The Theological Necessity of the Investigative Judgment: Albion Ballenger and His Failed Quest to Subvert the Doctrine—Part II

Abstract

Throughout the history of Seventh-day Adventists, the investigative (or pre-advent) judgment has been one of the most controversial doctrines, challenged and questioned more than any other Adventist belief. This paper explores the reasons critics of Adventism, and particularly Albion Fox Ballenger, object to the doctrine of the investigative judgment. Ballenger was an ex-Adventist minister and one of the strongest critics of Adventist doctrine of the sanctuary during the first part of the 20th century. All other criticism of the doctrine, and particularly of the investigative judgment, go back to Ballenger. This paper is the second of a two-part series on the investigative judgment. The first part offered an abridged exposition of Ballenger’s soteriology and his critique of the investigative judgment doctrine. This second part concludes with a theological analysis of the critique of the doctrine advanced by Ballenger and his evangelical followers in the context a broader understanding of Protestant soteriology.