An Evaluation To The Historical Objection of The Seventh-Day Adventist Doctrine of The Pre-Advent Investigative Judgment

Abstract

The Seventh-day Adventist doctrine of the pre-advent investigative judgment has beenattacked by some former Adventist members. Desmond Ford, one of the opponents, doubtedthe historical basis of the doctrine. He argued that this Adventist’s distinctive doctrine highlyrelies upon and can merely be proven from E. G. White’s writings. He claimed that theMillerites and the early Sabbatarian Adventist did not teach this teaching. No references intheir writings explained this doctrine. The purpose of this study is to present historical factsfrom the writings of Adventist pioneers as an evaluation to the objection. This study is ahistorical approach using documentary research method. From each development stage of theview, researcher uses primary resource. The researcher also employs the secondary resourcesonly to see current opinion about the subject. From the historical facts, it is found that theteaching of the pre-advent investigative judgment has been taught before E. G. White wroteit. Some Millerites and early Sabbatarian Adventists employed several terms to express theconcept, such as the typical Day of Atonement, breastplate of judgment, announcement ofGod’s judgment hour, scene of God’s, Christ’s parable of the wedding ceremony, judgmentof the “house of God”, the term “Laodicea”, and God’s rewards either for salvation orpunishment at the second coming of Christ. Thus, it is evident that before E. G. White wroteabout the pre-advent investigative judgment, some Millerites and early SabbatarianAdventists have already mentioned it in their writings. The terms used by Millerites andSabbatarian Adventists to describe the teaching of the pre-advent investigative judgment areimportant to prove that the doctrine is not merely derived from E. G. White.