What do you think?
Rate this book
The Shaking of Adventism
Book by Geoffrey J. Paxton
172 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1977
10 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
May 15, 2024
A RECOUNTING OF SIGNIFICANT DEVELOPMENTS IN ADVENTIST DOCTRINE
The Reverend Geoffrey J. Paxton was an ordained minister in the Anglican Church of Australia, and former president of a theological school.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1977 book, “This book approaches Adventism from a perspective which has not been adopted before. In this respect it may modestly claim the appellation, ‘original.’ The book seeks to ‘get inside the skin’ of the Adventist and look at his movement from that vantage point… This book is sent out in the hope that it will be a contribution to Seventh-day Adventists from a sympathetic critic and will lead to better understanding among Christian people.”
He explains, “The Adventist views himself as standing n the line of the Protestant Reformation. He regards himself as ‘Protestant’ in the truest sense of the word. Where other Christians would not claim to stand in the line of the sixteenth-century Reformers, the Adventist is in no doubt of it. He is a son of Luther and Calvin… the Seventh-day Adventist sees himself as standing in a unique relation to the Reformation. He believes that God has called him to carry forward the message of the Reformation in such a way as no other Christian or Christian body is able to do. In his opinion the Seventh-day Adventist is God’s ‘special’ heir of the Reformers. ONLY through the Adventist Church can the work of the Reformation be carried to its God-designed end. Obviously, the existence of such a stupendous claim will require verification. As far as Adventists are concerned, we could hardly commence with a more prestigious testimony than that of Mrs. Ellen G. White. Mrs. Whtie saw the Adventist movement a standing in the line of Luther and Calvin and, of course, Paul before them.” (Pg. 18)
He recounts, “two evangelical scholars made their way to the Adventist leaders to clarify their thinking on the actual status of Adventism. (Was it a cult or an evangelical church?) Donald Grey Barnhouse and Walter Martin were warmly received at General Conference headquarters. The major concerns of Barnhouse and Martin were (1) the human nature of Christ, (2) the atonement, (3) the concept of ‘Babylon,’ and (4) the idea of the ‘remnant.’ After discussion, Barnhouse and Martin were surprised and somewhat impressed at the answers they receive on these aspects of theology. [LeRoy Edwin] Froom and [Roy Allen] Anderson denied that Adventism had fundamentally taught either the sinful nature of Christ or that the atonement had not been completed at the cross. Froom said that such deviations belonged to what he called the ‘lunatic fringe’ of the church… Thus, Barnhouse and Martin were satisfied that the Seventh-day Adventist movement should be recognized as an evangelical denomination in spite of its heterodox features.” (Pg. 87-88)
He continues, “This historical meeting and the publication of ‘Questions on Doctrine’ brought a mixed reception among Adventists. Some welcomed the turn of events as at last vindicating the movement as a legitimate evangelical denomination, while others… saw it as ‘selling the movement down the river.’ … An examination of Christianity Today around the time will show that Adventists were not the only ones who were divided over the status of Adventism and the significance of the Barnhouse and Martin meeting with the General Conference leaders.” (Pg. 88-89)
He goes on, “‘Questions on Doctrine’ was a notable turn in the direction of the Reformation on what Froom called the ‘eternal verities.’ Definite advancement took place on the subjects of the incarnation and the atonement… The importance of ‘Questions on Doctrine’ is less, however, when we come to ask whether or not there is advancement over previous two periods on the Adventist articulation of justification by faith.” (Pg. 89-90)
He states, “If Adventism has a distinctive contribution, there is little doubt that it lies in the area of eschatology. Most Reformation scholars would be quick to agree that the Reformation stopped short of a full-blown eschatological perspective consistent with its dogmatic center. However, if the Adventist Church is going to speak seriously of FURTHERING the Reformation, she must elucidate her eschatological contribution in a way that BUILDS upon rather than DESTROYS the foundation laid by the Reformers.” (Pg. 147-148)
He points out, “Unqualified admission that mistakes have been made are rare in Adventism. Take for example the period of the 1950s to the 1970s. The book, ‘Questions on Doctrine,’ was a real break with past Adventist teaching on Christology, especially the matter of the sinful human nature of Christ. Yet to my knowledge there was not one open acknowledgement of this to either the rank-and-file members of the Adventist Church or to the evangelical Protestant world. Why? Why was it covered up by saying that only a few on the ‘lunatic fringe’ held and taught what had actually been the Adventist position before that time?” (Pg. 153)
He concludes, “I fear very deeply that the use made of Mrs. White in Seventh-day Adventism is testimony to an un-Protestant attitude toward the Bible. I fear that many Adventists have a Roman Catholic… belief that the Bible is too difficult for rank-and-file Christians to understand. In place of the Bible, they turn to Mrs. White to tell them what God says. The leaders, theologians, and pastors of the church must accept the blame or this state of affairs. Who else has taught the laity to behave this way? Let me say clearly that, so long as this situation exists, Adventism has no hope of influencing evangelical Protestants who claim the Reformers---with their Sola Scriptura… as their forefathers.” (Pg. 156)
This book will be of great interest to SDAs and other evangelicals, concerned with the doctrine of the SDA Church.
The Reverend Geoffrey J. Paxton was an ordained minister in the Anglican Church of Australia, and former president of a theological school.
He wrote in the Preface to this 1977 book, “This book approaches Adventism from a perspective which has not been adopted before. In this respect it may modestly claim the appellation, ‘original.’ The book seeks to ‘get inside the skin’ of the Adventist and look at his movement from that vantage point… This book is sent out in the hope that it will be a contribution to Seventh-day Adventists from a sympathetic critic and will lead to better understanding among Christian people.”
He explains, “The Adventist views himself as standing n the line of the Protestant Reformation. He regards himself as ‘Protestant’ in the truest sense of the word. Where other Christians would not claim to stand in the line of the sixteenth-century Reformers, the Adventist is in no doubt of it. He is a son of Luther and Calvin… the Seventh-day Adventist sees himself as standing in a unique relation to the Reformation. He believes that God has called him to carry forward the message of the Reformation in such a way as no other Christian or Christian body is able to do. In his opinion the Seventh-day Adventist is God’s ‘special’ heir of the Reformers. ONLY through the Adventist Church can the work of the Reformation be carried to its God-designed end. Obviously, the existence of such a stupendous claim will require verification. As far as Adventists are concerned, we could hardly commence with a more prestigious testimony than that of Mrs. Ellen G. White. Mrs. Whtie saw the Adventist movement a standing in the line of Luther and Calvin and, of course, Paul before them.” (Pg. 18)
He recounts, “two evangelical scholars made their way to the Adventist leaders to clarify their thinking on the actual status of Adventism. (Was it a cult or an evangelical church?) Donald Grey Barnhouse and Walter Martin were warmly received at General Conference headquarters. The major concerns of Barnhouse and Martin were (1) the human nature of Christ, (2) the atonement, (3) the concept of ‘Babylon,’ and (4) the idea of the ‘remnant.’ After discussion, Barnhouse and Martin were surprised and somewhat impressed at the answers they receive on these aspects of theology. [LeRoy Edwin] Froom and [Roy Allen] Anderson denied that Adventism had fundamentally taught either the sinful nature of Christ or that the atonement had not been completed at the cross. Froom said that such deviations belonged to what he called the ‘lunatic fringe’ of the church… Thus, Barnhouse and Martin were satisfied that the Seventh-day Adventist movement should be recognized as an evangelical denomination in spite of its heterodox features.” (Pg. 87-88)
He continues, “This historical meeting and the publication of ‘Questions on Doctrine’ brought a mixed reception among Adventists. Some welcomed the turn of events as at last vindicating the movement as a legitimate evangelical denomination, while others… saw it as ‘selling the movement down the river.’ … An examination of Christianity Today around the time will show that Adventists were not the only ones who were divided over the status of Adventism and the significance of the Barnhouse and Martin meeting with the General Conference leaders.” (Pg. 88-89)
He goes on, “‘Questions on Doctrine’ was a notable turn in the direction of the Reformation on what Froom called the ‘eternal verities.’ Definite advancement took place on the subjects of the incarnation and the atonement… The importance of ‘Questions on Doctrine’ is less, however, when we come to ask whether or not there is advancement over previous two periods on the Adventist articulation of justification by faith.” (Pg. 89-90)
He states, “If Adventism has a distinctive contribution, there is little doubt that it lies in the area of eschatology. Most Reformation scholars would be quick to agree that the Reformation stopped short of a full-blown eschatological perspective consistent with its dogmatic center. However, if the Adventist Church is going to speak seriously of FURTHERING the Reformation, she must elucidate her eschatological contribution in a way that BUILDS upon rather than DESTROYS the foundation laid by the Reformers.” (Pg. 147-148)
He points out, “Unqualified admission that mistakes have been made are rare in Adventism. Take for example the period of the 1950s to the 1970s. The book, ‘Questions on Doctrine,’ was a real break with past Adventist teaching on Christology, especially the matter of the sinful human nature of Christ. Yet to my knowledge there was not one open acknowledgement of this to either the rank-and-file members of the Adventist Church or to the evangelical Protestant world. Why? Why was it covered up by saying that only a few on the ‘lunatic fringe’ held and taught what had actually been the Adventist position before that time?” (Pg. 153)
He concludes, “I fear very deeply that the use made of Mrs. White in Seventh-day Adventism is testimony to an un-Protestant attitude toward the Bible. I fear that many Adventists have a Roman Catholic… belief that the Bible is too difficult for rank-and-file Christians to understand. In place of the Bible, they turn to Mrs. White to tell them what God says. The leaders, theologians, and pastors of the church must accept the blame or this state of affairs. Who else has taught the laity to behave this way? Let me say clearly that, so long as this situation exists, Adventism has no hope of influencing evangelical Protestants who claim the Reformers---with their Sola Scriptura… as their forefathers.” (Pg. 156)
This book will be of great interest to SDAs and other evangelicals, concerned with the doctrine of the SDA Church.
May 21, 2012
Geoffrey Paxton, a Reformed scholar, does an outstanding job of providing insight into the Seventh-day Adventist movement. It is considered by many to be the first serious research into the real Adventist mentality that has ever been produced.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews