Can We Adventists Learn from Others?
Ohio’s Innovation Conference exposes pastors and church leaders to creative ideas from the wider Christian and business worlds—which has been troubling to some church members
A couple of weeks ago I attended the fifth annual Innovation Conference (IC5), in Columbus, OH. Suzy Welch, wife of GE’s Neutron Jack, was the main event, but I especially enjoyed Michael Lindsay’s presentation about the faith of people in the positions of power, and Samir Selmanovic, who has a knack for refreshing familiar faith concepts by turning them upside down and inside out.
I always go away from the IC realizing how confined the scope of my thinking. The church (this is probably true of any group in which one is long and deeply embedded) encloses us in itself such that we have a hard time seeing anything except through its portholes. The Innovation Conference helps to jar me out of that—not unlike the way foreign travel breaks down one’s cultural biases.
The innovator behind the IC is Elder Raj Attiken, president of the Ohio Conference. If you ask Raj why he’s doing this, he’ll point to the stagnating North American church: to thousands of smug little congregations marinating in the certainty that they have the truth, even as their children leave, the patriarchs and matriarchs die off, and the communities around them (if they know Adventists exist at all) think of them as a benign little cult.
We could use some creative ideas.
The critics’ complaint appears to be that Raj has invited speakers who aren’t Seventh-day Adventists, some of whose opinions and ideas may be quite different from, and in some particulars in opposition to, ours. Because Raj anticipated that an event like this could seem threatening, he relies on independent funding so no one can say he’s used their tithes and offerings for something they might not approve of.
So it wasn’t entirely unexpected when some saints stirred this into a controversy. Vance Ferrell seems always to show up in these kinds of discussions, and Pastor J. Allen Fine agitates on the topic from his base in Looneyville, WV. Although the Ohio Conference seems to like its conference president, a local anti-IC, anti-Raj website popped up, which conceals the identity of many of its contributors.
These Adventist critics haven’t had to do much original research: ironically, they get a lot of their ammunition against IC speakers from other Christian websites, especially Lighthouse Trails Research Project, which draws a bead on Leonard Sweet, Doug Pagitt and Rick Warren, especially, while setting up for straw men buzzwords like “emerging church,” “missional” and “post-modern.”
We Adventists have some profound truths as a movement and some lovely qualities as a people. At our best, we are charitable and gracious, with strong ties and sincere hearts. The dark side of our collective personality, though, is a tendency toward paranoia. We not only fear conspiracies against our Adventist truths, we expect them, and search for them, especially among ourselves. And what we search for, we inevitably find. How often I’ve been reminded by a critical member that the brightest lights will go out (Prophets and Kings, p.188) and that in the end times, “Men of talent and pleasing address, who once rejoiced in the truth, employ their powers to deceive and mislead souls” (The Great Controversy, p.608.)
The critics found a big target in the Leland Kaiser family, who keynoted IC1 and IC2. The Kaisers are Seventh-day Adventists, and cutting edge consultants to the hospital industry. “Cutting edge” is the key descriptor here, because people like these are intellectually adventurous, throwing out new ideas and metaphors without a lot of thought for how they’ll land. Both the Kaisers and Leonard Sweet are at once exciting and bewildering to listen to, because they think and speak rapidly, their thoughts careening through seemingly unconnected disciplines. One sometimes suspects that they’re experimenting with ideas, some of which they themselves may not, after all, wholly subscribe to.
I have this much sympathy for the critics: they can find phrases in the flow of talk from people like the Kaisers and Leonard Sweet that, especially if divorced from context, confirm the fears they were already nursing. There is an abandon in how these visionary speakers explore ideas, not unlike an artist wildly dashing paint on a canvas. I am more careful about what I say than the Kaisers are—but I’m an Adventist pastor, not a change consultant. It isn’t the nature of creative, cutting edge people to be cautious, and that’s why we want to hear them. They think of things we haven’t, and sometimes that can get a little edgy.
But the critics have not been entirely honest. You’d never know from what they write that most of the IC presenters are solid Christians (including some Seventh-day Adventist teachers and clergy) who address topics like trends in worship, evangelism, and church demographics. You’ll only hear about the most criticizable presenters, and most of their quotes are so abstracted from context as to be misleading. Much of the criticism has nothing to do with what was said at the Innovation Conference at all, but is speculation about the speakers’ hidden agendas based on prejudiced readings of their books or articles.
The critics seem to believe that because we’ve invited these speakers, we therefore accept and endorse everything they say. That’s ridiculous, as silly as thinking that we uncritically believe everything we read in the newspaper or see on TV. I’ve heard some wonderful, helpful stuff at each IC, some that didn’t do much for me, and some nonsense. I doubt anyone has trouble sorting it out. I get more benefit from the barrage of creativity than I am troubled by what I disagree with.
How much can we learn from people “out there”? In the Old Testament God warns against interaction with the natives of the land for fear his chosen would adopt heathen ways. The central figures of the New Testament, Jesus and Paul, seem to take a more offensive stance: go out and meet others, show kindness to them, live with them, discuss faith with them, and give them an opportunity to accept Christ. Paul, himself well-versed in Greek philosophy, doesn’t tell us to bury our heads in the sand, but to test everything and retain the good (1 Thessalonians 5:21), and he draws kindly but somewhat condescending comparisons between weak Christians, who can’t be in the presence anything with which they disagree, and strong Christians, who can and should (Romans 14:1-9).
And what about cooperative ministry with other Christians? Jesus once told his disciples that some local competitors—complete strangers—casting out demons in His name were not enemies but allies (Mark 9:38-40).
In the end, though, this is probably not a difference we’ll resolve by argument. Some among us feel extremely vulnerable to the possibility of error, and are deeply, sincerely frightened that there might be a danger to them and the church. It would be nice, though, if they could disagree without so much bile—it is this, not the content of their complaints, that enervates the church even while it seems to energize them.
Search
- Steve Moran on Mt. Ellis on the Brink of Winning Big
- Bonnie Dwyer on Mt. Ellis on the Brink of Winning Big
- Donna Haerich on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- victor on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- Andre Reis on Hate Speech?
- Your Friend on Fascinating Adventist Mathematics
- Your Friend on Hate Speech?
- Donna Haerich on Hate Speech?
- Your Friend on Laughing in Church
- bevin on Hate Speech?
Comments
I enjoyed reading this report and learned much. Thank you!
Good on Raj for his vision and steadfastness!
The Innovation Conference sounds intriguing—I'd like to attend the next one! I do sympathize, however, with those who criticize such a gathering. After all, the conference isn't (I don't think) discussing various business strategies and methods for promoting Vege-Links; it's dealing with spiritual matters. Any approach, idea, or methodology either positively or negatively impacts the cause of God—there is no neutral zone. As I said, I can sympathize with the detractors.
What I didn't note in Pastor Loren's column was any mention of evaluating ideas to discover the presuppositions and theological foundations that give rise to these concepts. The question, Is this biblical? is much more important than, Will this work?
I hope such care is given at IC to discuss and evaluate the ideas presented using a biblical criteria. And I hope to attend to find out for myself.
Thank you Loren for sharing your thoughts on this subject! It is a sad reality that the majority of people who come to me complaining about the IC or the Ohio Conference are basing their opinions on third parties’ opinions, which basically goes against Biblical principles.
We expect others to listen to and accept our doctrines when what we believe about the Sabbath, etc. seem as radical to others as some of these ideas seem to our more paranoid members.
I believe that we should be open to learning new things and I believe that the Holy Spirit gives us the wisdom to discern between truth and error. We should not be afraid of new ideas and ways of doing things.
This is a sensible and well balanced article. Good job, Loren. I think this article should be required reading for all our church members.
The Innovative Conference is a great idea to bring people of like mind together to share approaches to evangelistic out-reach.
Certainly we have had more than enough of the antics of Doug U. Bachelor and Amazing Facts.
It seems that the starting place would be to define the Good News.
1. There is a cure for the cancer of sinfulness.
2. The identity of the Great Physician.
3. Becoming a patient of the Great Physician.
4. The Life Style of the “healed”.
5. The mission of the “healed”.
6. The fellowship of the “healed”.
This is not the format of contemporary SDA Evangelism.
The format is to overwhelm the listener with evidence of the validity of the SDA brand of theology: an attempt to “unlock” all the mystery portions of Scripture as evidence of genuineness; followed by the same approach to the Spirit of Prophecy. After which the Scriptures take a back seat to E. G. White.
If the “mark” comes to agreement with all of the above, the “mark” is declared healed is baptized and voted into membership.
The end result is not far distant from the spoof of Gilbert and Sullivan in their Pirates of Penance in which the Very Model of a Modern Major General is ridiculed.
Americans have been burnt over so many times, there has been no time for healing let alone growth.
The first thing the Conference should do would be to ask:
Did the thief on the Cross understand: The 2300 days, 666, foot washing, two meals a day? He probably, being a Jew, understood the Sabbath, Tithing, diet and foods, even stewardship although had not practiced any for years.
If the thief didn’t understand the things that Adventist evangelists love to major in—why keep trying to innovate the minors?
Let us preach a risen Savior—His constant presence through the Spirit and then study how best to worship Him and serve Him and all His children.
What is the ethics and ethos of Heaven should follow the passion of Christ: not precede it. Tom
Tom,
Let's be kind to Doug Batchelor and Amazing Facts. You may not be attracted to their form of evangelism, but some are. As I am coming to understand, the folks with responsibilities for defining Adventist evangelism do so in favor or highlighting Biblical prophecy because they believe that it is what works for them. From their experience people do not come out for meetings on a general description of the Gospel. They can find that elsewhere. Adventist evangelists see prophecy as their Biblical niche.
That there might be other ways to evangelize other than meetings is an important topic for conversation. And I am sure that there is much to be discussed in how Adventism presents itself to the world. Thank goodness for people like Raj Attiken who understand the importance of creativity in that conversation. And many thanks, Loren, for a balanced presentation of what takes place at IC. I, too, would like to attend and learn more.
A good fisherman uses the perfect bait for the type of fish he wishes to attract.
When the "bait" of prediction of Bible prophecy is used, the attraction is for those who are enticed by the Dan Browns and Tim Le Hayes who forecast the future: the gullible, and biblically illiterate who hardly know what is contained in the Bible. When a TV evangelist "decodes" all the secret numbers and codes he is seen as a prophet, just as the Benny Hinns are seen as healers. What is the difference?
The church then dunks and brings into fellowship those who have been "converted" by the eminent prophetic interpretations outlining the Catholic church as the "Beast" and anti-catholicism is fostered even further.
This is where the church has found its fastest growth: in the third world countries where there is not only biblical illiteracy, but illiteracy at a much higher rate than the first world countries. Witness the "evangelists in parts of Africa where many children have been identified as witches and demons by the local
"Christian" pastor, and they have been horribly mutilated, burned, and forever scarred when they have no realization of the reason. The ignorance and devoted following of such "Christian converts" have caused untold harm.
This is the "amazing conversion rate" praised in the SDA publications. There is much evil behind such practices; practices that continue to prey on the gullibility of naive peoples wherever they live.
well done, loren. thank you for the review.
The Kaisers were at IC1 & IC2 as Loren has said. If anyone would spend any time reading Kaiser's personal blog it is very easy to see that it is completely New Age.
I live in the Ohio Conference and the Innovative Conferences are garbage.
I thought we were not supposed to mix truth with error. Haven't we as Adventists always said that this is exactly what Satan does? Mixes truth with error. Isn't that what Satan did in the Garden of Eden? Told Eve that she would not surely die. Did she die immediately? No. Satan mixed truth with error then and he is still doing the same today.
Paul also says that, "we must be wise as serpents and harmless as doves."
Beth
Thank you for your critical but helpful comments. To carry the issue further-see Elaine. Also, I would suggest a study on the religious history, present understanding, and future spiritual travels of the Amazing Facts converts.
Imagine the tools Jesus could have used. But primarily parables, analogies, and compassionate healing, feeding, and asssurance. When Amazing facts can count 11 out of 12, I'll be quiet.
"I know something you don't know!" "I'll give you a peek!" "Don't you wish you knew as much as I?" Is aimed at the gullible not the seeker.
Contrast that with: "Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for such is the Kingdom of Heaven."
Or contrast Graham Maxwell's "Safe to Save!" or "How God Won His Case." with any Amazing Facts telecasts.
There is a vast difference between Innovation and Gamesmanship.
Amazing facts is built upon the Cotton Mather fear dimension or the infamous sermon of J. Edwards. "Man in the Hands of an Angry God."
God should be depicted like the writer of Jonah presented Him.
Jonah
Jonah was a messenger for God out of the Northern Ten Tribes of Israel, a prophet if you please, and a pleasant one. Jonah, at God’s bidding, foretold of national strength (it seems as an inducement to return to God.) If threats didn’t work, try blandishments: a task Jonah enjoyed.
Now Jonah got a very unpleasant assignment. He was told to travel three days and tell a heathen king his city state was about to be destroyed. It wasn’t just any old king; it was the king that lost land along the coast of the Mediterranean to an Israeli king taking advantage of an internal struggle in Assyria. Just imagine Pat Robertson standing on a corner in Tehran crying in 40 days Tehran will be wiped from the face of the earth!
Jonah knew the way of kings. They delighted in beheading messengers with bad news. Jonah also knew that God wouldn’t be sending him to Nineveh unless God really wanted to spare Nineveh, making Jonah look foolish. What a choice: lose your head or lose face.
So Jonah did the smart thing, “You want me to travel? You say East, I’ll go West!” So Jonah traveled down the coast to Joppa and bought a one way ticket to Spain. He didn’t even stay on deck long enough to bid farewell to the Coast of Israel. He went down as far into the hold as he could dig, right among the “stuff” and immediately fell asleep.
Sailing in Jonah’s day was a lot like flying: hours of boredom and moments of shear terror. Sailors were men of the world, swaggering on land and shuddering at sea. To quiet their nerves there were women, booze, tattoos to frighten even the Devil himself, and tall tales to impress anyone with the time to listen. But who can blame them. The ships were 60 feet long, the waves sometimes 80 feet high, and the water so deep their anchors couldn’t find the bottom. Well they were about to get the ride and the tale to tell for the rest of their lives.
As soon as the sun set, the winds arose to a howling blow and with the wind came waves that crashed over the gunwales. The sailors furled sails, lashed the helm into the wind, and bailed for all they were worth. It might not become the perfect storm but it certainly was one for the books! Everyone prayed to their god when one remembered their passenger. Why wasn’t he bailing and praying?
A search found him sound asleep deep in the hold among the “stuff”. Quick questions and Jonah said: “Throw me overboard and the storm will stop.” One man for one ship! What an idea! With great reluctance the sailors, seeing no other solution, complied. Over the side Jonah went. The winds died down, the seas calmed and a great fish, especially prepared by God, swallowed Jonah whole. Most likely head first, much less resistance that way. Although it was a God provided stomach, it certainly wasn’t a Donald Trump VIP suite. Three days and three nights in the stomach of a fish, dark, damp, smelly—Nineveh sounded better every minute. With great agony of soul searching and prayer Jonah agreed with God: Nineveh was the place to be.
Three days later, the fish coughed Jonah up on shore far north of Joppa. Did he go home first to change clothes and get preparations for a three days journey, most likely, but he was quick about it, you can be sure.
Once in Nineveh, Jonah delivered God’s message: “Yet forty days, and Nineveh will be overthrown.” Wonder of wonders, the people believed God, proclaimed a fast, put on sackcloth, even the king covered himself in sackcloth and sat in ashes.
Just as Jonah expected, he was looking foolish. Nineveh was going to be spared. Never-the-less, Jonah retired to a mountain top to watch for fireworks. It was full sun and no shade. Just as with the fish, God prepared a vine that grew quickly and provided Jonah with cooling shade. Then God bade a cut worm to attack the vine, of course the vine quickly withered and died. Now to pile it on, God caused a hot wind to blow out of the East and the sun to beat down directly on Jonah’s head until Jonah fainted and wished to die.
The teachable moment had arrived! God said to Jonah, “You have pity on a miserable kudzu vine that came up in a night and died the next, yet you would have Me destroy a great city of 60 thousand people.”
This is the God who would not quench a smoking flax or break a bent reed.
This is the God who parted the Red Sea. This is the God who dwelt in the Pillar of Cloud by day and the Pillar of Fire by night. This is the God who shut the lions’ mouths. This is the God that stilled the waves on Galilee. This is the God that died to save one of His creations. This is the God who opened the prison doors for Peter. This is the God who tore down the prison for Paul and Silas
Yes we have a mission, a simple one. “Tell the story of Jesus, who entered a storm tossed world, lived a perfect life, died a cruel death at the hands of angry men, rose again the third day, comforted and taught His followers for forty days, entered Heaven itself and stands as our Advocate with the Father.” Covered by His Righteousness what more can we say: “Even so come Lord Jesus!”
Tom
Tom
There are no postings by Beth here.
Are you thinking of Bonnie?
Michael
Thanks I was thinking of Bonnie. Tom
Beth
Sorry, I owe you an apology. I guess Ron Numbers was almost correct. Tom
Loren,
The birth story and history of the Adventist Church give overwhelming evidence that the answer to your question is, "Yes, we can learn from others!" Just about everything that we are, that we practice, and that we hold as fundamental beliefs have been borrowed, adapted, or adopted from the larger Christian community and the corporate world.
A prayer from Kenya:
"From the cowardice that dares not face new truth,
from the laziness that is contented with half-truth,
from the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth,
Good Lord, deliver me."
Raj
Wonderful Prayer Raj-
Donna
Sorry I miss addressed my remarks to Beth. Now I wonder why Spectrum posted the piece about Doug's video--Not a peek out of your word processor. Strange! The idiom on both sides is the same. Tom
"I get more benefit from the barrage of creativity than I am troubled by what I disagree with." Loren Seibold's Column.
What a breath of fresh air that is! It is wonderful that a group of Adventist church workers are meeting in this way for the purpose of listening to the "creative ideas from others."
The more we study into the sources of Ellen White's major works, the more we realize how indebted Ellen White was to the creative ideas of other writers (mostly non-Adventist)in the books that she copied or paraphrased. One respected Pastor in Australia has said that Ellen White was the greatest rebel the church has had. She valued independent and common sense thinking even above counsels that she had put into her writings.
Elder Raj Attiken's "Ohio Innovation Conference" is a wonderful testimony that there are those in the workforce of the church who are humble enough to consider creative ideas with the purpose of being open to consider changes for the better.
The central theological issues of evangelism are:
1. God created man and gave him dominion over earth and its bio-mass.
2. God gave man the power of choice.
3. Man surrender both to Lucifer
4. Jesus Christ pledged to recover dominion and to redeem man.
5. Man is faced with his second choice: [judgment] Was the birth, life, service, trial, death, resurrection necessary and sufficient to recover dominion and to offer redemption to man? Phil 2: 5-11 says yes.
Unless evangelism addressed these issue directly, it is showmanship and institutional recruitment. To spend five minutes on 666 is 4 minutes and 60 seconds too long unless it first addresses as above: "The Hour of His Judgment Has Come!" How say ye? For me and my house we say: Yes Lord, we accept adoption as sons and daughters and worship You as King of Kings and Lord of Lords. Even so Come Lord Jesus. Tom
No problem Tom. Don't worry, I'll be happy to take you on over something else later ;)
And for what it's worth, I hope I stay as sharp as you have as time rolls on.
Thanks for your piece, Loren. Well stated. I am one of those who is very happy to live in the Ohio Conference!
Thank you, Loren, especially for the call to abandon bile. I too like to bask in a wash of ideas and art, though I find a Scriptural impetus to be discerning and discriminating as I choose the fountains in which to jump.
I'm at least as put off by the bile against Doug Bachelor and Amazing Facts as by that against IC. I myself was rather scandalized at the time I was first invited to an IC. I had enjoyed my prior exposure to the main presenter for that year. Upon reading his then-current teachings at his own web site, I was hard-pressed to find compatibility with any form of Biblical Christianity, and so lost any enthusiasm for attending that I may have had. Who knows, maybe I'll attend another one someday.
I believe that the minimum we owe each other as humans is the assumption (until proven otherwise, and even then ameliorated by a forgiving spirit) that we are after the good. With fellow Christians comes the added assumption that we are genuinely seeking to follow and serve Christ. This certainly applies within the bounds of Adventism also.
As for Jonah, I'm afraid that his was not a very progressive agenda. He believed or bemoaned himself to have a direct channel to the voice of God. The message he preached based on that Divine enlightenment was not even a message of hope, only of apocalyptic destruction, certainly well-calculated to frighten the naive.
So who are we to look down from the heights of sophistication on the naive who assume that the Book of God is relevant and to be understood, even in its most apparently frightening and garish passages?
Loren, I'm drawn back to your objection to bile. I still believe, as I preach every week in one form or another, that everything boils down to God's overriding goal to produce people who are love, just as He is love--a love that holds no exceptions. The extent to which we except, no matter what our doctrinal position, is the only true measure of our distance from His heart.
Seibold’s superficial and sweepingly dismissive review aside, the real purpose of IC has been to provide a “protected” incubator within the church for the elevation of the imagination and creativity of man.
The parameters of theological experimentation laid down have been exceedingly broad. The charge given at the initial gavel was, “If it isn’t illegal, immoral, or anti Christian; Go do it!” (Elder Raj Attiken, Introduction: National Innovation Conference 2005). Seibold and other “pupils” have willingly taken up the cause.
(BTW, where was that quoted from anyway?…ahh yes, Hezekiah?)
Not surprisingly propositional truth and the “still small voice” have been nearly drowned out by the conga line of “teachers” and programs that have since followed.
Seibold’s zeal to deconstruct Historic Adventism hobbles both discernment and objectivity. As a result he can offer little more than rhetorical questions, straw men and superficial generalities mixed with equal parts of “distilled bile”.
Sadly, such is the result of those who “marinate” in the expectation that the business world and man’s creativity will rescue the church.
A prayer from Ohio:
From the deconstructive process of what is theologically certain…
From the arrogance that seeks to elevate human ingenuity and imagination above Scripture…
From the naivety that supplants the Spirit with business methodology and sociological “trendiness”….
Good Lord, deliver us."
From the deconstructive process of what is theologically certain…
From the arrogance that seeks to elevate human ingenuity and imagination above Scripture…
From the naivety that supplants the Spirit with business methodology and sociological “trendiness”...
*********************************************************************************************
Hey Buckeye...
One would never discount the understanding of the human body and the practice of good health and sound medicine as exalting human ingenuity above God. Exercising the gifts and abilities that God has placed at our disposal in this area of life is viewed as working in concert with his Spirit, not supplanting it. The idea of praying for healing in our culture but not seeking help from those with medical expertise or expertise in health maintenance is not faith...its ignorance, arrogance, or presumption.
Why should it be any different when it comes to the church availing itself of the gifts and gifted people in our midst and also outside our circle, in order to better underdtand how to engage our culture for Christ in the 21st c? Paul was not above engaging his culture on its own terms. Acts gives evidence of such. The statement "I became all things to all men so that by all means I may win some," also validates such a course.
There are those among us who are gifted in reading and engaging the culture on its own terms, in order to build bridges that people can cross into God's kgd. Why should this be ignored or discounted as less than spiritual?
Also, whether we like it or not, the church has a business side to it. It is subject to the same type of principles of organizational theory and structures that businesses are. Jesus himself said that "the children of this world are wiser than the children of light." The way the church has been traditionally run from an organizational standpoint often reflects the truth of what Jesus said. To put down those who are seeking to operate the church in wise business fashion as somehow less than spiritual, also unwittingly reflects the truth of what Jesus said.
Thanks...
Frank
Hey Frank,
Thanks; in your zeal to offer False Dilemma, Weak Analogy (Paragraph 1) and eisegesis (Paragraphs 2, 4) I’m afraid you missed my main points. 1. The wisdom of men and women should not supersede….or contradict… the wisdom of God as revealed by the Holy Spirit through His Word. 2. Much of what is offered at IC is not in concert with this standard.
If you have been critically thinking attendee at IC you'll what I am saying Now that the objective for IC (and other Ohio & NAD programs) has been diminished to merely “learning from others”… unhinged from reasonable accountability for what is being taught; the door is left wide open (to quote Siebold) for “nonsense”.
BTW, you are absolutely correct in that the church has always had “a business side”. As I recall, Jesus reserved his most dramatic demonstration of displeasure for those, who were innovative and entrepreneurial about “doing church” along the business models of that day (cf Matt 21, Mark 11 and John 2).
Frank, Noticed a couple of words were omitted above in the second paragraph:
If you have been a critically thinking attendee at IC you’ll appreciate what I am saying. Now that the objective for IC (and other Ohio & NAD programs) has been diminished to merely “learning from others”… unhinged from reasonable accountability for what is being taught; the door is left wide open (to quote Siebold) for “nonsense”.
So let me get this straight…? We must learn from other Christians like Suzy Wetlaufer-Welch who lured Neon Jack (Welch) away from his (former) wife…and through the process, became embroiled in business ethical breaches that received national acclaim.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/24/60II/main682830.shtml
But Christian websites such as Lighthouse Trails that offer commentary and insights into the raging expanses of Contemplative Spirituality are discounted as having nothing to teach us?
Hmmmm? Is that a hint of intolerance…or just an indication of what turns Siebold and the IC Clan on?
BTW, you are absolutely correct in that the church has always had “a business side”. As I recall, Jesus reserved his most dramatic demonstration of displeasure for those, who were innovative and entrepreneurial about “doing church” along the business models of that day (cf Matt 21, Mark 11 and John 2).
**************************************************************
Buckeye...
Jesus reserved his criticism for those who were abusing the religious structure of the day for personal gain. This is not at all related to what I stated about the church's business side. Your point is also classic eisegesis.
The church, while God's idea, and the living body of Christ to be led and empowered by the Spirit, still has the aspect of human organization. It is thus subject to the same type of organizational theory, dynamics and principles as any organization. If those dynamics are not functioning correctly, then the body will be sick...just as improper care of the human body, also made by God, will lead to the same results.
The children of this age are wiser than the children of light in many of these aspects because they recognize the role and value of sound organizational theory, and organizational and leadership principles in order to run their enteprises succesfully. We, OTOH, excuse all kinds of ignorance of such as if it's all unspiritual. It's a copout...and the results prove it.
The NAD has run on the same organizational structure for the past 108 years. Has the world changed since 1901? Have our results also kept diminishing? Is an organizational overhaul maybe in order? Could we learn from outside our ranks about the best way to approach this...because we certainly don't seem to be finding the answers from within? Could God very possibly want to lead us to take seriously people who aren't Adventist who just might know more than us in this area...like maybe someone like Lyle Schaller?
This is just one example of our closed rank mentality. Is it a case of maintaining purity, or a narrow view of where and how and with and through whom God works?
Why is it that this is sounding a lot like the arrogance that Jesus encountered in the Judaism of his day?
Thanks...
Frank
I am not in favor of the presenters who have been invited to address our people over the past few years, at these Innovation conferences. These individuals believe many things that are not at all Scriptural. Even a summary glance at what they espouse and promote, and one could easily see that it is unwise to expose our people to them. What on earth is happening in the Ohio Conference? Why is there such an incredible de-emphasis on loving obedience? Why are those who believe in a Spirit-empowered continuum of justification and sanctification viewed as legalistic?
A transformed life, true conversion, reform in entertainment, diet, dress--we have been called to this and more as a remnant people! We should not be ashamed of the power of the Gospel! How dare anyone put down honest-hearted believers who simply want to give God full reign in their lives! We must return to our heritage of simplicity, divine trust, and uniqueness as a remnant who are called out of the world.
People in the 21st century are concerned about their health and well-being. We should embrace the guidance God has given us in health reform, and use this right arm of the message to do its work in our communities. If we don't believe our message, how can we expect anyone else to believe it? What are we so afraid of? God has entrusted us with the most precious truth of all time! He wants us to present the Everlasting Gospel in all its fullness to the souls who are lost in sin and despair in this world. We have answers to many of their questions. We must befriend them, engage them, and not shy away from sharing the life-enhancing Word with them.
Our young people--many of them--are fired up about Jesus and His power to save! Let's follow their lead and boldly, unashamedly declare, through our lifestyle, what it truly means to be "Christocentric." It means surrendering to Jesus Christ, allowing His Spirit to have authority in every part of our lives; it means centering our affections, our plans, our habits on Jesus and His glory.
Please, those of you in leadership positions, pay attention to what the True Witness, the Lord Jesus, is saying to you in 2010. He is calling all of us into an innovation conference of His own--in the prayer chamber--in the Word of God--in the timely guidance of the Spirit of Prophecy writings. Let's go there, and lose our attachment to the schemes and wisdom of man. We--the Seventh-day Adventist Church--we stand at a crossroads in time. There is only one road that will lead us all the way to heaven. "This is what the Lord says: 'Stop at the crossroads and look around. Ask for the old, godly way, and walk in it. Travel its path, and you will find rest for your souls.'" (Jer. 6:16). Let us not have the same response of the spiritual leaders of Judah, in the days of Jeremiah, when they said: "No, that's not the road we want!"
http://lifesavingtruth.webs.com/apps/blog/
David Sullivan
Post new comment