The Golden Chain - Robert J. Wieland

wrong side.
(c) She did not take a neutral stand but took the
opportunity in the Review to uphold his view. Her
statement is not merely a general endorsement of
justification by faith as the Protestant world and the
16th Century Reformers taught it; it is emphatically
an endorsement of this unique feature of
Waggoner's message—Christ took the sinful nature
of man after the Fall. Had she wished to fault
Jones's and Waggoner's view of the nature of
Christ, this was her excellent opportunity to do so.
Not a word is evident of such a desire, only the
opposite.
(d) In fact, she goes a step further than
Waggoner at that time. He apparently took the
initial, immature view that it was impossible for
Christ to have sinned—at least his faulty
expressions seem to convey that idea in his early
Signs editorials. Thus she implies that Waggoner in
1889 did not express fully the extent and reality of
Christ taking man's fallen nature. (By the time
Waggoner edited his Signs editorials for
82