Stephen
Terry, Director
The
Seven Last Plagues
Commentary
for the March 16, 2019 Sabbath School Lesson
“All the stars in the sky will be dissolved and the heavens
rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves
from the vine, like shriveled figs
from the fig tree.” Isaiah 34:4, NIV
As this quarter has progressed a questionable level of
scholarship demonstrated in the quarterly has become a growing source of
embarrassment to me as a Seventh-day Adventist. I do not know whom to blame. I
find it hard to believe that the holder of a PhD would either construct such a
poorly substantiated document or would allow the editor to so substantially
corrupt a properly offered text as to produce what has been offered this
quarter. Barring that possibility, then perhaps the remaining conclusion is
that for reasons of furthering a particular agenda, the editor took it upon
himself to alter the work without so much as a “by your leave” request to the
true author of the text. I hope that is not the case, for it leaves a very poor
image of what constitutes scholarship within Adventism. I have touched upon
this problem in previous commentaries this quarter, and I regret that it
continues to be an issue.
Let me give an example. The
quarterly states in the introduction to this week’s lesson when referring to
Revelation 15:1-4,[i]
“These victorious saints are the same ones referred to as the 144,000 in
Revelation 14:1–5.[ii]
This assertion is made without validation even though the identifying
qualifiers in the two passages are distinctly different. Is it possible that
the two groups are the same? Can it be demonstrated on the evidence that they
are? If so, why has that not been done? It further seems strange that the
lesson should present this as such a certainty in light of other counsel in
that regard. Ellen White wrote that these individuals have passed through the
time of Jacob’s Trouble and had stood without an intercessor through the final
outpouring of God’s judgments.[iii] How then could they be
in heaven when the angels leave the temple with the seven last plagues? It is an
interesting side note that Mrs. White’s mention of God’s people being without
an intercessor appears to affirm Last Generation Theology which asserts necessary
perfectionism for God’s people in the final generation because of this absent
intercessor. This is an apparent rebuttal of Morris Venden’s
book, “Never Without an Intercessor.”[iv] The charge has been made
by some that the quarterly is being used to advance Last Generation Theology.[v] If so, the lesson
quarterly may stand guilty as charged, but this appears to be somewhat
consistent with Ellen White’s position. But apart from that digression, it
still leaves us with the dilemma of the quarterly claiming these are the
144,000, yet per the biblical text they are in heaven observing the final
judgment, not present to experience it. Therefore it may be possible to
conclude that the two groups in chapters 14 and 15 are not the same.
Unfortunately, we are left with the conundrum that Ellen White not only appears
to endorse Last Generation Theology in “The Great Controversy,” but she also
seems to draw the two groups into one from the text on pages 648 and 649. One
might then draw the conclusion that the quarterly, rather than being based on
biblical exegesis alone is an attempt to synthesize a theological perspective that
harmonizes the biblical narrative with that of “The Great Controversy.” In some
ways this mirrors the Roman Catholic position that does not grant to the Bible
greater authority than that provided by derived church tradition. The primary
difference may be that Catholic tradition draws on the inspiration of many
Anti-Nicene and Nicene writers, whereas the Seventh-day Adventist Church relies
primarily upon the inspiration of only one, Ellen White. But I will move on
from the issue of the 144,000, for Ellen White herself said that it is not
God’s will that we should not get into controversies over questions like “who
is to compose the 144,000.”[vi]
Another issue that presents
itself appears to be in a similar vein in that it seems to be an attempt to
reconcile a contradiction. All the biblical texts that are seen to be referring
to Cyrus’s campaign but one point out that Babylon will be conquered from the
North. But in Isaiah 41:2, he makes the statement that the conqueror will come
from the east. In this the lesson reveals its literalist perspective and its
unwillingness to abandon that perspective when faced with a contradiction. The
lesson states that Cyrus came and initially attacked the city from the east,
thereby fulfilling Isaiah 41:2. The lesson does not offer any evidence that
this was the case. Herodotus, a 5th century B.C.E. Greek historian,
who presents what is arguably considered the most authoritative account of
Cyrus’s assault on Babylon, makes no mention of such a maneuver. In fact, he
states that Cyrus placed armed contingents both upriver and downriver of the
city and the main part of his army to the northwest of the city, for the
purpose of diverting the flow of the Euphrates. Once the stream was low enough
those contingents waiting upriver and downriver were to march under the walls
in the stream bed from both east and west, which they did and took the city.
Why our lesson needed to make the strange claim it did regarding some initial
attack on the city form the east is unclear. The particular passage in Isaiah
may have been a scribal error, especially considering in other passages, he
said north rather than east. It also may have been due to a nebulous idea of
what was to the east of Jerusalem allowing for a very vague understanding of
what east meant once you traveled to foreign realms. It may also have been
intended to be a metaphorical expression for deliverance. When God acts, it is at
times said to be from the east. When Jesus returns, the Bible compares it to
lightning flashing from east to west.[vii] A wind sent by God is also
said to come from the east by Hosea.[viii] Also per Zechariah’s
account, when the Lord appears to deliver his people he will arrive to the east
of Jerusalem, splitting the Mount of Olives.[ix] In any event, in view of
all of these possibilities, I am curious why they chose the undocumented military
maneuver as the answer.
When I first learned of Seventh-day Adventism, I was amazed at the cohesive
understanding of prophecy and world history that the denomination presented to
me. This was in the era before we had the Fundamental Belief Statement voted at
the April, 1980, Dallas General Conference, so when I joined the church in El
Paso Texas, there was no requirement to agree to over two dozen doctrinal
statements in order to be considered a member in good standing. Whether that
means I am “grandfathered in,” I do not know. What I do know is that the
creedal statement voted then and enhanced in 2005 has become the de facto
standard for employment and for holding of local church office throughout much
of the denomination. When this is the case, it can have a chilling effect on
the ability to do pure theology because some of the questions that must be
asked in that discipline can be seen as subversive to doctrinal uniformity,
euphemistically called “unity.” Thus far, if one is content not to seek denominational
employment or lay leadership positions, the person is relatively safe from
denominational censure. Whether that will change of not, I do not know. The
case of recently deceased theologian, Desmond Ford, illustrates that for all
the wrath of the denomination toward dissenters, and in spite of his
defrocking, the denomination is unable to silence the voice from the pew,
especially in this age of egalitarianism brought about through social media.
Information can no longer be tightly controlled by an
elite who wish to impose their perspective on everyone else.
Perhaps the most important takeaway from this quarter’s lessons is that as much as we might wish to portray it as such, our understanding of apocalyptic prophecy and events is not as thoroughly cohesive as we might like to believe. Our Fundamental Belief Statement may make it appear as though we have truth “nailed down,” and there is no further room for discussion, but to once again quote from Ellen White on the matter, “There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make an error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation.”[x] In this spirit, we should perhaps understand that the Sabbath School Quarterly is not the arbiter of truth within the denomination, but rather may serve as the catalyst for growth and development as we strive to move ever closer to Christ-like compassion and grace. He is ultimately the only truth.
