Q. What exactly did Brother Jones and Porter disagree with?

A. I addressed this a bit in the response to John. They disagreed with Waggoner's view of the Covenants because had they accepted it they would have had to accept his teachings regarding the law in Galatians.

Salient points to Waggoner's view of the covenants are:

1) The "covenants" of God are "promises"
2) The Old Covenant was initiated by the COI, not by God.
3) The Old Covenant was a matter of condition, not of time.
4) The "faulty promises" of Hebrews 8 were the promises of the people.

There's no way to divorce EGW's endorsement of Waggoner's teaching of the covenants from these salient points. These points are interconnected and form the heart of Waggoner's view. If you change Waggoner's assertion that the Old Testament was initiated by the people to the idea that God initiated it, then you have the view of those who were opposing Waggoner, the view of those that EGW said were "wasting their investigative powers."

Sister White did not agree with Waggoner regarding the law in Galatians:

1SM 233
I am asked concerning the law in Galatians. What law is the schoolmaster to bring us to Christ? I answer: Both the ceremonial and the moral code of ten commandments. {1SM 233.1}

It is obviuos, to me, that Sister White did not agree with everything Waggoner wrote about the law and the old covenant. Yes, she endorsed his basic premise, but not all the particulars. She wrote very plainly, in words that cannot be misconstrued, that God made the old covenant with the COI, and that He required them to comply with its conditions.

Mike, it appears to me you are either unknowledgeable about this issue or being purposely disingenuous.

quote:

---

"The law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith" (Gal. 3:24). In this scripture, the Holy Spirit through the apostle is speaking especially of the moral law. The law reveals sin to us, and causes us to feel our need of Christ and to flee unto Him for pardon and peace by exercising repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.

An unwillingness to yield up preconceived opinions, and to accept this truth, lay at the foundation of a large share of the opposition manifested at Minneapolis against the Lord's message through Brethren {E.J.} Waggoner and {A.T.} Jones. By exciting that opposition Satan succeeded in shutting away from our people, in a great measure, the special power of the Holy Spirit that God longed to impart to them. The enemy prevented them from obtaining that efficiency which might have been theirs in carrying the truth to the world, as the apostles proclaimed it after the day of Pentecost. The light that is to lighten the whole earth with its glory was resisted, and by the action of our own brethren has been in a great degree kept away from the world. (1SM 234)

---

Ellen White perceived that the subject treated in the 1888 conference transcended simply the law in Galatians but that God was giving us great light in regards to righteousness by faith. She said Waggoner and Jones could teach it better than she could. She said she would be as a little child to receive all the rays of light that God had to share. She endorced their writings over 1000 times for a period of time lasting more or less a decade.

I am well acquainted with her endorcements ( she wrote over 2000 pages dealing with 1888) and with Jones and Waggoner's teachings, and am only aware of one detail on which she corrected either Jones or Waggoner regarding their theological views. (The issue in question was regarding whether Christ could sin or not. Waggoner taught for a short time that because Christ had perfect faith, He couldn't sin. EGW corrected him, and he accepted the correction.)

In the support she gave of Waggoner's view on the Law in Galatians, she not only agreed with it, but stated it.

The endorcement of the Covenants is also an implicit endorcement of Waggoner's view on the Two Covenants because she said those who opposed Waggoner's views on the Covenants did so because they saw if they accepted Waggoner's view on the Covenants, they would have to accept his view on the law. When EGW said Waggoner's view on the Covenants was correct, the implication is his view on the Law in Galatians was correct as well.

Ellen G. White said that God had shown her in vision that Crosier “had the true light, on the cleansing of the Sanctuary etc., and I feel fully authorized by the Lord to recommend that Extra [a special edition of a periodical containing Edson and Crosier’s views] to every saint.” (Letter of Ellen White to Eli Curtis, Apr. 21, 1847, in A Word to the Little Flock, p. 12). But how far did she endorse Crosier’s article? It contains several positions contrary to her teachings, like his views that no atonement was made at the cross and that the first apartment of the earthly sanctuary was for "forgiveness of sins" only; hence, when the work in the first apartment of the heavenly sanctuary closed (Oct. 22, 1844), there ended forgiveness of sins for all the world.
As McMahon says, “to quote Mrs. White's endorsement of Waggoner is like quoting her endorsement of 0. R. L. Crosier's article on the sanctuary. Some have tried to use this endorsement to support everything Crosier wrote in the article. But careful investigation will show that Mrs. White took a number of positions decidedly contrary to Crosier. There is a great difference between full and qualified endorsement.”

Ooops

Pontos excelentes, meu amigo brazilian. Nenhum mensageiro tem a resposta cheia muito no começo. Prophets, sim: professores e mensageiros, No..

Translation: all saints progress in their understanding or are cut off in their self-sufficiency. Beware!

Perhaps the best way to fully understand Elder Waggoner's fullest researchings, you need to study what he wrote in 1900, his fine book "The Everlasting Covenant". Leaves of Autumn may still have copies available. My two copies are thumb-warn and underlined like crazy.
This was the acme of his work, even more than his Galatians book. And sadly what most people have today is some abridged and mangled version by Mr. Wieland.

Could you please post as "Dan Jones", not just Jones, as newcomers may think it's A.T.!

Tom, did God require the COI to comply with the conditions of the old covenant? If you can answer, Yes, then our differences are merely academic.

The only condition for salvation is faith (true faith) in Jesus Christ. Such faith is always manifest in obedience to God's commandments, and indeed, the law is written in heart when a person believes (that's a part of the New Covenant).

The requirement for salvation has never changed since the fall. What God required of them is exactly what He requires of us, and vice versa.

Please let me know if that answers your question.

Regarding errors on the parts of Jones and Waggoner, it appears that God raised them up to assist Sis. White in the proclamation of His message of righteousness by faith, but that they didn't stay faithful for long. Jones ended up throwing in with J.H. Kellogg before the 1890's were out, and Waggoner followed not long after. As early as 1891 Waggoner had heretical ideas concerning "spiritual affinities":

(To W.W. Prescott) -- "I have been shown your peril during the time of your connecting with Dr. E.J. Waggoner. You both came to the conference of 1891, enthused with what you supposed to be precious spiritual light. You were desirous of presenting this light to me, but I was shown that much of that which you supposed to be precious light was dangerous, misleading fables, and that I must have no conversation with you regarding these ideas that were filling your minds.
{10MR 358.03}

"The theories held by Ellet Waggoner were similar in character to those we had met and rebuked in several places where we met fanatical movements after the passing of the time in 1844. Dr. Waggoner was then departing from the faith in the doctrine he held regarding spiritual affinities."
{10MR 358.04} (1908)

"Spiritual affinities" involved the belief that one could be married to one spouse in this life, yet be spiritually mated to another person who was to be one's mate in the life to come. Waggoner's beliefs in this area eventually led to his divorce, remarriage, and separation from the SDA Church. And we see he had these strange beliefs only a few short years after the 1888 conference, and well before he wrote Glad Tidings in 1900.

Glad Tidings itself contains pantheistic teachings, which shows Kellogg's influence over Waggoner even in 1900:

"To believe on His name is to believe that He is the Son of God; to believe that He is the Son of God, means to believe that He is come in the flesh, in human flesh, in our flesh, for His name is "God with us;" so to believe on His name means simply to believe that He dwells personally in every man, -- in all flesh. We do not make it so by believing it; it is so, whether we believe it or not; we simply accept the fact, which all nature reveals to us."

http://www.brooklawn.org/Books/GladTidings/GT03LifebytheFaithofChrist.htm (about 2/3 of the way down the page)

EGW also had to rein in A.T. Jones in his teaching about justification. Writing to Jones in 1893, Mrs. White said,

"In my dream you were presenting the subject of faith and the imputed righteousness of Christ by faith. You repeated several times that works amounted to nothing, that there were no conditions. The matter was presented in that light that I knew minds would be confused, and would not receive the correct impression in reference to faith and works, and I decided to write to you. You state this matter too strongly. There are conditions to our receiving justification and sanctification, and the righteousness of Christ. I know your meaning, but you leave a wrong impression upon many minds."
{1SM 377.1}

Point being, we have to be careful when using Jones and Waggoner's works, and pay special attention to when they were written.

Tom, I'm not sure if your response answered my question. Again, my question is - Did God require the COI to comply with the conditions of the old covenant? I realize they were saved by faith, not by works, the same as we are today, but faith without works is dead. So, did God require the COI to comply with the conditions of the old covenant? That is, did He require them to obey the moral and ceremonial laws? Was their salvation dependent upon them obeying these laws?

AA 207, 208
The Galatians were given up to the worship of idols; but, as the apostles preached to them, they rejoiced in the message that promised freedom from the thralldom of sin. Paul and his fellow workers proclaimed the doctrine of righteousness by faith in the atoning sacrifice of Christ. They presented Christ as the one who, seeing the helpless condition of the fallen race, came to redeem men and women by living a life of obedience to God's law and by paying the penalty of disobedience. And in the light of the cross many who had never before known of the true God, began to comprehend the greatness of the Father's love. {AA 207.2}