Larry Kirkpatrick

A Positive Place on the Web for the Third Angel's Message

BXIX (Basic eXperience in Christ)


What does the basic experience in Christ look like? How do you live your day to day life as a Christian?

True Christianity is a transformative religion. That is, on the basis of divine revelation, we hold that the human race has been damaged by a moral Fall. When Adam and Eve chose to disobey God, they brought upon themselves and all their progeny the twisting of their humanity. The goal of Christianity is to make it possible for those sharing this damaged nature to form righteous characters in spite of it, to be transformed, and in their lives to show that the power of God heals those willing to be healed.

God desires to change His people but He requires our cooperation. He does not force us to change; He offers opportunities. Each day is a unique, unrepeatable opportunity to cooperate in being transformed; a unique, unrepeatable opportunity to draw close to our Father in Heaven through Jesus and the Holy Spirit. We now outline the pattern, but with this caveat. We here propose that Christians take far more seriously the biblical pattern for the day--namely, that it be viewed as encompassing a time period of evening to evening.


Being Found in Him


Being Found in Him

When you read the Bible from front to back, something should jump right out at you: From Genesis to Revelation, one of the most common spiritual problems, is self-righteousness. And at the last ticking of time, in the last fleeting moments before earth’s midnight arrives, it is no different. Our danger of self-righteousness, may be even greater than other generations, for on us shines the full light of Bible truth. God’s sending us great light is no indication of special favor or goodness in us. We dare not nurture the slightest notion of pride, for pride is deadly.

We also live at the age when the Christian world makes light of God’s law, when obedience itself is viewed as suspect. We live in an age of cheap piety and the casting of charges easily, without a second...


What is the New Theology, part 5: Is Sin Choice or Nature?


The New Theology teaches that the primary problem that the gospel is meant to deal with is not human choice but human nature. “Sin” is made firstly a matter of our nature. One way this is sometimes said is that, “You are not a sinner because you sin; you sin because you are a sinner.”

The problem, according to the New Theology, is not what we end with, but what we begin with. The character at last developed in one’s life, is less significant, while the equipment we are born with, concerning which we have exercised no personal choice, is made most significant. Built into the core of the New Theology is an antipathy to issues concerning freewill, and an exalting of the significance of aspects of the human situation concerning which we can do nothing. In sharp contrast, the messenger of the Lord says,


What is the New Theology, part 4: Markers


Contrasting, the New Theology with the true theology

In its early and middle days, it was relatively easy to spot the New Theology. Its proponents openly claimed that, this side of translation, real victory over sin was impossible. But with increasing frequency we hear advocates of the New Theology say that yes, you can have victory over sin by the understanding of salvation that they teach. The “Can you have victory over sin?” test no longer suffices. The disease has advanced to another stage.


What is the New Theology, part 12: Selective use of the Writings of EGW


Revelation by its nature marks off a boundary. It says, “This is truth and you cannot countermand.” It marks the dividing line between what God speaks by divine authority and what man says in his own authority. God’s information is pure, protected from error by the phenomenon of inspiration. Man’s material is a miserable tissue of speculations and nothingnesses.

Thus, inspired writings can be inconvenient. They get in the way of human ideas. Since Ellen G. White wrote over 100,000 pages it becomes tempting for advocates of error to bend the information. Selected bits of her writings are quoted to persuade the listener that a teaching is sound, while the preferred teaching of the teacher often directly contradicts the truth. Will we use the inspired writings given us by God only selectively, or will we let them speak to us more broadly with their full testimony? In some cases White's writings have been presented in such a manner that they appear to teach original sin.


What is the New Theology, part 11: Does the 1844 Investigative Judgment Really Matter?


The New Theology has no need for the Bible’s teachings of Jesus’ movement from the holy to the most holy place in heaven in 1844 at the end of the 2300 day/year prophecy. The New Theology-infected are willing to say that 1844 was necessary. They may even in some vague way believe it. And yet, the description of the investigative judgment shows it to be only an empty add-on which plays no effective part in their gospel.

Christ moving into the most holy place to cleanse the sanctuary, an investigative judgment to see who “Through the grace of God and their own diligent effort” have become “conquerors in the battle with evil” (The Great Controversy, p. 425), is about the development of a people who follow Jesus into the zone where there is no sinning. But this is supremely unimportant in the New Theology.


What is the New Theology, part 10: Is the Gospel Justification Only?


The New Theology artificially limits the gospel to counted justification alone. It understands justification as effectively separate from the question of whether the one justified is experiencing an internal holiness. These hold sanctification, the making-holy of a believer, to be a fruit of the gospel, and not a necessary part of salvation. Now, a few quotations from the wild. First, from Desmond Ford:

Traditionally, Adventists have erroneously placed sanctification within the scope of the Pauline ‘righteousness by faith.’ It is now time for a clear change to be made to correct that error. We should follow the decision made at Palmdale Conference, which I attended in the 1970s and which was written up in the Review as concluding that righteousness by faith meant justification only, though sanctification was always its fruit. This will safeguard the precious doctrine of Christian assurance.1