Journal of the Adventist Theological Society, 27/1-2 (2016): 344-351. Article copyright © 2016 by Gerhard Pfandl. Desmond Ford and the Righteousness by Faith Controversy Gerhard Pfandl Biblical Research Institute General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Let me begin by saying that from 1968-1970 I was a student at Avondale College in Australia where Desmond Ford was head of the theology department and the major professor of theology. I spent many hours in his classroom and I still consider him one of the best teachers I ever had. His dismissal in 1980 was not because of his views on righteousness by faith; it was the result of his change in understanding the doctrine of the sanctuary and prophetic interpretation. The Australian Scene In the 1950s and 60s, the church in Australia was very conservative. It was the time when Robert Brinsmead preached his perfectionist gospel; and because of the way the investigative or pre-Advent judgment was proclaimed most Seventh-day Adventists had no assurance of salvation. Enter Desmond Ford: he had completed a Ph.D. in Speech at Michigan State University' in December of 1960 and began teaching at Avondale in February 1961. Confronted with Robert Brinsmead’s perfectionism he began emphasizing the topic of righteousness by faith. Righteousness by faith he declared is the same as justification by faith. This ran counter to the general Adventist understanding at that time that righteousness by faith includes justification and sanctification. ' His dissertation was “A Study of Selected Pauline Epistles as Written Addresses.” 344PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY For Desmond Ford, Paul's Epistle to the Romans was the cornerstone of his teaching on righteousness by faith, In class he summarized Romans 1-8 as follows: Ch.1 The heathen are sinners and are lost-22, 24, 26, 28. Ch. 2 The Jews are also sinners and are lost-I, 11-13. Ch. 3 All men are sinners and lost-10, 23. All men are saved the same way. How? Through justification by faith apart from the deeds of the law-24, 28. Ch. 4 The example of Abraham-3, 10-11. Ch. 5 ‘The results of justification—1. Ch. 6 The new life in Christ-Sanctification-3-4, 11-12. Ch. 7 The battle in the new life-18-20, 24-5. Ch. 8 The life in the Spirit-1, 14. He defined justification by saying that “Justification in Paul’s writings is the act of remitting the sins of guilty men and accounting them righteous freely by his grace, through faith in Jesus Christ; not on the ground of their own works but on the ground of the representative law keeping and redemptive blood shedding of Christ on their behalf? Justification, he explained, is Christ’s work for us-on the cross, in the heavenly sanctuary. It happens outside of us; it is a change of status. Through justification we become children of God. Sanctification, on the other hand, is Christ’s work in us through the Holy Spirit. Sanctification changes us into the likeness of Christ. Desmond Ford never separated justification and sanctification. He distinguished between them but he did not separate them. Some of his favorite sayings were: “We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is not alone, works follow.” “Justification is the root, sanctification is the fruit.” Emphasizing that first we become children of God and then we bring forth works of righteousness. ‘Assurance of salvation, which many Adventists at that time were lacking, is based on what Jesus has done, he said, not on how perfect we are. Sermons preached by Ford were characterized by an emphasis on justification by faith, but not everyone was happy with his messages. Some felt that he was preaching cheap grace. 2 “Introduction to Theology” class notes (1968). 345JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY The years 1971 and 1972, Ford spent at Manchester University in England, After completing his second doctorate in New Testament at Manchester under F. F. Bruce, Ford returned to Avondale in the summer of 1972/73. In the years following, complaints against Ford’s teaching mounted, and in February 1976 the South Pacific Division leadership called a meeting at Avondale College where the theology faculty, its supporters and critics could sit down together and discuss the various complaints, At issue was not just righteousness by faith but also the inspiration of Scripture, Ellen White, and the nature of a two-apartment sanctuary in heaven. After a two-day discussion, twenty-two participants voted in support of Ford, the sixteen critics remained opposed.” The Palmdale Conference on Righteousness by Faith The theological wrangling in Australia, however, did not stop. Its effects were also felt in America. On April 23-30, 1976, therefore, nineteen scholars and administrators from Australia and America met at Palmdale, California, to discuss the topic of salvation. The American delegation was led by Elder Robert Pierson, the General Conference president, and included Raoul Dederen and Hans LaRondelle from Andrews University. From Australia came R. R. Frame, the South Pacific Division president, several administrators, Desmond Ford, and Alwyn Salom, a New Testament scholar. The following papers were read and discussed at Palmdale: D. F. Neufeld, “Word Studies in the area of Righteousness by Faith” A.P. Salom, “The Concept of Righteousness in the New Testament” R. W. Olson, “E. G. White’s Concept of Righteousness by Faith” R. Dederen, “Justification by Faith as understood by the Reformation Leaders” D. Ford, “The Scope and Limits of the Pauline Expression ‘Righteousness by Faith’” K. H. Wood, “The Historic Adventist Concept of Righteousness by Faith” H. K, LaRondelle, “The Eschatological Dimensions of Righteousness by Faith” A. S. Jorgensen, A Conspectus of the Righteousness of God” D. Ford, “The Relationship between the Human Nature of Christ and Milton Hook, Desmond Ford: Reformist Theol ae iversid CA: Adventist Today Foundation, 2008) 139. 710810”: Gospel Revivalis (Riverside, 346PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY Righteousness by Faith” K. H. Wood, “The Historic Adventist Concept of the Human Nature of Christ™ The chief point of discussion at that conference was the meaning of the expression “Righteousness by Faith.” Did it refer only to justification or did it also include sanctification? In his first paper “The Scope and Limits of the Pauline Expression “Righteousness by Faith,” Ford outlined the problem that “Among Seventh-day Adventists it [righteousness by faith] has often been understood as a term comprehending justification and sanctification,”* but in the writings of Paul the expression “Righteousness by Faith is identical with Justification by Faith.” On the basis of the outline of Romans 1-8 mentioned above, he emphasized that chapters 1-5 deal with justification and chapters 6-8 with sanctification. ‘Thus, Rom, 3:21-28 shows that Righteousness by Faith has to do not with holy works prompted by the regenerating Spirit but with a mew standing before God,-the standing of one hundred percent righteousness freely bestowed to all who believe on the basis of Christ’s perfect life and atoning death. Inasmuch as only a perfect righteousness can give us such a standing, we see the impossibility of introducing sanctification as a means towards our acceptance, or in other words as a part of Righteousness by Faith. One hundred percent righteousness is found only in Christ. It has to be His gift; it can never be our attainment in this life, for “sanctification is the work of a lifetime.” Thus Righteousness by Faith must always mean Justification whereby we receive as a gift the imputed merits of Christ.’ 7 Jack D. Walker in his pamphlet Documents from the Palmdale Conference in Righteousness by Faith (Goodletsvlle, TN: Jack D. Walker, 1976) includes athird paper by D Ford titled “Ellen G. White and Righteousness by Faith.” This paper, however, according to the official summary of the papers, was not presented at Palmdale. SD. Ford, “The Scope and Limits of the Pauline Expression ‘Righteousness by Faith in Walker, 2. *Tbid., 5. 7 Ibid. 347JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY P. Salom’s paper was primarily a word study of dikaiosyne in the New Testament. He brought out the forensic meaning of dikaiosyne, emphasizing that “righteousness or justification is essentially a matter of right status in the sight of God and that this status shows that we are accepted with Him.” In contrast to the Catholic position that teaches that “the meaning of the verb dikaiod is ‘to make righteous,’” Salom stated that “the majority of contemporary scholars understand justification to involve a relationship rather than an ethical quality, and the distinctive Pauline meaning is “to be accounted right with God.” In his conclusion he said that because our theology must be based on Scripture alone “it is evident that our use of the term ‘righteousness by faith’ should be restricted to its biblical use as an equivalent for ‘justification by faith.””"” The official report of the Palmdale Conference, published in The Review and Herald, stated that the group “studied and prayed together, shared sweet fellowship and gained unity of spirit and viewpoint as the days passed.”'' Concerning the meaning of righteousness by faith, the report stated: We agree that when the words righteousness and faith are connected (by “of,” “by,” et cetera) in Scripture, reference is to the experience of justification by faith. God the righteous Judge, declares righteous the person who believes in Jesus and repents. Sinful though he may be, he is regarded as righteous because in Christ he has come into a righteous relationship with God. This is the gift of God through Christ.”2 This seems clear enough. However, the section on “Justification and Sanctification” also contains some ambiguous statements. For example: In the last judgment our works of faith and love testify to the reality of justifying faith and our union with Christ; we are still saved by justification through Christ without any works of law, that is, without meritorious works. Thus Seventh-day Adventists have often used the * A. P. Salom, “The Concept of Righteousness in the New Testament” in Walker, 18. ° Ibid., 20. " Tbid., 22. 11 “Christ our Righteousness,” Review and Herald, May 27, 1976, 4-7. ” Ibid., 4. 348PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY Justification is Christ’s work for us-on the cross, in the heavenly sanctuary, outside of us—a change of status: we become children of God. Sanctification is Christ’s work in us-through the Holy Spirit, Sanctification changes us into the likeness of Christ. Justification answers the question, how do I become a child of God? The answer is it is a gift of God. Sanctification answers the question, how do I remain a child of God? The answer is by obedience through Jesus. “For it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure” (Phi 2:13). This is where the good fight of faith is fought. This is where the battle between spirit and flesh, between the old man and the new man takes place, not to achieve salvation, but to retain it. ‘The fact that Desmond Ford denied the pre-Advent judgment and was. dismissed from the ministry does not change the positive impact his teaching on righteousness by faith had on the church, In this regard the church is indebted to him; and it behooves us to continue to preach the good news of righteousness by faith. Gerhard Pfandl is a retired Associate Director of the Biblical Research Institute. He is a native of Austria and holds an M.A. and Ph.D. in Old Testament from Andrews University. He has worked as a church pastor in Austria and in the Southern California Conference. From 1977-1989 he was Professor of Religion at Bogenhofen Seminary in Austria, Prior to joining the Biblical Research Institute in 1999 he served for seven years as Field Secretary of the South Pacific Division in Sydney. He has published many articles for scholarly and popular journals in German and English and is the author of The Time of the End in the Book of Daniel (Adventist Theological Society Dissertation Series, 1992), Daniel: The Seer of Babylon (Review and Herald, 2004), and The Gift of Prophecy (Pacific Press, 2008). He also edited the books Interpreting Scripture: Bible Questions and “Answers (Biblical Research Institute, 2010) and The Great Controversyandthe End of Evil (Biblical Research Institute, 2015). 351PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY phrase “righteousness by faith” theologically to include both justification and sanctification.” No explanation is given as to whether this use of the phrase “righteousness by faith “should continue or not. Both sides therefore could claim that the statement supports their position. Although only two presentations at Palmdale dealt with the nature of Christ, the larger part of the report dealt with this issue. Both views on the nature of Christ (sinless-by Ford) and (sinful-by Wood) are mentioned. Ford emphasized that righteousness by faith is nothing other than the appropriation of the merits of the righteous life and the atoning death of the God-Man. And these merits depended on who and what Jesus was. Therefore, he had to be without sin, both as to His nature and His actions, “else His life in human flesh and His death on the cross would have been of no more value in procuring grace for the sinner than the death of any other man.”"* From Avondale to Exile ‘After his return to Avondale, Ford reported on the Palmdale meetings in a series of speaking appointments in the islands of the Pacific and in ‘Australia. However, the opposition to Ford continued. John Clifford and Russell Standish, two medical men, published a 160-page document titled Conflicting Concepts of Righteousness by Faith. In the preface they stated, “[mparted Righteousness is the crucial factor in salvation.”'* Ford wrote a reply that was endorsed by the Biblical Research Committee of the Australasian Division, but the controversy continued. In 1977, therefore, it was thought best to remove Ford temporarily from the Australian scene and have him spend a few years at Pacific Union College with which Avondale had an affiliation agreement. “Among other features it involved a regular exchange of lecturers.”"* “And the rest is history,” as the saying goes. Ford began teaching at PUC in the autumn of 1977 and on Sabbath afternoon, October 27, 1979, he presented a lecture on ino eee " Ibid. 1 FD, Nichol, ed., Seventh Day Adventist Bible Commentary, 7 vols. (Washington, D.C Review and Herald, 1978), 7:933, cited by Desmond Ford, “The Relationship between es fluman Nature of Christ and Righteousness by Faith” in Walker, 26. IS John Clifford and Russell Standish, Conflicting Concepts of Righteousness by Faith (Wahroonga, Australia: Burnside Press, 1976), ix, x, cited in Hook, 176, © Hook, 186. 349Journal of the # ventist Theological Society Article copyright 2016 by Stéphane Beaulieu, 1-2 (2016): 3-23. Isaiah’s Messiah: Adventist Identity for the Last Days Stéphane Beaulieu Pacific Union College Angwin CA Introduction Adventist identity is based on a number of biblical theological views,' but two concepts at the core of Adventism are the central message of Jesus as the Messiah of the OT and the message of salvation—redemption and hope of a better life now and yet to come. The purpose of Adventism in these last days is to proclaim the true Messiah/Servant and to proclaim the truth about salvation. This article proposes that Isaiah’s Messiah is the essence of Adventism and is what Adventists must proclaim in the eschaton. Portraits of the Messiah and His work for the people of God permeate the book of Isaiah. And while Isaiah’s Messiah was relevant for the people of the seventh century, the Messiah is portrayed as the One who will deliver and save His people now as well as then. In fact, Isaiah places his message of the Messiah in the realm of the last days. One portrayal of Isaiah’s Messiah is revealed in Isaiah 42: 1-9, the first " For a detailed treatment of the 28 fundamental beliefs, see General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 28 Fundamental Beliefs: A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Silver Spring, MD: Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day ID: Pacific Press, 2005). 7'The delimitation of Isa 42:1-9 is determined by several factors. (See, for more information on the delimitation of biblical passages, Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching [8th ed.: Grand Rapids, ME: Baker, 1989], 71-77.) First, it is important to note that Isa 42:1-9 is not an isolated text; it flows from what comes before it and what follows. However, Isa 42:1-9 is also a sectional text within its context.JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY servant song. An exegetical examination of this passage reveals that the Messiah is the Servant of Isaiah 42:1-9. The Servant-Messiah here performs asalvific work. Finally, the theology of this passage suggests that His work I blueprint for Adventists living in the last day’ Structure of Isainh 42:1-9 ructure of Isaiah 42:1-9 points to the importance of Isaiah’s servant, his call, and his mission. This passage contains two chiastic structures, the first one suggested by W. A. M. Beuken, who sees the structure of Isa 42:1-4 as a chiasm with a juridical literary genre, “The structure of the oracle is quite clear: A la Yhwh designates his Servant B Ib’ Yhwh equips his Servant C Ib" his mission: mispar D_ 2-3a _ his behaviour: no shouting, no violence against the oppressed C 3b his missio B’ da’ his destiny: oppression At 4a"-b his mission: migpaf and tora.” demarcated by a clear inelusio found in vv. 1 and 9, the word qa “behold.” which is a grammatical clue of transition to another servant. Second, the repeated “justice/judgment” also suggests a switch to a new section. Third, there is a change of verb tense from the imperfect with a jussive (Isa 41:28) to simply an imperfect in Isa 42:1. Fourth, there isa change of direct object: in ch. 41 itis the second person plural (vv. 21, 24) whereas in Isa 42:1-8 the direct object is third masculine singular. Fifth, the tone is different in Isa 41:21-29 versus Isa 42:1-9. Isaiah 41:21-29 has a tone of judgment and accusation, while in Isa 42:1-9 the tone is more gracious, gentle, kind, and supportive. ally, in Isa 42:1-9, the repetition of the suffix first common singular signals a change of section, ‘After Isa 42:1-9, the tone again changes in v. 10. A vibrant tone is expressed by the vocative of address using the term rz “sing” in the imperative, The imperative also reveals achange of tense, which suggests a different section. The subject changes: In Isa 42:1-9 the subject is first common singular, while in Isa 42:10-13 the subject is third masculine plural. Isaiah 42:1-9 reveals a servant's call and mission, while Isa42:10-13 is a hymn toward God. Thus, based on these factors, the first servant poem is best delimited to vv. 1 through 9. * Willem A. M. Beuken, “Mispat: The First Servant Song and Its Context,” 17722, no. 1 (1972): 3. While I concur with Beuken’s structure of vy, 1-4, he does not accept that the first servant poem encompasses vv. 1-9. Therefore, his analysis of the first servant poem is structurally limited in that he does not give an adequate structure of Isa 42:1-9,JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY the investigative judgment to the Angwin chapter of the Association of Adventist Forums which led to the Glacier View Conference in August of 1980 and his subsequent dismissal from church employment. Evaluation Desmond Ford’s emphasis on Righteousness by Faith, as taught by Paul in the book of Romans, was a necessary course correction to the prevailing perfectionism in the 1960s, particularly in Australia, but not only there, Associated with it was an almost total lack of assurance of salvation among church members. Ford, like E. J. Waggoner in 1888, attempted to show that acceptance by God is on the basis of what Jesus has done, not on the basis of how good we are. Paul says, “He hath made Christ to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). What is the Tighteousness of God? Perfection-perfect works. Therefore, only perfect obedience is acceptable to God. No human being could render this to God, except Christ. He lived a perfect, sinless life in word, thought, and deed, and then He took our place on the cross and died that we may live. And this Perfect obedience-his righteousness, the only righteousness God can accept, is given to us-if we believe, It is imputed to us, ie., it is put to our account. This, said Ford, is righteousness by faith or justification, Ford did not teach that therefore we have nothing to do in the plan of salvation. We cannot add anything to the gift of Christ’s righteousness—we can only accept it by faith; but once we have it, once we are forgiven, once Testament: “Behold, 1am coming quickly! Hold ast what you have thotee one may take your crown” (Rev 3:11); “Moreover, brethren, T delve you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received cuit. which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast thac cond which I preached to you-unless you believed in vain" (1 Cor {S:1), "He hos reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and flameless, and above reproach in His sight-f indeed you eora faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the ospel which you heard” (Col 1:22,23); For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end” (Heb 3:14). This is where obedience comes in, 350BEAULIEU: ADVENTIST IDENTITY FOR THE LAST DAYS I suggest that the second chiasm, found in vv. 5 to 9, is structured as follows: A 5 God’s creative acts B 6a “I Yhwh” demonstrates his character to the servant/you (emphasis on “righteousness”) c 6b-7 The Servant as a covenant to the people and his work B 8 “LYhwh” demonstrates his character to the servant (emphasis on “my glory”) A 9 God’s creative acts by telling the future “new things” The structure of Isa 42:1-9 suggests two key elements about the servant. The central message of the first chiasm refers to the servant's behavior, which is surrounded by the adjacent verses describing his mission. Then the second chiasm demonstrates how this mission is accomplished in his behavior, the central message of the chiasm, where the servant is given as a covenant to the people. The servant is designated by God to fulfill God’s special act that is found in the behavior of the servant; however, the image of equipping him functions in conjunction with the description of the work that he is doing jn v. 7. The notion of bringing justice, referred to as “his mission” of justice, is reinforced in the name of God that is given to the servant: Creator and Redeemer. The Torah is related to God’s creative acts in Genesis; both the law and God’s creative acts also appear throughout the Pentateuch in the imagery of the sanctuary, in the form of the law found in the Ark of the Covenant, and in the form of the sacrifices revealing God’s re-creative power, pointing to something taking place in the future—a “new thing,” It appears to me that there is a definite parallelism between the two chiasms, with one reflecting the other. An exploration of the grammatical and syntactical aspects of the first chiasm—42:1-44—reveals that, at the outset, the first verse emphatically eo “Twill not exegete all nine verses here, but you can refer to my work: Stéphane Beaulieu, “Behold! My Servant”: An Exegetical and Theological Study of the Identity and Role of the Servant in Isaiah 42:1-9 (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2015). ‘Also, there has been some suggestion that “the style and structure of such an oracle are an imitation of the royal initiation oracle by which a king is called, as in Pss. ii and cx, andJOURNAL OF THE ADV T THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY makes a connection to two previous paralle! passages that also contrast the idols and the servant. “Each passage ended with a dramatic summons (Heb. én), ‘Look!’ or ‘Behold!*: Isa 41:24, ‘Look at this|—Meaningless idol: Isa 41:29, ‘Look at this!—Pathetic idolaters!’ Now, for the third time, the same word rings out (42:1, én): ‘Look at this!—My Servant!’”” It seems that each of these verses intends to focus the reader’s attention on the message Isaiah wants to convey: a contrast between two subjects’—the idols and My Servant. Overview of the Servant and His Work While the entire passage of Isa 42:1-9 speaks of the servant, several key words and phrases—*servant,” “grasp his hand,” and “covenant with people and nation”—specifically reveal the servant's identity and his work. In this section, each of these words/phrases will be analyzed exegetically and contextually. Servant The term 7227 has a wide range of meanings. It is attributed to the relationship between God and God’s people (cf. Ps 19:11) or to individuals such as Abraham (Exod 32:13), Moses (Exod 4:10; 14:31), Joshua (Exod in the sequel to the present passage (sli, 5-9), the oracle in which Cyrus is called.” Sigmund Mowinekel, He That Cometh (ed. G. W. Anderson; New York: Abingdon, 1956), 90. For further views on the Messiah and his role in these verses, pointing to him as King, see John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66 (NICOT; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans 1998), 109n, 12. 1van Engnell concludes that *Ebed Yahweh’ is none other than the Ds Messiah, which is referring to his kit I“ The Ebed Yahweh Songs and the Suffering Messiah in ‘Deutero-tsaiah,"” BJRL 31, no, 1 (January 1948): 54-93, *J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduetion & Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1993), 259, © Rignell appears to support this view that the word 4 suggests continuation and contrast between Isa 42:1 and 41:29. Lars G. Rignell, 4 Study of Isaiah, ch. 40-55 (Lund: C.W. K. Gleerup, 1956), 31-32. See also John Goldingay and David F. Payne, Critical ‘and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40-55 (\CC; London: T&T Clark, 2006), 211 7 The term 722 in Isa 40-55 has been scen to refer to a new or second exodus. For example, Hans Eberhard von Waldow, “Message of Deutero-Isaiah,” Jat 22, no. 3 (1968); 259-287; Rikki E. Watts, “Consolation or Confrontation; Isaiah 40-35 and the Delay of the New Exodus,” TynBul 41, no. 1 (1990): 31-59,THK ype Ocdrrvevatos Kal adpearrLog JOURNAL OF THEADVEN]IST. THEOLOG|CAL SOCIETY Volume 27 Numbers 1 & 2 2016 The Editor's Page. . Randall W. Younker Isaiah's Messiah: Adventist Identity for the Last Days. . . Stéphane Beaulieu ‘A Power or Person: The Nature of the Holy Spirit... . we 24 Jo Ann Davidson God and "Gods’-Poetic Ambiguity and Wordplay: ‘A Proposal towards a Better Understanding of Ps 82... . 37 Dragoslava Santrac “They Will Be Like Angels.” Paradise Without Marriage? .... . 55 René Gehring Human Reason and Biblical Hermeneutics: An Introduction . . . .85 Angel Manuel Rodriguez Seventh-day Adventism, Doctrinal Statements, and Unity Michael W. Campbell Genesis 3 as a Model for Understanding the Nature of Sin Bnd SAIVeHON passa cenaserenasiosnne eaue swine 17 Jifi Moskala Psalm 73-Its Structure and Theology: | Delight in God's, Goodness in Spite of Devastating Problems .......... 153 Jifi Moskala ‘Adventist Theological-Missiology: Contextualization in Mission and Ministry ...... 2.00005 LAME NS Lctiad acts, 078 Wagner Kuhn Vision and Mission-Part 2: Christ, Spirituality, and the Emerging Remnant Church ....... er sina +. 209 Fernando Canale God, Power, and Gospel in a Postmodern World-A Critique of Griffin's Postmodern God... . . Jenifer A. Daley 271 Methodology for Interpretation of Daniel 11:2-12:3...... . 294 Roy E. Gane Desmond Ford and the Rightousness by Faith Controversy . . 344 Gerhard Pfandl =e WOT EZ GOSJournal of the Adventist Theological Society, 27/1-2 (2016): 344-351. Article copyright © 2016 by Gerhard Pfandl. Desmond Ford and the Righteousness by Faith Controversy Gerhard Pfandl Biblical Research Institute General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists Let me begin by saying that from 1968-1970 I was a student at Avondale College in Australia where Desmond Ford was head of the theology department and the major professor of theology. I spent many hours in his classroom and I still consider him one of the best teachers I ever had. His dismissal in 1980 was not because of his views on righteousness by faith; it was the result of his change in understanding the doctrine of the sanctuary and prophetic interpretation. The Australian Scene In the 1950s and 60s, the church in Australia was very conservative. It was the time when Robert Brinsmead preached his perfectionist gospel; and because of the way the investigative or pre-Advent judgment was proclaimed most Seventh-day Adventists had no assurance of salvation. Enter Desmond Ford: he had completed a Ph.D. in Speech at Michigan State University' in December of 1960 and began teaching at Avondale in February 1961. Confronted with Robert Brinsmead’s perfectionism he began emphasizing the topic of righteousness by faith. Righteousness by faith he declared is the same as justification by faith. This ran counter to the general Adventist understanding at that time that righteousness by faith includes justification and sanctification. ' His dissertation was “A Study of Selected Pauline Epistles as Written Addresses.” 344BEAULIEU: ADVENTIST IDENTITY FOR THE LAST DAYS 5:14), and David (2 Sam 7:19; | Kgs 8:24).* The term “my servant” is also associated with the people of Israel (Lev 25:42) and is also found in Isa 40- 55. Prophets were called servants of the Lord (¢.g., Ahijah of Shiloh in | Kgs 14: 29; Isaiah in Isa 20:3). The term 729 can refer to a slave, subject, official, vassal, or a follower of a particular god.” Therefore, only by closely reading the text to determine its function, action, and relation to the other traditional servant poems can one begin to determine what is meant by the servant." Isaiah appears to be intentional when he uses “my servant” with an apposition and when he does not.'' The hypothesis, suggested by some scholars, that Isa 42 refers to Israel seems to be based on the assumption of other passages, such as Isa 41:8. Because “My servant” is found ina nominal clause (v. 1a), scholars may be linking it to a previous use of the “Th Joshua. In the HB, “My servant” is used for Moses s prophets nine times, Job seven times, and Nebuchadnezzar two times. See Motyer, Prophecy of Isaiah, 319 n. 1: Roger N. Whybray, Isaiah 40-66 (ed. Ronald E. Clements and Matthew Black; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1981), 71. Also, for more details, see Ringeren, “ DOT 10:376-405, ° Ringgren, “122,” TDOT 10:376-405. \ The term 132 occurs twenty-one times in [sa 40-50 (41:8, 9; 42:1; 42: 44:1, 2, 21 (2x), 26; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3, 5, 6, 7; 50:10; $2:13; 33:11; 54:17), and twelve of those times it has the first person suffix, as found in Isa41 2:1, 19: 43:10; 4421, 2, 215 45:4; 49:3; 52:13; 53:11. In Isa 40-50, “my servant” occurs most commonly with the apposition Jacob, four times (Isa 41:8; 44:1, 2; 45:4), although Isa 41:9 could be included since “my servant” refers back to v. 8. It occurs wvice with Israel (Isa 4:21; 49:3), which could be considered an apposition as well. The only passage in the servant poems that has an apposition with “Israel!” and “my servant” is Isa 49:3. Ifthe word Jsrael is taken, in this particular case, as a description of the individual servant instead of the corporate servant because of its context (Isa 49:5-6), it would resolve the challenge often raised by scholars that the servant in this poem is Israel. (The same approach is used in the book of Numbers with Balaam’s oracles. The first three oracles refer to Israel, but in the fourth oracle, Balam moves from the plural pronoun used in the first three oracles to a single pronoun, pointing toa prophetic aspect of the one who would fulfill Israel's role. This also appears to be the case with Isa 49:3-6.) Yet, the servant poems asa whole do not contain a descriptor that clearly identifies the servant, Moreover, there are only five occurrences of the twelve that use “my servant” without any description (Isa 42:1, 19; 43:10; 52:13; 53:11). {tis interesting to note that the Targum refers to Israel in Isa 41:8, 9: 44:1, 2, 21: 3, and only three passages are messianically interpreted in the Targum of 10; 52:13, Walther Zimmerli and J. Jeremias, The Servant of God (SBT 20; Naperville, IL: A. R. Allenson, 1957), 67.PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY For Desmond Ford, Paul's Epistle to the Romans was the cornerstone of his teaching on righteousness by faith, In class he summarized Romans 1-8 as follows: Ch.1 The heathen are sinners and are lost-22, 24, 26, 28. Ch. 2 The Jews are also sinners and are lost-I, 11-13. Ch. 3 All men are sinners and lost-10, 23. All men are saved the same way. How? Through justification by faith apart from the deeds of the law-24, 28. Ch. 4 The example of Abraham-3, 10-11. Ch. 5 ‘The results of justification—1. Ch. 6 The new life in Christ-Sanctification-3-4, 11-12. Ch. 7 The battle in the new life-18-20, 24-5. Ch. 8 The life in the Spirit-1, 14. He defined justification by saying that “Justification in Paul’s writings is the act of remitting the sins of guilty men and accounting them righteous freely by his grace, through faith in Jesus Christ; not on the ground of their own works but on the ground of the representative law keeping and redemptive blood shedding of Christ on their behalf? Justification, he explained, is Christ’s work for us-on the cross, in the heavenly sanctuary. It happens outside of us; it is a change of status. Through justification we become children of God. Sanctification, on the other hand, is Christ’s work in us through the Holy Spirit. Sanctification changes us into the likeness of Christ. Desmond Ford never separated justification and sanctification. He distinguished between them but he did not separate them. Some of his favorite sayings were: “We are saved by faith alone, but the faith that saves is not alone, works follow.” “Justification is the root, sanctification is the fruit.” Emphasizing that first we become children of God and then we bring forth works of righteousness. ‘Assurance of salvation, which many Adventists at that time were lacking, is based on what Jesus has done, he said, not on how perfect we are. Sermons preached by Ford were characterized by an emphasis on justification by faith, but not everyone was happy with his messages. Some felt that he was preaching cheap grace. 2 “Introduction to Theology” class notes (1968). 345JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY The years 1971 and 1972, Ford spent at Manchester University in England, After completing his second doctorate in New Testament at Manchester under F. F. Bruce, Ford returned to Avondale in the summer of 1972/73. In the years following, complaints against Ford’s teaching mounted, and in February 1976 the South Pacific Division leadership called a meeting at Avondale College where the theology faculty, its supporters and critics could sit down together and discuss the various complaints, At issue was not just righteousness by faith but also the inspiration of Scripture, Ellen White, and the nature of a two-apartment sanctuary in heaven. After a two-day discussion, twenty-two participants voted in support of Ford, the sixteen critics remained opposed.” The Palmdale Conference on Righteousness by Faith The theological wrangling in Australia, however, did not stop. Its effects were also felt in America. On April 23-30, 1976, therefore, nineteen scholars and administrators from Australia and America met at Palmdale, California, to discuss the topic of salvation. The American delegation was led by Elder Robert Pierson, the General Conference president, and included Raoul Dederen and Hans LaRondelle from Andrews University. From Australia came R. R. Frame, the South Pacific Division president, several administrators, Desmond Ford, and Alwyn Salom, a New Testament scholar. The following papers were read and discussed at Palmdale: D. F. Neufeld, “Word Studies in the area of Righteousness by Faith” A.P. Salom, “The Concept of Righteousness in the New Testament” R. W. Olson, “E. G. White’s Concept of Righteousness by Faith” R. Dederen, “Justification by Faith as understood by the Reformation Leaders” D. Ford, “The Scope and Limits of the Pauline Expression ‘Righteousness by Faith’” K. H. Wood, “The Historic Adventist Concept of Righteousness by Faith” H. K, LaRondelle, “The Eschatological Dimensions of Righteousness by Faith” A. S. Jorgensen, A Conspectus of the Righteousness of God” D. Ford, “The Relationship between the Human Nature of Christ and Milton Hook, Desmond Ford: Reformist Theol ae iversid CA: Adventist Today Foundation, 2008) 139. 710810”: Gospel Revivalis (Riverside, 346PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY Righteousness by Faith” K. H. Wood, “The Historic Adventist Concept of the Human Nature of Christ™ The chief point of discussion at that conference was the meaning of the expression “Righteousness by Faith.” Did it refer only to justification or did it also include sanctification? In his first paper “The Scope and Limits of the Pauline Expression “Righteousness by Faith,” Ford outlined the problem that “Among Seventh-day Adventists it [righteousness by faith] has often been understood as a term comprehending justification and sanctification,”* but in the writings of Paul the expression “Righteousness by Faith is identical with Justification by Faith.” On the basis of the outline of Romans 1-8 mentioned above, he emphasized that chapters 1-5 deal with justification and chapters 6-8 with sanctification. ‘Thus, Rom, 3:21-28 shows that Righteousness by Faith has to do not with holy works prompted by the regenerating Spirit but with a mew standing before God,-the standing of one hundred percent righteousness freely bestowed to all who believe on the basis of Christ’s perfect life and atoning death. Inasmuch as only a perfect righteousness can give us such a standing, we see the impossibility of introducing sanctification as a means towards our acceptance, or in other words as a part of Righteousness by Faith. One hundred percent righteousness is found only in Christ. It has to be His gift; it can never be our attainment in this life, for “sanctification is the work of a lifetime.” Thus Righteousness by Faith must always mean Justification whereby we receive as a gift the imputed merits of Christ.’ 7 Jack D. Walker in his pamphlet Documents from the Palmdale Conference in Righteousness by Faith (Goodletsvlle, TN: Jack D. Walker, 1976) includes athird paper by D Ford titled “Ellen G. White and Righteousness by Faith.” This paper, however, according to the official summary of the papers, was not presented at Palmdale. SD. Ford, “The Scope and Limits of the Pauline Expression ‘Righteousness by Faith in Walker, 2. *Tbid., 5. 7 Ibid. 347PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY phrase “righteousness by faith” theologically to include both justification and sanctification.” No explanation is given as to whether this use of the phrase “righteousness by faith “should continue or not. Both sides therefore could claim that the statement supports their position. Although only two presentations at Palmdale dealt with the nature of Christ, the larger part of the report dealt with this issue. Both views on the nature of Christ (sinless-by Ford) and (sinful-by Wood) are mentioned. Ford emphasized that righteousness by faith is nothing other than the appropriation of the merits of the righteous life and the atoning death of the God-Man. And these merits depended on who and what Jesus was. Therefore, he had to be without sin, both as to His nature and His actions, “else His life in human flesh and His death on the cross would have been of no more value in procuring grace for the sinner than the death of any other man.”"* From Avondale to Exile ‘After his return to Avondale, Ford reported on the Palmdale meetings in a series of speaking appointments in the islands of the Pacific and in ‘Australia. However, the opposition to Ford continued. John Clifford and Russell Standish, two medical men, published a 160-page document titled Conflicting Concepts of Righteousness by Faith. In the preface they stated, “[mparted Righteousness is the crucial factor in salvation.”'* Ford wrote a reply that was endorsed by the Biblical Research Committee of the Australasian Division, but the controversy continued. In 1977, therefore, it was thought best to remove Ford temporarily from the Australian scene and have him spend a few years at Pacific Union College with which Avondale had an affiliation agreement. “Among other features it involved a regular exchange of lecturers.”"* “And the rest is history,” as the saying goes. Ford began teaching at PUC in the autumn of 1977 and on Sabbath afternoon, October 27, 1979, he presented a lecture on ino eee " Ibid. 1 FD, Nichol, ed., Seventh Day Adventist Bible Commentary, 7 vols. (Washington, D.C Review and Herald, 1978), 7:933, cited by Desmond Ford, “The Relationship between es fluman Nature of Christ and Righteousness by Faith” in Walker, 26. IS John Clifford and Russell Standish, Conflicting Concepts of Righteousness by Faith (Wahroonga, Australia: Burnside Press, 1976), ix, x, cited in Hook, 176, © Hook, 186. 349JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY the investigative judgment to the Angwin chapter of the Association of Adventist Forums which led to the Glacier View Conference in August of 1980 and his subsequent dismissal from church employment. Evaluation Desmond Ford’s emphasis on Righteousness by Faith, as taught by Paul in the book of Romans, was a necessary course correction to the prevailing perfectionism in the 1960s, particularly in Australia, but not only there, Associated with it was an almost total lack of assurance of salvation among church members. Ford, like E. J. Waggoner in 1888, attempted to show that acceptance by God is on the basis of what Jesus has done, not on the basis of how good we are. Paul says, “He hath made Christ to be sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Corinthians 5:21). What is the Tighteousness of God? Perfection-perfect works. Therefore, only perfect obedience is acceptable to God. No human being could render this to God, except Christ. He lived a perfect, sinless life in word, thought, and deed, and then He took our place on the cross and died that we may live. And this Perfect obedience-his righteousness, the only righteousness God can accept, is given to us-if we believe, It is imputed to us, ie., it is put to our account. This, said Ford, is righteousness by faith or justification, Ford did not teach that therefore we have nothing to do in the plan of salvation. We cannot add anything to the gift of Christ’s righteousness—we can only accept it by faith; but once we have it, once we are forgiven, once Testament: “Behold, 1am coming quickly! Hold ast what you have thotee one may take your crown” (Rev 3:11); “Moreover, brethren, T delve you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you received cuit. which you stand, by which also you are saved, if you hold fast thac cond which I preached to you-unless you believed in vain" (1 Cor {S:1), "He hos reconciled in the body of His flesh through death, to present you holy, and flameless, and above reproach in His sight-f indeed you eora faith, grounded and steadfast, and are not moved away from the hope of the ospel which you heard” (Col 1:22,23); For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end” (Heb 3:14). This is where obedience comes in, 350JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY P. Salom’s paper was primarily a word study of dikaiosyne in the New Testament. He brought out the forensic meaning of dikaiosyne, emphasizing that “righteousness or justification is essentially a matter of right status in the sight of God and that this status shows that we are accepted with Him.” In contrast to the Catholic position that teaches that “the meaning of the verb dikaiod is ‘to make righteous,’” Salom stated that “the majority of contemporary scholars understand justification to involve a relationship rather than an ethical quality, and the distinctive Pauline meaning is “to be accounted right with God.” In his conclusion he said that because our theology must be based on Scripture alone “it is evident that our use of the term ‘righteousness by faith’ should be restricted to its biblical use as an equivalent for ‘justification by faith.””"” The official report of the Palmdale Conference, published in The Review and Herald, stated that the group “studied and prayed together, shared sweet fellowship and gained unity of spirit and viewpoint as the days passed.”'' Concerning the meaning of righteousness by faith, the report stated: We agree that when the words righteousness and faith are connected (by “of,” “by,” et cetera) in Scripture, reference is to the experience of justification by faith. God the righteous Judge, declares righteous the person who believes in Jesus and repents. Sinful though he may be, he is regarded as righteous because in Christ he has come into a righteous relationship with God. This is the gift of God through Christ.”2 This seems clear enough. However, the section on “Justification and Sanctification” also contains some ambiguous statements. For example: In the last judgment our works of faith and love testify to the reality of justifying faith and our union with Christ; we are still saved by justification through Christ without any works of law, that is, without meritorious works. Thus Seventh-day Adventists have often used the * A. P. Salom, “The Concept of Righteousness in the New Testament” in Walker, 18. ° Ibid., 20. " Tbid., 22. 11 “Christ our Righteousness,” Review and Herald, May 27, 1976, 4-7. ” Ibid., 4. 348PHANDL: RIGHTEOUSNESS BY FAITH CONTROVERSY Justification is Christ’s work for us-on the cross, in the heavenly sanctuary, outside of us—a change of status: we become children of God. Sanctification is Christ’s work in us-through the Holy Spirit, Sanctification changes us into the likeness of Christ. Justification answers the question, how do I become a child of God? The answer is it is a gift of God. Sanctification answers the question, how do I remain a child of God? The answer is by obedience through Jesus. “For it is God who works in you both to will and to do for His good pleasure” (Phi 2:13). This is where the good fight of faith is fought. This is where the battle between spirit and flesh, between the old man and the new man takes place, not to achieve salvation, but to retain it. ‘The fact that Desmond Ford denied the pre-Advent judgment and was. dismissed from the ministry does not change the positive impact his teaching on righteousness by faith had on the church, In this regard the church is indebted to him; and it behooves us to continue to preach the good news of righteousness by faith. Gerhard Pfandl is a retired Associate Director of the Biblical Research Institute. He is a native of Austria and holds an M.A. and Ph.D. in Old Testament from Andrews University. He has worked as a church pastor in Austria and in the Southern California Conference. From 1977-1989 he was Professor of Religion at Bogenhofen Seminary in Austria, Prior to joining the Biblical Research Institute in 1999 he served for seven years as Field Secretary of the South Pacific Division in Sydney. He has published many articles for scholarly and popular journals in German and English and is the author of The Time of the End in the Book of Daniel (Adventist Theological Society Dissertation Series, 1992), Daniel: The Seer of Babylon (Review and Herald, 2004), and The Gift of Prophecy (Pacific Press, 2008). He also edited the books Interpreting Scripture: Bible Questions and “Answers (Biblical Research Institute, 2010) and The Great Controversyandthe End of Evil (Biblical Research Institute, 2015). 351JOURNAL OF THE ADVENTIST THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY servant song. An exegetical examination of this passage reveals that the Messiah is the Servant of Isaiah 42:1-9. The Servant-Messiah here performs asalvific work. Finally, the theology of this passage suggests that His work I blueprint for Adventists living in the last day’ Structure of Isainh 42:1-9 ructure of Isaiah 42:1-9 points to the importance of Isaiah’s servant, his call, and his mission. This passage contains two chiastic structures, the first one suggested by W. A. M. Beuken, who sees the structure of Isa 42:1-4 as a chiasm with a juridical literary genre, “The structure of the oracle is quite clear: A la Yhwh designates his Servant B Ib’ Yhwh equips his Servant C Ib" his mission: mispar D_ 2-3a _ his behaviour: no shouting, no violence against the oppressed C 3b his missio B’ da’ his destiny: oppression At 4a"-b his mission: migpaf and tora.” demarcated by a clear inelusio found in vv. 1 and 9, the word qa “behold.” which is a grammatical clue of transition to another servant. Second, the repeated “justice/judgment” also suggests a switch to a new section. Third, there is a change of verb tense from the imperfect with a jussive (Isa 41:28) to simply an imperfect in Isa 42:1. Fourth, there isa change of direct object: in ch. 41 itis the second person plural (vv. 21, 24) whereas in Isa 42:1-8 the direct object is third masculine singular. Fifth, the tone is different in Isa 41:21-29 versus Isa 42:1-9. Isaiah 41:21-29 has a tone of judgment and accusation, while in Isa 42:1-9 the tone is more gracious, gentle, kind, and supportive. ally, in Isa 42:1-9, the repetition of the suffix first common singular signals a change of section, ‘After Isa 42:1-9, the tone again changes in v. 10. A vibrant tone is expressed by the vocative of address using the term rz “sing” in the imperative, The imperative also reveals achange of tense, which suggests a different section. The subject changes: In Isa 42:1-9 the subject is first common singular, while in Isa 42:10-13 the subject is third masculine plural. Isaiah 42:1-9 reveals a servant's call and mission, while Isa42:10-13 is a hymn toward God. Thus, based on these factors, the first servant poem is best delimited to vv. 1 through 9. * Willem A. M. Beuken, “Mispat: The First Servant Song and Its Context,” 17722, no. 1 (1972): 3. While I concur with Beuken’s structure of vy, 1-4, he does not accept that the first servant poem encompasses vv. 1-9. Therefore, his analysis of the first servant poem is structurally limited in that he does not give an adequate structure of Isa 42:1-9,BEAULIEU: ADVENTIST IDENTITY FOR THE LAST DAYS I suggest that the second chiasm, found in vv. 5 to 9, is structured as follows: A 5 God’s creative acts B 6a “I Yhwh” demonstrates his character to the servant/you (emphasis on “righteousness”) c 6b-7 The Servant as a covenant to the people and his work B 8 “LYhwh” demonstrates his character to the servant (emphasis on “my glory”) A 9 God’s creative acts by telling the future “new things” The structure of Isa 42:1-9 suggests two key elements about the servant. The central message of the first chiasm refers to the servant's behavior, which is surrounded by the adjacent verses describing his mission. Then the second chiasm demonstrates how this mission is accomplished in his behavior, the central message of the chiasm, where the servant is given as a covenant to the people. The servant is designated by God to fulfill God’s special act that is found in the behavior of the servant; however, the image of equipping him functions in conjunction with the description of the work that he is doing jn v. 7. The notion of bringing justice, referred to as “his mission” of justice, is reinforced in the name of God that is given to the servant: Creator and Redeemer. The Torah is related to God’s creative acts in Genesis; both the law and God’s creative acts also appear throughout the Pentateuch in the imagery of the sanctuary, in the form of the law found in the Ark of the Covenant, and in the form of the sacrifices revealing God’s re-creative power, pointing to something taking place in the future—a “new thing,” It appears to me that there is a definite parallelism between the two chiasms, with one reflecting the other. An exploration of the grammatical and syntactical aspects of the first chiasm—42:1-44—reveals that, at the outset, the first verse emphatically eo “Twill not exegete all nine verses here, but you can refer to my work: Stéphane Beaulieu, “Behold! My Servant”: An Exegetical and Theological Study of the Identity and Role of the Servant in Isaiah 42:1-9 (Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2015). ‘Also, there has been some suggestion that “the style and structure of such an oracle are an imitation of the royal initiation oracle by which a king is called, as in Pss. ii and cx, andJournal of the # ventist Theological Society Article copyright 2016 by Stéphane Beaulieu, 1-2 (2016): 3-23. Isaiah’s Messiah: Adventist Identity for the Last Days Stéphane Beaulieu Pacific Union College Angwin CA Introduction Adventist identity is based on a number of biblical theological views,' but two concepts at the core of Adventism are the central message of Jesus as the Messiah of the OT and the message of salvation—redemption and hope of a better life now and yet to come. The purpose of Adventism in these last days is to proclaim the true Messiah/Servant and to proclaim the truth about salvation. This article proposes that Isaiah’s Messiah is the essence of Adventism and is what Adventists must proclaim in the eschaton. Portraits of the Messiah and His work for the people of God permeate the book of Isaiah. And while Isaiah’s Messiah was relevant for the people of the seventh century, the Messiah is portrayed as the One who will deliver and save His people now as well as then. In fact, Isaiah places his message of the Messiah in the realm of the last days. One portrayal of Isaiah’s Messiah is revealed in Isaiah 42: 1-9, the first " For a detailed treatment of the 28 fundamental beliefs, see General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, 28 Fundamental Beliefs: A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Silver Spring, MD: Ministerial Association, General Conference of Seventh-day ID: Pacific Press, 2005). 7'The delimitation of Isa 42:1-9 is determined by several factors. (See, for more information on the delimitation of biblical passages, Walter C. Kaiser, Jr., Toward an Exegetical Theology: Biblical Exegesis for Preaching and Teaching [8th ed.: Grand Rapids, ME: Baker, 1989], 71-77.) First, it is important to note that Isa 42:1-9 is not an isolated text; it flows from what comes before it and what follows. However, Isa 42:1-9 is also a sectional text within its context.JOURNAL OF THE ADV T THEOLOGICAL SOCIETY makes a connection to two previous paralle! passages that also contrast the idols and the servant. “Each passage ended with a dramatic summons (Heb. én), ‘Look!’ or ‘Behold!*: Isa 41:24, ‘Look at this|—Meaningless idol: Isa 41:29, ‘Look at this!—Pathetic idolaters!’ Now, for the third time, the same word rings out (42:1, én): ‘Look at this!—My Servant!’”” It seems that each of these verses intends to focus the reader’s attention on the message Isaiah wants to convey: a contrast between two subjects’—the idols and My Servant. Overview of the Servant and His Work While the entire passage of Isa 42:1-9 speaks of the servant, several key words and phrases—*servant,” “grasp his hand,” and “covenant with people and nation”—specifically reveal the servant's identity and his work. In this section, each of these words/phrases will be analyzed exegetically and contextually. Servant The term 7227 has a wide range of meanings. It is attributed to the relationship between God and God’s people (cf. Ps 19:11) or to individuals such as Abraham (Exod 32:13), Moses (Exod 4:10; 14:31), Joshua (Exod in the sequel to the present passage (sli, 5-9), the oracle in which Cyrus is called.” Sigmund Mowinekel, He That Cometh (ed. G. W. Anderson; New York: Abingdon, 1956), 90. For further views on the Messiah and his role in these verses, pointing to him as King, see John N. Oswalt, The Book of Isaiah: Chapters 40-66 (NICOT; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans 1998), 109n, 12. 1van Engnell concludes that *Ebed Yahweh’ is none other than the Ds Messiah, which is referring to his kit I“ The Ebed Yahweh Songs and the Suffering Messiah in ‘Deutero-tsaiah,"” BJRL 31, no, 1 (January 1948): 54-93, *J. Alec Motyer, The Prophecy of Isaiah: An Introduetion & Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: IVP, 1993), 259, © Rignell appears to support this view that the word 4 suggests continuation and contrast between Isa 42:1 and 41:29. Lars G. Rignell, 4 Study of Isaiah, ch. 40-55 (Lund: C.W. K. Gleerup, 1956), 31-32. See also John Goldingay and David F. Payne, Critical ‘and Exegetical Commentary on Isaiah 40-55 (\CC; London: T&T Clark, 2006), 211 7 The term 722 in Isa 40-55 has been scen to refer to a new or second exodus. For example, Hans Eberhard von Waldow, “Message of Deutero-Isaiah,” Jat 22, no. 3 (1968); 259-287; Rikki E. Watts, “Consolation or Confrontation; Isaiah 40-35 and the Delay of the New Exodus,” TynBul 41, no. 1 (1990): 31-59,BEAULIEU: ADVENTIST IDENTITY FOR THE LAST DAYS 5:14), and David (2 Sam 7:19; | Kgs 8:24).* The term “my servant” is also associated with the people of Israel (Lev 25:42) and is also found in Isa 40- 55. Prophets were called servants of the Lord (¢.g., Ahijah of Shiloh in | Kgs 14: 29; Isaiah in Isa 20:3). The term 729 can refer to a slave, subject, official, vassal, or a follower of a particular god.” Therefore, only by closely reading the text to determine its function, action, and relation to the other traditional servant poems can one begin to determine what is meant by the servant." Isaiah appears to be intentional when he uses “my servant” with an apposition and when he does not.'' The hypothesis, suggested by some scholars, that Isa 42 refers to Israel seems to be based on the assumption of other passages, such as Isa 41:8. Because “My servant” is found ina nominal clause (v. 1a), scholars may be linking it to a previous use of the “Th Joshua. In the HB, “My servant” is used for Moses s prophets nine times, Job seven times, and Nebuchadnezzar two times. See Motyer, Prophecy of Isaiah, 319 n. 1: Roger N. Whybray, Isaiah 40-66 (ed. Ronald E. Clements and Matthew Black; Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1981), 71. Also, for more details, see Ringeren, “ DOT 10:376-405, ° Ringgren, “122,” TDOT 10:376-405. \ The term 132 occurs twenty-one times in [sa 40-50 (41:8, 9; 42:1; 42: 44:1, 2, 21 (2x), 26; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3, 5, 6, 7; 50:10; $2:13; 33:11; 54:17), and twelve of those times it has the first person suffix, as found in Isa41 2:1, 19: 43:10; 4421, 2, 215 45:4; 49:3; 52:13; 53:11. In Isa 40-50, “my servant” occurs most commonly with the apposition Jacob, four times (Isa 41:8; 44:1, 2; 45:4), although Isa 41:9 could be included since “my servant” refers back to v. 8. It occurs wvice with Israel (Isa 4:21; 49:3), which could be considered an apposition as well. The only passage in the servant poems that has an apposition with “Israel!” and “my servant” is Isa 49:3. Ifthe word Jsrael is taken, in this particular case, as a description of the individual servant instead of the corporate servant because of its context (Isa 49:5-6), it would resolve the challenge often raised by scholars that the servant in this poem is Israel. (The same approach is used in the book of Numbers with Balaam’s oracles. The first three oracles refer to Israel, but in the fourth oracle, Balam moves from the plural pronoun used in the first three oracles to a single pronoun, pointing toa prophetic aspect of the one who would fulfill Israel's role. This also appears to be the case with Isa 49:3-6.) Yet, the servant poems asa whole do not contain a descriptor that clearly identifies the servant, Moreover, there are only five occurrences of the twelve that use “my servant” without any description (Isa 42:1, 19; 43:10; 52:13; 53:11). {tis interesting to note that the Targum refers to Israel in Isa 41:8, 9: 44:1, 2, 21: 3, and only three passages are messianically interpreted in the Targum of 10; 52:13, Walther Zimmerli and J. Jeremias, The Servant of God (SBT 20; Naperville, IL: A. R. Allenson, 1957), 67.THK ype Ocdrrvevatos Kal adpearrLog JOURNAL OF THEADVEN]IST. THEOLOG|CAL SOCIETY Volume 27 Numbers 1 & 2 2016 The Editor's Page. . Randall W. Younker Isaiah's Messiah: Adventist Identity for the Last Days. . . Stéphane Beaulieu ‘A Power or Person: The Nature of the Holy Spirit... . we 24 Jo Ann Davidson God and "Gods’-Poetic Ambiguity and Wordplay: ‘A Proposal towards a Better Understanding of Ps 82... . 37 Dragoslava Santrac “They Will Be Like Angels.” Paradise Without Marriage? .... . 55 René Gehring Human Reason and Biblical Hermeneutics: An Introduction . . . .85 Angel Manuel Rodriguez Seventh-day Adventism, Doctrinal Statements, and Unity Michael W. Campbell Genesis 3 as a Model for Understanding the Nature of Sin Bnd SAIVeHON passa cenaserenasiosnne eaue swine 17 Jifi Moskala Psalm 73-Its Structure and Theology: | Delight in God's, Goodness in Spite of Devastating Problems .......... 153 Jifi Moskala ‘Adventist Theological-Missiology: Contextualization in Mission and Ministry ...... 2.00005 LAME NS Lctiad acts, 078 Wagner Kuhn Vision and Mission-Part 2: Christ, Spirituality, and the Emerging Remnant Church ....... er sina +. 209 Fernando Canale God, Power, and Gospel in a Postmodern World-A Critique of Griffin's Postmodern God... . . Jenifer A. Daley 271 Methodology for Interpretation of Daniel 11:2-12:3...... . 294 Roy E. Gane Desmond Ford and the Rightousness by Faith Controversy . . 344 Gerhard Pfandl =e WOT EZ GOS