1919 Bible Conference (Adventist)

The liberal churches accepted Darwinian evolution and integrated it into their belief system as "God's way of doing things."

What was not reasonable or scientific was discarded, such as the virgin birth, resurrection and Second Advent of Jesus, miracles, and substitutionary atonement.

They promoted the essential goodness of human nature, that sin is not rebellion but ignorance correctable by education and social reform, and that the kingdom of God was brought through the ceaseless process of evolution.

The fundamentalists emphasized the doctrines and issues denied by the modernists, centering on inerrancy and verbal inspiration of the Bible, The virgin birth, substitutionary atonement, the bodily resurrection and authenticity of miracles, the Second Advent and the importance of creation over evolution.

According to W. C. White, W. W. Prescott brought the idea of inerrancy and "verbal inspiration" of the Bible into Adventism during the late 1880s "The acceptance of that view," White wrote, "by the students in the Battle Creek College and many others, including Elder S. N. Haskell, has resulted in bringing into our work questions and perplexities without end, and always increasing.

This position on thought versus verbal inspiration was the one officially adopted by the denomination three years earlier at the 1883 General Conference session.

By 1919, General Conference president Daniells and Prescott viewed inspiration in the same light as the Whites and the 1883 GC resolution.

Daniells said his view on verbal inspiration changed when he saw that Ellen White had rewritten some chapters in The Desire of Ages "over and over and over again."

The 1919 Bible Conference was academic, the first of its kind having a significant number of participants with advanced training in theology, history, and biblical languages.

The meeting was by invitation only so that those present could "exercise care and good judgment" while discussing varying viewpoints.

[9] While not on the original agenda, other historical and theological issues would be incorporated into the conference—-most significantly, the inspiration and role of Ellen White and how Adventist viewed her.

George B. Thompson, field secretary of the General Conference, noted: "If we had always taught the truth [regarding Ellen White] we would not have any trouble or shock in the denomination now".

[11] The suggestion that Ellen White's writings might not be inerrant appears to have met with hostility, especially by Benjamin G. Wilkinson.

[14] Yet the suspicions of J. S. Washburn and Claude Holmes, among others, were aroused, and they saw "this Bible Institute" as one of "the most terrible thing[s] that has ever happened in the history of this denomination".