forgiving grace.”25
“When a sinner accepts Christ by faith. . .” This is easy enough to explain to one of my children.
As we have seen, on the Day of Atonement only the sins that had gone beforehand into the sanctuary were atoned for. Herein lies the danger of the teaching of universal justification. If, indeed, all sin (past, present and future) was already atoned for—if all are already justified—why is there further need of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary? Here was Ballenger’s dilemma. He stated that the work of Christ in the sanctuary is simply to see who would reject the already complete and finished atonement on the cross. To him, there was no need for a further atonement to take place in heaven, thus there was no need of the sanctuary message as historically taught! The idea of Christ going into the Most Holy Place in 1844 to finish the work of atonement totally lost its significance. Thus Ballenger adjusted the Bible to fit within his own ideas. This is what Ellen White tried to warn people about:
“The word of God is always the truth, but the doctrines that Elder Ballenger advances, if received, would unsettle our faith in the sanctuary question.”26
“I testify in the name of the Lord that Elder Ballenger is led by satanic agencies and spiritualistic, invisible leaders. Those who have the guidance of the Holy Spirit will turn away from these seducing spirits.”27
“I have been pleading with the Lord for strength and wisdom to reproduce the writings of the witnesses who were confirmed in the faith and in the early history of the message. After the passing of the time in 1844 they received the light and walked in the light, and when the men claiming to have new light would come in with their wonderful messages regarding various points of Scriptures, we had, through the moving of the Holy Spirit, testimonies right to the point, which cut off the influence of such messages as Ballenger has been devoting his time to presenting. This poor man has been working decidedly against the truth that the Holy Spirit has confirmed. . . .”28
Some Scriptures Defined
In his book, The Proclamation of Liberty and the Unpardonable Sin, Ballenger builds his case around several key texts. A few of these texts are here listed and hopefully clarified.
2 Corinthians 5:18, 19: “And all things [are] of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation; To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.”
Who has God reconciled?—”Us,” His people—not everyone in the whole world. “Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.” 2 Corinthians 5:20. If all are already reconciled, why doesn’t the Scripture say “ye are reconciled to God,” instead of “be ye reconciled to God?” The answer is obvious—while Christ holds out to us His love, redemption and forgiveness, He does not force His salvation on us against our will. He wants us to choose to accept the forgiveness being offered through His death on the Cross.
“For thou, Lord, [art] good, and ready to forgive; and plenteous in mercy unto all them that call upon thee,” Psalm 86:5.
“It may be that the house of Judah will hear all the evil which I purpose to do unto them; that they may return every man from his evil way; that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin,” Jeremiah 36:3.
“Pardon and justification are one and the same thing. Through faith, the believer passes from the position of a rebel, a child of sin and Satan, to the position of a loyal subject of Christ Jesus, not because of an inherent goodness, but because Christ receives him as His child by adoption. The sinner receives the forgiveness of his sins, because these sins are borne by his Substitute and Surety. The Lord speaks to His heavenly Father, saying: ‘This is My child. I reprieve him from the condemnation of death, giving him My life insurance policy—eternal life—because I have taken his place and have suffered for his sins. He is even My beloved son.’ Thus man, pardoned, and clothed with the beautiful garments of Christ's righteousness, stands faultless before God.”29
Romans 5:10: “For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life.”
Who but sinners and enemies of Christ can be reconciled? Did Christ come to reconcile the righteous? No. “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance,” Luke 5:32. His reconciliation is for those who need it the most—those who were enemies! And yes, Christ died for us while we were yet sinners. Who else was there to die for? Are all sinners and enemies automatically forgiven by Christ’s death because He came to die for sinners and enemies? The answer is obviously, No.
Romans 5:18, 19: “Therefore as by the offense of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.”
All have inherited a sinful nature from Adam and therefore have sinned by reason of that inheritance. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God,” Romans 3:23. Righteousness is offered which grants eternal life through the life and death of Jesus Christ. An eternal death sentence (the 2nd death) is passed upon all men, “for that all have sinned.” The Scriptures clarify these points by saying: “The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.” Ezekiel 18:20. So while we inherit physical death, we do not inherit guilt—guilt comes from our own choice to sin. The natural consequence of sin is everlasting death, and that death cannot come in any other way than by sin.
“God justly condemns all who will not receive and believe in Christ as their personal Saviour. Christ is standing at the door of our hearts, longing to pardon all who will come unto Him that they may have life. O what words, what precious words are these! He is not merely merciful, but is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and cleanse us from all unrighteousness. Our work is to hear His voice, open the door of our hearts, and welcome the heavenly guest. We then stand before God and the whole heavenly universe innocent, though ourselves undeserving, while Jesus carries our guilt. He takes the load which it was the lot of the sinner to bear. What responsive love, what gratitude, what thank-offerings should ascend to God, because Christ has died to make reconciliation for our sins, and by his complete obedience bring in everlasting righteousness.”30
Not the 1888 Message
It amazes me that some think the teaching of universal justification is the heart of the 1888 message. A. T. Jones, E. J. Waggoner, and Ellen G. White never separated legal justification from justification by faith wherein we have access to the power of the Holy Spirit. They each taught that Christ made a complete provision for all sin, but forgiveness is not placed to the account of a person until he comes to Christ. By repentance and confession the sinner responds to the wooing of the Holy Spirit.
Elder E. J. Waggoner, a key player in the 1888 messages, plainly states that he did not believe in universal justification. In the early part of 1896, he made this comment on Romans chapter 5 in an article that appeared in the Signs of the Times: “The text says that ‘by the obedience of One shall many be made righteous.’ Some one may ask, ‘Why are not all made righteous by the obedience of One?’ The reason is that they do not wish to be. If men were counted righteous simply because One was righteous eighteen hundred years ago, then all would have to be righteous by the same obedience. There would be no justice in counting righteousness to one and not to all, if it were in that way. But we have seen that it is not so.” 31
Elder Waggoner also commented that the “free gift came to all men unto justification of life,” stating, “Are all men going to be justified? All men might be if they would, but says Christ, ‘Ye would not come to me that ye might have life.’ All are dead in trespasses and sins. The grace of God that brings salvation hath appeared unto all men. It comes right within the reach of all men, and those who do not get it are those who do not want it.”32
What one does begin to see in Waggoner’s 1897 and later writings is a neo-pantheistic teaching regarding the personal presence of God. This, I believe, has been construed by some as the teaching of universal justification. In his book, The Glad Tidings, published in 1900, Waggoner adds a new twist to Romans 5:18, regarding the “free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.” What he started teaching is that Christ’s life was manifest wherever life was seen, whether in the grass, trees, or as he later concluded, that Christ literally has come into all men’s flesh.33 Therefore Christ was already dwelling in everyone and experiencing Him was only a matter of accepting that He was already dwelling in you by faith.34 These theosophical ideas caused Elder Waggoner to eventually no longer believe the sanctuary doctrine, the 2300 day prophecy, the biblical explanation of sin, as well as many other fundamental teachings held by Adventists.35 Both Ballenger’s universal justification and Waggoner’ theosophical life theory destroy the doctrine of the atonement and the heavenly sanctuary, though approaching the subject from two different perspectives.
If, indeed, universal justification was the 1888 message why could not Jones or Waggoner expound it as clearly as A. F. Ballenger, as found in The Proclamation of Liberty and the Unpardonable Sin? Considering what Mrs. White wrote about Ballenger’s theology, how can anyone say it is the 1888 message?
Ellen White states plainly: “While the sinner cannot save himself, he still has something to do to secure salvation. ‘Him that cometh to Me,’ says Christ, ‘I will in no wise cast out,’ John 6:37. But we must come to Him; and when we repent of our sins, we must believe that He accepts and pardons [justifies] us. Faith is the gift of God, but the power to exercise it is ours. Faith is the hand by which the soul takes hold upon the divine offers of grace and mercy.”36
“Christ pardons [justifies] none but the penitent, but whom He pardons He first makes penitent. The provision made is complete, and the eternal righteousness of Christ is placed to the account of every believing soul. The costly, spotless robe, woven in the loom of heaven, has been provided for the repenting, believing sinner.” 37
“Christ is our pattern; His life was an example of good works. He was a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief. He wept over Jerusalem because they would not be saved by accepting the redemption which He offered them. They would not come to Him that they might have life. Compare your course of life with that of your Master, who made so great a sacrifice that you might be saved.”38
A Sad Ending
In Elder Ballenger’s later years he joined himself to the Seventh-day Baptist Church. His paper, The Gathering Call, was used to try to convince Seventh-day Adventists of the correctness of his positions. On Friday, the 18th of August, 1921, after a day’s work, A. F. Ballenger laid down on the sofa and died. His brother, Edward, tried to carry on the paper, but took a shift toward criticism toward church leadership, attacks on the Spirit of Prophecy and the organized work. The paper, too, finally died. It was the sad end of a movement and a message that caused confusion, conflict and led souls astray. Elder Ballenger had such potential as an evangelist and revivalist. His energies could have been used to win thousands of souls to Christ. But by holding on to his pet theory, he spent the rest of his life trying to justify his positions.
Today people are again trying to revive these doctrinal ideas. If you start out with a wrong premise, you will come to a wrong conclusion—and with Elder Ballenger’s premise, you end up undermining Christ’s finishing work in the heavenly sanctuary. May we not make the same mistake as he did. The closing work of Christ in the sanctuary above is the most important work now taking place in behalf of His followers on earth. We should do nothing to undermine this special work in these closing hours of earth’s history.
-----------FOOTNOTES--------------------------------------
1 For examples see Review & Herald, Nov. 2nd, 1897,
p. 699; Review & Herald, Nov. 9th, 1897, p. 715. Every
issue through January of 1898 had a report about the
results of Ballenger’s meetings.
2 R. W. Schwartz, Light Bearers to the Remnant, ©1979,
Pacific Press Publishing, p. 448.
3 Ibid. p. 449
4 See The Gathering Call, Sept.-Oct. 1921. The Gathering
Call was an independent paper published by A. F.
Ballenger and E. S. Ballenger.
5 A. F. Ballenger, The Proclamation of Liberty and the
Unpardonable Sin, ©1915, pp. 5, 6.
6 Light Bearers to the Remnant, p. 449.
7 1905 General Conference Daily Bulletin, May 18th, p. 23
8 Ellen G. White, Diary, May 20th, 1905, MS-59-1905.
9 Ellen G. White, "A Warning Against False Theories," May
24th, 1905, MS-62, 1905.
10 1905 General Conference Daily Bulletin, June 1st, 1905,
p. 3.
11 Ellen G. White, Diary, St. Helena, Cal., Oct. 31, 1905; MS-
145-1905.
12 Leviticus 4:1-35
13 Hebrews 13:12; Hebrews 10:4.
14 See Leviticus 4:7, 18, 25, 30; Leviticus 6:30.
15 Cast Out for the Cross of Christ, A. F. Ballenger, circa.
1905-6, chapter 6.
16 Ibid. p. 66
17 Some examples are seen in: Leviticus 1:1-9; all of
Leviticus 4 and 5:1-6.
18 Leviticus 23: 6-8, 26-31.
19 See 1 John 2:2; John 1:29.
20 Leviticus 16:5-10; Revelation 20:14, 15; Micah 7:19.
21 Cast Out for the Cross of Christ, pp. 65—82.
The Proclamation of Liberty and the Unpardonable Sin,
pp. 60–76.
22 The Proclamation of Liberty and the Unpardonable Sin,
p. 64.
23 Ibid. p. 9-30; The main thrust of this whole book is to
prove the doctrine of universal justification and atonement
for all men.
24 Ellen G. White, Sons and Daughters of God, p. 239.
25 Ellen G. White, The Signs of the Times, May 19th, 1898.
Emphasis added.
26 Ellen G. White, Diary, St. Helena, Cal., Oct. 31, 1905; MS-
145-1905.
27 Ellen G. White, Ms 59, 1905. (“The Sabbath Truth in the
Sentinel, and Elder Ballenger's Views,” May 20, 1905.
Manuscript Release #760, p. 4.)
28 Ellen G. White, MS 62, 1905.
29 Ellen G. White, 1888 Materials, p. 898
30 Ellen G. White, The Home Missionary, November 1st,
1897.
31 E. J. Waggoner, “The Free Gift,” Signs of the Times,
March 12, 1896, (In this same article Waggoner also
clearly states that we are not under condemnation for
Adam's sin, but rather, because “All have sinned, and,
therefore, all are in condemnation.”)
32 E. J. Waggoner, 1891 General Conference Bulletin,
March 17th, 1891, Vol. 4 , #10, p. 138. Emphasis added.
This is an excellent article on the topic of Romans Ch. 5.
33 E. J. Waggoner, The Glad Tidings, This is the original Z
copy by Pacific Press Publishing Assoc., 1900, pp. 15, 16;
80-81; 85-88 (This edition is not to be confused with the
revised edition by Robert J. Weiland); E. J. Waggoner,
1897 General Conference Bulletin, Feb. 15, pp. 71-72;
See Pantheism By Faith, by Jeff Reich, which covers this
whole topic in depth and proves Waggoner never taught
the universal justification doctrine. This can be obtained
from Laymen Ministries.
34 E. J. Waggoner, 1897 General Conference Bulletin, Feb.
12, 1897, pp. 34, 45, 71-72; 1899 General Conference
Bulletin, Feb. 24, p. 80; The Everlasting Covenant, pp.
240-261. For a complete article on this matter see
Pantheism By Faith, by Jeff Reich, from Laymen
Ministries.
35 E. J. Waggoner, Confession of Faith, 1916
36 Ellen G. White, Patriarchs and Prophets, p. 431
37 Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, Book 1, pp. 393, 394.
38 Ellen G. White, Testimonies for the Church, Volume
One, p. 505. Emphasis added.
Director, Laymen Ministries
Ballenger self-published his book, The Proclamation of Liberty and the Unpardonable Sin, in an effort to justify his views on universal justification.
Ballenger appeared before the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the General Conference session in 1905 to present his new views on justification and forgiveness.
Ballenger's views on the Atonement and ministry of Christ were a departure from what had been taught by the Advent pioneers.
In the Old Testament, there were two phases to the atonement: the daily sacrifices and the yearly Day of Atonement.
the truth, but the doctrines that Elder Ballenger advances,
if received, would unsettle our faith in the sanctuary question.”
Albion Ballenger (left) and his brother, Adward, who co-published the paper, The Gathering Call, in an effort to validate the teaching of universal justification.