THE GREAT CONSPIRACY - Part #4
"Call no man father" Mtthew 23:9.
[23:9 And call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven.
23:10 Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ.
23:11 But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant.
23:12 And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.
23:13 But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in.]
CHURCH FATHERS
The Corruption Of the New Testament
Suggested by the father of lies
ancient writings were forged by monks
The Great Controversy, page 56
efore a proper conspectus of the corruption of the New Testament can be reached, one
must first have a brief knowledge of what took place among Biblical scholars during the
fourth century of the Christian era. The Textus Receptus, referred to in this study, is the
Greek manuscripts preserved by the Waldenses of Northern Italy, used by Martin Luther in his
translation of the Bible, and the translators of the Authorized King James Version in 1611 A.D.
The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus are the Greek manuscripts of the Roman Catholic Church. These
erroneous manuscripts are highly regarded today by contemporary Evangelical and Seventh-day
Adventist scholars.
Only Two Bibles
There are really only two versions of the Bible in existence today. (1) The Textus Receptus, Greek
manuscripts known as the “Received Text.” (2) The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, the Greek
manuscripts of the Latin Vulgate. The Vulgate was known as “the great Bible,” and was
translated into Latin from the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus Greek manuscripts for the Roman Catholic
Church by Saint Jerome. The Vaticanus and Sinaiticus were the Greek manuscripts corrupted at
Alexandria, Egypt during the fourth century. These are the spurious Greek manuscripts of the
contemporary Roman Catholic Church, and all modern translations!
Pioneer Seventh-day Adventists did not believe in these spurious Greek manuscripts of the
Roman Catholic Church. Dr. Benjamin G. Wilkinson, a renown Seventh-day Adventist teacher
and Biblical scholar commented on how the corruption of the New Testament began in the first
century:
Beginning shortly after the death of the apostle John, four names stand out in prominence whose teachings
contributed both to the victorious heresy and to the final issuing of manuscripts of a corrupt New
Testament. These names are, 1, Justin Martyr, 2, Tatian, 3, Clement of Alexandria, and 4, Origen.
Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, pages 16, 17.
B
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-65-
In his book, Dr. Wilkinson quotes from some of the most reliable and respected sources of the
history of the early Christian era. His account of what took place shortly after the apostles had
passed from the scene is confirmed by many noted Christian and secular historians. Among these
were men like – Dr. Adam Clarke, Scrivener, Dean Burgon, Dr. Schaff, J. Hamlyn Hill, and even
Dr. Newman, a noted theologian of the Roman Catholic Church. Professor Wilkinson gleaned
information from such reliable works as: History of Christianity, Encyclopedias, Americana, Ante-
Nicene Fathers (Scribner’s), Commentary on the New Testament (Clarke’s), Eusebius, Eccles.
(History Book), The Diatessaron of Tatian (Hill’s), and McClintock and Strong, to name a few.
Justin Martyr
The first outstanding name to appear in the history of the Christian era is that of Justin Martyr.
Many contemporary Evangelical scholars believe Justin Martyr to be one of the true “Fathers” of
the early Christian church. About this man Dr. Wilkinson commented:
The year in which the apostle John died, 100 A.D., is given as the date in which Justin Martyr was born.
Justin, originally a pagan and of pagan parentage, afterward embraced Christianity and although he is said
to have died at heathen hands for his religion, nevertheless, his teachings were of a heretical nature. Even
as a Christian teacher, he continued to wear the robes of a pagan philosopher.
ibid., Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, page 16. (emphasis supplied).
Dr. Wilkinson, like pioneer Seventh-day Adventist Biblical scholars before him, did not believe
in the teaching of “textual critics” like Justin Martyr. In his book Dr. Wilkinson narrates how the
pure Scriptures were being corrupted as early as fifty years after the death of the apostle John by
the erroneous teachings of Justin Martyr:
In the teachings of Justin Martyr, we begin to see how muddy the stream of pure Christian doctrine was
running among the heretical sects fifty years after the death of the apostle John. It was in Tatian, Justin
Martyr’s pupil, that these regrettable doctrines were carried to alarming lengths, and by his hand committed
to writing.
ibid., Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, page 16.
Tatian – Student Of Justin Martyr
The second important name to appear in the history of the early church is that of Tatian. Like
Justin Martyr, his teacher before him, Tatian is also considered to be an excellent source of
history and truth by many contemporary Evangelical scholars and theologians of our day (and
now it appears like many Seventh-day Adventist scholars and writers). Dr. Wilkinson narrates
for us how Tatian developed the heresy further during his lifetime:
After the death of Justin Martyr in Rome, Tatian returned to Palestine and embraced the Gnostic heresy.
This same Tatian wrote a Harmony of the Gospels which was called the Diatessaron, meaning four in one.
The Gospels were so notoriously corrupted by his hand that in later years a bishop of Syria, because of the
errors, was obliged to throw out of his churches no less than two hundred copies of this Diatessaron, since church
members were mistaking it for the true Gospel.
ibid., Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, page 16. op. sit. Encyclopedias, Art.
Tatian. (emphasis supplied).
Notice how each of these men seemed to have a prominent pupil who carried on his heretical
teachings. Not only that, but after the passing of their famous teachers, the student then carried
the heresy even further, weaving in more of the subtle teachings of Paganism. Clement of
Alexandria, Tatian’s famous pupil, carried the heretical teachings to the utmost extremes.
Clement Of Alexandria – Student Of Tatian
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-66-
Clement of Alexandria is referred to many times in footnotes of Roman Catholic translations of
the Scriptures. Contemporary Protestant Evangelical scholars and theologians relied heavily
upon the writings of these men who were so admired by the medieval Roman church. A most
interesting statement is found in a “footnote” to Romans 16 verse 22 in the St Joseph Catholic
edition:
The Clementine Vulgate adds: `and I have been hindered till now,’ The Greek has nothing that
corresponds to it.
Footnote, Romans 16:22, Saint Joseph Catholic Edition, Douay-Rheims. Published by Catholic Book
Publishing Company, New York. New Edition Copyright, 1962, (emphasis supplied).
Notice the Catholic footnote refers to “The Clementine Vulgate,” and that: “The Greek has
nothing that corresponds to it.” The Greek here referred to, of course, could only mean the
erroneous Vaticanus and Sinaiticus manuscripts. By “The Clementine Vulgate,” they obviously
mean Clement of Alexandria. Noted Biblical historian Dean Burgon comments on the teachings
of Clement:
Clement expressly tells us that he would not hand down Christian teachings, pure and unmixed, but rather
clothed with precepts of pagan philosophy. All the writings of the outstanding heretical teachers were
possessed by Clement, and he freely quoted from their corrupted MSS. as if they were the pure words of
Scripture.
Dean Burgon, The Revision Revised, page 336. (emphasis supplied).
In 1930, noted Seventh-day Adventist teacher and scholar, Benjamin George Wilkinson
published his splendid work, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated. In his book Dr. Wilkinson stated
about Clement of Alexandria:
We come now to Tatian’s pupil known as Clement of Alexandria, 200 A.D. (J. Hamlyn Hill, The
Diatessaron of Tatian, p. 9). He went much farther than Tatian in that he founded a school at Alexandria
which instituted propaganda along these heretical lines. . .. His influence in the depravation of Christianity
was tremendous. But his greatest contribution, undoubtedly, was the direction given to the studies and
activities of Origen, his famous pupil.
ibid., Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, pages 16, 17. (emphasis supplied).
Origen – Student Of Clement
Origen, the fourth and last in the succession of heretical ”church fathers” corrupted the New
Testament more than all previous scholars who had tampered with the original text of Scripture.
Undoubtedly Origen contributed the most heresy in the demise of the pure original teachings of
the New Testament manuscripts.
“When we come to Origen, we speak the name of him who did the most of all to create and give
direction to the forces of apostasy down through the centuries,” Dr. Wilkinson wrote. “It was he who
mightily influenced Jerome, the editor of the Latin Bible known as the Vulgate.” (ibid., Wilkinson, Our
Authorized Bible Vindicated, page 17, emphasis supplied).
Notice that it was Origen “who mightily influenced Jerome, the editor of the Latin Bible known
as the Vulgate.” The St. Joseph Catholic edition refers to the “Vulgate” Manuscripts many times.
Even the Protestant translators of the New International and Revised Standard Versions refer
many times to the Vulgate.
It must be repeated that both the Roman Catholic Church, and contemporary Protestant
Evangelical translators relied heavily upon the Vaticanus and Sinaiticus Greek manuscripts. These
manuscripts were believed to be two of the fifty Bibles translated by Bishop Eusebius at the direct
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-67-
request of the Roman Emperor Constantine in the fourth century:
Dr. Tischendorf believed that this [the Sinatic] and the Vatican manuscript were two of the fifty copies of
the Bible which were made in Greek, by command of the Emperor Constantine, about the year A.D. 331,
under supervision of Bishop Eusebius, the historian of Caesarea.
Sidney Collett, The Scripture of Truth, page 28. (emphasis supplied).
Bishop Eusebius, the man chosen by the Roman Emperor Constantine to translate the Bible into
Greek for the Roman Church, was an admirer of the writings of Origen. Because Bishop Eusebius
admired the writings of Origen it is not difficult to understand how the Greek New Testament
was corrupted by this bishop of the Roman Church.
Eusebius worshiped at the altar of Origen’s teachings. He claims to have collected eight hundred of
Origen’s letters, to have used Origen’s six-column Bible, the Hexapla, in his Biblical labors. Assisted by
Pamphilus, he restored and preserved Origen’s library. Origen’s corrupted MSS. of the scriptures were well
arranged and balanced with subtlety. The last one hundred and fifty years have seen much of the so-called
scholarship of European and English Christianity dominated by the subtle and powerful influence of Origen.
ibid., Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, pages 16, 17. (emphasis supplied).
Notice that in the succession of apostasy each man was an admirer of the man who proceeded
him. In other words, man following man. “Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man,
in whom there is no help.” (Psalms 146:3).
Let us pause for a moment and note the chain in the corrupting of the pure New Testament
Greek manuscript. Note how each man from each succeeding generation carried the corruption
further.
(1) Justin Martyr to his pupil Tatian.
(2) Tatian to his student Clement of Alexandria.
(3) Clement to his famous student Origen.
(4) Origen then translated the corrupted Greek manuscripts of Clement into his famous sixcolumn
Bible known as the Hexapla.
(5) In the fourth century, 331 A.D. the Hexapla was used by Bishop Eusebius when he translated
into Greek the fifty copies of the Bible for the Roman Empire and the Roman Church at the
direct request of Emperor Constantine the Great. Two of these copies are believed to be the
Vaticanus and Sinaiticus Greek manuscripts of the Roman Catholic Church. (Remembering time
and place in history, 321 A.D., was the date Emperor Constantine decreed the first Sunday Law.
See Encyclopedia Britannica, Art. “Constantine”).
(6) When the Bible was translated into Latin by Saint Jerome for the Roman Catholic Church, it
was the writings of Origen that influenced Jerome. (See, Dr. Scrivener, Introduction to the
Criticism of the N.T., p. 270. “The readings approved by Origen, Eusebius, and Jerome should
closely agree.”)
(7) The last one hundred and fifty years have seen much of the so-called scholarship of European
and English Christianity dominated by the subtle and powerful influence of Origen. (ibid.,
Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, page 17).
It is well known how contemporary Evangelical scholars admire the writings of Origen. Even Dr.
Newman, the famous theologian of the Roman Catholic Church, boldly declares his admiration
for Origen.
“I Love. . .the name of Origen,” Dr. Newman wrote. “I will not listen to the notion that so great
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-68-
a soul was lost.” (Dr. Newman, Apologia pro vita sus. Chapter VII, page 282).
Origen. What did this evil man teach? His opinion of individuals studying the Scriptures for
themselves is noted in the following statement from his writings:
“The scriptures are of little use to those who understand them as they are written.” (McClintock
and Strong. Art. Origen, emphasis supplied).
Special counsel from the Lord to Seventh-day Adventists states the opposite from the teachings
of Origen. Note carefully the inspired counsel:
“There is great need that all who claim to be Bible Christians should take the Scriptures as they
read.” (Ellen G. White, The Signs of the Times, February 19,1894, emphasis supplied).
“We must be careful lest we misinterpret the Scriptures. . . ,” Ellen White counseled. “Take the
Scriptures as they read.” (Selected Messages, Bk. 1, page 170, emphasis supplied).
If one considers the position taken by the Roman Catholic Church in the Council of Trent, i.e.,
that Tradition is equal with the Bible, is it any wonder that the Roman Church loves the writings
of Origen? Dr. Schaff, one of the most respected and reliable Biblical historians, in his brilliant
work relates more about the beliefs and teachings of Origen:
“His [Origen] predilection for Plato (the pagan philosopher) led him into many grand and
fascinating errors.” (Dr. Schaff, Church History, Vol. II, page 791).
“He [Origen] studied under the heathen Ammonius Saccas, founder of Neo-Platonism.”
(Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, page 17).
In his book, Dr. Wilkinson points out many of the false teachings of Origen. Note carefully the
teaching of this so-called “church father.”
He taught that the soul existed from eternity before it inhabited the body, and that after death, it migrated
to a higher or a lower form of life according to the deeds done in the body; and finally all would return to
the state of pure intelligence, only to begin again the same cycles as before. He believed that the devils would
be saved, and that the stars and planets had souls, and were, like men, on trial to learn perfection. In fact,
he turned the whole law and Gospel into an allegory.
ibid., Benjamin G. Wilkinson, Our Authorized Bible Vindicated, (page 17).
“Such was the man who from his day to this has dominated the endeavors of destructive textual
critics,” Dr. Wilkinson stated. “One of the greatest results of his life, was that his teachings became
the foundation of that system of education called Scholasticism, which guided the colleges of Latin
Europe for nearly one thousand years during the Dark Ages.” (ibid., Wilkinson, Our Authorized
Bible Vindicated, page 17, emphasis supplied).
Dr. Scrivener tells how deep were the corruptions of the early Greek manuscripts of the New
Testament. He also describes why he believed the Textus Receptus, the Greek manuscript used by
Martin Luther and the translators of the Authorized King James Version, is the most reliable.
It is no less true to fact than paradoxical in sound, that the worst corruptions to which the New Testament
has ever been subjected, originated within a hundred years after it was composed; that Irenaeus (A.D. 150),
and the African Fathers, [Justin Martyr, Tatian, Clement of Alexandria, Origen] and the whole Western,
with a portion of the Syrian Church, used far inferior manuscripts to those employed by Stunica, or Erasmus, or
Stephens thirteen centuries later, when molding the Textus Receptus.
Scrivener, Introduction to N.T. Criticism, 3rd Edition, page 511. (emphasis supplied).
Thus we see how a mutilated New Testament has come to be recognized by the majority of
Christendom today. How sad that most of the world today accepts a Bible, corrupted by the socalled
church fathers, and amplified by the Roman Catholic Church.
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-69-
Pioneer Adventist Leadership Rejected the Church Fathers
Did pioneer Adventists believe and teach the writings of the “church fathers?” Indeed, they did
not! It must be stated by the Seventh-day Adventist pioneers themselves how they felt about the
so-called “church fathers” who changed the Scriptures and the seventh day Sabbath of the Lord.
“Accordingly, extracts were made on a more extensive scale, and were woven together, the result
being this book,” E. J. Waggoner wrote, “which is in reality a brief account of the rise of that
Antichristian structure called the papacy, which was built on the foundation of the so-called
Fathers, the heathen philosopher Plato being the chief corner-stone.” (E. J. Waggoner, Fathers of the
Catholic Church, page iii, emphasis supplied).
Waggoner’s book was published in 1888 by Pacific Press Publishing Company, Oakland,
California. In this book Waggoner stated further that, “I would not forget to acknowledge the
service rendered by my friends, Elders E. W. Farnsworth, W. C. White, and A. T. Jones, who
read the book in manuscript, and made valuable suggestions.” (ibid., Fathers of the Catholic
Church, p. iv). This list, beyond question, is a significant endorsement of Waggoner’s book by
leading pioneer Seventh-day Adventists, wouldn’t you say?
“Now there are certain men who have acquired great celebrity as `Church Fathers,’” Waggoner
wrote. “This term, strangely enough, is never applied to the apostles, to whom it would seem to be
more applicable than to any other men, but to certain men who lived in the first few centuries of
the Christian era, and who exerted a great influence on the church.” (ibid., FCC, p. 58, emphasis
supplied).
“As a matter of fact, the true church has but one Father,” Waggoner continued, “even God;
therefore whatever church recognizes any men as its Fathers, must be a church of merely human
planting, having only human ordinances.” (ibid., FCC, p. 58, emphasis supplied).
Waggoner Comments On Church Father, Origen
“So, also, Christians who adopt from Plato the doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul,
have conveniently lost sight of the absurd and atheistical doctrine on which it rests,” Waggoner
stated. “Some of the most eminent of the `Church Fathers,’ however, and especially Origen,
accepted without question all the vagaries of Plato concerning the pre-existence of souls.” (ibid., Fathers
of the Catholic Church, p. 34, emphasis supplied).
“It passes all comprehension how, in the face of all this testimony, which is perfectly familiar to
every scholar,” Waggoner reasoned, “Professor Worman can say, as he does in McClintock and
Strong’s Encyclopedia, `Origen may well be pronounced one of the ablest and worthiest of the
church Fathers–indeed, one of the greatest moral prodigies of the human race.’” Waggoner
added further that, “It is difficult to retain any respect whatever for the judgment of a man who
can indulge in such gush over Origen.” (ibid., FCC, p. 229).
“And the matter is so much the worse because, in the very same article in which the above
language occurs, Professor Worman brings the identical charges against Origen, which are made
in the quotations from Mosheim, Farrar, and Schaff,” Waggoner observed. “Such lavish and
unmerited praise is an indication that Origen’s influence is by no means dead, and that the reviving
interest in his writings, and in patristic literature in general, augurs ill for the future condition of the
Christian church.” (ibid., FCC, p. 229, emphasis supplied).
“Origen’s writings were largely instrumental in bringing about the great apostasy which resulted in the
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-70-
establishment of the papacy,” Waggoner stated, “and if they are taken as the guide of the
theologian to-day, they must necessarily result in another similar apostasy.” (ibid., FCC, p. 229,
emphasis supplied).
“The Reformation was a protest against the speculative dogmas of the schoolmen, and a
movement toward relying on the Bible as the only guide in matters of faith and practice,”
Waggoner concluded, “and just in proportion as the Fathers are esteemed, the Bible will be
neglected, and the work of the Reformation undone.” (ibid., Fathers of the Catholic Church, page 229,
emphasis supplied).
Waggoner Comments On Church Father, Justin Martyr
On page 148 Waggoner states his opinion of Justin Martyr. He then quoted a powerful
statement on Justin Martyr from the writings of Dr. Schaff. This statement is noted in part:
“He is the first of the church Fathers to bring classical scholarship and Platonic philosophy in
contact with the Christian theology.” (Dr. Schaff, Vol. 1, sec. 122, emphasis supplied).
Waggoner Comments On Church Father, Gregory Thaumaturgus:
“Mosheim says that Gregory Thaumaturgus, one of the most highly esteemed of the church
Fathers, allowed his people, at their festivals in honor of the martyrs, not only `to dance, to use
sports, to indulge conviviality,’” Waggoner observed, “but also `to do all things that the worshipers of
idols were accustomed to do in their temples on their festival days.’” (ibid., Fathers of the Catholic
Church, page 247, emphasis supplied).
J. N. Andrews Comments On Church Father, St. Augustine
“St. Augustine did not regard the Sunday festival as a divine institution,” J. N. Andrews wrote.
“He gave the credit of the work, not to Christ or his inspired apostles, but to the holy doctors of the
church, who, of their own accord, had transferred the glory of the ancient Sabbath to the
venerable day of the sun.” (J. N. Andrews, Sermons on the Sabbath and Law, Steam Press of the
Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association, Battle Creek, Mich. 1870, page 149, emphasis
supplied).
“More than this, we will add, that though Cyprian, or Jerome, or Augustine, or even the fathers
of an earlier age, Tertullian, Ignatius, or Irenaeus,” Andrews observed, “could be plainly shown to
teach the unscriptural doctrines and dogmas of Popery, which, however, is by no means admitted, still
the consistent Protestant would simply ask, Is the doctrine to be found in the Bible?” (J. N.
Andrews, History of the Sabbath, page 199, emphasis supplied).
A. T. Jones Comments On Church Father, St. Augustine
“First, the church had all work on Sunday forbidden, in order that the people might attend to
things divine,” A. T. Jones wrote, “work was forbidden, that the people might worship. But the
people would not worship: they went to the circus and the theater instead of to church.” (Alonzo
T. Jones, The Two Republics, page 326).
“Then the church had laws enacted closing the circuses and the theaters, in order that the people
might attend church,” Jones continued. “But even then the people would not be devoted, nor
attend church; for they had no real religion.” (ibid., TTR, p. 326).
“The next step to be taken, therefore, in the logic of the situation, was to compel them to be
devoted – to compel them to attend to things divine,” Jones observed. “This was the next step
logically to be taken, and it was taken.” (ibid., TTR, p. 326).
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-71-
“The theocratical bishops were equal to the occasion,” Jones concluded. “They were ready with
a theory that exactly met the demands of the case; and one of the greatest of the Catholic
Church Fathers and Catholic saints [St. Augustine] was the father of this Catholic saintly theory.
He wrote:–” (ibid., TTR, p. 327, emphasis supplied).
It is, indeed, better that men should be brought to serve God by instruction than by fear of punishment or
by pain. But because the former means are better, the latter must not therefore be neglected. . . . Many must
often be brought back to their Lord, like wicked servants, by the rod of temporal suffering, before they
attain the highest grade of religious development.
Augustine, The Correction of the Donatists, chap. vi. I adopt Schaff’s translation, History of the Christian
Church, Vol. iii, par. 12. (emphasis supplied).
Uriah Smith Comments On Church Father, St. Augustine
“John Knox, the celebrated Scotch reformer, was born in 1505, and was educated at St. Andrew’s
University,” Uriah Smith wrote. “He received a priest’s orders, but renounced popery after
reading the writings of St. Augustine and Jerome.” (Uriah Smith, Daniel and the Revelation, page 790,
emphasis supplied).
James White Comments On Church Father, St. Augustine
“The harmony is found in the nature of the punishment,” James White wrote on the final
punishment of the wicked. “This the Scriptures show to be death; and this view overthrows alike
the restoration view of Origen and the eternal hell of Augustine.” (James White & Uriah Smith,
The Biblical Institute, Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing House, Oakland, California, page
215, emphasis supplied).
It must be conceded that from these few statements alone by, J. N. Andrews, A. T. Jones, Uriah
Smith, E. J. Waggoner and James White, that pioneer Seventh-day Adventists did not believe in
the so-called “church fathers.” What about contemporary Adventist scholars and SDA Church
leaders? Do they believe in the Fathers of the Catholic Church? Yes, they do!
Contemporary Adventist Leadership Honor the Church Fathers
These “church fathers,” used by Satan to change the very Word of God, and who were
instrumental in the forming of the papacy, are now praised and honored by the leadership of the
contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church. Consider three paragraphs from the 1993
“missionary book of the year,” Pause for Peace, by Clifford Goldstein. This book has the
endorsement, or IMPRIMATUR, if you please, of the highest authority of the Church. Indeed,
the introduction to this book was penned by George E. Vandeman, speaker emeritus of the It Is
Written television program. In his conclusion, Goldstein expresses the position of most
contemporary Adventist scholars on the church fathers in three paragraphs. The statements in
these three paragraphs are so foreign to the pioneer Seventh-day Adventist position on Clement
of Alexandria, Origen, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and St. Augustine, the so-called church fathers,
that comment must be made on each of the three paragraphs.
Paragraph #1 of Goldstein’s Statements on Church Fathers
Imagine a vast, pulsating throng, composed of those who, throughout history, have kept Sunday. Besides
the unknown millions, church fathers, such as Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Ignatius, and Justin Martyr
are there. Amid the mass stand the great and revered – Saint Augustine, Saint Francis, and Saint Thomas
Aquinas, popes, cardinals, monks, and many selfless missionaries who devoted, even donated, their lives to
spread the gospel to all the World. Martin Luther, John Calvin, William Wilberforce, John Wesley, Charles
Finney, William Miller, and Charles Spurgeon stand among them, along with Mother Teresa, Pope John
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-72-
Paul II, and even Billy Graham.
Clifford Goldstein, Pause for Peace, published by Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1992, page 120.
(emphasis supplied).
The documented evidence presented above clearly shows that pioneer Seventh-day Adventists
did not believe that “Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Ignatius, Justin Martyr, and St. Augustine,”
were “church fathers.” According to true Seventh-day Adventist history, and even the Spirit of
Prophecy, these so-called church fathers were the very men who altered the Holy Scriptures.
“I saw. . .learned men had in some instances changed the words,” Ellen White stated. (Early Writings,
page 200, emphasis supplied).
“Suggested by the father of lies,” Ellen White continued the thought in the Great Controversy.
“Ancient writings were forged by monks. And a church that had rejected the truth greedily
accepted these deceptions.” (GC, p. 56, emphasis supplied).
No, pioneer Seventh-day Adventists did not believe in the Church Fathers as do contemporary
Seventh-day Adventist leaders. Again we quote pioneer Adventist, E. J. Waggoner:
“Origen’s writings were largely instrumental in bringing about the great apostasy which resulted
in the establishment of the papacy, and if they are taken as the guide of the theologian to-day,
they must necessarily result in another similar apostasy,” E. J. Waggoner wrote. “As a matter of
fact, the true church has but one Father, even God; therefore whatever church recognizes any men
as its Fathers, must be a church of merely human planting, having only human ordinances.” (E. J.
Waggoner, Fathers of the Catholic Church, page 58, emphasis supplied).
In the third sentence of this first paragraph, Goldstein makes the astounding statement that,
“Amid the mass stand the great and revered–Saint Augustine.” Are you kidding me! First of all,
we as Seventh-day Adventists do not believe that any man is, or ever was, a saint. Especially
Augustine. Neither do we believe that he was “great” or “revered.” True history reveals that
Augustine was the man who brought persecution and death to Protestants. (See any reliable
history of the Reformation). He was the one person who convinced the Roman Catholic
hierarchy that it was proper to “compel” (by the power of the state) the people to conform to the
dogmas of the Roman Catholic Church.
“Many must often be brought back to their Lord, like wicked servants,” Augustine wrote, “by the
rod of temporal suffering, before they attain the highest grade of religious development.”
(Augustine, The Correction of the Donatists, chap. vi., emphasis supplied).
Goldstein goes on to list the complete hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church, “Saint Francis,
and Saint Thomas Aquinas, popes, cardinals, monks.” According to my Bible, the Spirit of
Prophecy, and true Protestant historians, these personages are the core of the “man of sin,” the
beast of Revelation 13, the very authors of Sunday, the false Sabbath. Indeed, they are the
founders, the originators of what will be the mark of the beast before the Lord of the Sabbath
comes to save his people and destroy the beast.
In this first paragraph, Goldstein further states that there were many “selfless [Roman Catholic]
missionaries who devoted, even donated, their lives to spread the gospel.” Astounding! Roman
Catholic missionaries did not spread the true gospel throughout the world. They promoted the
heretical teachings of the papacy, the false dogmas of the beast, to all the world. The Bible says “.
. .and all the world wondered after the beast.” (Revelation 13:3). “With whom the kings of the
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-73-
earth have committed fornication,” the apostle John wrote, “and the inhabitants of the earth
have been made drunk with the wine of her fornication [false doctrine].” (Revelation 17:2). Do
contemporary Seventh-day Adventists believe that officials of the Roman Catholic Church are
Christian brethren? Apparently so.
After this, Goldstein lists the great reformers, “Martin Luther, John Calvin, William Wilberforce,
John Wesley, Charles Finney.” These very reformers were persecuted and even killed by the first group
listed by Goldstein in the sentences before! They would resent being classed, or even hinted as
being, Christian brethren, with the first group.
Goldstein finished the first paragraph by lumping two great later reformers, William Miller, and
Charles Spurgeon, with contemporary leaders of the Roman Catholic Church. He states that
these two great later reformers, “William Miller, and Charles Spurgeon stand among them, along
with Mother Teresa, Pope John Paul II, and even Billy Graham.” William Miller, the great
Advent reformer, would turn in his grave if he knew that a latter-day “Adventist” would class
him with “Mother Teresa” and “Pope John Paul II.” While it is true that all these personages
listed did keep Sunday, the true reformers, especially William Miller, were no brothers in Christ,
or “contemporaries” of the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church. Are current Seventh-day
Adventist scholars and writers totally ignorant of history?
Would Clifford Goldstein consider the leaders of Nazi Germany contemporaries of the six million
Jews they destroyed in the death camps of World War II? I think not. Although the atrocities of
Nazi Germany against the Jewish people was heinous, the Papacy’s persecution of Protestants was
much more heinous. History testifies that the Papacy killed and mutilated over 90 million
Protestants! One might say that Nazi Germany was more merciful than the Papacy when they
gassed people to death. The Papacy tortured and mutilated it’s victims on the rack, the stake,
and other instruments of torture. (See, Foxes Book of Martyrs, also, Lecky, noted Roman Catholic
Historian, available at most Christian book stores). Only Satan himself could have devised such
awful means of torture of human beings, yet Goldstein classes them all together as
“contemporaries.”
Paragraph #2 of Goldstein’s Statement on Church Fathers
In the second paragraph of his statement on the “church fathers,” Goldstein includes another
smaller group of seventh-day Sabbath keepers who he lumps together with the first group of
“church fathers.” Ellen White had stated that this first group were the ones who had “changed
the words” of Scripture. (See, Early Writings, page 200; The Great Controversy, page 56).
Another group, smaller, lowlier, and more meek than the first has gathered nearby. It is composed of those
who have kept the seventh day Sabbath. Because “the Sabbath was made for man” (Mark 2:27), Adam,
the first man, stands there. Abraham, “who obeyed My voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My
statutes, and My law” (Genesis. 26:4,5), stands with this group too, along with Moses, Aaron, King David,
John the Baptist, John the Revelator, Paul, James, and Peter. Throughout history, in Asia, Europe, and
Africa, there have been scattered Christians who, despite persecutions, alienation, and suffering, have kept
the seventh day Sabbath, sometimes at the cost of their lives. They are numbered among this group too.
Standing also in the crowd are those Christians from almost every land today who, though unable to boast
the big names or numbers of their Sunday-keeping contemporaries, keep the seventh day Sabbath.
ibid., Clifford Goldstein, Pause for Peace, published by Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1992, page
120)
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-74-
Notice that Goldstein places the great men of the Bible, “Adam, Abraham, Moses, Aaron, David,
John the Baptist, John the Revelator, Paul, James, and Peter” in the same spiritual status, the
same group with, “Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Ignatius [founder of the Jesuit Order], Justin
Martyr, the great and revered–Saint Augustine, Saint Francis, Saint Thomas Aquinas, popes,
cardinals, monks,” and the “church fathers” who altered the Scriptures. These great men of the
Bible, Goldstein says, “stand with this group too!” (emphasis supplied). The “great and revered” St.
Augustine? Please!
Then Goldstein places the faithful people of God during the dark ages, those who kept the
seventh day Sabbath, and who were persecuted for standing for truth, “sometimes at the cost of
their lives,” among the first group of persecutors. Who was it, dear reader, that persecuted and
took the lives of these faithful Sabbath-keeping Christians during the dark ages?
“The papacy that Protestants are now so ready to honor is the same that ruled the world in the days
of the Reformation, when men of God stood up, at the peril of their lives, to expose her iniquity,”
Ellen White replies. “Her spirit is no less cruel and despotic now than when she crushed out human
liberty and slew the saints of the Most High.” (The Great Controversy, page 571, emphasis supplied).
Goldstein then includes the Seventh-day Adventists with the “church fathers” and leaders of the
Roman Catholic Church. “Standing also in the crowd are those Christians from almost every
land today who, though unable to boast the big names or numbers of their Sunday-keeping
contemporaries, keep the seventh day Sabbath.” Is this true? Are the Sunday-keeping churches
of Babylon our contemporaries, and as such, our Christian brethren? Evidently the leadership of
the Seventh-day Adventist Church believe this statement to be true. This, of course, flies
directly in the face of the Spirit of Prophecy statement, “The papacy that Protestants are now so
ready to honor is the same that ruled the world in the days of the Reformation.” (ibid., The Great
Controversy, page 571, emphasis supplied).
Paragraph #3 of Goldstein’s Statement on Church Fathers
In the third and last paragraph, Goldstein places Jesus Christ among the smaller group that have
kept the seventh day Sabbath. However, the Bible says that Christ is standing outside of the
Laodicean Church, knocking at the door.
“Behold, I stand at the door, and knock,” Jesus said to the church of the Laodiceans, “if any man
hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.”
(Revelation 3:20).
“I stand at the door,” Jesus said. He is not standing among Seventh-day Adventists, but He is
standing at the door knocking. Jesus is speaking to individuals. “If any man hear my voice, and
open the door.” Jesus is standing outside the Church, at the door, knocking, pleading with
individuals. If any man will open the door, “I will come in to him,” Jesus promised. The promise
is to the individual. However a solemn warning is given to the Church.
“I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot,” Jesus warned. “So then because thou art
lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.” (Revelation 3:14a, 15a,
16).
Yet one more person remains. He who spoke His holy day into existence, who thundered it from Sinai, who
called Himself the Lord of the Sabbath, stands meek and lowly amid that smaller, less-imposing throng.
Then, extending His scarred hands, as if to embrace His flock in both groups, Jesus pulls in His breath and
Chapter 4 Church Fathers, and the Corruption of the New Testament
-75-
in a loving plea that has echoed across the millennia cries out, “If you love Me, keep My commandments.”
(John 14:15).
ibid., Clifford Goldstein, Pause for Peace, published by Pacific Press Publishing Association, 1992, page
120. (emphasis supplied).
“Then, extending His scarred hands, as if to embrace His flock in both groups,” Goldstein says.
Does Jesus hold out His scarred hands to “Clement of Alexandria, Origen, Ignatius, Justin
Martyr, the great and revered–Saint Augustine, Saint Francis, and Saint Thomas Aquinas, popes,
cardinals, monks?” I think not! Does the leadership and scholars and writers of the
contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church now believe in the Roman Catholic doctrine of
purgatory? These so-called “church fathers” are now dead. Their probation is past. They have no
second chance to be saved! Does Jesus really hold out his scarred hands to the leaders of the
Papacy, the beast which used the power of the state to change and enforce the false Sabbath?
Preposterous! Absurd! Ridiculous! There are not enough words in the English language to
describe this contradictory position.
The great second Advent movement is a last-day movement, commissioned by Jesus to give a
final warning to planet earth. This movement would “build the old waste places,” and “raise up
the foundations of many generations.” Indeed, God’s remnant people will be called “the repairers
of the breach” in the law, which was made by the Papacy! (Isaiah 58:12).
No, dear reader, the Lord Jesus Christ does not hold out His scarred hands of mercy to the
leaders of the Papacy who are now dead. Neither does He hold out His scarred hands of mercy to the
leaders of the Papacy who are now alive! This is the beast power, the Antichrist, the “man of sin.”
(See, Rev. 13;17; 2 Thess. 2:2). Jesus Christ does not hold out His scarred hands of mercy to the
Antichrist, living or dead, or the “church fathers” who gave rise to the Papacy. That is a
contradiction of truth. If Jesus said of Israel, “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate,”
(Matt. 23:38), what would He say of the Papacy? What would Jesus say to Seventh-day
Adventists who uphold the Papacy as Christian brethren and “contemporaries” of Adventists?
“And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice,” Jesus warned through the apostle
John, “If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his
hand, the same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into
the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy
angels, and in the presence of the Lamb.” (Revelation 14:9, 10, emphasis supplied).
No comments:
Post a Comment