How about an essay on "Why I became an Adventist"? Because for most of the young people in the U.S. I would bet it's because they were born into it. Usually a parent, grandparent, or further generation before them is the deciding factor.

How many of your age are recent converts? Is it fair to wager that by far the majority of college-age Adventits are NOT new converts? That in itself places Adventism with the Catholics, Lutherans, Baptists and even Muslims who can honestly declare they "inherited" their religion with no conscious choice of their own. What credit is there, then, in claiming "Why I am still an Adventist." Was there ever a conscious decision to become one? And how important is it to feel close to people you've know all your life and felt like "family"?

I am not sure what the message is here. So you are basically saying I am an SDA because I am an SDA? Perhaps it is your personal journey with your religious conviction and how that leads you culturally back to the SDA church? I agree, as the “nurture” part of your development leaves you with very little choice to be anything else. So where is your choice? Did free will lead you to being an SDA? Do you think you have complete free will? Doesn't sound like it.

To answer Elaine, “Why I became an Adventist” has effectively the same answer as “Why I am still and Adventist” - it is because you really have very little choice about it. Even if you “forced” yourself to exercise what little piece of free will you may have, and went into another belief system, you will probably never be as comfortable.

Patty--

Really appreciated your post, no matter how foreign and alien it is to me, a convert (at 24 and now a grey 52). But your words better help me understand where fellow SDAs are coming from.

Funny, but even after all these years in the church (24 of them at the GC) I find many things uncomfortable about Adventism. It goes against my entire upbringing, culture, and education. As a secular Jew having grown up in Miami Beach (Beach High, '73), I have not had an easy time adjusting to what is, bacically, a conservative Protestant denomination!

And yet--you're stuck with me because I believe that this is where God has led me, and because I believe that this church has been given more light, "present truth" as we call it, than any other one in the world.

That is the ONLY reason I am here. No matter how good folks have been to me, I'd be gone tomorrow if I stopped believing in all the doctrines. In fact, I believe in all 28; and when they come up with 29--I will believe it too!

Happy Sabbath

One of the reasons why I've stayed (or, more honestly, returned) to Adventism is because of the vision articulated most recently (to my knowledge) by Julius Nam in his blogging the preamble as part of the blogging the 28 series--the vision of inclusiveness and even Adventisms (not a typo on the "s").
http://progressiveadventism.com/2007/07/31/in-medias-res-bloggin-the-pre...

If we take our preamble seriously, then I can be an Adventist even without endorsing all 28 as long as I'm still giving the Bible the central role in my inquiry. It seems a brilliant stroke of inclusiveness to not outline how a member must interpret the Bible, just that he/she must take it seriously.

I appreciate your comments Cliff, and they help confirm what I've sensed about some differences between Adventist converts and Adventists-by-birth. I have stopped fully endorsing some of the 28--or at least I'm very comfortable living with ambiguity on several, but I discovered that in many crucial ways I'm always going to be an Adventist; it's almost an ethnicity when you've been born into it. I might struggle with my identity--and indeed I do--but at a fundamental level, I can't change it. I've also discovered that there isn't really another denomination (or religion) that I wouldn't also have certain issues with, so I've chosen to stay with the family I know, flaws and all (and, hey--we all have seen that flaws can be seen as beauty marks by those who love us).

I LOVE that blog of Julius's, Daneen!!! It brought tears to my eyes and even my fourth-generation-Adventist pastor-dad cried when he read it. I think that preamble is amazing (or in Julius's fab prose: "pregnant with potential") and could really help us find the unity and comfort and inspiration and bravery that we need to be the people of God. We'd rather have it all spelled out. And we have so much to draw on that could do radical things in the world--if we only didn't keep casing it in lists of fundamental beliefs and revelation seminars.

Much as I know the 'right' answer is supposed to be about having the truth - being born in an Adventist family adds the cultural aspect of the church to almost every facet of life. Sometimes I wonder if my being here [in the church] is simply the foregone conclusion of my birth/upbringing. Even more than just my comfort and my emotional/familial/social ties...my understanding of the Bible and our beliefs are such that I doubt I could ever be swayed to anything else. [One reason I often wonder how others who have grown up in another faith could 'move house' so to speak, and become Adventists. That, certainly, is the Holy Spirit. But I digress..]

I think for many of us born and acculturated in the church we are Adventists [as someone said above] because *we are Adventists*. (If nothing else, the system certainly can perpetuate itself.) Conscious choices to 'stay' in the church come much later in life for us. And oftentimes, they're not so difficult. As the author stated, she's chosen to stay even with all the foibles [the church's and her own]. I'm dissatistifed with this though, because the discussion avoids any particulars...

I'm left to choose one of the 2 scenarios that come to mind:
1-this friendship is one of the shallow/acquaintance variety, where folks don't always agree, but they just 'agree to disagree' and move on, cuz there's not a whole lot invested/care involved
2-this friendship is one of the deep/long-haul variety, where folks don't always agree, but the love is so thick that, even with a few disagreements, each knows the other would give her last dime [life, even, maybe] in order to save them.

i kinda hope she's talking about the #2 kind of friendship.

Being an adventist because you're an adventist isn't that strange. People acquire faith the way they acquire language--through their communities. The people of Pakistan are not muslim because they chose to be. Islam is not their faith-- it is the faith of the community. And as long as the faith people grow up with remains a good cultural fit, it will feel right and true. The reason why adventist young people leave the church in droves has probably less to do with the ideology of the community than with the communal culture generated by its ideology. The question for you who still remain within the SDA community is this: can adventist beliefs generate more than one type of community, for instance, one that is a good cultural fit for the 21st century, without abandoning fundamental elements of its ideology?

I was raised and educated SDA and still have ties but did finally have to make the decision to break. I can honestly say that I was treated very well and in many ways it was a healthy community to grow up in. As a young adult I was agnostic but became interested in faith again after having children (common story I know). For me and my husband (also raised SDA) though, it was also the very fact that we had children that made us finally seek another faith community. It is our experience that while there are opportunities for adults to discuss issues in a more progressive way, there is really no room for children to be taught that way as well. Noone seems comfortable straying from orthodoxy when it comes to children and while I can understand the importance of that when passing on a distinct faith tradition, it makes it difficult. I finally had to ask myself why I was stretching the definition of SDA further and further to try and fit in (and rationalizing belonging to an organization that violated my very strongly held beliefs about women's roles, gay and lesbians, and science). While there are minorities within the church that disagree with the official church position, the fact remained that I belonged to an organization that told my daughter she was not equal to men, that told me I could not, as a straight married woman, even advocate for my gay friends, and that faith has to trump reason in science. As an adult, it is easier to see the good and bad and value the progressive communities within the whole but my children could not benefit from that. You can only explain so much to your kids about how we think differently until one day you just have to say enough. For anyone who thinks that SDAs are open about evolution issues (mentioned on another thread), just see how welcome an 8 year old's suggestion that the 7 creation days aren't literal is in SS class LOL. It was painful to come to the realization that there were irreconcilable differences but it was a friendly divorce - I still have some ties and still carry that strong cultural imprint.

I am an Adventist pastor who struggles at times with identifying myself with the Adventist church; and representing it. I am embarrassed by our church at times (no need to name names or policies) [just this past week I apologized on behalf of our church (again) for not being able to welcome this person into community; this sickens me]. We can be better than this!
But at the same time I cling to the preamble, as Daneen expressed, it represents much of who I am as a follower of Jesus - and why I am, and will be for the foreseeable future, a Seventh-day Adventist pastor.
The preamble expresses a sense of mystery and adventure: "I do not know where you will take me God, but I will go there without fear. This is where I think I'm at now, but I'm just human, and we make mistakes all the time. I'm ready to be moved." Its kind of like Abraham's 'lech-lecha'...the prime illustration of God and change; God and hope. I know things get complicated with the institution, but at its central core, Adventism is about following God wherever he leads, regardless of the consequences and cultural fallout. This is why I am an Adventist.

I'm still intersted in Adventism because--to quote Neil Young--"all my changes were there."

I've been an Adventist child and survived the oddness that Adventist standards imposed on me. I missed a question on a spelling test in the fourth grade because it presupposed that everyone watched tv on Friday nights. I was allowed to catch the Beatles and Rock & Roll acts on the Ed Sullivan show with the family but never on the family radio.

I've been an Adventist teen and prayed with academy after-school groups when the born-again bug hit the Adventists in the 70s.

I've been an Adventist collegiate and marveled at the "liberal" Adventist teachers who listened to Cool Jazz, enjoyed reading both Herman Hesse's Demian and Carlos Castaneda's proto-New Age writings, went to Ingmar Bergman movies on a Saturday night, and still wanted to "read all the Testimonies to the Church during one summer marathon".

I've been an Adventist adult and hunted from church to church until I found one that fit like a glove, the Adventist Forum fellowship.

I've been an ex-Adventist but still felt that I couldn't really shake Adventism from me as it haunted me even in my dreams.

I've been a quasi-Adventist which is where I find myself now and I'm comfortable with this life of reading the Spirit of Prophecy occasionally, reading the Bible even more frequently, praying like it never went out of style, attending prayer meetings just in case the outpouring of the Spirit occurs on one of these nights, attending church when I don't have to punch a time clock on alternate Saturdays.

For what it's worth, thank you Seventh-Day Adventism, for coloring my life with indelible hues.

"Not because I don’t think I wouldn’t have been happy anywhere else...

Somehow I am not liking this as a criteria for truth. Should perceived "happiness" be any measure of the truth of the Seventh-Day Adventist message--or any other?

I suppose this depends on what the author means by "happy".

To the larger question.

Why would anyone want to live a lie (ultimately)?
If the universe is a real thing, then there have to be some sort of objective dimensions about it.
To me, that is what searching for truth is all about. God being the Ultimate Reality, I would want to stay as close to an understanding of that as possible, because that is where I would expect to find the most abundant life to satiate my innate will to live.
Adventism currently provides me with the most consistent explanation of Reality I have found so far (my "feelings" having, hopefully, nothing at all to do with it).

People who expect perfection from "the church" (read: other people) are set up to be perpetually disappointed.

Thank you soo much for this perspective. As another commenter indicated, I too am an Adventist Pastor. I was born into the church. I have been in recent years wondering if I fit because of my thinking on various SDA beliefs. However, lately I've felt impressed to journal/write about what I do value about Adventism and even what I value about beliefs that I may not totally agree with.

Your perspective is confirming for me. I've felt God leading me on a journey that sees much differently, and yet I also feel that so far He's calling me to remain serving within the church-sometimes I don't know why-so I just try to trust His knowledge is greater than mine.

Note, should the above Pastor/commentor wish to contact me I would love to have a conversation.

I made the decision to become an "ex-Adventist" more than 20 years ago. It was not without long, hard, soul-searching and not an easy decision because I had been raised a PK with all that entails.

However, as a mature adult, I began studying the Bible, influenced greatly by people who were real students of the Bible, and especially the NT, something that in my previous SDA education had been totally by-passed for the prophecies of D&R and Bible Doctrines (as determined by SDA).
Reading the Bible without SDA glasses is seeing what is new: That the message to the Gentiles is NOT the Law and rules of the OT, but entirely new and the OT plan was only given, specifically, to the Jew and NOT to the Gentiles.

Christ changed everthing. The SDA beliefs are, for a large part, still based on the OT; a dissonance unacceptable, and unexplainable to the Christian. It is clear and unambiguous to nearly all the Christian community, but for some reason, the SDA church is still like the early American settlers: An OT based faith.

Elaine, thank-you for your wonderful summation of the difference between Adventism and Christianity.

I also am an "ex-Adventist", now for 3 years after being a member for 45. It was only after reading scripture without the SDA glasses on, that the Gospel finally made sense, and it became clear why the News was so good.

As a Christian my Covenant is the New Covenant in Christ. I know longer have to pay homage to the Bondwoman of the Old.

No longer do I have to try and serve two masters or pretend that I can.

Again, thank-you for summing up my experience so well.

RJG

Elaine and RJG you are incredibly mistaken when you say that SDA beliefs are ALL based on the OT.

You say that you've read people who are real students for the Bible, ie, evangelical theologians. These are the same theologians who cannot find a reason in the Bible for keeping the real Sabbath, the seventh-day that Jesus kept, who believe the soul is immortal (just like the Serpent in Eden) and who believe in a "loving" God that will burn people forever and ever in the lake of fire (sure makes you feel good you're in heaven forever and not in the lake of fire doesn't it?). You mean to say that that kind of theology is better than the one SDA's preach??

The Christ you claim to have found was waiting for you all along in the true SDA message of salvation by faith and grace alone, not legalism. I'm sorry you missed Him...

I know because I believe in that Christ; and more I believe my Christ is indeed different from yours because I believe in that full expression of Christ's mission on earth and in heaven: not only his sacrificial death and complete atonement on the Cross but his priestly work in the sanctuary today, applying the benefits of that perfect sacrifice to my life (Hebrews 9). In that sense, you have actually abandoned a full covenant with the Christ of the New TEstament that SDAs believe in for a watered down version of Christ, who has does not seem to be involved in my life today, at least not that you can prove from Scriptures using your new "glasses". Your Christ is just sitting at the right hand of the father, idly while I suffer down here. Mine is standing up for me in the Sanctuary!! (Hebrews 9)

In essence, you seem to have created your own "grace-based legalism", your own rules by which you live by that can include anything but Adventism.

Andre, please re-read what I wrote. I DID NOT SAY that ALL of Adventism was based on the OT, as you imply, but that the beliefs were in a LARGE PART based on the Old Testament.

Andre

What is an evangelical theologian and where is it mentioned in Elaine's treatise?

"Mine is standing up for me in the Sanctuary!!" I guess while you are still suffering here.

I don't see how a Christian version of Christ is watered down. If anything, it is more powerful.

Andre, you interpret "real students" of the Bible as evangelical theologians. My use of "real students" is used as biblical historical academicians; not evangelicals. There IS a difference.

Unless they're ATHEIST biblical historical academicians, they could be best described as evangelicals...

Honestly, that's besides the point, the majority of populist theologians today cannot see plain biblical truth because of prior commitments, e.g., Sunday observance, immortality of the soul, eternal hell to mention a few. Hence, their God of love is far removed from the doctrines they spouse and their Christ is not the real Christ of the Scriptures, although they call themselves Christians.

Anonymous,
I have never met an "Anonymous" and so I take their comments as meaningless.

sorry, forgot the add my name there...

Andres,
How would you classify Calvin and Luther? Did they know the real Christ of Scripture? Why did EGW praise them?

Pat, Luther was certainly praised by EGW, however, that doesn't mean his theology was correct in all issues. Luther was a racist and he never accepted the true day of worship, for instance.

For people to come here and say that SDAs do not know Christ, that they have found a better, or "more powerful" Christ elsewhere when a chunk of their theology blatantly belies that fact is highly offensive. If I were a seeker, I would immediately reject the Christ that burns people in hell forever and ever, and yet, that is the Christ that many people and most of the these "qualified theologians" are preaching. These so-called biblical scholars are the same ones who choose not to see many Biblical truths as I've pointed out. [SDA's do not believe in an eternal hell by the way.]

In that case, former SDAs who claim to have found the light are not really returning to the protestant principle of Sola Scriptura by rejecting EGW as "extra biblical", they're just resorting to other sources of extra-biblical information. And they do a good job creating their "grace based legalism", their little rules by which they must be saved.

I'm not attacking anyone personally by the way, we're discussing ideas...

Andre

I am not sure of what fact belies their knowledge of Chirist. Just because your belief system is rejected does not mean the alternative system you put forward is the alternative.

Do you believe EGW is has more revelation than Martin Luther?

One of the things I like about being an Adventist is that we do not distance ourselves from the Old Testament and Judaism.

[Many now say "Hebrew Scriptures." I prefer "First Testament."]

We consider it a priviledge to be part of the branch that God has grafted into the tree that is Israel, as Paul put it. If it dies, so does all of Christianity!

For centuries Christians of all sorts have believed in superscessionism, the view that in God's providence their community of faith has replaced Israel. Most ecumenical [as differented from "evangelical"] theologians now reject this doctrine. I am pleased that many SDA theologians do so as well. It has contributed to many horrors.

Professor Jacques Doukhain (spelling?) at Andrews University has written an excellent forward looking book on the subject.

The point is Andre is that the first essential of being a Christian is found in Rom.10:3-9 and 1 Cor 15:3,4. If a brother or sister claims to be in Christ and professes these things then we are not to judge weather they are saved or lost.We may feel they have less than perfect understanding in areas (so do we) but Christ is the essential. I suggest SDA's would not exist without the Spirit led work of Luther and Calvin.

IMHO we have a few doctrines wrong also...but we must not be wrong on needing,knowing and accepting Christ as Savior and Lord.
--------------------
David,
I bet your glad to be off a plane after the long flight!

I appreciate the continuities and discontinuities that are taught in Reformed Covenant theology. Christ is the vine (John 15)and as Paul said in Romans and Galatians...
"But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; 7 neither are they all children because they are Abraham’s descendants, but: “through Isaac your descendants will be named.” 8 That is, it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants."Rom.9:6-8.

"26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. 28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. 29 And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise."Gal.3:26-29.

And Gal.3:16-"Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, “And to seeds,” as referring to many, but rather to one, “And to your seed,” that is, Christ."

LaRondelle's book "The Israel of God in Prophecy" is also a good read.

Andre

Your phrase "grace based legalism" intrigies me. Could you give me three examples. I always thought that Selected Messages, Messages to Young People, Diets and Foods and other compilations of E.G.W. were chock a block full of "grace based legalisms." While living in Loma Linda an unknown well meaning brother would pin E.G.W saying on the screen door--like one should wear susppenders rather than a belt and other golden oldies. When we meet on a golden street, I am sure he will immediately conclude that I am there because of his persistent evangelizing. Tom

P.S. I did find that wearing suspenders while playing golf gave me renewed confidence on my back swing.

Too bad you're not an Adventist because it's the most loving and inclusive denomination... Too bad you're confusing the love of God with the non-wearing of jewelry, and the volume of music... Too bad Adventism raises people like you who think punitive measures are more important than love itself... I've been an Adventist all of my life, and I'm still trying to figure out why I keep membership. Maybe it's because there are still people out there who are radical enough to forego the "Adventist Rule" and sincerely care about me regardless to what I wear and what I listen too. Those are the Adventists who remind me of God's love...

Some of you are so into Adventism that it is pathetic. I used to be like that until I developed a loving relationship with Christ. We should be bragging and talking about how good Jesus is to us, how much he loves us and how he has changed our lives. It is all about him and not Adventism.

The devil wants us to keep our eyes off of Jesus and be more concerned with our doctrines, our beliefs and the most precious to some Adventists, our denomination. I don't even call myself an Adventist, I refer to myself as a christian because I want my identity to be tied to Christ and not a denomination (I do not condemn those who call themselves Adventists). Keep your focus on Christ!! God bless you all.

Patty,

you are still an Adventist for the simple reason that you ignore the bad and embrace the good.

The SDA church, like every culture, is a mix of bad and good. If the good stuff happens to correspond with your likes, and the bad stuff is in areas that don't irk you, it is pleasant to belong to the culture.

There is much about being an SDA that I miss, since I no longer attend. But there is even more that no longer irks me every week.

Enjoy your membership. In many ways, I wish I had a similar experience.

/Bevin

Annoymous

Known but to God. If you enjoy Adventism great. I enjoy adventists who find membership secondary to fellowship with
people of faith.

Check-list theology is a turn-off in any rational society.

However, the present SDA church world wide is so permissive--they probably would even accept me back. Tom

Very well and compassionately stated, Beth. I agree.

Greetings:

Shortly after the 9/11 Muslim terrorist attacks, Patty recorded a song titled "America" that had voice clips of President Bush intertwined with the lyrics. It is an extremely moving rendition. After only a few playings, the President Bush clips were removed for some reason. Is there an "official" version of that variation of the song available anywhere?

I happened to record if from the radio, and have what may be a very rare instance of it. I would really like to post it to YouTube or some other public venue if it is not otherwise available, but will not violate any copyright.

Any information that can be provided will be appreciated. This blog is the most recent instance I could find of anything related to Patty.

Thanks.

denominations, doesnt take us to heaven.
but Jesus did. stop talking about denominations.
just live ur life like Jesus did.