The Misconceptions About Hell

HELL

www.jackflacco.com

The place and state of punishment and destruction, by eternal fire in the second death, of those who reject God and the offer of salvation in Jesus Christ. The Hebrew sheÕoÆl and the Greek hadeµs, both translated “hell,” refer to the unseen world, or world of the dead. The Greek geenna denotes the “hell” of fiery punishment. The Greek verb tartarooµ, “to cast [down] to hell,” occurs but once (2 Peter 2:4). Inasmuch as in the Bible the English word “hell” is used to connote a place of punishment for the impenitent, as well as the realm of the dead (geenna as well as sheÕoÆl and hadeµs), confusion often results. Recognizing the difference in meaning, the Revised Standard Version and other modern translations prefer to transliterate the Hebrew sheÕoÆl into English as Sheol and the Greek hadeµs as Hades. Of the 11 times hadeµs occurs in the New Testament, in nine instances the RSV retains the Greek transliteration. In one of the other instances (Matt. 16:18), the RSV translates the words of Christ rendered in the KJV as “the gates of hell,” as “the powers of death,” and in the other (1 Cor. 15:55) it renders hadeµs, “death.” In the four occurrences of hadeµs in Revelation, the term is in each instance connected with the word for death in the twin expression “death and Hades” (RSV). The word hadeµs appears on many ancient tombstones in Asia Minor with reference to the grave of the person there buried.

The Gr. term denoting a place of punishment, geenna, is used 12 times in the NT. It is derived from the Heb. GeÆ Hinnom, or “Valley of Hinnom,” the deep valley immediately to the south of Jerusalem. From OT references (Joshua 15:8; 2 Kings 23:10; Jer. 7:31) and from the description of its position in 1 Enoch 26:1–5, it has been identified with the present WaÆdé÷ er-RabaÆbeh. Jeremiah (2:23; 7:31, 32) indicates that the valley was the site where the barbaric heathen rite of burning children to Molech was conducted. Wicked King Ahaz seems to have instituted this devilish practice (2 Chron. 28:3; cf. Prophets and Kings 57). Manasseh, a grandson of Ahaz, restored this rite (2 Chron. 33:1, 6; cf. Jer. 32:35). Years later good King Josiah formally desecrated the high places in the Valley of Hinnom (2 Kings 23:10), thus bringing the practice to a halt. Jeremiah announced that because of this wicked practice the valley was to be called “valley of slaughter,” because there the enemies of the Jews would kill the fleeing inhabitants of Jerusalem and leave their bodies unburied (Jer. 7:32; 19:6, 7).

In the postexilic period, with the development of a definite doctrine of eschatology, the idea of a fiery hell as the place of punishment for sinners became a part of popular Jewish belief. GeÆ Hinnom was regarded first as the entrance to hell, and then as a term for hell itself. See also 1 Enoch 67:6; 90:26; 98:3. The tradition that makes the Valley of Gehenna a place of burning rubbish, and thus a type of the fires of the last day, appears to have originated with Rabbi Kimchi, a Jewish scholar of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. Ancient Jewish literature knows nothing of the idea. The earlier rabbis cite Isa. 31:9 for the concept of Gehenna’s being a type of the fires of the last day.

Three times in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus referred to geena (Matt. 5:22, 29, 30). He also spoke of Him who is “able to destroy both soul and body in hell [geena ]” (Matt. 10:28), and warned the Pharisees of “the damnation of hell [geena ]” (Matt. 23:33). He said that it is better to be maimed and gain eternal life than to be cast whole into geena (Mark 9:43, 45, 47). Luke 12:5 clearly indicates that the geenna experience lies beyond death.

As to the nature and effect of hellfire, Bible teaching is clear. In Matt. 3:12 sinners are compared to chaff that is burned with “unquenchable fire” (cf. Mark 9:43–48; Luke 3:9). In Matt. 25:41 the wicked are represented as being consigned to “everlasting [aioµnios] fire.” And in Matt. 5:22 Jesus referred to the final judgment on the wicked as “hellfire.” All three passages refer to the fires of the last day that will devour the wicked and all their works. This fire will purge the earth (2 Peter 3:10–12; Luke 3:17). It will be ignited after all the finally impenitent who come up in the second resurrection (Rev. 20:5) are marshaled under Satan around the New Jerusalem (v. 9). (In other words, it is not burning now.) The devil, his evil confederates, and all who have been deceived by them are cast into this lake of fire (vs. 10, 14, 15).

Seventh-day Adventists have generally avoided the use of the word “annihilation” because of the connotation some have given it, such as that the wicked forever cease to exist at the first death. The SDA view is that “the unrighteous dead will . . . be resurrected, and with Satan and his angels will . . . [be consumed by] fire from God” (Church Manual [1990], p. 31).  This is the second death, from which there will be no resurrection. The word aioµnios, usually translated “everlasting” or “eternal,” and once “forever,” means literally, “lasting for an age,” in the sense of being continuous and not subject to capricious change. The English words “everlasting” and “eternal,” on the other hand, imply duration unlimited. The duration signified by aioµnios  must be determined by the nature of the person or thing it describes. In the NT aioµnios  is used to describe both the fate of the wicked and the reward of the righteous. Following the above principle, we find that the reward of the righteous is life to which there is no end, whereas the reward or judgment of the wicked is death to which there is no end (cf. Rom. 6:23). In John 3:16 “everlasting life” stands in contrast to “perish.”

The word “unquenchable” may be similarly understood. Jeremiah predicted that God would kindle a fire in Jerusalem that would “not be quenched” (Jer. 17:27). This prediction was fulfilled when the city was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar (2 Chron. 36:19–21). Obviously that fire is not burning today. It was unquenchable in the sense that the Jews were unable to put it out; it burned until it destroyed their city and went out.

This has been the Seventh-day Adventist position from the first. James White, one of the founders, wrote in 1850: “To those on his left hand the King will say, ‘Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.’ This ‘everlasting fire’ is that which ‘comes down from God out of heaven,’ and DEVOURS them. It will ‘BURN THEM UP, saith the Lord of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch.’ This everlasting fire, which will not be quenched until the whole host of Gog and Magog are devoured, which was prepared for the devil and his angels, will burn up, not only the ‘root,’ the devil, but the branch, or branches, his children, not a scrap left, thank heaven! Then God will have a clean universe and there will be no more tempting devil to annoy the saints, or holy beings of other worlds” (Advent Review 1:50, September 1850).

Uriah Smith, for many years editor of the official church organ, the Review and Herald, wrote a series of articles in 1859 under the title “Mortal or Immortal, Which?” He made a thorough investigation of texts bearing on the subject, and in his concluding article stated that the doctrine of eternal punishment in hell, unless proof is found in Scripture, should be rejected “as most dangerous and destructive error.”

Seventh-day Adventists have also pointed to the inconsistency of the doctrine of eternal torment with the character of God as revealed in the Bible.

“How repugnant to every emotion of love and mercy, and even to our sense of justice, is the doctrine that the wicked dead are tormented with fire and brimstone in an eternally burning hell; that for the sins of a brief earthly life they are to suffer torture as long as God shall live. . . .

“Where, in the pages of God’s Word, is such teaching to be found? Will the redeemed in heaven be lost to all emotions of pity and compassion, and even to feelings of common humanity? Are these to be exchanged for the indifference of the stoic, or the cruelty of the savage? . . .

“What would be gained to God should we admit that He delights in witnessing unceasing tortures; that He is regaled with the groans and shrieks and imprecations of the suffering creatures whom He holds in the flames of hell? Can these horrid sounds be music in the ear of infinite Love? . . .

“It is beyond the power of the human mind to estimate the evil which has been wrought by the heresy of eternal torment. The religion of the Bible, full of love and goodness, and abounding in compassion, is darkened by superstition and clothed with terror. When we consider in what false colors Satan has painted the character of God, can we wonder that our merciful Creator is feared, dreaded, and even hated? The appalling views of God which have spread over the world from the teachings of the pulpit have made thousands, yes, millions of skeptics and infidels” (GC 535, 536).

As to Jesus’ story of the rich man and Lazarus, which is often presented as proof that the soul goes to its reward at death, SDAs believe that it was a parable and that Jesus was using an argument ad hominem based on the Pharisees’ erroneous concept of the condition of men and women in death.

This concept is reflected in Josephus’ discourse concerning Hades, in which he sets forth Hades as a place wherein the souls of all—both righteous and unrighteous—are confined until a proper season, which God has determined, when all will be resurrected from the dead. He pictures it as a subterranean region shrouded in darkness. In this region, he says, a place has been set apart as a lake of unquenchable fire, where the wicked will eventually be cast. At the gate of this region, presumably, stands an archangel, with a group of guards. Passing through the gate, the just are conducted to the right by their respective angels, to a place of light. Here in bliss and rejoicing, basking in the smiles of their forebears, they rest, awaiting the resurrection and eternal new life in heaven. This imaginary place is called “the bosom of Abraham.”

 
Josephus goes on to explain that as the unjust reach the gate, the angels drag them to the left into the neighborhood of hell itself. There they hear the noise of hell and feel its hot vapor, while awaiting in fearful expectation the horrors of the lake of fire. They may also look in the opposite direction and see the righteous enjoying the bliss of Abraham’s bosom. Between the two groups, however, there is a deep chasm which cannot be crossed by either the just or the unjust (“An Extract out of Josephus’s Discourse to the Greeks Concerning Hades,” in his Works, Whiston translation, Philadelphia [1853], pp. 524–526).

Understanding the First Phase of the Judgment

INVESTIGATIVE JUDGMENT

A Seventh-day Adventist term for the preliminary phase of the great final judgment by which God intervenes in human affairs to bring the reign of sin to a close and to inaugurate Christ’s eternal reign of righteousness (see Dan. 7:9, 10, 13, 14). This opening phase is called an investigative judgment because it consists of an examination of the life records of all who have ever professed to accept salvation in Christ and whose names are therefore inscribed in “the Lamb’s book of life.” Its purpose is to verify their eligibility for citizenship in God’s eternal kingdom. At the close of the investigative judgment the sins of those who have endured to the end are “blotted out” from the books of record and the names of all others are stricken from the book of life (Ex. 32:32, 33; Rev. 3:5; 20:12, 15; 22:19). Seventh-day Adventists teach that in view of the fact that at His second coming Christ rewards “every man according as his work shall be” (Rev. 22:12; cf. Rom. 2:5–11), it is evident that this investigation of the life record takes place before He returns to earth to gather the elect. The divine proclamation “Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come,” is specifically presented as preceding the Advent (Rev. 14:7; cf. v. 14).

To be sure, God does not need to investigate the records in order to learn or to determine who is eligible to be saved. It is for the benefit of all created beings that the facts with respect to each person’s fate should be known, as an assurance to all that justice has been done and as a guarantee of the eternal stability of the divine government. The Bible writers speak of “books” in which God keeps a record of character-of good and evil deeds as measured by a person’s knowledge of, and voluntary relationship to, divine grace and God’s revealed will (Ex. 32:32; Mark 16:16; Phil. 4:3; James 4:17; Rev. 20:12, 13; 22:11, 12).

The doctrine of the investigative judgment is an integral part of the sanctuary doctrine, and relates especially to the fulfillment in antitype of the ancient Day of Atonement service. In brief, the Day of Atonement consisted, in figure, of a review of the individual records of God’s people-of their personal relationship to God through the sanctuary ministration. At the close of the special service of the day a final disposal of all sins that had been confessed, forgiven, and transferred in figure to the sanctuary during the preceding year was made; the sanctuary was “cleansed” of the record of these sins removed (see Lev. 16).

Persons whose sins were included in this work of cleansing were released from further responsibility for their past record of sin, and their status under the covenant relationship was revalidated. Those no longer eligible to continue in the covenant relationship were to be “cut off” from Israel. The ancient Day of Atonement was thus a day on which the eligibility of each individual Israelite to continue under the covenant relationship was reviewed, and it was therefore a day of judgment (see SB, Nos. 111–118; SDADic, “Atonement, Day of”).

Development of Seventh-day Adventist View. William Miller based his 1843/1844 message chiefly on the text (Dan. 8:14) “Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed,” holding that the period of time here specified terminated in that year (see Sanctuary; Twenty-three Hundred Days). He understood this cleansing of the sanctuary to involve a work of judgment and to consist in the purification of this earth by the fires of the last day, at the second coming of Christ in power and glory. When, after the disappointment of 1844, those who later became Seventh-day Adventists reviewed Miller’s interpretation of Dan. 8:14, they became convinced of the validity of Miller’s exposition of the time period, but concluded that the sanctuary here referred to is the sanctuary in heaven, mentioned in the book of Hebrews, where Christ now ministers as our great high priest. Inasmuch as the earthly sanctuary and its services were types of the heavenly sanctuary (Heb. 8:2, 5; 9:6–9, 23; cf. Ex. 25:8, 9), as the earthly sanctuary was cleansed on the ancient Day of Atonement (Lev. 16), and as the earthly sanctuary ceased to exist in A.D. 70, early SDAs concluded that the cleansing of the sanctuary foretold in Dan 8:14 must refer to a counterpart of the ancient Day of Atonement to be conducted in the heavenly sanctuary. The SDA understanding of a cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary, of a great antitypical day of atonement, and of an investigative judgment is based on this analogy drawn in the book of Hebrews between the earthly and heavenly sanctuaries.

The view that the sanctuary to be cleansed in 1844 is the one in heaven was first written out by Owen R. L. Crosier, in the Day-Dawn in 1845 and in the Day-Star Extra of Feb. 7, 1846. Crosier emphasized two aspects of the antitypical cleansing-the blotting out of sins and the disposal of sins by placing them, in figure, on the head of the scapegoat. This he based on Acts 3:19: “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.”

Crosier connected this blotting out of sins with the cleansing of the sanctuary from the sins of the people on the ancient Day of Atonement. “A little attention to the law will show that the sins were borne from the people by the priest, and from the priest by the goat. 1st, They are imparted to the victim. 2nd, The priest bore them in its blood to the Sanctuary. 3rd, After cleansing them from it on the 10th day of the seventh month, he bore them to the scape-goat. And 4th, The goat finally bore them away beyond the camp of Israel to the wilderness. This was the legal process, and when fulfilled the author of sins will have received them back again, (but the ungodly will bear their own sins,) and his head will have been bruised by the seed of the woman” (ibid. 43).

About the time Crosier was first writing his view concerning the heavenly sanctuary William Miller wrote a letter (Mar. 20, 1845) in which he applied the judgment-hour message to the closing ministry of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary: “That the prophetic numbers did close in 1844, I can have but little doubt. What then was there worthy of note that could be said to answer to the ending of the periods under these numbers so emphatically describing the end? I answer. The first thing I will notice is, ‘The hour of his Judgment is come.’ I ask, is there any thing in the scriptures to show that the hour has not come, or in our present position to show, that God is not now in his last Judicial character deciding the cases of all the righteous, so that Christ (speaking after the manner of men) will know whom to collect at his coming or the angels may know whom to gather when they are sent to gather together the elect, whom God has in this hour of his Judgment justified? Rom. 8:33. . . . It also seems by John’s description of this event, Rev. 19:1, 2, 11, that the scene of the Judgment begins in heaven, and the first thing mortals on earth will see will be the messenger of God, Rev. 20:1, who is Jesus Christ, descending from God, to execute the Judgment written in heaven, and fulfill the decrees and promises made in heaven by him who sitteth on the great white throne. . . . If this is true, who can say God is not already justifying his Sanctuary, and will yet justify us in preaching the time?” (Day-Star 5:31, Apr. 8, 1845).

Judging by their writings, Adventists who later formed the Seventh-day Adventist Church did not notice William Miller’s suggestion relating the judgment of Rev. 14:6, 7 to the cleansing of the sanctuary mentioned in Dan. 8:14.

In his initial explanation of the October 1844 disappointment, Hiram Edson had spoken of Christ’s having “a work to perform” in the heavenly sanctuary after the end of the 2300 days and before His return, but he gave no further explanation. Crosier’s expanded discussion of the sanctuary in his 1846 article did not connect the cleansing of the sanctuary with the judgment. The nearest approach to the idea was an allusion to “the breast-plate of judgment” worn over the heart of the high priest when he went into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement, “that he may bear their judgment” (Day-Star 9:40, Extra, Feb. 7, 1846).

He may or may not have derived this from Enoch Jacobs, who in November 1844 spoke of the names of the children of Israel on the “breast-plate of judgment” as typifying the people whose sins are put away before Christ personally returns, and suggested the possibility that on the antitypical Day of Atonement, the tenth day of the seventh month, Jesus had begun to sit in judgment and was on His way to execute the judgment in person (Western Midnight Cry 4:19, Nov. 29, 1844).

Neither is it clear whether Jacobs derived this idea of the final putting away of sins from a letter he had received from William Miller (dated Nov. 22) in which Miller, replying to an inquiry, wrote that Christ would come as judge, to bear our sins away; “that our sins cannot be blotted out until Christ comes to judge His people is evident from . . . Rom. 14:10; 2 Cor. 5:10; Rom. 2:6” (ibid. 4:26, Dec. 21, 1844).

Nor is it possible to find a connection between the SDA view and the earlier reference by Josiah Litch (Prophetic Expositions [1842], vol. 1, pp. 49–54) to a preliminary phase of the judgment-the examination, or trial, of every person preceding the resurrection, and the execution of the judgment at the Second Advent. The various elements-the blotting out of sins, the putting away of sins, the examination of the books, the cleansing of the sanctuary from the sins-were all present in Millerite thinking, but the synthesis cannot be traced exactly.

By 1849, when the early Seventh-day Adventist group had well established its identity, Ellen White wrote: “I saw that Jesus would not leave the Most Holy Place until every case was decided either for salvation or destruction” (Present Truth 1:22, August 1849; reprinted in EW 36), yet she did not call it the judgment.

In the same year David Arnold (Present Truth 1:43–45, December 1849) and the next year Joseph Bates (Review and Herald 1:22, December 1850) echoed the phrase “breast-plate of judgment,” and carried the idea further, to equate the coming of the Bridegroom to the wedding with the entrance of the high priest into the Holy of Holies on the Day of Atonement, blotting out the sins of those whose names are on the breastplate (in the antitype, the Israel of God), but neither mentions the judgment. James White did not mention the breastplate of judgment in his article in Present Truth 1:75–79, May 1850; and in another discussion of the sanctuary doctrine (Review and Herald 1:29, January 1851), he mentioned only the removal of sins by placing them on the head of the scapegoat. In 1853 J. N. Andrews wrote a series of articles on the sanctuary. When he came to the cleansing on the Day of Atonement, he mentioned only the blotting out of sins and the transfer of sins to the scapegoat (Review and Herald 3:147, 148, Feb. 3, 1853).

However, in 1854 J. N. Loughborough, like William Miller in 1845, connected the cleansing of the sanctuary as a work of judgment with the message of the first angel of Rev. 14: “The hour of his judgment is come.” He asked: “What was that work of cleansing? Is the work of cleansing the Sanctuary fitly heralded by the first angel’s message? in other words, Is it a work of judgment? For light on this subject, we shall be obliged to go to the type. Let us look at the type. See the high priest preparing himself to cleanse the Sanctuary; almost the first thing he did was to gird upon him the breast plate of judgment. For what does he put that on? It certainly looks as though he was going to do a judgment work. . . .

“Now read 1 Pet. iv. Verse 5 declares that Christ is ready to judge the quick and the dead. Verse 7. ‘But the end of all things is at hand.’ Verse 11. ‘If any man speak let him speak as the oracles of God.’ (Oraclesten commandments. See Acts vii, 38.) Why speak as the oracles of God? Because the oracles are the duty brought out by the third angel’s message. Verse 17. ‘The time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God.’ Verse 19. Commit the keeping of your souls to God. 1 Tim. v, 24. ‘Some men’s sins are open before-hand going before to judgment.’ We see by this what the judgment is that the first angel of Rev. xiv refers to” (ibid. 4:30, Feb. 14, 1854).

The next year Uriah Smith formally developed the idea of judgment, building also on the connection between the cleansing of the sanctuary and the judgment-hour message: “The work of cleansing the earthly sanctuary was a work of judgment. The high priest went into the most holy place, bearing the breast-plate of judgment, and on that breast-plate the names of the twelve children of Israel, to make an atonement for the holy sanctuary, and for all the people of the congregation. Lev. xvi, 33. This prefigured a solemn fact; namely, that in the great plan of salvation, a time of decision was coming for the human race; a work of atonement, which being accomplished, God’s people, the true Israel, should stand acquitted, and cleansed from all sin. . . . We read in Dan. vii, 10, that the judgment was set, and the books were opened. Again in Rev. xx, 12, the books were opened, and the dead were judged out of those things written in the books, according to their works. From this we learn that a record is kept of the acts of all men; and from that record, their reward is given them according to their deserts. There is no judgment in this sense of the term, independent of these books of record; but we read [1 Pet. iv, 17] that there is a time when judgment must begin at the house of God; when some men’s sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; [1 Tim. v, 24;] and if, says Peter, it first begin at us what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God. This must be a judgment of the same nature and can refer to no other work than the closing up of the ministration of the heavenly Sanctuary, hence that work must embrace the examination of individual character; and we conclude that the lives of the children of God, not only those who are living, but all who have ever lived, whose names are written in the Lamb’s book of life, will during this time pass in final review before that great tribunal. We see, therefore, how in this respect, the work of the type is infinitely surpassed by that of the antitype. . . .

“The first angel proclaimed, Fear God and give glory to him; for the hour of his Judgment is come. At the end of the 2300 days, when that message closed, had that time come? If the judgment scene which takes place in the second apartment of the Sanctuary, to which this proclamation doubtless refers, did not then commence, it had not come; and the first angel with his message, was too fast. But we believe that work did there commence; that there was the time when judgment began at the house of God, and the time came when Daniel, and all the righteous in the person of their Advocate should stand in their lot” (ibid. 7:52–54, Oct. 2, 1855).

Finally, in 1857, James White rounded out the doctrine, using “investigative judgment”: “The time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God, and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God? And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear? 1 Pet. iv, 17, 18.

“This text we must regard as prophetic. That it applies to the last period of the church of Christ seems evident from verses 5–7, 12, 13. In the judgment of the race of man, but two great classes are recognized-the righteous and the sinner, or ungodly. Each class has its time of judgment; and, according to the text, the judgment of the house, or church, of God comes first in order.

“Both classes will be judged before they are raised from the dead. The investigative judgment of the house, or church, of God will take place before the first resurrection; so will the judgment of the wicked take place during the 1000 years of Rev. xx, and they will be raised at the close of that period.

“It is said of all the just, ‘Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection,’ therefore all their cases are decided before Jesus comes to raise them from the dead. The judgment of the righteous is while Jesus offers his blood for the blotting out of sins. Immortal saints will reign with Christ 1000 years in the judgment of the wicked. Rev. xx, 4; 1 Cor. vi, 2, 3. The saints will not only participate in the judgment of the world, but in judging fallen angels. See Jude 6.

‘Some men’s sins [the righteous] are open before hand, going before to judgment, and some men [the wicked] they follow after.’ 1 Tim. v, 24. That is, some men lay open, or confess their sins, and they go to judgment while Jesus’ blood can blot them out, and the sins be remembered no more; while sins unconfessed, and unrepented of, will follow, and will stand against the sinner in that great day of judgment of 1000 years.

“That the investigative judgment of the saints, dead and living, takes place prior to the second coming of Christ seems evident from the testimony of Peter. ‘Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick [living] and the dead.’ . . . 1 Pet. iv, 5–7.

“It appears that the saints are judged while some are living and others are dead. To place the investigative judgment of the saints after the resurrection of the just, supposes the possibility of a mistake in the resurrection, hence the necessity of an investigation to see if all who were raised were really worthy of the first resurrection. But the fact that all who have part in that resurrection are ‘blessed and holy,’ shows that decision is passed on all the saints before the second coming of Christ. . . .

“When will the cases of the living saints pass in review in the investigative judgment of the house of God? This is a question worthy the candid and most solemn consideration of all who have a case pending in the court of heaven, and hope to overcome. In the order of heaven, we must look for their judgment to follow that of the dead, and to occur near the close of their probation” (“The Judgment,” ibid. 9:100, Jan. 29, 1857).

Summary of Seventh-day Adventist View. The best presentation of the investigative judgment in current SDA literature is the chapter entitled “The Investigative Judgment,” in The Great Controversy, by Ellen White, from which the following summarizing sentences are taken:

“The work of the investigative judgment and the blotting out of sins is to be accomplished before the second advent of the Lord” (p. 485).

“He comes to the Ancient of days in heaven . . . at the termination of the 2300 days in 1844. . . . Our great High Priest enters the Holy of Holies, and there appears in the presence of God, to engage in the last acts of His ministration in behalf of man-to perform the work of investigative judgment” (p. 480).

“Jesus will appear as their [His people’s] advocate, to plead in their behalf before God” (p. 482).

“The intercession of Christ in man’s behalf in the sanctuary above is as essential to the plan of salvation as was His death upon the cross” (p. 489).

“In the great day of final atonement and investigative judgment, the only cases considered are those of the professed people of God” (p. 480).

“Beginning with those who first lived upon the earth, our Advocate presents the cases of each successive generation, and closes with the living” (p. 483).

“Every man’s work passes in review before God, and is registered for faithfulness or unfaithfulness” (p. 482).

“The books of record in heaven, in which the names and the deeds of men are registered, are to determine the decisions of the judgment” (p. 480).

“The law of God is the standard by which the characters and the lives of men will be tested in the judgment” (p. 482).

“All who have truly repented of sin, and by faith claimed the blood of Christ as their atoning sacrifice, have had pardon entered against their names in the books of heaven; as they have become partakers of the righteousness of Christ, and their characters are found to be in harmony with the law of God, their sins will be blotted out, and they themselves will be accounted worthy of eternal life” (p. 483).

“When any have sins remaining upon the books of record, unrepented of and unforgiven, their names will be blotted out of the book of life, and the record of their good deeds will be erased from the book of God’s remembrance” (p. 483).

“When the work of the investigative judgment closes, the destiny of all will have been decided for life or death” (p. 490). 

“When the investigative judgment closes, Christ will come, and His reward will be with Him to give to every man as his work shall be” (p. 485).

Real Definition of Sin

SIN

The act, attitude, or condition of rebellion against, or apartness from, God on the part of a morally free person. The Bible terms for sin characterize it as a missing of the mark, a failure, a fault (Heb. chattaÔth and related words, Gr. hamartia); rebellion, or deliberate unfaithfulness (Heb. peshaÔ, cf. Gr. anomia, “lawlessness,” and asebeia, “impiety”); evil (Heb. raÔ, Gr. kakos); wickedness or unrighteousness (Heb. Oawen, Gr. adikia); guilt (Heb. Ôawon); and transgression (Gr. parabasis).

Sin originated in the universe before the creation of human beings, when an angelic being, Lucifer, deliberately chose to become Satan, the adversary (see Eze. 28:12–17 and Isa. 14:12–14). At some time subsequent to the creation of the human race, Satan, in the guise of the serpent (Gen. 3:1–6), incited Eve and Adam to rebel against a specific divine command designed to symbolize the sovereignty of the Creator. (See Evil, Origin of; Satan and His Angels.)

The supreme self-revelation of God in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ is the divine response and solution to both the universal and the personal problem of sin. By accepting Christ’s sacrifice on the cross, sinners acknowledge their own sinfulness, recognize God’s justice in condemning sin, and dedicate themselves to a life of obedience to the divine will (see Conversion; Justification; New Birth). The plan of salvation demonstrates before the universe, once and for all, divine justice in utterly condemning sin, and at the same time, divine mercy in providing that persons who have sinned may nevertheless enjoy eternal life if they repent and accept the divine provisions.

In traditional Christian theology, “original sin” is the personal moral guilt for Adam’s transgression presumably inherited by every human. Seventh-day Adventists do not stress the idea that personal, individual moral guilt adheres to Adam’s descendants because of his sin. They stress, instead, that his sin resulted in the condition of estrangement from God in which every human being is born. This estrangement involves an inherent tendency to commit sin. In a state of sin a person’s life is self-centered; however, conversion reorients the life and centers it in Christ.

Seventh-day Adventist literature has been concerned with the problem of sin primarily on the practical level; on the theological level, concern has been chiefly with its relationship to God’s moral law, as “the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4). From this point of view J. N. Andrews wrote (Review and Herald 33:66, Feb. 23, 1869): Sin “is armed rebellion against the Almighty. It is high treason against the government of God. It is the principle of wrong contending with right for a place in the universe.” Interest in the origin of sin in a good universe has been reflected in such articles as “God Is Not the Author of Sin,” by J. N. Andrews (ibid. 34:28, July 20, 1869), and “Origin of Evil,” by Roswell F. Cottrell (ibid. 45:164, May 20, 1875).

The Seventh-day Adventist concept of the origin of sin, and of God’s way of dealing with it, is best set forth in the chapters “Why Was Sin Permitted?” in Patriarchs and Prophets, and “The Origin of Evil,” in The Great Controversy, both by Ellen White. Mrs. White defines sin as selfishness: “Sin originated in self-seeking” (DA 21). As to its origin, she wrote: “God did not ordain that sin should exist, but He foresaw its existence, and made provision to meet the terrible emergency” (ibid. 22).

“Sin originated with him, who, next to Christ, had been most honored of God. . . . Little by little, Lucifer came to indulge the desire for self-exaltation” (PP 35).

“It is impossible to explain the origin of sin so as to give a reason for its existence. . . . Nothing is more plainly taught in Scripture than that God was in no wise responsible for the entrance of sin; that there was no arbitrary withdrawal of divine grace, no deficiency in the divine government, that gave occasion for the uprising of rebellion. Sin is an intruder, for whose presence no reason can be given” (GC 492, 493).

 
Mrs. White accounts as follows for the purpose in permitting sin to run its course: “It was therefore necessary to demonstrate before the inhabitants of heaven, and of all the worlds, that God’s government is just, his law perfect. . . . [Satan’s] own work must condemn him. . . . The whole universe must see the deceiver unmasked. . . . The inhabitants of heaven and of the worlds, being unprepared to comprehend the nature or consequences of sin, could not then have seen the justice of God in the destruction of Satan. . . . For the good of the entire universe through ceaseless ages, he must more fully develop his principles, that his charges against the divine government might be seen in their true light by all created beings, and that the justice and mercy of God and the immutability of his law might be forever placed beyond all question. Satan’s rebellion was to be a lesson to the universe through all coming ages—a perpetual testimony to the nature of sin and its terrible results. . . . Thus the history of this terrible experiment of rebellion was to be a perpetual safeguard to all holy beings, to prevent them from being deceived as to the nature of transgression, to save them from committing sin, and suffering its penalty” (PP 42, 43).