23 January 2003 Editorial:
Beyond Experience

Larry Kirkpatrick

Editorial #119

Two different approaches are sometimes taken when a certain kind of statement is found in inspiration. For example, suppose one on this line is found: "We are accepted in the Beloved. The sinner's defects are covered by the perfection and fullness of the Lord our righteousness." (Ellen G. White, Our High Calling, p. 51). Some will advance from such words to a sentiment that their own personal obedience plays little if any role in their being "saved."¹

Another approach says, "The statement sounds precious. Let's study it, and let's see if context will provide us any aid in grasping all of its meaning. We want to live according to God's truth rightly divided." One approach tends to extrapolate from limited data, letting a bifurcated slice out of the whole witness of inspiration command the salvation understanding. The other says, "Here's light. Praise God! Is there anything else that inspiration says that I should put with this?"

Taken to Task For Being Logical?

The difference between these approaches on occasion leads to complaints about logic and consistency -- with those seeking a sound understanding gently scolded for being too logical. Those who adhere to the principle of letting inspired writings interpret inspired writings, Scripture to interpret Scripture, are said to be wanting in their understanding of truth.

Logic alone, they say, might lead such a one to think he can live however he wants because his defects are thus covered. In contrast to that logic, it is argued that the result of God's mercy in covering our defects leads us to thank heaven for the cleansing, to urge God to purge us of every sin, and to love Jesus more. Nothing will make you love God more than knowing that God has covered your defects.²

I don't recall having made the argument about cheap grace; still, perhaps for some it is an important one and they hear its siren call. We are thankful when those whose theology might lead them to think in such a way respond in the positive, seeking God's cleansing and loving Him more and more for His mercy. But is it not possible that some at least, lured by the subtle argument proposed, succumb to it, and permit the flesh to rule with an eye toward a future time of repenting? "I will sin now and repent later. And my Father will receive me." Russian Roulette lives on.

The problem is that some are putting into print the theological revolver -- and loading a projectile into the chamber. How many thousands of pairs of eyes will read those sentiments, and there find justification to pull the trigger one too many times?

There is a danger in letting our experience rule our theology. If we should say, "I cannot obey, even by Christ's strength," where would we be? Outside the walls of God's truth.³ On the contrary, God's Word is pointed and we may indeed know the power that gives victory through Christ:

I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me" (Philippians 4:13).

His divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness" (2 Peter 1:3).

Will man take hold of divine power, and with determination and perseverance resist Satan, as Christ has given him example in His conflict with the foe in the wilderness of temptation? God cannot save man against his will from the power of Satan's artifices. Man must work with his human power, aided by the divine power of Christ, to resist and to conquer at any cost to himself. In short, man must overcome as Christ overcame. And then, through the victory that it is his privilege to gain by the all-powerful name of Jesus, he may become an heir of God and joint heir with Jesus Christ. This could not be the case if Christ alone did all the overcoming. Man must do his part; he must be victor on his own account, through the strength and grace that Christ gives him. Man must be a co-worker with Christ in the labor of overcoming. (Ellen G. White, God's Amazing Grace, p. 254).

God's grace is indeed amazing. How carefully it keeps together both the centrality of Christ and the necessity of human effort even while human effort brings no merit to the salvation equation. Notice "man must work. . . resist and conquer at any cost. . . man must overcome. . . and then, through the victory that it is his privilege to gain by the all-powerful name of Jesus. . . become an heir of God." "In short, man must overcome as Christ overcame." "This could not be the case if Christ alone did all the overcoming." "Man must do his part; he must be victor on his own account, through the strength and grace that Christ gives him." "Man must be a co-worker with Christ in the labor of overcoming." Over and over again (and this is but one of numerous statements from the pen of Ellen), comes the emphasis on synergy, co-working, co-operation, communion. But never does Mrs. White even suggest that we are saved by our own merit -- in any measure.

It is a noteworthy observation that those holding this new salvific view in the church which removes sanctification -- even obedience -- from the gospel, prefer to take their shots at those quoting the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy, rather than at the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy directly. Let them address the inspired evidences of the Adventist faith, rather than mine or another's defense of it. That would be a telling day!

Personal Merit? The Broken Record Spins On

We have rather persistently affirmed our position. The role played by one's personal obedience in the salvation equation is like this: my obedience is, without qualification, non-meritorious. At the same time, we have echoed inspiration, which says over and over that obedience is a condition of being saved.⁴ Where some seem to find reconciling these ideas to be an impossibility beyond logic, some of us have no problem with it. Where is the problem? It is not on God's part. It can be traced solely to a faulty theology constructed by those who would opine that "The argument that it's God doing the works in us, and thus not our own [work], doesn't let them off the hook. . . It' s still the people themselves doing these works, and if these works justify them, then they're saved by faith and works, period."⁵

Notice what is being said. If God does works in us, that is the same to the mind of the writer quoted, as saying "It's still the people themselves doing these works." Thus, if these works have any part in justification, "then they're saved by faith and works, period." A very convenient package. But it is truth via naked assertion. It is difficult to follow -- biblically -- how such an argument can stand in its logical connections. But then that could explain why it has become necessary now for proponents of the new theology to go beyond logic.

As previously discussed at some length, those demanding such a view are failing to reason with clarity and to recognize the distinction between necessary conditionals and sufficient conditionals.⁶ These are no logical tricks. Our purpose is straightforward; let's see if we can read the inspired materials as they are given and watch to see if they do not make sense as they are given. Let no such project be viewed as hostile to anything but error.

Judging the Experience of Others

It surprises me sometimes when friends who disagree with me from time to time will come along and say that the gospel as we understand it to be presented in the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy leaves us but a Christless Cross, or when they will suggest that the reason we hold to our gospel is because we have never been converted by the real one -- that we have never experienced for ourselves justification by faith.⁷ I have ever sought to veer away from making such analyses of the personal salvation experience of those with whom I disagree. I don't know where we obtain license to do that, to go there. God alone knows my heart or the heart of one who holds a different viewpoint.

It seems obvious that sometimes when two people who both love the Lord, who both want to be in His kingdom disagree, one may find his friend's viewpoint to seem so alien to his own that he can only explain it by the thought that perhaps the answer is that his friend is unconverted. But maybe -- just maybe -- issues sometimes fall in the range of ideas rather than conversion. At least I want to proceed that way. It makes it easier to be friendly.

Perhaps what we need is, we need to go beyond experience. Augustine let experience rule his views about sin and salvation and righteousness. The result was an error that brought confusion to Christianity for the past millennia and a half.⁸ I am persuaded that we can do better. Indeed, at time's end we must. God knows each heart and there is much wisdom in refusing to speculate about such things. It likely does little to advance a theological argument to imply that he who one may be writing against is unconverted.

The Sinner's Defects Covered

What then about the concerns of our writer? "Unless I am saved by a righteousness that exists outside of me, a righteousness that is credited to me independent of my own personal righteousness. . . I'm not going to be there ["saved"]."⁹ Let me assure our writer that no one will be saved by any measure of personal righteousness. That is, my personal righteousness -- in whatever measure it might exist -- does not figure at all in the merit equation. I am saved by Christ's righteousness; His merit becomes, as a gift, my merit. It is credited to me. I have no share in it.

Having said that, let us read some Scripture.

For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which He shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justified by His grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:4-7).

These words come to us in the context of the aorist verbs in the fifth verse, referring to works that we "have done" and speaking of salvation as a completed whole "He saved us." These aorist verbs alert us that Paul is looking at personal salvation from the standpoint of the whole action placed in past time. It is certain from these verses that we are not saved "by works of righteousness that we have done." That is, our personal righteousness is excluded from carrying any salvific merit in itself. But how we are saved is according to His mercy. This is another way of indicating that we have not earned it by works of righteousness. The fascinating thing though is the means of salvation.

Paul says it is "by the washing of regeneration," that we are saved. To which the externalist might say, "huh?" But clearly, salvation includes regeneration -- undeniably an internal work. The implications here are enormous, for recall the complaint: "The argument that it's God doing the works in us, and thus not our own [work], doesn't let them off the hook. . . It' s still the people themselves doing these works, and if these works justify them, then they're saved by faith and works, period." If we let that statement stand, then we have to start tossing Scriptures, for our passage in Titus explicitly states that it is addressing salvation, it speaks quite explicitly of justification, and in connection with that process it places a work of "regeneration" in us, rather than the supposedly saving righteousness which it is said must exist "outside of" the saved person.¹⁰

The next phrase in the verse speaks of this same work again, "and renewing of the Holy Ghost." This renewing or renovating effect is an internal as opposed to an external effect. It is not of a nature to be mere accounting. The Holy Spirit does an internal work.

Ellen White has spoken of the salvation equation in two closely related aspects, "title" and "fitness." "The righteousness by which we are justified is imputed; the righteousness by which we are sanctified is imparted. The first is our title to heaven, the second is our fitness for heaven." (Ellen G. White, RH, June 4, 1895). She has also said with all plainness, "The proud heart strives to earn salvation; but both our title to heaven and our fitness for it are found in the righteousness of Christ. The Lord can do nothing toward the recovery of man until, convinced of his own weakness, and stripped of all self-sufficiency, he yields himself to the control of God. Then he can receive the gift that God is waiting to bestow. From the soul that feels his need, nothing is withheld. He has unrestricted access to Him in whom all fullness dwells." (Ellen G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 300).

It seems clear that the work of God covers (title) and regenerates (fitness). That is, salvation includes an external work (covers) and an internal work (regeneration). This work, external and internal, is available only through Christ. Both are spoken of as "righteousness," and the righteousness is sourced only "in Christ," yet it does its work both outside of and inside of the believer. Thus we must argue that the salvation by which we are saved is found both outside of us and inside of us. Otherwise we shall have to jettison Paul's counsel to Titus.

All this righteousness is sourced in Christ and has in it no personal merit generated by ourselves. So what is the problem? The problem is not in Paul or in Ellen White or in the Bible. The problem is in the assertion that even work that God does in us is our work, our personal possession and contains some measure of personally creditable merit. This is false.

It is said that the issues are not sanctification or character perfection or demonstration theology -- points one author claims to believe in. He seems to believe these but says what matters is justification above all else. But in the Bible we often find these sayings in coordinate relationship -- outward work and inward work is treated as equal in importance. We all deserve the second death and we all agree in this. We are saved "by His mercy." In fact, when we begin to work through this topic we find that there are only a few places where views differ. But those places are so important. They make all the difference.

If a writer is surprised by the strong reactions his words elicit from fellow believers, it could be that many of our people love the gospel as soundly and biblically presented in Adventism. Many of our people have left other Christian communities that taught a faulty understanding at these points. In Adventism they found a harmony between all the inspired writings. In Adventism, Paul and James are good friends. Can't we let them keep that friendship?

The same page on Our High Calling (p. 51) says the following: "Many feel that their faults of character make it impossible for them to meet the standard that Christ has erected; but all that such ones have to do is to humble themselves at every step under the mighty hand of God; Christ does not estimate the man by the amount of work he does, but by the spirit in which the work is performed." When we find it difficult to imagine that God could accept us, we need to humble ourselves. When our heart condemns us, John pleads that God is greater than our heart (1 John 3:20).

For Those Who May Be Baffled

One has asked the question of how anyone who knows the Lord could believe that whatever the Holy Spirit is doing in their lives is good enough to give them saving merit before God. But it may be that what that writer means and what we mean would be very different. He concludes that such works are really nothing more than our own personal works or personal righteousness. He insists on our direct ownership of these works to such an extent that we receive merit for them.

But here is a different perspective. The work that is accomplished in us by God is His work. We consent for Him to work in us, we cooperate with His working. The hope of glory in us is Christ in us (Colossians 1:27-29). We abide in Him and He in us (John 15). Paul urges "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave Himself for me." (Galatians 2:20). And Ellen White will say, "So we have nothing in ourselves of which to boast. We have no ground for self-exaltation. Our only ground of hope is in the righteousness of Christ imputed to us, and in that wrought by His Spirit working in and through us." (Steps to Christ, p. 63).

Thus there is a co-working, but if we are cooperating with God it is only made possible by Him. He enables, and at a 100% rate. Thus, anything rising from this connection not only comes from Him but returns to Him. We can do nothing without Him but all things with Him. So at the end of the salvific day who gets all the credit? It is never us and it is always Him. "All things come of Thee, and of Thine own have we given Thee." (1 Chronicles 29:14).

It is asked how, when Ellen White writes that the closer we come to Christ, the more imperfect we shall appear in our own eyes, the believer could think that what is happening in them would justify them in any way? First we must recall that any work in us is automatically forbidden by those who object. This is a fallacy that has already been demonstrated to simply be wrong. Salvation includes a work in us and that is for sure. So what is happening in me is indeed I hope God's work. But if I am really drawing closer and closer to Jesus then how could I think this?

The answer is that we walk by faith and not by sight. As I see my defects more and more clearly, as I sense my spiritual hunger more and more and have an increased urging toward deeper surrender, I refuse to be discouraged. In the same pages Mrs. White addresses this very concern. "Pray more fervently; believe more fully. As we come to distrust our own power, let us trust the power of our Redeemer. . ." (Ibid., p. 64). "The more our sense of need drives us to Him and to the word of God, the more exalted views we shall have of His character, and the more fully we shall reflect His image." (Ibid., p. 65). We walk by faith, we heed the counsel to refuse to become discouraged. We draw closer to Jesus, and we more fully reflect His image.

The point we must reiterate is that we refuse to claim God's work in us as our own work in us. Whatever merit there is it is His and not ours. It is forever true that we must "Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord" (Hebrews 12:14). We shall not see the Lord without holiness, even a personal holiness. But merit for salvation is strictly sourced in Jesus' death and dying outside of me, and the work of the Holy Spirit in me which acquires no personal merit for me.

Conclusion

Let us not weary ourselves in worrying about whether we will be outside the wall at the end of the millennium. God wants to save us. He loves us. He sent His Son on the most expensive mission, and His plan is to regenerate His people. He wishes us to have the privilege of living with Him, "soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world" as we look with positive hope toward the second coming of our Lord. (Titus 2:12).

We are told that "When He [Jesus] sees men lifting the burdens, trying to carry them in lowliness of mind, with distrust of self and with reliance upon Him, He adds to their work His perfection and sufficiency, and it is accepted of the Father. We are accepted in the beloved. The sinner's defects are covered by the perfection and fullness of the Lord our righteousness. Those who with sincere will, with contrite heart, are putting forth humble efforts to live up to the requirements of God, are looked upon by the Father with pitying, tender love; He regards such as obedient children, and the righteousness of Christ is imputed unto them." (Our High Calling, p. 51).

Jesus adds to our work His perfection and sufficiency. That does not mean we are saved by our own works plus those of Christ. It means that the one relying upon Jesus receives His merits for salvation. We have no sufficiency. He has all sufficiency. We have no merit. He has all merit. Even in the longer passage we see what? God at work and man at work. The sinner accepts Christ. There is co-operation here. Look at the lines and verbs that speak of the sinner: "men lifting the burdens," "trying to carry. . .in lowliness," "distrust of self. . . with reliance upon Him [Jesus]," "Those who with sincere will. . . contrite heart. . . putting forth humble efforts. . . the requirements of God." And how does God regard such? "He regards such as obedient children." He's glad to save us. We are glad to obey.

The problems we have with the views that have been promoted have not been predicated on the speculated point of logic that cheap grace will lead to cheap behavior. Error is never harmless, so in some respect that is doubtless true, even if it has not been our expressed concern. The fact is, this kind of inflamed justification teaching is simply wrong in itself. It plucks thoughts here and there from inspiration, amplifies them and spins them, doubtless unintentionally, and pulls them out of harmony with the broader witness of inspiration. It puts the premium on experience and risks its becoming a final measure of truth.

Rather, the premium must be put on God's power to save to the uttermost. Let us tell of His power, and make room for it in our lives. Let us build our Christian walk upon His possibilities rather than our own impossibilities. Let us run the race to the finish and ever look to the Author and Finisher. After all, He designed Adventism, and He knew what He was doing.

[Minor modification on January 27, 2003]

1. Clifford Goldstein, Adventist Review, "Beyond Logic," January 23, 2003, http://www.adventistreview.org/2003-1504/story4.html.
2. Ibid.
3. Ibid.
4. Larry Kirkpatrick, "Is Obedience a Condition of salvation?" March 30, 2000, http://www.greatcontroversy.org/documents/papers/kir-cond.html.
5. Clifford Goldstein, Adventist Review, "The Christless Cross," November 22, 2001, p. 28, http://www.adventist.org/rhp/pdf/2001/1547-2001.pdf.
6. Larry Kirkpatrick, "Conundrum 2001," December 8, 2001, http://www.greatcontroversy.org/reportandreview/kir-conu.php3. (For a similar discussion read at the following link: Larry Kirkpatrick, "GracecLink: Origins and Ideologies," October 25, 2001," http://www.greatcontroversy.org/reportandreview/kir-gracelink-oi.php3.)
7. Goldstein, "The Christless Cross," and "Beyond Logic."
8. Larry Kirkpatrick, "Axe of the Ages," October 23, 2000, http://www.collisionwithprophecy.org/journey/cwp3.html.
9. Clifford Goldstein, "Beyond Logic."
10. Ibid.

Pastor Larry Kirkpatrick is an ordained minister of the gospel. Since 1994 he has served in the American Southwest as pastor to several churches. He received his BA in Religion from Southern Adventist University in 1994 and a Master of Divinity from Andrews University in 1999 with a specialization in Adventist Studies. While in Michigan he was employed by the General Conference at the White Estate Berrien Springs branch office. More important than his scholastic preparation has been his immersion in the biblical and Spirit of Prophecy materials. He is author of the 2003 book Real Grace for Real People. Presently he serves as Pastor of the Mentone Church of Seventh-day Adventists, located near Loma Linda, California. Larry is married to Pamela. The couple presently live in Highland, California along with their two children, Etienne and Melinda.