Talk:Investigative judgment

640:

who had known Desmond Ford very well. During the Martin/Johnsson debate, Martin recalled a 1957 meeting with Ted Heppenstall, William Murdoch, and George Canon. Canon was then a graduate student in NT Greek brought in by the Barnhouse team. Canon read a passage out of the Greek NT from Hebrews 9 and got Murdoch and Heppenstall to agree that Christ completed the atonement at the Ascension. 1844 was not in the Greek text of Hebrews. Johnsson, who had written a dissertation in NT Studies on Hebrews 9 and 10, gave a rather weak reply concerning the Greek word "agia" and how it can be translated as "sanctuary. " Conservative adventists have spent 54 years arguing over this passage of Greek, but a reading of Hebrews 9&10 in plain English seems to favor Martin's view. In my view the distinctive doctrines of the SDA church were developed by laymen with no specialized knowledge of Greek, Hebrew, Aramaic, ANE history, archeology, or Egyptology. Of course, any Adventist is free to ASSUME the truth of her church's doctrines. My point is this- if such great Adventist professors as Heppenstall and Murdoch were willing to admit that the Greek text of the NT has nought to do with the doctrines of Ellen White, then why would Adventists expect nonadventists to take the claims surrounding 1844 seriously at all? Need I remind us that Crozier, a young man who helped write out the Sanctuary doctrine, became an anti-adventist crusader later on. Miller himself disavowed his past views and explicitly rejected Ellen White and her claims.

1813:

the cross. He was inaugurated as our great High Priest and began His intercessory ministry at the time of His ascension. In 1844, at the end of the prophetic period of 2300 days, He entered the second and last phase of His atoning ministry. It is a work of investigative judgment which is part of the ultimate disposition of all sin, typified by the cleansing of the ancient Hebrew sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. In that typical service the sanctuary was cleansed with the blood of animal sacrifices, but the heavenly things are purified with the perfect sacrifice of the blood of Jesus. The investigative judgment reveals to heavenly intelligences who among the dead are asleep in Christ and therefore, in Him, are deemed worthy to have part in the first resurrection. It also makes manifest who among the living are abiding in Christ, keeping the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus, and in Him, therefore, are ready for translation into His everlasting kingdom.

755:

for any reason, especially if you work for the 7DA church. On the other hand, the denomination seeks to actively expunge writings that would put Sister white in a bad light by modern standards. Most "pew adventists" who have never read Ford and Rea are blissfully ignorant of church history and the hierarchy wants to keep them so. On the other hand, the explosive growth of the Seventh Day Adventist Church in the third world bespeaks the fact that the global church is more christocentric and less Ellen White centric. Last time I went to an sda service the preacher was Korean and in his sermon he did not quote or cite EG White once. How is it possible to evaluate the IJ doctrine when many primary materials on the "shut door" have been destroyed or hidden?

1414:

Denominational hierarchy wants their own people to know as little as possible about any real history concerning pre-1888 Adventism. Part of the problem is that the Second Advent movement anticipated the return of the Savior in their own lifetimes. The "shut door" idea and the lack of clarity on the God head are symptomatic of a church that expected to last only a generation. They were left a hornet's nest of difficulties because of the delay of the Parousia and the need to become an institutional church. The early church had to deal with doctrines and dogmas as generation after generation passed without the Second Coming actually taking place.

1398:

too heavily on defrocked pastors such as Ford, and Van Rooyen as primary sources for the history and content of the teaching does not provide clarity. For example - the reader has no chance of knowing that in fact the Seventh-day Adventist church as a denomination did not come into being until the 1860's and as such never had a doctrine on the "Shut door" stating that probation for mankind had ended. In addition, the fact that the SDA Fundamental Belief statement remains virtually unchanged is getting clouded for the reader in the discussion that precedes that section.

1301:

pre-advent judgment. God treats the human race as intelligent beings. He doesn't ask for blind trust or blind obedience. He can be trusted now and forever because that trust is based on complete understanding. God has made provision for people to stand on a sea that looks like glass and thoughtfully, honestly say, "Great and marvelous are thy works, ...just and true are your ways." God is interested not only in justifying sinners, but in being just at the same time. The cross and the complete atonement justify God in forgiving anyone.

635:"I know men who are key figures in the leadership of our Adventist world church who have told me privately that they also disagree with the traditional interpretation of the Investigative Judgment. Although these men are the thought leaders of the Church, they are afraid to express themselves publicly on this matter. They cannot be honest on this subject, for if they were, they fear that they would all be sacked, and our universities, colleges, and editorial offices would be denuded. " 80: 53: 1729: 90: 156: 1203:. The same material is found in several of Venden's other book and many recorded sermon tapes, but this is the best source I've found. According to Knight, this view point represent the ideas of Heppenstahl, LaRondelle and Dederen in the classrooms and Venden from the pulpit. I agree that it needs polishing, but it will be very hard to condense it much further. This is 22: 580:

However as it stands now - the entire document has small segments with the critic point of view inserted so it is difficult to tell what the denomination actually says about the subject. Adventist Today and Spectrum are good sources if one is looking for critics that operate from inside the Adventist church and those views are valuable in a critics section of the article.

1335:

problem. The pre-advent judgment justifies God in forgiving the ones who get forgiven. Not everyone is forgiven--only those who accept forgiveness are forgiven. God doesn't force His forgiveness on anybody. It must be accepted, and on a continuing basis. The pre-advent judgment reveals to the universe those who have accepted and continue to accept His justifying grace.

1548:

evidence contained "in books". As for who is judged it is all mankind either directly or indirectly - because those who are not included in this judgment are not covered by the blood of Christ. At the end of the judgment "Judgment is passed in favor of the saints" Dan 7:22, and then Christ's second coming brings an end to the persecution of the saints.

388:, #70) I found out that Seventh-day Adventist scholars seem to favor the Millerite date of October 22, but that doesn't seem worth mentioning in this article. Maybe it could say "Many Seventh-day Adventists maintain..."? It seemed easier just to remove the date as it requires too much explanation to connect it to a specific source." 1222:

investigative judgment. And where he didn't speak, audio and video tapes were passed from hand to hand and listen to over and over while traveling to work or Sabbath afternoons, etc. And then, when you add in the 20 to 30 book he wrote that often covered much of the same material, Venden is the recognized authority on the topic.

975:, which is the denomination's official book on doctrine -- the reason for this, as I understand it, is that recent scholarship has challenged the accuracy of those dates. Current Adventist scholarship no longer defends the old dates, and argues that the terminus of the 70 weeks prophecy is only approximate. 1413:

How many lay Adventists of today have any idea that their church actively taught against the Holy Trinity? How many "little people" who put their tithes in the collection plate on Saturday mornings know that many of their legendary founders were arians, semiarians, and adoptionists? I think that the

1334:

All who watch a case in court need the assurance that justice is being dealt. If those who observe are unable to see justice in the decisions, their confidence in the judge is undermined. If the people who are being governed do not have confidence in the justice of their rulers, there's going to be a

522:

Moved Prescott details to the article about him. However, I assume it is true that most Adventists in the past believed the IJ was the day of October 22, 1844. Hence worth saying that Prescott and others disagreed, IMO, as he was an important early figure. Perhaps there was too much trivial detail in

410:

I do not understand even the basics of what investigative judgment is from reading the first two sentences, and I do not want to read the entire article. The second sentence already begins to speak of the history of IJ, when it should probably explain a bit more about what IJ is (without requiring us

287:

told me that during his 1979 Pacific Union College address, Ford said that the 1844 date could not be derived from Hebrews. Apparently, a year later at Glacier View, the church had moved on to accept this earlier position of Ford; although by this time Ford himself had moved substantially further. Is

1812:

why on earth, with all the words in this article, can you say something simple like There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up and not man. In it Christ ministers on our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice offered once for all on

1309:

A case will never come to trial without a prosecutor. A legally authorized government sanctioned prosecutor needs the judgment context--in fact, demands it to ensure that justice is done, that the innocent are not condemned and that the guilty do not escape justice. In Matthew 12:33-34 Christ states

1283:

For a long time people have had held a primitive concept of what the pre-advent judgment is all about, thinking of it primarily in terms of God judging us and deciding our eternal destiny. God is perceived as rushing through the books since 1844, trying to get through all the names before the end of

1167:

Regarding Rooyen's comment, I replaced it. This article is about the belief, including its modifications throughout time. I also replaced the comment about Brinsmead. To claim he "joined with Ford" is ambiguous, and potentially misleading – yes they both rejected the investigative judgment, but this

555:

doctrine. Is that true? If so, then the fact that they say nothing about the IJ means very little -- they do not support it but they do not deny it either. I think we should be wary of trying to make an argument from silence. Does the ASRS say anything about Creationism? If not, does that imply they

457:

Yes, it probably is too complicated. My edit, "Some other Adventist scholars..." could well be deleted - this is currently "original research"; in fact based on what one lecturer at Avondale said in class. I would assume that a substantial group of conservative scholars would support the precise day

1603:

If one assumes that the primary focus of the article is "the critics" then "counter arguments" is clearly addressed to the critics. But IF the primary purpose is the actual subject of the article (in this case the "Investigative Judgment" doctrine) then "Counter Arguments" would be "counter" to the

1397:

As I stated in a prior comment - it is fine to show critics and various factions arguing (even from inside the denomination) for change - but we need to clearly state the facts about what the published statement of beliefs actually "is" vs what various groups might be pushing for over time. Relying

1391:

This is a very good point. A lot of effort seems to be going into the article to claim that the doctrine is changed. But when you look at the actual evidence in this article (the 2005 statement of fundamental beliefs and the recent 2006 Sabbath School Quarterly and the BRI 1989 documents) where the

1313:

In the Bible we see that there are also false witnesses and false accusers. In Revelation 12 the false accuser of God's people is the enemy, the dragon, the serpent called the Devil and Satan. We see this again in Daniel 7 and 8 in the form of the little horn persecuting and accusing the people of

997:

is an official book is overstated – yes it was published by the General Conference and one can say it is a very significant book with wide-input, but as it itself points out, "While this volume is not an officially voted statement—only a General Conference in world session could provide that—it may

754:

Before his death Walter Martin was investigating the White Estate. An allegation was made that Arthur White was editing out views and editorials written by Sister White if they were embarrasing. I see a contradiction here. There is sort of an informal rule against publically criticizing Ellen White

446:

I guess I feel that all the fine detail just complicates things and is unnecessary. It would be better to keep things simple: Adventists officially teach that the investigative judgment began in 1844 (precise season or date irrelevant), and this is supported by the ATS in their constitution as well

434:

In light of the absence of any reference to October 22 in official statements (as pointed out above), I wonder if there is any need to mention October 22 here at all ("Many Adventists believe the event started on the specific day of October 22, 1844;"). Similarly, I question whether it is necessary

1343:

The final One who needs the judgment is God Himself. The judgment is "his judgment"--God's judgment. God has been accused before the universe. The "accuser of the brethren" is also the accuser of God and has been hurling his accusations at the God as unfair, unjust, and unreasonable. In order for

891:

I agree with you Colin. The language of "pillar" is "club-talk" within Adventism, and even then is quite anachronistic (i.e. older generation). As such I don't think it is appropriate for a public encyclopedia. Also agree that the official church has changed its position over time, not reconfirmed

639:

I did not try to edit the main page because I am sure the edit would have been reversed. However, I did want to make the following point about the Sanctuary and the judgment. On the John Ankerberg Show in the early 80s, Walter Martin debated Dr. William Johnsson, an Australian adventist professor

403:

The article seems deficient in that it describes the internecine history of the doctrine in great detail but never clearly explains what it is, which should be done in the first paragraph or two. Investigative judgment meaning that God is investigating our character and our sins to determine what

353:

Not in my personal collection, but presumably it would be in the College library. Sorry for suggesting a source that is probably hard to come by :) This comment was left here partly for my own future reference, if I get around to looking up the book, but I thought others might appreciate it too. I

1547:

All - I am not sure how to use this discussion section - so please advise. I tried to clarify the point that "investigative judgment" is actually a label Adventists have given to the Daniel 7:9-10 heavenly court room scene where "the court sits and the books are opened". Thus a judgment based on

579:

I think that some clarity is lost by including the Critic's point of view in almost every section. I think the reader would like to know what the doctrine is (from the official Adventist position) including the official history on the doctrine, and then a section on critics vs answers to critics.

203:

I'm impressed with the Glacier View controversy section. The sources are well balanced. One addition I suggest is to mention the other document as well. The consensus document, which Ford found he could agree with, was prepared by the designated group of scholars. According to my limited reading,

1680:

I found this article while looking for LDS Investigative Judgement belief information. The article is very technical and concentrates mainly on the controversial aspects and personalities who have contributed to the Investigative Judgement controversy and the doctrine. At the moment every single

869:

Also I don't consider "the church has reconfirmed its original position of this doctrinal pillar since 1980" to be correct, in that the doctrine has changed over time. What is has done is confirm the IJ, but I wouldn't say "its original position" in all areas, e.g. literal/figurative building in

585:

JATS and BRI quotes are good sources for conservative denominationally approved reviews of the doctrine. There is a lot of value in comparing and contrasting these mainline conservative sources with Spectrum, defrocked SDA pastors, ex-SDAs etc. But we need to be sure we make it clear when we are

1300:

But God wants them to understand the human heart and to see it as He sees it. The records of the investigative judgment will be open for all. They will be able to see as God can see, and understand the justice of His government as well as His great love. In this way they will be present at the

1221:

Here in the US during the 70s, 80s, and 90s, Venden spoke at least once if not several times at every camp meeting, every College and University, most large churches and hundreds of smaller ones about justification and sanctification by faith and the 7 pillars of the SDA faith, especially the

1635:

One of the reasons for this policy, as I understand it, and the reason all our articles have a separate section just for external links, is that we want our readers to know when clicking on a link will take them offsite. If regulars on this article want to keep the information present in the

565:

What would be more useful for this article is if someone can find a well supported claim along the lines of: "70% of Adventist pastors are unsure if the doctrine of the Investigative Judgment, as taught by the church officially, is accurate". Or "70% of Adventist pastors do not preach on the

298:

I have the original Glacier View documents from one of the attendees and find nothing there (Or in the Daniel and Revelation committee books that followed) suggesting that the church ever concluded that 1844 was not the right year for the start of the Most Holy Place ministry of Christ (the

779:

People who make such claims are totally clueless about Ellen. Take the time to read the 6 volume biography of Ellen White. All this nonsense is discussed openly and fully. The problem is that most critics don't want to know the truth and certainly won't bother to take the time to learn

441:

I question the necessity of the sentence: "Some other Adventist scholars support the doctrine, but only say the event occurred in approximately the year 1844." It lacks citation, and in any case doesn't really add anything of value. What is the difference between "1844" and "approximately

1133:

This material might be helpful and broadly relevant; however it is not presented in an encyclopedic manner -- i.e. it reads somewhat like a story and lacks adequate citation; also it is only a single man's point of view. I have removed it from the article until it can be improved.

1296:

It has been noted that the saved will experience some big surprises in heaven. Friends and family they knew and loved may not be present! And some they knew could not make it are there! They will have looked at the only thing mankind can look at, the outward appearance.

684:

Nice citation hunting, Tonic. I think I read the McLarty article, if it is a recent one. I have also read critics from ellenwhite.org (I think) say that they know many Adventist leaders who disbelieve this or that. I hope that these citations can be added to the article.

966:

I have simplified this section. The details about the 69 and 70 week periods terminating at the baptism/death of Jesus etc. are not relevant to 1844 and the Investigative Judgment, and I have noted in any case that the material is already exactly replicated in the

1494:

means in the 7dA-context ― judging anything, or are they judged, or both? If they aren't judging themselves, who is/are judging? What qualities of /unknown-object/ are evaluated in this judging context? When the judgement is done, what happens next? ... said:

540:

On second thought, perhaps it is worth mentioning the point about the precise starting date. I've worked it into "Derivation of 1844 date", where I think it fits better. It would be worth finding out if any theologians consider that the exact starting date is

509:" have a different view of the doctrine or believe it is inaccurate." This is already stated in the article lead, and also in the criticism section. I don't think it needs to be repeated here -- it is better just to have a section for official statements IMO. 385:"The date October 22 is not mentioned in the Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists. In fact Ellen White (co-founder) only mentions the season of fall, and some Adventists believe(d) that the investigative judgment began in the spring of 1844 ( see 702:

I propose that a lot of content be added to the "Glacier View controversy" section, and that when large enough it be branched out to a new article with a "summary style" left behind, per the policies. Numerous articles link to this precise topic, such as

1459:

Rooyen's book review is now posted, so I have cited it directly and removed mention of Patrick's article (the presently dead link above). As a note for the future, there were two sources cited, and one dead link would not be grounds to remove content.

946:

To be more specific, I believe the article is currently weighted to a critical bias. Material is neutral and reasonably cited, it's just that more weight is given to that point-of-view. I encourage other editors to expand the positive point-of-view.

873:

Finally, it has always been controversial throughout the history of the church, not just recently. I have made some changes to reflect these comments. With all additions, please reliably source any contributions, stating all major points of view.

1510:

Thanks for the query. The article makes it quite clear what the investigative judgment is, I think. I've made a small clarification in the lead. "Professed Christian believers" means exactly that -- people who profess to be Christian believers.

1029:

The dates about the 70 week prophecy come straight from the SDA Bible Commentary, which is about as official as you can get. The assertion that current SDA scholarship no longer defends these dates needs sourced. I've not seen it anywhere.

1344:

God to be vindicated, in order for the entire universe, including us, to see that God is indeed a God of love and justice, in order to make the universe forever safe from sin and its results, the investigative judgment must take place.

2158:

The Pre-advent Judgment article is only a stub, and the topic isn’t understandable or notable outside the context of Investigative Judgment. Knowledge is not a dictionary; there doesn’t need to be a separate entry for every concept. .

1110:

Just to clarify -- It's fine for those details & citations to go in the 70-weeks-prophecy article, but the end-points of the 70 weeks are still irrelevant in the IJ article. Thanks for letting us know those citations skeptic.

1310:

that mankind is held accountable for every word spoken, and that "by your words you shall be justified and by your words you shall be condemned". In John 12:48 Christ says that His Word will judge mankind in the last days.

523:

my edit though. Agreed with other points, but I do think the ASRS is worth mentioning. The fact that you can believe whatever you want about the IJ to join one of the main two Adventist theological organizations (it contains

319:

I just found a comment that "Leaving the Adventist Ministry" by Peter Ballis, professor of sociology at Monash University in Australia, is one of the best sources regarding the fallout from the Glacier View controversy; in a

669:"When I query Adventist pastors, they say they agree with the traditional teaching regarding Daniel 8:14. But these same preachers report they never preach on the topic.... is a doctrine that is best believed and ignored." 719:, and probably many others including potentials. There has been a lot of material written about those events both for and against, which I believe merits such focus. Also, it has been considered one of the most (possibly 827:"Increasingly, I'm inclined to think that many of our pioneers saw the sanctuary teaching less as a distinct doctrine and more as simply our Adventist way of pointing to 'the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.'" 192:

Hi - I've recently expanded this page substantially. If anyone has any comments, I'd love to hear them. It'd be great if someone who has researched the Glacier View controversy could expand that section further as well.

901:

Christian Skeptic, can you please discuss changes here on the talk page, and provide good sources for your edits, prior to make them. Many of your recent edits to this and other articles have reflected a one-sided POV

566:

Investigative Judgment because they have hesitations about the doctrine." I have heard quite a lot of people claim things like this, so I'm sure someone somewhere has done some real research! What about Atoday?

550:

I am still not convinced about mentioning ASRS. The previous version of the article said that the ASRS "poses no theological requirements for membership". This sounds to me like they don't say anything about

1287:

Instead, there are bigger issues involved in the judgment than just us humans. A mature understanding of the purpose of the pre-advent judgment includes us, the entire universe, and even for God Himself.

204:

there was another document prepared, unofficially, by a different group present at the meeting. This document specificially highlighted the differences. It was this document that Ford was trialled by. -

2197: 1755:; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. 1480:

I can find no definition of "investigative judgment". Probably because the formulations trying to define "investigative judgment" assumes too much knowledge of the reader, f.ex. this from the intro:

170: 1148:

Also regarding the recent additions, Venden is a significant Adventist author, known for his emphasis on God's grace. I consider him a relevant source for this article. However a couple of lines is

806:

and therefore not really encyclopedic, at least not for the "history" section which should be hard facts only. Perhaps it can be fitted in elsewhere, maybe in critcism? (Is it a veiled criticism?)

1820: 1705:

Thanks for the comment, I've taken the liberty to add a tag at the top the of the article. I agree that every paragraph is about controversy (way too much), this article needs a rewrite IMHO.

484:

suggested that the investigative judgment occurred in the spring, and not autumn, in one of his numerous suggested editorial revisions of the 1911 edition of the book. In point 70, he declared

1684:

A beginner - like me - needs to know what the current position is and then the beliefs and practical implications which derive from that. The article is very short on practical implications.

1600:

I changed the "Counter Arguments" section title to "Adventist Response to Critics" since it is confusing as to whether "counter arguments" is a reference to the subject - or to the Critics.

2202: 2047: 733:

Yes, I think this would be a very good idea in the long term. Currently I don't have much more material to add. Some more good quality research needs to be done, and more sources gathered.

586:

doing it. Basically I am appealing for clarity since readers will come here first with a "What is it?" kind of question and next with a "and what do the critics say about that?" question.

1661:

Hi Simbagraphix, thank you for your constructive revisions, which improve the quality of the article rather than taking an axe to it. I think that this is the best way to move forward.

1529:

Tonic's mini-adjustment helps, but I agree Rursus that it is a little obscure. That is simply the nature of the belief, one might say. Yet if anyone can clarify it, please go ahead.

2192: 438:

If ASRS doesn't say anything about the IJ, do we need to mention it at all? I don't think it is necessary to include something about the ASRS simply to counter-balance the ATS view.

248:

The Ten-Point Critique (Spectrum's title. Adventist Review calls it 'Statement on Desmond Ford'. It is the document prepared by a small group to highlight the differences.)

165: 63: 1581:

There have been several POV edits with no sources to back them up. Also, There is too much reliance on a single source--Cottrel--need more sources to back up his POV.

858:

The assertion it is a "pillar" is overemphasized in the lead, I believe. To illustrate, this language is not used in the 28 Fundamentals. I do believe however there is

288:

this correct? If so (and a citation would be better), it would make a good addition IMO. (I haven't read/listened to the 1979 address or Glacier View yet.) Regards,

1899: 1636:

in-the-body-of-the-article links, they'll need to convert those links to references using, for example, the "cite book" template for Bible verses. Best regards, –

2089: 2085: 2071: 1931: 1927: 1913: 2187: 146: 136: 2057: 928:

as I slowly work through his article. This is a work-in-progress: I look forward to a greater variety of sources being used. I encourage other editors to "

712: 2048:

https://web.archive.org/web/20060625231246/http://www.atoday.com/6.0.html?&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=49&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=1&cHash=0b214c4947

2207: 1314:

God in all ages. Yet there will come a time when even the devil himself will bow and acknowledge the justice and fairness of God. “At the name of Jesus

1633:"Knowledge articles may include links to web pages outside Knowledge (external links), but they should not normally be used in the body of an article." 1011:

As for updated dates for Jesus' crucifixion, etc., I have personally heard Adventist scholars say this, but it would be nice to have a good reference.

1681:

paragraph seems to be about controversy. I appreciate this is an excellent source of information for church members but it is unsuited to a beginner.

1084:

You have some good sources here – please add them! The individuals cited are all from the more conservative POV, which this article needs more of for

527:

than the ATS) is highly significant. It represents a major POV, along with the official position which is a very major POV but still just one POV.

2051: 355: 216: 112: 435:

to include the detail about Prescott's interpretation (spring vs. autumn). It just seems like a piece of historical trivia, but not very notable.

2182: 1248:. This shift in understanding has definitely occurred if you compare older writings (i.e. pre 1970s) with modern authors (including Venden). 998:

be viewed as representative of "the truth . . . in Jesus" (Eph. 4:21) that Seventh-day Adventists around the globe cherish and proclaim.", a

496:

Renamed "modern Adventist views" back to "Official belief statements", because there are also historical statements here (. See also below...

1604:

I.J -- not counter to some critic. I have changed the section title to point out that this is supposed to be Adventist response to critics.

1207:

to Ford and is the main reason why most SDA's reject Ford's strange ideas. It therefore should hold a prominant position in this article.

1421: 647: 2041: 2027: 1691: 1859: 1824: 1485:

unique Seventh-day Adventist doctrine, which asserts that a judgment of professed Christian believers has been in progress since 1844.

762: 103: 58: 2067:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

1909:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

1869: 1900:

https://web.archive.org/web/20080305012831/http://www.atoday.com/magazine/2002/11/progressive-and-traditional-adventists-examined

1788: 1564: 716: 488:"It seems to me abundantly evident from the Scripture and history that the 2300 days commenced in the spring of B.C. 457...", 1240:

What would be extremely helpful would be a well-sourced explanation of how the SDA understanding of the IJ has changed from

447:

as other scholars. Some Adventists however (the progressives) do not agree with the doctrine, full stop. What do you think?

2058:

https://web.archive.org/web/20071012233622/http://www.worldevangelicalalliance.com/news/WEAAdventistDialogue20070809d.pdf

1903: 1326:

tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." (Emphasis added) Philippians 2:10, 11

2132: 1974: 1889: 1879: 33: 1784: 1284:

the world. But, God already “knows who are his,” and certainly doesn't need years and years to pore over the books.

2061: 2009: 1534: 1465: 1381: 1227: 1212: 1173: 1157: 1093: 1067: 1016: 968: 952: 937: 879: 379: 2088:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

1930:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

2164: 2052:

http://www.atoday.com/6.0.html?&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=49&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=1&cHash=0b214c4947

1425: 651: 1695: 2123: 2001: 1965: 1851: 1666: 1516: 1253: 1139: 1116: 980: 907: 811: 1775: 1735: 236: 2152: 1997: 1993: 1843: 1774:

To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant

1646: 1223: 1208: 1063: 766: 2160: 354:

just checked, and Arthur Patrick references him multiple times in the 25 Years Since Glacier View article

231:

which is an independent magazine, but the format is HTML or PDF, which are standard formats. I went with

2107:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

2095: 1949:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

1937: 1586: 1168:

could be interpreted they colluded. Yet claims of collusion are absent from reliable sources I know of.

506: 39: 2042:

http://atoday.com/series/1844-lesson-commentaries/part-13/sanctuary-doctrine-asset-or-liability-part-13

2028:

http://atoday.com/series/1844-lesson-commentaries/part-12/sanctuary-doctrine-asset-or-liability-part-12

2000:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 1850:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 228: 1816: 1687: 1609: 1560: 1552: 1530: 1461: 1417: 1403: 1377: 1169: 1153: 1089: 1012: 948: 933: 875: 758: 746: 724: 686: 643: 630: 591: 528: 459: 392: 358: 331: 304: 289: 260: 205: 1088:. I do maintain with TonictheBrown that many Adventist scholars recognize these dates as uncertain. 21: 2148: 1860:

https://web.archive.org/web/20091212000000/http://www.jesusinstituteforum.org/AssetOrLiability.html

1710: 1004: 785: 743: 412: 326: 95: 1623:

Hi, all. I noticed that this article has numerous external links (links to off-wiki sites) in the

1445: 971:

article where it belongs. Also, these details about 27 AD and so on are not explained in the book

220: 111:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

2035: 2021: 1870:

https://web.archive.org/web/20061011110908/http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents.htm

1662: 1512: 1392:

contemporary denomination is studying the subject -- there is no change from the 1872 statements.

1249: 1135: 1112: 976: 903: 807: 734: 673: 567: 513: 448: 416: 341: 270: 194: 2092:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

1934:

before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template

411:

to move to a separate linked page) before moving on. Sincerely, One humble end user's opinion

2108: 1950: 1376:

Exactly what changes did Heppenstall and others cause? More details would improve the article.

1739: 1638: 1449: 803: 375: 1270: 245:

The Role of Ellen G. White Writings in Doctrinal Matters (consensus statement on Ellen White)

1582: 1500: 925: 708: 284: 2115: 1957: 1863: 1246:

God showing the onlooking universe the reasons for his decisions about who can go to heaven

321: 1605: 1556: 1399: 587: 300: 1873: 1441: 843: 629:

Further to what I said above, here is a claim by Des Ford from his interview with Atoday

492:

also arguing it was the original interpretation of Miller. This suggestion was rejected.

259:

As I mentioned earlier, I am impressed with the article as it already stands. Good job! -

2074:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 1916:, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by 1760: 1706: 1085: 929: 820: 781: 481: 2114:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

1956:

If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with

1904:

http://www.atoday.com/magazine/2002/11/progressive-and-traditional-adventists-examined

2176: 1890:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070531225517/http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc.asp

1880:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070531225517/http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc.asp

1767: 1149: 859: 613: 386: 1444:). Can someone find an alternative source or delete this part out of the article? -- 1359:

This section is a synthesis of Venden, Morris, 1984, "The Hour of God's Judgment,"

1628: 999: 704: 458:

of October 22, 1844 - we should see what some BRI articles say, JATS articles etc.

108: 2168: 2137: 1979: 1828: 1792: 1714: 1699: 1670: 1651: 1613: 1590: 1568: 1538: 1520: 1504: 1469: 1453: 1429: 1407: 1385: 1257: 1231: 1216: 1177: 1161: 1143: 1120: 1097: 1071: 1020: 984: 956: 941: 911: 883: 815: 789: 770: 749: 737: 727: 689: 676: 655: 595: 570: 531: 516: 462: 451: 420: 395: 361: 344: 334: 308: 292: 273: 263: 208: 197: 2081: 1923: 1496: 2080:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 2062:

http://www.worldevangelicalalliance.com/news/WEAAdventistDialogue20070809d.pdf

2010:

https://web.archive.org/web/20070817052909/http://www.jesusinstituteforum.org/

1922:. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than 1728: 1186:

I replaced the statement about Brinsmead with the source it came from--Knight.

85: 79: 52: 1893: 1883: 1763:

then you may need to upload it to Knowledge (Commons does not allow fair use)

1361:

Uncommon Ground: A look at the distinctive beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists,

505:

Removed this statement: "Many Adventists such as those who label themselves "

1781:

This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image

1490:

What? Who are judging whome? Are "professed Christian believers" ― whatever

723:

most) damaging/controversial events in the history of the Adventist church.

155: 89: 1269: 502:

Removed reference to ASRS, as they do not have a relevant belief statement

430:

I'd just like to raise a few points about the new section ("other views")

357:. It would be good to quote the original source. I will do this sometime. 1199:

section is a synthesis of an entire chapter by Venden as it appears in

242:

Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary (consensus statement on the sanctuary)

2013: 1807: 1062:, Review and Herald Pub.), all support 457BC, 27, 31, and 34 AD. 477:

Removed trivia about spring vs. autumn 1844 (as discussed above)

224: 661:

And here is what John McLarty (editor of AToday) has to say in

15: 1808:

https://en.wikipedia.org/Heavenly_sanctuary#Official_position

990:

I agree the "70 weeks prophecy" details needed trimming here.

154: 1279:: Morris Venden's parable about the Investigative Judement 2004:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

1854:

for additional information. I made the following changes:

215:

I found some online sources, which were referenced in the

1242:

God judging people to decide their eligibility for heaven

1864:

http://www.jesusinstituteforum.org/AssetOrLiability.html

1036:

The Seventy Weeks, Leviticus, and the Nature of Prophecy

1847: 382: 1874:

http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/documents.htm

1442:

http://sdanet.org/atissue/doctrines/inves-judgment.htm

844:

http://people.wwc.edu/staff/thomal/gleaner/baptist.htm

330:. It would be good to incorporate this work sometime. 235:

for convenience, but it is up to you. See the section

2198:

High-importance Seventh-day Adventist Church articles

1008:

describes it and/or similar books as "semi-official".

499:

Removed reference to October 22 (as discussed above)

340:

I don't have access to the source - do you have it?

107:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2084:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 1926:using the archive tool instructions below. Editors 1766:If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no 614:http://www.whiteestate.org/issues/GC-Prescott.html 391:Good content to verify and then (presumably) add. 269:I've done some more updating - what do you think? 251:Papers Prepared for the Sanctuary Review Committee 2203:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church articles 802:I've removed this from the article. I feel it is 744:25 year anniversary Sydney Adventist Forum report 698:New subpage suggestion: Glacier View controversy 2070:This message was posted before February 2018. 1912:This message was posted before February 2018. 2193:B-Class Seventh-day Adventist Church articles 8: 1627:of the article. That's not permitted by our 1619:Significant cleanup needed re external links 1720:File:TheWayItWas.jpg Nominated for Deletion 713:History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church 1894:http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc.asp 1884:http://www.whiteestate.org/books/gc/gc.asp 1814: 1440:Hi there, the source #6 seems to be dead ( 47: 1992:I have just modified 3 external links on 1842:I have just modified 5 external links on 166:WikiProject Seventh-day Adventist Church 1352: 836: 606: 49: 19: 1821:2601:192:4200:1E42:4D03:E775:34BD:19AD 1806:a decent explanation is provided here 1738:, has been nominated for deletion at 7: 2188:Low-importance Christianity articles 101:This article is within the scope of 2014:http://www.jesusinstituteforum.org/ 1770:then it cannot be uploaded or used. 324:which I assume is by the editor of 38:It is of interest to the following 1631:, which says, among other things, 1002:from page iv apparently. I recall 121:Knowledge:WikiProject Christianity 14: 2208:WikiProject Christianity articles 1996:. Please take a moment to review 1846:. Please take a moment to review 1776:image page (File:TheWayItWas.jpg) 995:Seventh-day Adventists Believe... 124:Template:WikiProject Christianity 1727: 221:Ministry magazine (October 1980) 88: 78: 51: 20: 1744:Deletion requests February 2012 1734:An image used in this article, 141:This article has been rated as 1330:Those watching the controversy 973:Seventh-day Adventists Believe 717:Seventh-day Adventist theology 239:which includes the following: 198:07:11, 15 September 2006 (UTC) 1: 2183:B-Class Christianity articles 2138:23:53, 15 November 2017 (UTC) 1793:23:43, 16 February 2012 (UTC) 1715:01:26, 21 December 2010 (UTC) 1700:00:55, 21 December 2010 (UTC) 1671:13:00, 12 December 2010 (UTC) 1652:12:59, 10 November 2010 (UTC) 1596:Adventist Response to Critics 1476:Definition missing (actually) 1320:knee should bow...; and that 1044:Daniel: The vision of the End 274:13:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC) 264:17:15, 12 November 2006 (UTC) 163:This article is supported by 115:and see a list of open tasks. 1829:21:16, 25 October 2015 (UTC) 1386:14:53, 1 February 2009 (UTC) 1258:09:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC) 1232:23:10, 1 February 2009 (UTC) 1217:17:24, 1 February 2009 (UTC) 1178:14:40, 1 February 2009 (UTC) 1162:14:33, 1 February 2009 (UTC) 1144:08:12, 1 February 2009 (UTC) 1121:09:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC) 1098:08:01, 2 February 2009 (UTC) 1072:17:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC) 1021:06:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC) 985:04:17, 26 January 2009 (UTC) 962:Detailed calculation of 1844 957:14:03, 24 January 2009 (UTC) 942:13:15, 24 January 2009 (UTC) 912:08:00, 2 November 2008 (UTC) 884:04:28, 31 October 2008 (UTC) 750:10:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC) 219:article on the page. One is 209:12:37, 8 November 2006 (UTC) 1742:in the following category: 816:04:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC) 738:13:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC) 728:17:19, 19 August 2007 (UTC) 690:13:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC) 677:11:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC) 571:10:27, 27 August 2007 (UTC) 532:15:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC) 517:12:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC) 463:11:01, 20 August 2007 (UTC) 452:14:44, 18 August 2007 (UTC) 396:18:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC) 254:Desmond Ford Correspondence 217:25 Years After Glacier View 2224: 2101:(last update: 5 June 2024) 1989:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1980:11:22, 12 April 2017 (UTC) 1943:(last update: 5 June 2024) 1839:Hello fellow Wikipedians, 1676:Simple introduction needed 1614:14:34, 9 August 2010 (UTC) 1408:14:46, 9 August 2010 (UTC) 1060:Daniel the Seer of Babylon 1052:Daniel: Hostage in Babylon 596:12:54, 9 August 2010 (UTC) 556:disagree with Creationism? 374:I found these comments by 362:13:39, 21 March 2007 (UTC) 345:07:49, 21 March 2007 (UTC) 335:16:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC) 309:12:41, 9 August 2010 (UTC) 237:Sanctuary Debate Documents 147:project's importance scale 1569:04:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC) 1539:09:19, 14 July 2009 (UTC) 1521:11:23, 21 June 2009 (UTC) 1505:18:47, 20 June 2009 (UTC) 1430:00:31, 19 July 2011 (UTC) 969:Prophecy of Seventy Weeks 924:I'm adding material from 790:22:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC) 771:16:51, 20 July 2011 (UTC) 656:01:45, 18 July 2011 (UTC) 625:Pastors secretly disagree 421:01:52, 26 June 2012 (UTC) 380:Talk:Great Disappointment 299:Investigative Judgment). 293:13:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC) 162: 140: 73: 46: 2169:17:52, 3 June 2019 (UTC) 1591:14:33, 7 June 2010 (UTC) 1470:09:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC) 1454:21:12, 16 May 2009 (UTC) 1152:, not whole paragraphs. 426:Too much trivial detail? 229:Spectrum (November 1980) 104:WikiProject Christianity 1985:External links modified 1835:External links modified 1129:Who needs the Judgment? 993:I think the claim that 2153:Investigative_judgment 1994:Investigative judgment 1844:Investigative judgment 1785:CommonsNotificationBot 1280: 1197:Who needs the Judement 1054:, Stanborough Press), 892:its original position. 616:, suggestion number 70 507:progressive Adventists 159: 28:This article is rated 1629:external links policy 1275: 1046:, Andrews U. Press), 866:mention in the lead. 404:our judgment will be? 158: 127:Christianity articles 2082:regular verification 1924:regular verification 1736:File:TheWayItWas.jpg 1272:File:TheWayItWas.jpg 1205:THE primary response 370:Possible new content 2149:Pre-advent_judgment 2147:I propose to merge 2072:After February 2018 1914:After February 2018 1577:Substantive editing 1005:Seeking a Sanctuary 227:format. Another is 96:Christianity portal 2151:into this article 2126:InternetArchiveBot 2077:InternetArchiveBot 1968:InternetArchiveBot 1919:InternetArchiveBot 1768:fair use rationale 1292:For the human race 1281: 473:My changes today: 160: 34:content assessment 2102: 1944: 1831: 1819:comment added by 1799: 1798: 1748:What should I do? 1740:Wikimedia Commons 1690:comment added by 1572: 1555:comment added by 1420:comment added by 1224:Christian Skeptic 1209:Christian Skeptic 1064:Christian Skeptic 761:comment added by 665:vol 14, issue 6. 646:comment added by 376:User:CheerfulPaul 185: 184: 181: 180: 177: 176: 2215: 2136: 2127: 2100: 2099: 2078: 2039: 2025: 1978: 1969: 1942: 1941: 1920: 1759:If the image is 1731: 1724: 1723: 1702: 1650: 1643: 1571: 1549: 1432: 1364: 1357: 1273: 1265:Removed material 926:Raymond Cottrell 846: 841: 798:Thompson opinion 780:something.... 773: 709:Robert Brinsmead 658: 617: 611: 285:Avondale College 188:Recent expansion 129: 128: 125: 122: 119: 98: 93: 92: 82: 75: 74: 69: 66: 55: 48: 31: 25: 24: 16: 2223: 2222: 2218: 2217: 2216: 2214: 2213: 2212: 2173: 2172: 2145: 2143:Merger proposal 2130: 2125: 2093: 2086:have permission 2076: 2033: 2019: 2002:this simple FaQ 1987: 1972: 1967: 1935: 1928:have permission 1918: 1852:this simple FaQ 1837: 1804: 1722: 1685: 1678: 1659: 1639: 1637: 1621: 1598: 1579: 1550: 1531:Colin MacLaurin 1478: 1462:Colin MacLaurin 1438: 1415: 1378:Colin MacLaurin 1374: 1369: 1368: 1367: 1358: 1354: 1341: 1332: 1307: 1294: 1271: 1201:Uncommon Ground 1170:Colin MacLaurin 1154:Colin MacLaurin 1131: 1090:Colin MacLaurin 1013:Colin MacLaurin 964: 949:Colin MacLaurin 934:Colin MacLaurin 922: 876:Colin MacLaurin 856: 851: 850: 849: 842: 838: 823:has commented, 800: 756: 747:Colin MacLaurin 725:Colin MacLaurin 700: 687:Colin MacLaurin 663:Adventist Today 641: 627: 622: 621: 620: 612: 608: 529:Colin MacLaurin 471: 460:Colin MacLaurin 428: 393:Colin MacLaurin 372: 359:Colin MacLaurin 332:Colin MacLaurin 317: 290:Colin MacLaurin 281: 261:Colin MacLaurin 206:Colin MacLaurin 190: 171:High-importance 126: 123: 120: 117: 116: 94: 87: 67: 61: 32:on Knowledge's 29: 12: 11: 5: 2221: 2219: 2211: 2210: 2205: 2200: 2195: 2190: 2185: 2175: 2174: 2161:Bluepenciltime 2144: 2141: 2120: 2119: 2112: 2065: 2064: 2056:Added archive 2054: 2046:Added archive 2044: 2030: 2016: 2008:Added archive 1986: 1983: 1962: 1961: 1954: 1907: 1906: 1898:Added archive 1896: 1888:Added archive 1886: 1878:Added archive 1876: 1868:Added archive 1866: 1858:Added archive 1836: 1833: 1803: 1802:crappy article 1800: 1797: 1796: 1772: 1771: 1764: 1750: 1749: 1732: 1721: 1718: 1677: 1674: 1658: 1655: 1620: 1617: 1597: 1594: 1578: 1575: 1574: 1573: 1544: 1543: 1542: 1541: 1524: 1523: 1488: 1487: 1477: 1474: 1473: 1472: 1437: 1434: 1422:173.30.209.199 1411: 1410: 1394: 1393: 1373: 1370: 1366: 1365: 1351: 1350: 1346: 1340: 1337: 1331: 1328: 1306: 1303: 1293: 1290: 1277:The Way It Was 1263: 1261: 1260: 1237: 1236: 1235: 1234: 1219: 1190: 1189: 1188: 1187: 1181: 1180: 1130: 1127: 1126: 1125: 1124: 1123: 1105: 1104: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1100: 1077: 1076: 1075: 1074: 1024: 1023: 1009: 991: 963: 960: 921: 918: 917: 916: 915: 914: 896: 895: 894: 893: 855: 852: 848: 847: 835: 834: 830: 829: 828: 821:Alden Thompson 799: 796: 795: 794: 793: 792: 741: 740: 699: 696: 695: 694: 693: 692: 671: 670: 648:173.30.209.199 637: 636: 626: 623: 619: 618: 605: 604: 600: 599: 598: 582: 581: 576: 575: 574: 573: 560: 559: 558: 557: 545: 544: 543: 542: 535: 534: 511: 510: 503: 500: 497: 490: 489: 482:W. W. Prescott 479: 478: 470: 467: 466: 465: 444: 443: 439: 436: 427: 424: 408: 407: 406: 405: 371: 368: 367: 366: 365: 364: 348: 347: 316: 313: 312: 311: 283:A lecturer at 280: 277: 267: 266: 257: 256: 255: 252: 249: 246: 243: 212: 211: 189: 186: 183: 182: 179: 178: 175: 174: 161: 151: 150: 143:Low-importance 139: 133: 132: 130: 113:the discussion 100: 99: 83: 71: 70: 68:Low‑importance 56: 44: 43: 37: 26: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2220: 2209: 2206: 2204: 2201: 2199: 2196: 2194: 2191: 2189: 2186: 2184: 2181: 2180: 2178: 2171: 2170: 2166: 2162: 2156: 2154: 2150: 2142: 2140: 2139: 2134: 2129: 2128: 2117: 2113: 2110: 2106: 2105: 2104: 2097: 2091: 2087: 2083: 2079: 2073: 2068: 2063: 2059: 2055: 2053: 2049: 2045: 2043: 2037: 2031: 2029: 2023: 2017: 2015: 2011: 2007: 2006: 2005: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1990: 1984: 1982: 1981: 1976: 1971: 1970: 1959: 1955: 1952: 1948: 1947: 1946: 1939: 1933: 1929: 1925: 1921: 1915: 1910: 1905: 1901: 1897: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1885: 1881: 1877: 1875: 1871: 1867: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1853: 1849: 1845: 1840: 1834: 1832: 1830: 1826: 1822: 1818: 1810: 1809: 1801: 1795: 1794: 1790: 1786: 1782: 1778: 1777: 1769: 1765: 1762: 1758: 1757: 1756: 1754: 1747: 1746: 1745: 1741: 1737: 1733: 1730: 1726: 1725: 1719: 1717: 1716: 1712: 1708: 1703: 1701: 1697: 1693: 1692:118.90.34.224 1689: 1682: 1675: 1673: 1672: 1668: 1664: 1663:Tonicthebrown 1656: 1654: 1653: 1648: 1644: 1642: 1634: 1630: 1626: 1618: 1616: 1615: 1611: 1607: 1601: 1595: 1593: 1592: 1588: 1584: 1576: 1570: 1566: 1562: 1558: 1554: 1546: 1545: 1540: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1527: 1526: 1525: 1522: 1518: 1514: 1513:Tonicthebrown 1509: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1502: 1498: 1493: 1486: 1483: 1482: 1481: 1475: 1471: 1467: 1463: 1458: 1457: 1456: 1455: 1451: 1447: 1443: 1435: 1433: 1431: 1427: 1423: 1419: 1409: 1405: 1401: 1396: 1395: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1383: 1379: 1371: 1362: 1356: 1353: 1349: 1345: 1338: 1336: 1329: 1327: 1325: 1324: 1319: 1318: 1311: 1304: 1302: 1298: 1291: 1289: 1285: 1278: 1274: 1268: 1266: 1259: 1255: 1251: 1250:Tonicthebrown 1247: 1243: 1239: 1238: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1220: 1218: 1214: 1210: 1206: 1202: 1198: 1194: 1193: 1192: 1191: 1185: 1184: 1183: 1182: 1179: 1175: 1171: 1166: 1165: 1164: 1163: 1159: 1155: 1151: 1146: 1145: 1141: 1137: 1136:Tonicthebrown 1128: 1122: 1118: 1114: 1113:Tonicthebrown 1109: 1108: 1107: 1106: 1099: 1095: 1091: 1087: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1080: 1079: 1078: 1073: 1069: 1065: 1061: 1057: 1053: 1049: 1045: 1041: 1037: 1034:, ed. (1986, 1033: 1028: 1027: 1026: 1025: 1022: 1018: 1014: 1010: 1007: 1006: 1001: 996: 992: 989: 988: 987: 986: 982: 978: 977:Tonicthebrown 974: 970: 961: 959: 958: 954: 950: 944: 943: 939: 935: 931: 927: 920:Negative bias 919: 913: 909: 905: 904:Tonicthebrown 900: 899: 898: 897: 890: 889: 888: 887: 886: 885: 881: 877: 871: 867: 865: 861: 853: 845: 840: 837: 833: 826: 825: 824: 822: 818: 817: 813: 809: 808:Tonicthebrown 805: 797: 791: 787: 783: 778: 777: 776: 775: 774: 772: 768: 764: 760: 752: 751: 748: 745: 739: 736: 735:Tonicthebrown 732: 731: 730: 729: 726: 722: 718: 714: 710: 706: 697: 691: 688: 683: 682: 681: 680: 679: 678: 675: 674:Tonicthebrown 668: 667: 666: 664: 659: 657: 653: 649: 645: 634: 633: 632: 631: 624: 615: 610: 607: 603: 597: 593: 589: 584: 583: 578: 577: 572: 569: 568:Tonicthebrown 564: 563: 562: 561: 554: 549: 548: 547: 546: 539: 538: 537: 536: 533: 530: 526: 525:more scholars 521: 520: 519: 518: 515: 514:Tonicthebrown 508: 504: 501: 498: 495: 494: 493: 487: 486: 485: 483: 476: 475: 474: 468: 464: 461: 456: 455: 454: 453: 450: 449:Tonicthebrown 440: 437: 433: 432: 431: 425: 423: 422: 418: 414: 402: 401: 400: 399: 398: 397: 394: 389: 387: 384: 381: 377: 369: 363: 360: 356: 352: 351: 350: 349: 346: 343: 342:Tonicthebrown 339: 338: 337: 336: 333: 329: 328: 323: 314: 310: 306: 302: 297: 296: 295: 294: 291: 286: 278: 276: 275: 272: 271:Tonicthebrown 265: 262: 258: 253: 250: 247: 244: 241: 240: 238: 234: 230: 226: 222: 218: 214: 213: 210: 207: 202: 201: 200: 199: 196: 195:Tonicthebrown 187: 172: 169:(assessed as 168: 167: 157: 153: 152: 148: 144: 138: 135: 134: 131: 114: 110: 106: 105: 97: 91: 86: 84: 81: 77: 76: 72: 65: 60: 57: 54: 50: 45: 41: 35: 27: 23: 18: 17: 2157: 2146: 2124: 2121: 2096:source check 2075: 2069: 2066: 1991: 1988: 1966: 1963: 1938:source check 1917: 1911: 1908: 1841: 1838: 1815:— Preceding 1811: 1805: 1780: 1779: 1773: 1752: 1751: 1743: 1704: 1683: 1679: 1660: 1641:OhioStandard 1640: 1632: 1624: 1622: 1602: 1599: 1580: 1491: 1489: 1484: 1479: 1439: 1436:Source dead. 1416:— Preceding 1412: 1375: 1360: 1355: 1347: 1342: 1333: 1322: 1321: 1316: 1315: 1312: 1308: 1299: 1295: 1286: 1282: 1276: 1264: 1262: 1245: 1241: 1204: 1200: 1196: 1147: 1132: 1059: 1055: 1051: 1047: 1043: 1039: 1035: 1031: 1003: 994: 972: 965: 945: 923: 872: 868: 863: 857: 839: 831: 819: 801: 763:208.80.25.62 757:— Preceding 753: 742: 720: 705:Desmond Ford 701: 672: 662: 660: 642:— Preceding 638: 628: 609: 601: 552: 524: 512: 491: 480: 472: 445: 429: 409: 390: 373: 325: 318: 282: 268: 232: 191: 164: 142: 118:Christianity 109:Christianity 102: 59:Christianity 40:WikiProjects 1753:Don't panic 1686:—Preceding 1583:Allenroyboy 1551:—Preceding 1372:Heppenstall 1363:pps. 34-40 1339:God Himself 1305:The Accuser 711:, possibly 279:PUC lecture 2177:Categories 2133:Report bug 1975:Report bug 1606:BobRyan777 1557:BobRyan777 1400:BobRyan777 1348:References 1150:due weight 832:References 804:WP:Opinion 602:References 588:BobRyan777 541:important. 301:BobRyan777 2116:this tool 2109:this tool 2036:dead link 2022:dead link 1958:this tool 1951:this tool 1707:Willfults 1042:, (1987, 782:RVscholar 383:as of now 322:blog post 64:Adventist 2122:Cheers.— 1964:Cheers.— 1817:unsigned 1761:non-free 1688:unsigned 1565:contribs 1553:unsigned 1418:unsigned 1038:, BRI), 1032:Holbrook 932:" also! 870:heaven. 759:unsigned 644:unsigned 413:Jinjit82 327:Spectrum 233:Spectrum 2040:tag to 2026:tag to 1998:my edit 1848:my edit 1446:Thekryz 1086:balance 1058:(2004, 1056:Pfandll 1050:(1991, 1040:Doukhan 930:be bold 469:Changes 315:Sources 145:on the 30:B-class 2032:Added 2018:Added 1657:Thanks 1497:Rursus 1323:every 862:for a 854:Pillar 442:1844"? 36:scale. 1501:bork² 1317:every 1244:, to 1000:quote 864:brief 2165:talk 1825:talk 1789:talk 1711:talk 1696:talk 1667:talk 1647:talk 1625:body 1610:talk 1587:talk 1561:talk 1535:talk 1517:talk 1492:that 1466:talk 1450:talk 1426:talk 1404:talk 1382:talk 1254:talk 1228:talk 1213:talk 1195:The 1174:talk 1158:talk 1140:talk 1117:talk 1094:talk 1068:talk 1048:Down 1017:talk 981:talk 953:talk 938:talk 908:talk 880:talk 860:room 812:talk 786:talk 767:talk 652:talk 592:talk 417:talk 305:talk 225:DjVu 2155:. 2090:RfC 2060:to 2050:to 2012:to 1932:RfC 1902:to 1892:to 1882:to 1872:to 1862:to 721:the 553:any 378:on 223:in 137:Low 2179:: 2167:) 2103:. 2098:}} 2094:{{ 2038:}} 2034:{{ 2024:}} 2020:{{ 1945:. 1940:}} 1936:{{ 1827:) 1791:) 1783:-- 1713:) 1698:) 1669:) 1612:) 1589:) 1567:) 1563:• 1537:) 1519:) 1503:) 1468:) 1452:) 1428:) 1406:) 1384:) 1267:: 1256:) 1230:) 1215:) 1176:) 1160:) 1142:) 1119:) 1096:) 1070:) 1019:) 983:) 955:) 940:) 910:) 882:) 814:) 788:) 769:) 715:, 707:, 654:) 594:) 419:) 307:) 173:). 62:: 2163:( 2135:) 2131:( 2118:. 2111:. 1977:) 1973:( 1960:. 1953:. 1823:( 1787:( 1709:( 1694:( 1665:( 1649:) 1645:( 1608:( 1585:( 1559:( 1533:( 1515:( 1499:( 1464:( 1448:( 1424:( 1402:( 1380:( 1252:( 1226:( 1211:( 1172:( 1156:( 1138:( 1115:( 1092:( 1066:( 1015:( 979:( 951:( 936:( 906:( 878:( 810:( 784:( 765:( 650:( 590:( 415:( 303:( 149:. 42::

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index