I see you have expanded this chart to include more Seventh-day Adventist history. I am not a church historian, but I’m familiar enough with the writings of Ellen G White, Alonzo T Jones, E J Waggoner, Edward Heppenstall, and Desmond Ford to not see any obvious connection with New Covenant theology other than that all these emphasized Christ’s atonement for our sin and justification by faith. I suppose Robert Brinsmead was influenced by his Adventist predecessors, but I’m having a hard time seeing a resemblance to New Calvinism before Brinsmead in the 1970s. Since Brinsmead’s teachings are not commonly accepted among Seventh-day Adventists, and Adventists are Arminian or Semi-Pelagian but never Calvinist, I don’t see how you can equate Seventh-day Adventism with New Calvinism as you did a few posts prior. Adventists have so little contact with Calvinists that they would never find your blog to correct you.
I’m a critic of many popular SDA doctrines, for example sinless perfectionism, works-righteousness and its concomitant lack of assurance, the investigative judgment, the authority of Ellen White, the peculiarly Adventist historical interpretation of Daniel and Revelation, the relevance of the Jewish sabbath for gentile believers, the Adventist identity as a remnant people gifted with the Third Angel’s Message, etc. You can blame a lot of misery on Adventism (don’t get me started on other groups/denominations!) but Calvinism of any sort is not their problem. Because they lack any inclination toward monergism, Adventist voices emphasizing righteousness by faith and the completed, sufficient work of Christ should be first seen as a critique of works-righteousness, the common pitfall of synergists. That these teachings have been abused in a Calvinist setting (becoming monergistic justification and monergistic sanctification) have more to do with monergism than the surpassing sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice. But experience has shown me that I can’t convince a monergist of his error even when considering fifty contrary Bible passages in context. I guess we just see God differently.
paulspassingthoughts said, on February 27, 2012 at 7:19 AM
Mike,
SDA is heavily involved in New Calvinism. Some New Calvinists identity with SDA directly, ie, Jon Zens and Wade Burleson (sp?). I would also refer you to Collin Hanson’s book about the YRR and SDA’s that attend their conferences. I would also recommend that you buy “The Shaking of Adventism” by one of the Australian Forum’s core 4, Geoffrey Paxton. The early SDA’s sought to employ neo-orthadoxy into their doctrine for an alternative to perfectionism, but the jury is out on how much influence SDA had on NO. The crux of all of this is following: First, you say well; what drives NC specifically was not before the Forum because the Forum invented it, primarily Brinsmead. But Brinsmead is the one who invented the contra-Existentialist doctrine that IS NEW CALVINISM. The evidence on this is black and white. NC is based this Brinsmead philosophy. The likes of Martin L. Cary were witness to the birth. But the doctrine based on this contra-Existentialist philosophy had a weakness (as pointed out by Carey): lack of personal experience. That’s were Piper’s Christian Hedonism comes into play. The framework is exposed, but there is a lot of putting pieces together; all movements borrow from others. OH, AND BY THE WAY: THE #1 TENET OF NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY AS STATED BY THE EARTH STOVE SOCIETY IS BASED ON BRINSMEAD’S 1970 PHILOSOPHY: ALL REALITY IS INTERPRETED THROUGH THE GOSPEL OUTSIDE OF US.
Talk to you later Mike,
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
I see you have expanded this chart to include more Seventh-day Adventist history. I am not a church historian, but I’m familiar enough with the writings of Ellen G White, Alonzo T Jones, E J Waggoner, Edward Heppenstall, and Desmond Ford to not see any obvious connection with New Covenant theology other than that all these emphasized Christ’s atonement for our sin and justification by faith. I suppose Robert Brinsmead was influenced by his Adventist predecessors, but I’m having a hard time seeing a resemblance to New Calvinism before Brinsmead in the 1970s. Since Brinsmead’s teachings are not commonly accepted among Seventh-day Adventists, and Adventists are Arminian or Semi-Pelagian but never Calvinist, I don’t see how you can equate Seventh-day Adventism with New Calvinism as you did a few posts prior. Adventists have so little contact with Calvinists that they would never find your blog to correct you.
I’m a critic of many popular SDA doctrines, for example sinless perfectionism, works-righteousness and its concomitant lack of assurance, the investigative judgment, the authority of Ellen White, the peculiarly Adventist historical interpretation of Daniel and Revelation, the relevance of the Jewish sabbath for gentile believers, the Adventist identity as a remnant people gifted with the Third Angel’s Message, etc. You can blame a lot of misery on Adventism (don’t get me started on other groups/denominations!) but Calvinism of any sort is not their problem. Because they lack any inclination toward monergism, Adventist voices emphasizing righteousness by faith and the completed, sufficient work of Christ should be first seen as a critique of works-righteousness, the common pitfall of synergists. That these teachings have been abused in a Calvinist setting (becoming monergistic justification and monergistic sanctification) have more to do with monergism than the surpassing sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice. But experience has shown me that I can’t convince a monergist of his error even when considering fifty contrary Bible passages in context. I guess we just see God differently.
LikeLike
Mike,
SDA is heavily involved in New Calvinism. Some New Calvinists identity with SDA directly, ie, Jon Zens and Wade Burleson (sp?). I would also refer you to Collin Hanson’s book about the YRR and SDA’s that attend their conferences. I would also recommend that you buy “The Shaking of Adventism” by one of the Australian Forum’s core 4, Geoffrey Paxton. The early SDA’s sought to employ neo-orthadoxy into their doctrine for an alternative to perfectionism, but the jury is out on how much influence SDA had on NO. The crux of all of this is following: First, you say well; what drives NC specifically was not before the Forum because the Forum invented it, primarily Brinsmead. But Brinsmead is the one who invented the contra-Existentialist doctrine that IS NEW CALVINISM. The evidence on this is black and white. NC is based this Brinsmead philosophy. The likes of Martin L. Cary were witness to the birth. But the doctrine based on this contra-Existentialist philosophy had a weakness (as pointed out by Carey): lack of personal experience. That’s were Piper’s Christian Hedonism comes into play. The framework is exposed, but there is a lot of putting pieces together; all movements borrow from others. OH, AND BY THE WAY: THE #1 TENET OF NEW COVENANT THEOLOGY AS STATED BY THE EARTH STOVE SOCIETY IS BASED ON BRINSMEAD’S 1970 PHILOSOPHY: ALL REALITY IS INTERPRETED THROUGH THE GOSPEL OUTSIDE OF US.
Talk to you later Mike,
paul
LikeLike