What did Ellen White mean by this?

 Calling Sin by Its Rightful Name

In the traditions of my life-long faith family--the Seventh-day Adventist Church--Ellen G. White stands head-and-shoulders above any other historical voice defining principles of life-style, theology, cultural mores, and social graces. Many tradition-oriented Adventists love to lift a judiciously chosen EGW quotation from her copious writings to reinforce their personal positions on a myriad of issues.

One often quoted passage comes from Ellen White's book Education, p.57.

The greatest want of the world is the want of men-men who will not be bought or sold; men who in their inmost souls are true and honest; men who do not fear to call sin by its right name; men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole; men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall.

This quote was recently posted by a friend on Facebook. The following is my response.

Look carefully at this often misused statement from EGW, especially at the "call sin by its rightful name" phrase.

Notice that it is both preceded and followed by phrases that call for *personal* integrity *within* the heart of the godly man himself. Thus, the standard of calling sin by its rightful name is not to be directed outward at other sinners. Instead, it is recognition and confession of the sinfulness of our own fallen nature and our relentless proclivity to act out the desires of sinful hearts.
The Apostle Paul said it this way: "You may think you can condemn such people, but you are just as bad" (Romans 2:1 NLT).
Jesus himself said, "Let the one who has never sinned throw the first stone!" (John 8:7).
Let's admit it. We're ALL sinners standing in constant need of God's saving grace. None of us has the moral ground to point our fingers at someone else and accuse them of sinning. That is the exclusive right of the Holy Spirit. Our job is to bear witness to what God has done for us personally and individually. This is the gospel message that is to go to all the world (Revelation 14:6): "Jesus saves!"

First-Century "Liberals" and "Conservatives" - A Lesson for Today

Among the Jews in the days of Jesus there were two major religio-political groups: the Pharisees and the Sadducees. In broad strokes, these were the "conservatives" and "liberals" of their day.

    I've read several recent posts on Facebook claiming that it was the "right-wing conservatives" aka "Pharisees" who opposed Jesus and were primarily responsible for his crucifixion. Ostensibly, citing this example serves to shore up the argument from today's liberal left-leaning Christians that Jesus was also a liberal who focused his ministry on social justice issues, caring for the poor and oppressed, and overturning the money-changers' tables in the temple courtyard.

    However, it was the Sadducees-controlled Sanhedrin which paid the bribe money to Judas, condemned Jesus to death, and turned him over to the Romans for execution. Both the Pharisees and the Sadducees were unanimous in their desire to rid the earth of this rabbi from Galilee whom they could not control. Their united action was purely political in their attempt to maintain their dominance and complete control over the Jewish nation.

    But, of course, they also had to deal with Rome. The Roman soldiers and governors were a foreign occupying force requiring obedience and taxes to support the Empire. They were hated by the Jews who were hoping for a Messiah to kick the Romans out of the Levant and regain Israel's glory days of Kings David and Solomon. When Jesus didn't play into their political agenda, the Sanhedrin condemned him to death by crucifixion and turned him over to Pilate. The rough Roman soldiers flogged him, jammed a crown of terrible Judean thorns on his head, and tortured him unmercifully before leading him out to Golgotha where they crucified him between two thieves.

    So, what do we see here?

    A centuries-long political struggle between the Jewish religionists (both Pharisees AND Sadducees) and the occupying Empire, united in the one momentary goal of ridding the Earth of someone who wouldn't yield to their worldly authority.

    Jesus did not give credence or support to either system--except to individuals who exhibited the principles of HIS Kingdom in their personal relationships with other people. He did heal the sick, raise the dead to life, encourage the poor and down-trodden, but *he did not do these acts of grace to support or shore-up the political ambitions of either the Jews or Rome.*

    He said clearly, "My kingdom is not of this world. If it were, my servants would fight to prevent my arrest by the Jews. But now my kingdom is from another place" (Matthew 18:36).

It seems clear to me that the end-time attack on true followers of Jesus will not come exclusively from either the left or the right. Instead, it will be a coalition of both liberal and conservative religionists, using the powers of civil government, to punish those who will not yield their allegiance to anyone but God alone.

I am fully convinced that as a follower of Jesus, my *primary loyalty* must never be to the warring political factions of our day in their struggle for political dominance and control. I cannot conscientiously align with either uber-liberals or ultra-conservatives. Our calling as individual Christians is to be "his hands," "his feet," "his presence" to minister grace, peace, and hope. This calling is entirely outside of and separate from any political parties or movements. Through his grace--and his grace alone--we are to be channels of God's love, acceptance, and forgiveness to a world he loves more than life itself.

O Lord, may "your kingdom come, [may] your will be done on earth, as it is in heaven" (Matthew 6:10).

"Even so, Come! Lord, Jesus!" (Revelation 22:20).