Conclusion
Early 19th-century American Protestantism provided the immediate historical context for origins of the SDA theology of mission. At that time there was great interest in the study of the apocalyptic-eschatology of Scripture, which was generally interpreted by historicist hermeneutical principles. Such principles had been used by Protestants in the Reformation and Post-Reformation era and their tradition can be traced back to the primitive church.FSDA 294.1
A major reason for the popularity of this approach to the Scriptures was that many commentators had successfully interpreted certain historical events which occurred in the previous century as a fulfillment of symbolic prophecy. The majority of such historicists advocated a postmillennial Second Advent and cherished an optimistic view of society, seeing historical and contemporary events as signs of the times heralding the imminence of a glorious millennium on earth. To historicists who adhered to a premillennial view of the Second Advent, these events were signs of the times indicating the imminence of Christ’s return and the divine judgment on a sinful world. Both post- and premillennialists agreed that the prophetic time period in Daniel 8:14 was about to be fulfilled, and consequently they expected the inauguration of some important event in salvation history. For most postmillennialists the termination of this time period pointed to an important event connected with the inauguration of the millennium; to the majority of premillennialists, however, it signified the personal return of Christ.FSDA 294.2
At a time in history when the religio-political climate in the U.S.A. was favorable to the rise of new religious movements, premillennialists with William Miller as one of their major representatives were able to develop rapidly into a large interconfessional Second Advent movement. A theology of mission gradually emerged which interpreted this movement as playing an important role in salvation history. The realization of their being participants in a prophetic movement whose task it was to prepare the world for Christ’s return induced an enormous sense of responsibility, missionary zeal, and enthusiasm. Within a few years their religious publications were distributed on a world-wide scope. These vigorous and often successful mission efforts could not but result in a reaction from both non-Millerite historicists and those inclined to a historical-critical approach to Scripture. A strong controversy developed which led to the termination of this interconfessional movement, a polarization of positions, and an inevitable separation from the established churches of those who continued to cherish Miller’s convictions. Miller’s followers, however, did not consider the rejection of his views by the ecclesiastical organizations as a set-back or defeat but as another sign of the times and a fulfillment of Bible prophecy.FSDA 294.3
Regarding the origin of the SDA theology of mission this study indicated that the Second Advent movement and Millerism were a logical consequence of a consistently applied historicist hermeneutic to a premillennial 19th-century understanding of symbolic prophecy. Both the predictions concerning the time of the Second Advent and the prediction about the inauguration of events related to the millennium failed. In many instances these unfulfilled expectations undoubtedly contributed to a rejection of these hermeneutical principles and stimulated a development toward a historical-critical approach to apocalyptic-eschatology.FSDA 295.1
After the Disappointment of 1844 the Millerites were forced again to investigate the validity of their hermeneutical method. Some rejected it and with it the raison d’ê tre of the Advent movement. Those who continued to affirm the validity of their interpretations arrived at two opposite explanations for the Disappointment. The opinion of the majority was that they had been mistaken in their time calculations but that the event predicted had been correctly interpreted as the Second Advent. The minority expressed the conviction that they had been mistaken with regard to the nature of the predicted event but that their time calculations as such had been correct, their mistake being an incorrect understanding of some of the apocalyptic symbols. A new understanding of this symbolism led the minority to a different concept of the nature of the event to take place at the end of the calculated time. The event was no more seen as the Second Advent, but was interpreted as the beginning of the final phase of Christ’s high-priestly ministry, the great antitypical Day of Atonement. This new interpretation, according to them, affirmed the validity of their historicist hermeneutic, provided an explanation for the Disappointment, and shed new light on the significance of the Decalogue in Christ’s post-1844 ministry. Those who accepted the new interpretation of Christ’s sanctuary ministry were the only Adventists on whom a current agitation on the Sabbath (resulting from a thrust by Seventh Day Baptists) had any lasting effects. From this minority view the SDA theology of mission gradually developed.FSDA 295.2
Initially the SDA theology of mission had two focal points: (1) The affirmation of the validity of the Advent experience of 1844; (2) the necessity of a restoration of certain neglected Bible doctrines (particularly the Sabbath) before the occurrence of the parousia. It was especially the aspect of restoration which came to play an increasingly important role in the self-understanding of SDA. The three angels’ messages of Revelation 14, which were frequently designated as the third angel’s message, formed the basic structure of the theology of mission during the formative years of the SDA Church. This basic structure consisting of three interrelated progressive proclamations in the context of Christ’s final mission in heaven and on earth was considered to prepare man for the Second Advent.FSDA 295.3
Later developments beyond the scope of this study indicated a growing emphasis on non-apocalyptic motives for mission, and additional research is necessary to discover from the primary sources reasons for such a shift. The post-1874 basic structure of the theology of mission came to be interpreted in a more Christo-centric manner without, however, diminishing or denying eschatological import. Thus, for example, E. G. White, who was and still is the most authoritative author among SDA, associated the third angel’s message with “the message of justification by faith,” “the gospel commission,” and “the gospel message.” In this context soteriological value was given to its reception and statements were made such as “a saving knowledge of the third angel’s message” and the “gospel of the third angel’s message.” The proclamation of the third angel’s message was also identified with the “work of sowing the gospel seed” and “the only hope for the salvation of a perishing world.” From historical evidence the inevitable conclusion is that for SDA “the third angel’s message is the gospel message for these last days.” A comparison between fundamental principles of SDA in the 1870s and those of the 1970s indicates that the basic apocalyptic-eschatological motives for mission have not changed. (See Appendix II and III.)FSDA 296.1
At first the mission of restoration was seen as a mission to restore certain spiritual principles. Later the restoration aspect began to be interpreted in the context of man’s spiritual and physical restoration as necessary preparation for Christ’s return. Finally it led to the realization that their mission was to proclaim a message of the complete restoration of “the principles that are the foundation of the kingdom of God” with the ultimate goal of restoring in man the image of God. In this mission of restoration the concept of God’s mission was recognized while man’s function was placed in the context of a divine-human cooperation.FSDA 296.2
This study indicates that one of the most important factors in the emergence of SDA was the powerful influence of a historicist hermeneutic which allowed for an interpretation of contemporary events as signs of Christ’s coming within a harmonious theological system. This is the reason why SDA could successfully develop after the failure of the 1844 prediction. It also indicated that their concept of truth, or present truth, at a particular moment was not a static but a dynamic reality, the underlying principle being that of progressive or unfolding revelation which brought out the fuller import and deeper meaning of the biblical text. For SDA, present truth was always in harmony with earlier truths, and was arrived at by their unfolding of these truths. This concept of revelation provided a rationale for emphasizing special truths which they considered to be of utmost importance for the salvation of the present generation of mankind, even though these truths had not been advocated as being of normative value by Christians in previous centuries.FSDA 296.3
SDA did not consider themselves the only true Christians on earth and as far as their view of other ecclesiastical organizations was concerned, they in time came to realize that most of God’s people were still to be found in the other Christian churches. It was E. G. White who pointed out that there were “true Christians in every church, not excepting the Roman Catholic communion.... God accepts their sincerity of purpose and their integrity before Him.” She further stated that “the greater part of the followers of Christ were to be found in the various churches professing the Protestant faith.” Many of these who actively participated in Christian service, she indicated, were “more advanced in the knowledge of practical work” than SDA, and advised that believers in their mission zeal should avoid making sweeping denunciations but in “humility and love, present to all the truth as it is in Jesus.” She suggested that no “unnecessary barriers” should be created between the believers and “other denominations, especially the Catholics, so that they shall think we are their avowed enemies. We should not create a prejudice in their minds unnecessarily by making raids upon them.” In another instance it was stated that “among the Catholics there are many who are most conscientious Christians and who walk in the light that shines upon them, and God will work in their behalf.... Do not censure others; do not condemn them.” She also brought out that “our work is to weed out of all our discourses everything that savors retaliation and defiance and making a drive against churches and individuals, because this is not Christ’s way and method.” The advice was given that SDA ministers “should seek to come near to the ministers of other denominations. Pray for and with these men, for whom Christ is interceding.” When invited to speak in other churches SDA should not make “denunciatory speeches” but “in word and deed be wise unto salvation, representing Christ to all with whom you come in contact. Let all see that your feet are shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace and good will to men.” E. G. White remarked that the believers should try to agree with others “on every point we can conscientiously,” and to come “as near the people as possible, and then the light and truth we have may benefit them.” In order to facilitate witnessing to other Christians and to break down existing prejudice she proposed that it would be best to discuss “the truths of God’s Word” which were of mutual interest. She stated that “here is common ground, upon which we can meet people of other denominations; and in becoming acquainted with them, we should dwell mostly upon topics in which all feel an interest, and which will not lead directly and pointedly to the subjects of disagreement.” If SDA had fully implemented these suggestions there would have been less isolationism, more contacts with other Christians, and a greater impact on the world in general.FSDA 297.1
It has become clear that a mission consciousness in an eschatological context did not necessarily imply an immediate outreach on a world-wide scope. The basic structure of the theology of mission only slowly emerged to a view of a world-wide outreach. Thus it was not until the 1870s, when the theology of mission had sufficiently matured, that the increasing interest in the SDA message in other continents led to the sending of missionaries to areas outside of North America.FSDA 298.1