THE CONCEPT OF SIN IN THE THEOLOGIES OF ELLEN G WHITE AND LEONARDO BOFF: A COMPARATIVE STUDY by NKOSIYABO ZHOU ZVANDASARA submitted in accordance with the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY in the subject SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY at the UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA PROMOTER: PROF S S MAIMELA MARCH 1997 THE CONCEPT OF SIN IN THE THEOLOGIES OF ELLEN G WHITE AND LEONARDO BOFF: A COMPARATIVE STUDY by N Z ZVANDASARA Degree: DOCTOR OF THEOLOGY Subject: SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY Promoter: PROF S S MAIMELA SUMMARY The aim of this thesis is to compare the concept of sin in the theologies of Ellen G. White and Leonardo Boff. Chapter 1 examines Ellen G. White's concept of sin. White's historical and theological backgrounds coupled with her use of the "great controversy" motif provide a better grasp of her understanding of sin. White defines sin as the transgression of God's Law. She views sin to comprise at least two dimensions, namely, the individual and the social. White regards these two aspects of sin to have equal significance. White's detailed treatment of the sanctuary teaching also highlights the two dimensions of sin. In Chapter 2 Boff' s idea of sin is investigated. Boff' s historical background, which exposed him to the poor, influenced his perception of sin. Boff's theological background together with his familiarity with Karl Marx's social analysis prompted Boff to define sin as the negation of God's love in a human history bedevilled by class conflict. Boff views sin to have the individual and social dimensions. Yet, in terms of importance, Boff believes that the social dimension of sin is more consequential than the individual one. In Chapter 3 White's and Boff s views on sin are compared. From this comparison it is evident that both White and Boff recognize the bipolarity of sin. Both seem to agree that christians should take an active role in correcting social evils because love for God is manifested by how we relate to our neighbor. Boff devotes less space to the individual aspect of sin than White. Chapter 4 shows that White's theological tradition has a lot to learn from Boff and his tradition and also vice versa. An awareness of the current priestly ministry of Christ evident in White's theology could help Boff to bring some balance to his stance on the social and the individual dimension of sin. Boff' s use of Marx's social analysis should also help Seventh-day Adventists, the inheritors of White's theology, not to interpret White's theology of sin only along individualistic lines while overlooking its social dimension. Title of thesis: THE CONCEPT OF SIN IN THE THEOLOGIES OF ELLEN G WHITE AND LEONARDO BOFF: A COMPARATIVE STUDY Key terms: Great controversy; Class conflict; Sin; Individual dimension; Social dimension; Sanctuary teaching; Law; Transgression; Disgrace; Capitalistic problematic; Investigative judgment. CURRICULUM VITAE I was born on the 10th of October 1961 in Zimbabwe. For my primary and secondary education I attended Rata School and Solusi Secondary School respectively. I hold a B.A. Theology degree (1987) and a Master of Divinity degree (1995) from Andrews University, Michigan, U.S.A. I also completed a BTh. (Hons) degree (1990) and a Master of Theology degree (1993) with the University of South Africa. Professionally, I served for five years as a district pastor in the Central Zimbabwe Field of the Seventh-day Adventist Church whose headquarters are in Gweru, Zimbabwe. I also was the Education and Youth Director for the same organization for two years. I was ordained to the ministry of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in 1990. In 1990 and 1991 I was the Chaplain of Solusi College where I also lectured part time. I served as the president of the Pan Africa Club at the campus of Andrews University from 1994 to 1995. TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . 1 INTRODUCTION ....................................... ii Significance . ii Problem . 111 Limitation . v Methodology . vi Outline of Chapters . vu CHAPTER 1 ELLEN WHITE'S VIEW OF SIN ............................. 1 1.1 The Context for Ellen White's View of Sin . 1 1.1.1 A Historical Background of Ellen G. White . 3 1.1.2 Ellen G. White's Theological Background ................. 7 1.1.2 .1 The Authority and Inspiration of Ellen G. White . 13 1.1.3 Ellen G. White and the Great Controversy Motif . 19 1.1. 3 .1 The Beginning of the Great Controversy . 19 1.1.3.2 The Creation and Fall of Man ........................ 22 1.1. 3. 3 The Plan of Salvation . 24 1.1. 3 .4 The Incarnation . 26 1.1.3.5 The Trial and Crucifixion .......................... 27 1.1.3.6 The Resurrection and Ascension ...................... 30 1.1.3.7 Christ in the Heavenly Sanctuary ...................... 32 1.1.3.7.1 The Great Controversy and the Holy Place ............... 33 1.1.3.7.2 The Great Controversy and the Most Holy Place ............ 36 1.1.3.8 The Time of Trouble and the Second Coming ............. 40 1.1. 3. 9 The End of the Great Controversy . 41 1.2 Ellen G. White's Reflections on Sin .................... 44 1.2.1 Ellen G. White's Definition of Sin ..................... 44 1.2.2 Sin and Personal Salvation . 55 1.2.2.1 Sin and Satan . 56 1.2.2.2 Sin and Adam . 58 1.2.2.3 Sin and the Patriarchs . 60 1.2.2.4 Sin and the Earthly Sanctuary . 62 1.2.2.5 The Earthly and the Heavenly Sanctuaries . 65 1.2.2.6 The Individual and the Heavenly Sanctuary . 68 1.2.3 Sin and Social Salvation . 72 1.2.3.1 Sin and the Heavenly Society . 73 1.2.3.2 Adam's Sin and Humanity .......................... 75 1.2.3.3 Individual and Corporate Accountability . 79 1.2.3.4 Sin, Poverty and Suffering . 83 1.2.3.5 The Church and Social Responsibility . 87 1.3 Summary and Conclusion . 92 CHAPTER2 LEONARDO BOFF'S VIEW OF SIN ......................... 95 2.1 The Context for Leonardo Boff' s Understanding of Sin . 95 2.1.1 Leonardo Boff' s Historical Background . 96 2.1.2 Leonardo Boff' s Theological Background . 100 2.1.3 Leonardo Boff and the Class Conflict Motif . 107 2.1.3.1 Bo ff and Marx . 108 2.1.3.2 Social Classes and Class Conflict . 112 2.1.3.3 Boff' s and Marx's Social Analysis . 117 2.2 Leonardo Boff' s Concept of Sin . 121 2.2.1 Towards Boff's Definition of Sin . 121 2.2.2 The Personal and Social Dimension of Sin . 128 2.2.3 Sin and Personal Salvation . 134 2.2.3.1 Towards Total Commitment to God . 137 2.2.4 Sin and Social Salvation . 140 2.2.4.1 Individual and Corporate Accountability . 140 2.2.4.2 Sin, Poverty and Suffering . 145 2.2.4.3 The Church and Social Responsibility . 148 2.3 Summary and Conclusion ......................... 156 CHAPTER3 A COMPARISON OF WHITE'S AND BOFF'S VIEWS ON SIN 158 3.1 Historical Backgrounds ........................... 158 3.2 Theological Backgrounds . 163 3.3 White's and Boff's Motifs ......................... 171 3 .4 On White's and Bo ff' s Views on Sin . 180 3.4.1 White's and Boff's Definition of Sin .................. 181 3.4.2 The Personal and Social Dimensions of Sin . 186 3.4.3 Sin and Personal Salvation . 195 3.4.4 Sin and Social Salvation .......................... 207 3 .4.4.1 Individual and Corporate Accountability . 207 3.4.4.2 Sin, Poverty and Suffering ......................... 213 3.4.4.3 The Church and Social Responsibility .................. 227 3 .4.4. 3 .1 An Evaluation of Human Effort and Social Transformation . 230 3.4.4.3.2 An Evaluation of Boff sand White's Eschatologies ......... 231 3.5 Summary and Conclusion ......................... 233 CHAPTER4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 235 4.1 Research Findings .............................. 235 4.1.1 On White and Boff . 235 4.1.2 On White's and Boff' s Definitions of Sin . 237 4.1.3 The Bipolarity of Sin . 238 4.1.4 On Sin and Personal Salvation . 240 4.1.5 On Sin and Social Salvation . 241 4.1.6 A Hermeneutic of White and the Problematic . 242 4.2 Implications .................................. 245 4.2.1 Definitions of Sin . 245 4.2.2 The Bipolarity of Sin . 247 4.2.3 Sin and Personal Salvation ......................... 247 4.2.4 Sin and Social Salvation .......................... 248 4.3 Recommendations .............................. 249 4.3 .1 For White and Her Theological Tradition . 250 4.3.2 For Boff and His Theological Tradition ................ 255 4.4 Conclusion ................................... 259 BIBLIOGRAPHY . 260 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS As one completes a research of this magnitude, one is struck by an overwhehning sense of indebtedness. Many individuals have contributed, directly or indirectly, to the conception, gestation and birth of this thesis. At the risk of omitting some, may I extend my heartfelt appreciation to a few individuals. My special thanks go to Professor Simon S. Maimela, my promoter, who challenged me to think and to mature. His patience, understanding and scholarly counsel provided me with an environment in which the most could be called out of my being. His perceptive criticism and comments refined my reflections and sharpened my focus. I wish to thank my parents Mr. and Mrs. Mabenge Zvandasara who instilled in me the desire to pursue an education. I will always treasure their encouragement over the long years of study. I commend them for their prayers and support. Many thanks go to my dear friend, Elijah Mvundura and to Linus Chata, my brother-in-law, who proofread the entire document.