Andrews University Digital Commons @ Andrews University Master's Theses Graduate Research 2009 The Doctrine of Sin in the Thought of George R. Knight: Its Context and Implications Jamie Kiley Andrews University Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/theses Recommended Citation Kiley, Jamie, "The Doctrine of Sin in the Thought of George R. Knight: Its Context and Implications" (2009). Master's Theses. 47. https://digitalcommons.andrews.edu/theses/47 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Research at Digital Commons @ Andrews University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ Andrews University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Thank you for your interest in the Andrews University Digital Library of Dissertations and Theses. Please honor the copyright of this document by not duplicating or distributing additional copies in any form without the author’s express written permission. Thanks for your cooperation. ABSTRACT THE DOCTRINE OF SIN IN THE THOUGHT OF GEORGE R. KNIGHT: ITS CONTEXT AND IMPLICATIONS by Jamie Kiley Adviser: Denis Fortin ABSTRACT OF GRADUATE STUDENT RESEARCH Thesis Andrews University Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary Title: THE DOCTRINE OF SIN IN THE THOUGHT OF GEORGE R. KNIGHT: ITS CONTEXT AND IMPLICATIONS Name of researcher: Jamie Kiley Name and degree of faculty adviser: Denis Fortin, Ph.D. Date completed: December 2009 George R. Knight attempts to chart a middle course between various historical extremes on the doctrine of sin. His view of the Fall and of the consequent effects on human nature is not as pessimistic as that of theologians in the Augustinian tradition (including Martin Luther and John Calvin), who stress the complete corruption of human nature and the loss of free will. On the other hand, Knight’s view is not as optimistic as the views of such theologians as Pelagius or M. L. Andreasen, who tend not to see the Fall as having affected human nature itself, and believe as a result that humans have full potential for overcoming sin. Knight’s view falls in the middle, in that he holds to the corruption of human nature, yet continues to espouse human free will. Knight’s moderate position on sin leads him to a moderate view of salvation and perfection: He stresses the utter helplessness of humanity in the face of sin and human beings’ complete incapacity to contribute anything to their own salvation. Simultaneously, however, he maintains that a necessary part of the process of salvation is the responsive cooperation of individuals with God. As a corollary, he also maintains that perfection is, in a sense, both possible and necessary. Unlike Andreasen, to whose writings he is most directly responding, Knight denies that human beings can ever achieve absolute sinlessness on this earth; Knight does believe, however, that they can develop an attitude of perfect willingness to do God’s will. It is the divergences in the doctrine of sin that lead directly to the differences in the theologies of salvation and perfection of Knight and Andreasen. Andrews University Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary THE DOCTRINE OF SIN IN THE THOUGHT OF GEORGE R. KNIGHT: ITS CONTEXT AND IMPLICATIONS A Thesis Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts by Jamie Kiley 2009 © Copyright by Jamie Kiley 2009 All Rights Reserved THE DOCTRINE OF SIN IN THE THOUGHT OF GEORGE R. KNIGHT: ITS CONTEXT AND IMPLICATIONS A thesis presented in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts by Jamie Kiley APPROVAL BY THE COMMITTEE: ___________________________________________ Denis Fortin, Ph.D., Adviser ___________________________________________ Jerry Moon, Ph.D. ___________________________________________ ________________________________________ Darius Jankiewicz, Ph.D. Date approved TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION . 1 Statement of the Problem . 2 Justification for Study . 3 Methodology. 3 II. HISTORICAL CHRISTIAN VIEWS ON THE NATURE, EXTENT, AND EFFECTS OF SIN. 5 Introduction . 5 The Central Questions with Respect to Sin . 6 Two General Positions Regarding Sin . 7 Severe View . 7 Mild View . 8 Augustine. 9 Pelagius . 16 Martin Luther and John Calvin. 21 M. L. Andreasen. 30 Andreasen’s Heritage from Adventist Pioneers. 30 Andreasen’s View of Atonement and the Nature of Christ. 35 Andreasen’s Understanding of the Nature of Sin and the Sinful Human Nature. 38 Summary . 43 iii III. GEORGE R. KNIGHT’S DOCTRINE OF SIN . 45 Biographical Factors Affecting Knight’s Doctrine of Sin. 46 Knight’s Critique of Andreasen’s Doctrine of Sin. 50 Knight’s Doctrine of Sin. 57 The Nature of Sin . 58 Sin as a Relational Concept . 59 Sin as an Orientation of Human Nature. 61 Sin as Action . .. 64 The Results of the Fall. 68 The Extent of Human Depravity . 71 The Nature of the Inheritance of Sin from Adam . 73 Sin and the Will. 75 Summary and Comparative Evaluation. 79 Summary of Knight’s Doctrine of Sin. 79 Comparison of Knight’s Views to Earlier Theologians . 80 IV. IMPLICATIONS OF KNIGHT’S DOCTRINE OF SIN FOR THE DOCTRINES OF SALVATION AND PERFECTION . 84 Knight’s Doctrine of Salvation. 85 God’s Work for Us versus God’s Work in Us. 86 Justification and Sanctification . 89 The Role of Human Works. 91 The Tension of Salvation: Already Accomplished, Not Yet Accomplished . 100 Summary of Knight’s Doctrine of Salvation. 103 iv Implications for the Doctrine of Perfection. 104 Ellen White on Perfection. 112 Perfection of the Last Generation . 114 Summary of Knight’s Doctrine of Perfection. 116 V. CONCLUSION. 118 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 122 v CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION As a retired professor of church history at the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary at Andrews University and the author of over thirty books, George R. Knight is a highly influential historian within the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. His writings on Adventist heritage and on the role of Ellen G. White within the church have impacted a large segment of the membership of the denomination, given that Knight’s books on these topics are written in a popular style accessible to a lay audience. Although Knight is a historian and held the position of professor of church history, he has also written a considerable amount of material on theology, and he stands as a theologian in his own right. One of the theological topics on which he has written the most, and which have had wide impact, are his writings on sin, salvation, and perfection. The fundamental theme that permeates Knight’s writings on salvation is his reaction against legalism, a problem that has plagued the Christian church ever since its inception and continues to threaten the Adventist denomination today. Having gone through a very legalistic and pharisaical phase in his own Christian experience, Knight is highly concerned now to stress that salvation does not come through works or obedience to the law, but as a gift. 1 According to Knight, the tendency to legalism arises from an insufficient view of the nature, power, and universality of sin. Specifically, he sees a danger in atomizing sin and treating sin as if it were merely a series of specific acts. If sin is atomized, it is possible to think that righteousness also is merely a series of particular acts. The real problem of sin, however, runs much deeper, according to Knight. Sinfulness is a state of being, not just an act, and it is this state of sin that produces particular acts of sin. Aiming to eliminate the specific acts of sin will never solve the root problem, which is the bent within human nature toward evil. For obvious reasons, Knight’s doctrine of sin has critical implications for his doctrine of salvation. This is to be expected, for one’s understanding of the predicament of the sinner will directly determine what kind of salvation and what kind of savior are needed. Given that Knight’s view of sin heavily impacts his understanding of justification, sanctification, and perfection, his writings on the topic of sin deserve careful consideration. Statement of the Problem Since no careful study of George R. Knight’s doctrine of sin has been done, this thesis aims to study the context, significance, and implications of Knight’s theology of sin. In particular, it will focus on three questions: (1) How does Knight’s doctrine of sin compare to other historical Christian theologies of sin? (2) What are the key points of Knight’s own doctrine of sin? (3) What impact does Knight’s doctrine of sin have on his understanding of justification, sanctification, and perfection? 2 Justification for Study The most significant reason why a study of Knight’s views is needed is that his writings are so popular and influential. As a prolific author, Knight has reached a large segment of the Adventist denomination with his views, and his concepts of sin and salvation have had widespread impact. Yet there are no comprehensive academic evaluations of his writings on salvation. A second reason to focus on Knight’s views of sin and salvation is that his positions are quite controversial in some Adventist circles. Many within the Adventist denomination fear that his view of salvation undermines the importance of the law and of observance of God’s commands. They believe Knight cheapens salvation and inappropriately detracts attention from the standard of perfection to which Christians are called. Given the controversy that surrounds his views, some analysis of his theology is needed. The major reason for isolating Knight’s view of sin for particular study is that his doctrine of sin is the foundation of his doctrine of salvation, as mentioned earlier. It is his view of the nature and extent of sin that necessitates his particular view of the law and determines his doctrines of justification and sanctification.