The Great Controversy Theme In Scripture

This chapter investigates the biblical credentials of the GCT. This biblical theme was

little regarded in Christian thought after the very early centuries of the Christian era.1 Yet,

arguably it was a dominant feature of Ellen White’s writings. This chapter is a

prerequisite to the central task of our thesis which is to demonstrate that Ellen White’s

writings are practical theology.2 After-all, such practical theology is nothing if not

biblical.

The central feature of this alternative theological paradigm concerns a so-called

orienting concern.3 This thesis proposes that the orienting concern of Ellen White is the

GCT. Notice the following quotation from Ellen White which points in this direction.

The Bible is its own expositor. Scripture is to be compared with scripture. The
student should learn to view the world as a whole, and to see the relation of its
parts. He should gain a knowledge of its grand central theme, of God’s original
purpose for the world, of the rise of the great controversy, and of the work of
redemption. He should understand the nature of the two principles that are
contending for the supremacy, and should learn to trace their working through the
records of history and prophecy, to the great consummation.4

Two scholars, among others, from Ellen White’s own Adventist faith tradition have

also commented similarly. Herbert Douglass, in his magnum opus concerning Ellen

White states that “many scholars have identified Ellen White’s unifying principle as the

1
Chapter 3 will survey the history of the GCT within Christian thought in some detail.
2
Throughout this thesis the term ‘practical theology’ is defined according to the alternative theological
paradigm proposed by Randy Maddox and outlined in chapter 1.
3
The term ‘orienting concern’ is a term used by Randy Maddox in conjunction with his alternative
theological paradigm. It is also defined in chapter 1.
4
Ellen White, Education (Mountain View, CA: PPPA, 1903), 190.
Great Controversy Theme. This provides a coherent framework for her theological

thought.”5 Richard Davidson writes of the GCT:

While …the multifaceted metanarrative … constitutes the “center” of Scripture,

… I see this center more as an “orientation point” in light of which the whole of
Scripture makes ultimate sense. It is a warfare worldview as Boyd rightly points
out. ”6

Since the GCT is posited to be the orienting concern of Ellen White’s practical

theology, it is valuable to demonstrate its biblical foundations. And to further this aim,

this chapter is divided into three major sections. 1) Exegesis that will expose the major

biblical and exegetical foundations of the GCT. 2) Biblical theology, dealing with some

of the major thematic dimensions of the GCT. 3) Systematic theology, outlining the

doctrinal framework of which the GCT is arguably the capstone and orienting concern.

Exegesis

The following exegesis of selected significant biblical passages that deal with the

GCT will be undertaken with reference to the five different elements within each

pericope. 1) The major theme of the passage together with minor themes and the

significance of these within the particular passage. 2) The general context of the specific

pericope. 3) The literary structure and form of the selected pericope. As well as outlining

issues to do with literary techniques, character, plot and important words, the text will be

analyzed from the following important perspectives. First, intertextuality, that is, how the

pericope uses other biblical passages. Second, in what way does the inclusion of this

material relate itself to the known interests of the author. We may term this the principle

5
Herbert Douglass, Messenger of the Lord: the prophetic ministry of Ellen G. White (Nampa, ID: PPPA,
1998), 256.
6
Richard Davidson, “Cosmic Metanarrative for the Coming Millennium,” 104 n 4. (Emphasis original).
of selectivity. Third, the principle of adaptation deals with questions of how and why the

author has adapted that particular material. Lastly, one may ask what the author’s

arrangement of his material tells us about his special interests and even why the pericope

is here and not elsewhere. 4) An investigation of the historico-cultural background of the

text to discover its cultural milieu is important. 5) Each of our passages invites the reader

to determine its theological significance which includes its message for both the original

audience and for today’s reader. The discussion of each of these elements will flow in a

clear, continuous argument elucidating the text.7

Genesis 3

This primeval narrative of the original sin of Adam and Eve is simple enough. They

were tempted by the serpent, and ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil

from which the Lord God had explicitly told them not to. These actions in the Garden of

Eden have long had the title “the fall of man.” They attracted divinely administered

negative consequences as the Lord God pronounced a series of curses on the serpent, the

woman and Adam, long known as “the curse.” Yet this sad piece of biblical protology

has within itself the seeds of biblical eschatology. For a divinely implanted “enmity” is

promised between the serpent and the women and their respective descendents.

Moreover, victory will eventually flow to the “Representative”8 from the side of the

woman as the serpent receives a mortal wound. The promise having been made, Adam

and Eve are escorted and banished from Eden, after having been provided with a

covering for their nakedness.

7
The style of exegesis here was suggested to me by Mr Kaale de Waale, a Lecturer of the New Testament
Studies Department of the Faculty of Theology, Avondale College, Cooranbong, NSW, Australia.
8
The use of this term anticipates the results of our exegesis.
 The themes embedded within this pericope swirl round two phenomena that have been

highlighted above. First, there is a focus on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil

which represents a core divine ideological commitment. Sigve Tonstad puts it neatly:

Consent and choice are set forth as core ingredients of God’s way….[This tree is]

the ‘voting booth’ of the Garden of Eden, the place where human beings are

freely offered an opportunity to express approval or disapproval with respect to

the terms of their existence.9

Removal of the opportunity to eat from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, even

though divinely prohibited, would have signaled the withdrawal of the freedom and the

reality of choice and even adherence to the principle of moral coercion on the part of the

Lord God. Humanity was thus constituted a free moral agent.10

However, as Paul F. Scotchmer writes, the symbolism of the tree “teaches that the

human person is free in all respects but one: determining what is right and what is wrong

solely on the basis of human insight.”11 Indeed, in Eden humanity was dependant on the

Lord God to define the terms of their existence by divine command.

Second, the focus of this pericope is concerned with the promise of a divinely

implanted enmity between the serpent and the women and the eventual victory by a

“Representative Descendant”12 of the woman. (Gen 3: 15). C. John Collins views this

9
Sigve Tonstad, “The Message of the Trees in the Midst of the Garden,” JATS, 19/ 1-2 (2008): 86.
10
These thoughts about freedom and moral coercion were first suggested to me by Tonstad, Ibid.
11
Paul F. Scotchmer, “Lessons from Paradise on Work, Marriage, and Freedom: A Study of Genesis 2:4-
3:22,” ERT 28 (2004): 81, 82.
12
Again, this term anticipates the results of the exegesis here.
verse from a wider perspective. He says, “We may say that Genesis fosters a messianic

expectation, of which this verse is the headwaters.”13

13
C. John Collins, Genesis 1 – 4: A Linguistic, Literary and Theological Commentary, (Phillipsburg, NJ: P
& R Publishing Company, 2006), 157.