Thanks for this report from our largest non-GC university in North America Raymond! It really is quite exciting- I look forward to reading more!

There is no such thing as a bad question. Blessings on you as you search for answers!

Sounds like the debates within Judaism...what constitutes being a true Jew?

It's too bad this kind of openess couldn't have been happening twenty years ago. Maybe a guy like Jerry Goodson would still be around.

But, better late than never.

Frank

Correction...Jerry Gladson.

Frank

I am more than pleased with the SAU Forum as described above. Genuine Adventism is kept alive and matures with open discussion when focused on a chosen theme. Bull and Lockhard gave us an overview of Adventist history, especially since 1957, that is surprisingly accurate, insightful, and instructive. My review of their book, "Searching for a Sanctuary," in a recent SPECTRUM mag,highlights their perceptive discernment. I trust that Dr. Allan Parker has time for your Forum meetings.

Correction: Sp: Lockhart

Hi Raymond!

Congratulations! It looks like your Forum is led by great people and that you are off to a great start!! Very well done!!!

I hope that you won't linger very long with the question, "What is an Adventist?"

It is impossible for us to give this question a stable answer because Adventism, like every healthy movment, is pluralistic and dynamic.

But even if we could, who in the big wide world would care? Very few. Who should care? None. This question isn't worth a lot of our time and energy. There are more intersting and important things to discuss.

"Christian Responses to 'Global Warming,'" "Evangelicals and Politics," "Human Starvation," and "Sexual Slavey Today" might be interesting.

More abstract topics like "Are All Our Beliefs Socially Constructed?" "Is Panentheism Christian?" or "Biology and Theology: Recent Trends" might also work.

If you do topics like these, and if you invite them, I think that on occasion local newspaper reporters will show up and write stories that will benefit their readers. If they don't, someone from your journalism program can and submit their stories to the papers. They are usually hungry for good copy.

I don't think they are likely to come out to very many seesions in which yet again we try to figure out who we are.

Two things kill Forum chapters, I think: (1) Intellectual Arrogance and (2) Intellectual Irrelevance. May you always steer clear of both!

Congratulations, Raymond! Thank you very much for being an effective leader.

Dave

It is passing strange that a people so steeped in Scripture and so jealously proud of their exegesis are still seeking a Sanctuary: particularly given their history of connecting the dots from type to antitype.

None other than Jesus Christ appropriated every part of the Hebrew Sanctuary to Himself.

The Lamb, The Door, The Water of Life, The Bread of Life, The Light of the World. The Mercy Seat, the Fulfillment of the Law.
All are subsumed under the person of Jesus Christ the One who tented with us. The Gospel of John was written for that purpose alone. The Epistle to the Hebrews was written to bring the Hebrew people up to date. Yet, once again, we seek new ways to justify the eisegesis of a forlorn little band of enthusiasts.

If there is to be a vibrant forum, let it be Seeking Jesus Christ—Our Coming King. How to witness to a 21st Century world caught in a web of deceit, doubt, and hopelessness. Tom

Dave and Tom: You have pointed to the narrow, navel-gazing and continued retrospective searching for "True Adventism" that is totally irrelevant to us today, and especially should be for vibrant, eager young people who should be seeking appropriate ways to demonstrate their beliefs in the many needs of their local communities. Activities should as these, not religious discussions, worthy as they are, would offer a far better impressions on the "world" outside their present scope and possibly gain publicity from the local media which is of much greater worth than some of the turbulence seen several decades past when an AAF meeting in Northern California resulted in tremendous publicity, not especially positive, when doctrines were discussed.

For many years I have received monthly audio tapes from the San Diego Chapter of AAF which has promoted a wide diversity of speakers. However, they seem much more in tune with the older, mature SDA who has long experience in the church. How, and what type of discussions can be directed to the college-age as well as mature audience that will be equally attractive?

Johnny, you mentioned that Southern was the largest non-GC SDA university in North America.
Can you give Southern's figures and some of the other universities, and which are GC and non-GC operated?

Elaine

Ouch! I disagree with your reading of my post. I think I was saying--get off the Old Testament Sanctuary kick and accept the reality of the Christ event. Hardly Old Time SDA navel gazing. Tom

How delightful to see new Adventist Forum chapters forming on college campuses. Oslo, Norway is home to another new chapter were students are active leaders.

Raymond, perhaps you will inspire participation by the students at the GC institutions in North America which are Andrews University (which does have a Forum chapter), Oakwood Adventist University (which does not) and Loma Linda University (which does).

Today the forum chapter at Pacific Union College is sponsoring the showing of Darius Goes West. On Feb. 28, "Fighting for Life" will be shown in Loma Linda.

We wish you all the best in your discussions at Southern and look forward to hearing more about the meetings from you, Raymond.

Sorry, Tom. I'm with you. We need to get out of the complex and complicated Sanctuary that has, since its inceptions, dogged Adventism. It has led to the truthful accusations that Adventists are living still in the OT era and have not yet fully embraced the message of the NT.

How many grade-school SDA students have spent countless hours constructing sanctuary models and memorizing all the articles and symbols that were in the tabernacle in the wilderness? Is that all there is to the Exodus story? The black churches for so many years have captured its meaning for them today while SDAs still devote time to the sanctuary, because of its recounting in the Hebrews--which only made sense to them, and there really is no meaning to us today, IMHO.

Elaine, the "Seeking a Sanctuary" reading and discussion that this new forum chapter is undertaking, has nothing to do with the "countless hours constructing sanctuary models" that you're speaking to. I'm sure you're familiar with this book? It's a scholarly look at Adventism as a uniquely American religion from a cultural, historical, and sociological viewpoint. See the Spectrum review of the 2nd edition here:
http://spectrummagazine.org/reviews/book/2007/09/27/review_seeking_sanct...

I also wanted to point out that this forum chapter is being started by students--so, if it is a little navel-gazing that they need to start off, let's give them our blessing. I realize that you (and Tom) have technically shed your Adventist label a long time ago, as have others who often comment here, but that's your story. Others still need time to find their story. I know that as a fifth generation Adventist, figuring out just what that heritage meant was (and still often is) hugely important to me. Until I know myself, my family, my culture (navel-gazing), I cannot fully embrace the world, the otherness that I was raised apart from. Of course I don't want to get stuck on self-reflection, but it's a crucial (and difficult) part of growth and self-awareness.

Daneen,

Well said!

Frank

Daneen

I certainly hope that in a study of the Sanctuary, the students find Jesus Christ. Otherwise, what is the point?

Tom

I am so delighted to witness the growth of Adventist Forum at Southern - I can't wait to read the interesting discussions - let the conversations begin!
Blessings
Ellen

Daneen, it seems that your background "as a fifth generation Adventist, figuring out just what that heritage meant was (and still often is) hugely important to me. Until I know myself, my family, my culture (navel-gazing), I cannot fully embrace the world, the otherness that I was raised apart from."

This would be, IMO, one of the best reasons to avoid isolation during one's developing years, and especially education. To be "apart" and feel the "otherness" is to be somewhat unable to relate to the "world" and is a handicap in our interaction.

Having been raised as only a 2nd generation SDA, but attending SDA schools through first year of college, it is a very isolated existence with no other relationships developing through the years, the time when our most valuable friendships are made. How are we able to understand those who have not been raised in such an isolated religious environment? We speak a different language (until we learn another) and our jargon is foreign-sounding to others' ears.

Not until I entered the world of work, did I begin to experience the many differences; but also that what I had been taught about "outsiders" was grossly exaggerated.

This is a plea for wider, not lesser association.
As adults we realize, sooner or later, that there's a big wide world out there and there are many wonderful people outside of Adventism; and there are also wonderful, dedicated teachers in our public schools. Why must we continue to protect adults, 18 and over? The college yearsw should be a time of exploring much more than their SDA heritage; the entire world should be their oyster. There may be less need to "study Adventist heritage" if we realized at a much earlier age that we are all on a lifetime journey together and no one has the last and best roadmap.

Tom--I'll repeat again, the students at the new SAU forum are not studying the sanctuary--not as a physical or metaphysical place! They're reading a book ("Seeking a Sanctuary: Adventists and the American Dream") on the socio-cultural roots of Adventism as a uniquely American religion--it's a scholarly treatise, not a doctrinal study of any sort.

I can't speak for them, but for myself, learning about Adventism as a social and historical religion helped me understand my place in it and how I wanted to continue to define that place. All of this helps with my relationship with Jesus--I need to know the assumptions I was raised with, that my parents were raised with, that my society had/has about my religion, that my religion has/had about society, etc. to know who I am as a spiritual being--it's not a pure process stripped of its social and historical contexts. For some of us that exploration allows us to finally be comfortable in the religion of our parents; for others, it requires a more decisive change (although, many like to stick around to participate in conversations like this one--funny how sticky that heritage seems to be).

Elaine--I'm not entirely sure what you're arguing for (or is it just against?). Are you opposed to Adventist education as a concept? I am just responding to the good news of the new Adventist Forum chapter at Southern and their decision to read and discuss a highly-acclaimed book about Adventism (acclaimed from scholars both inside and outside the church). I do view this as an opening up, a part of a wider, not lesser association. And I sensed an immediate, knee jerk reaction from some in this community who have already figured out what their Adventist heritage means for them and expect others to get to that same place instantly, forgetting that identity and self-exploration takes time. In my observation self-excavation and the reflection that goes along with it inevitably results in an opening up, not a shutting down.

I'll be interested to hear back from Raymond as this new chapter develops. Keep us posted.

I agree Daneen. I too will be interested to hear back from Raymond as the new chapter develops.

Last year I received a survey asking what could be done to improve the spirituality on campus at Southern Adventist University. My response was to encourage increased exchange of ideas and open dialogue. Many of us in the past have settled for being told what an Adventist is. I am greatly encouraged that there is a forum at Southern asking the question, "What is an Adventist."

Daneen

I understand completely. My point is Seeking the Sanctuary is an apology for the foundational history of Adventism. The bottom-line of which leaves the reader further from the body of Christ not closer. While the book takes a superficially
objective editorial policy It still places its approbation on the movement without the critical analysis it deserves.

If one were an objective student of Adventism, they would
come out about where Walter Rea did or Fred Veltmann or Ron Numbers.

That does not mean that I have any hostility toward Adventists. I do not support they primary positions on the Spirit of Prophecy and its sequelea. I worship with them and enterain them in my home. I just know my standing with God, in Jesus Christ without any checking of the "books". Tom

Tom--I respect your stance and your comfort with your own faith; I'm just asking us all to let others get to know their own story without us superimposing our walk on them.

I'm not sure how to even address your opinions on "Seeking a Sanctuary"--your comments make me think you haven't read it as it isn't an apologetic work at all; rather, it's historical. Of course it looks at the "foundational history of Adventism"--that's what historical, sociological works do. And it seems rather ironic to say that if the authors were "objective student[s] of Adventism, they would come out about where Walter Rea did or Fred Veltmann or Ron Numbers"--talk about superimposing a personal, subjective opinion onto a work (not to mention completely mixing genres and scholarly credentials--Rea, Veltmann and Numbers all worked for the church). We've done enough talking on this thread about that though. If you want to talk more about the particulars of this book, please do so over on the page about it here:
http://spectrummagazine.org/reviews/book/2007/09/27/review_seeking_sanct...

Daneen

I have no argument with anyone. The principals are history.
The Gospel is current. praise be to God. Tom

I was one of two pastors that attended the first forum meeting at SAU. I just want to say I was very proud of the students in charge, and blessed by the discussion and the broad range of perspectives that were present! And thank you to all who are remembering them in prayer as they are trying to take an active role in their own personal growth as Christians rather just taking in whatever is fed to them.

I graduated from Southern in 1975 (B.A. Religion) and I loved the place. Back then, before the fall, we all believed in the established verities. People still counted the years they had been in "the Truth". The faculty of religion was made up of young, dynamic teachers such as Jerry Gladson, Edwin Zackrison and Springett, seasoned pastors such as Bennett and Holbrook and Robert Francis. It must be hard to imagine for the younger generation of what it was like to live before the fall, when for most of us, there was no daylight between church creed and our own faith.

But then the world came crashing in on us. Spectrum Magazine brought news of Don McAdams' research on the Great Controversy manuscript, Desmond Ford and Robert Brinsmead began to challenge orthodox SDA theology and Walter Rae topped it off with his plagiarism research. "Happy Valley" became a very unhappy place to be.

Students, as well as outsiders (such as Florence Woolcock, a poor woman crazed with passion for fundamentalist adventism) began spying on teachers, standing behind room-dividers to catch them at saying something untoward, or even recording private conversations with members of the faculty and playing these tapes to local church gatherings. The Southern Union, led by people nobody had ever accused of an excess of personal piety, aligned itself with the local taliban and turned on Southern with a vengeance, and purged the religion faculty of its most vital members. Southern became a Bible College, with an endowed chair of Ellen White Studies and Gordon Hyde the theological kommisar.

It was a sad thing to see. Unlike Tom, I left the church at the beginning of this process, in 1981, and I felt nothing but relief being able to walk away from it all.

Looking back at it 25 years later, I would argue (as I remember doing in an Adventist Currents article in 1985) that Southern in one way chose the right strategy. If your goal is not to strive for truth, but to preserve the traditional beliefs of your church, you should avoid academics, as much as possible, and especially, the study of theology.

Adventism finds itself in no-man's land, caught between fundamentalistic beliefs and a commitment to academics. Fundamentalism is the idea that there is only one side to an argument whereas the academic world actively seeks out all possible sides, and is committed to following the facts wherever they lead. Just look at the problems facing adventist scholars. To survive within the church they have to play safe and leave it to autodidact fundamentalists, such as Cliff Goldstein (who did spend a couple of semesters at Southern as a new adventist, before defecting to Wildwood, in 1982) to deal with weighty issues such as the Remnant and the Sanctuary.

There are and have always been first-rate theologians in the SDA church but their contributions have been undercut by a very real fear of being fired, were they to stray from the reservation. What couldn't a man such as Friz Guy have accomplished if he had stayed at the University of Chicago, enjoying academic freedom? And I bet it is a question that he and many others ask themselves when they go to bed at night. And your own Spectrum blog begs the question: Where are the adventist scholars? As far as I can determine, they drop off a soft-ball article from time to time but studious avoid putting their signatures to viewpoints that have not been authorized. That is no way to live for adults with a mind of their own.

So, Southern has established its Forum. Of course, no teachers are involved. That figures.

Aage Rendalen:

Actually, there are several professors involved with the Forum, both directly and indirectly. Dr. Lisa Clark Diller is our sponsor and advisor; she has attended and contributed at both of our meetings. Dr. Diller also serves as the advisor for Amnesty International.

Dr. Don Leathermann (of the Religion Department) has contributed to our Amnesty and College Democrats events. Dr. Ben McArthur (chair of the History Department) is our advisor for College Democrats. We have more than several prominent theologians, pastors, chaplains, administrators, and professors at Southern who associate themselves with progressive, liberal ideas/beliefs (many of which are politically aligned with the Democratic Party).

Dr. Stanley Stevenson & Dr. Renee Drumm have added greatly to the scholarship of the Family Studies & Social Work Department; both of them have been an invaluable resource to discuss many issues ranging from spouse abuse in the church to sexuality and Adventism--the work that both of them are doing for the students of Southern help to challenge us intellectually and spiritually.

Additionally, the faculty has been reading 'Seeking a Sanctuary' and I had the honour of being invited to participate in one of the faculty discussions. Present at that meeting were some of our "Adventist scholars" who teach here at Southern.

Several members of the faculty and Adventist professionals "lead out" in many revolutionary Sabbath School studies, some of which I have attended.

On campus there is an active chapter of Adventist Peace Fellowship with faculty, student, and community membership. Amnesty International group, College Democrats, and most recently, Adventist Forums. All of these organizations have strong faculty involvement.

I am glad to say that things at Southern Adventist UNIVERSITY are far different from the "Inquisition" years with Ms. Woolcock as 'Grand Inquisitor.' The progressives are moving the university forward--the School of Visual Art and Design helps push the boundaries, as well.

Raymond

That is good news indeed. I was the receipent of a lot of that hate mail. The worst was not from Ms. Woolcock. She was motivated by powers much closer to the school's purse and the Union Conference President's ear. So why pick on her?

I am not fond of words like conservative and progressive.
Progressive at SAU means simply "We will ignore the wall and act as if it doesn't exist--just stay away from the hot wire.

Progressive wouldn't apply to Martin Luther. I think the word they used was Reformer and/or Protestant! Tom

Raymond
Don't worry too much about the opinions of people like Aage and Tom who constantly have to explain why they gave up so easily and just walked off when things got difficult. They had their chances and they made their choices. Don't let them push you around.

Aage-
I have encountered a wide variety of diverse views at Southern among both the students and faculty. I have no idea what you experienced 33 years ago, but I can assure you, just as the world has changed, so has Adventist culture. It is virtually impossible to remain stagnant for that amount of time.

It is true that the academic world should be seeking out all sides to a point. So why is every conclusion incorrect except for that which you have arrived?

The students and faculty at Southern Adventist University have embraced academics by examining their heritage and culture from a different point of view and listening to those who don't necessarily agree with their theology and/or culture...what are you doing to that same end?

Are these same students so intently examining their heritage, also sufficiently aware and knowledgeable about the entire Christian heritage of which Adventism is a late and very small part?

Graduate studies in religion and history, gives one a much better foundation on which to examine how Adventism developed from the much larger body of Christianity which had been around for ore than 1800 years before Adventism arrived on the scene.

One cannot fully understand the relationship of any entity until he has the prerequisites to make rational decisions: IOW, one cannot attempt organic chemistry until basic studies in the field have been done; or similar advanced background. These findings are displayed weekly in any Bible SS class where the history of Christianity and its major doctrines which were developed in those early years, are little understood, or even realized. Adventists have adopted these fundamentals, often without fully understanding that some were simply accepted with no consesus and dictated as what should be believed.

How can one be expected to study the development of Adventism without first studying the original development of the Christian church--both from what is written in the Bible, but what has been added since?

Blair

I don't think you need to protect Raymond. Neither he nor I believe that telling the truth is "pushing around".

If you want to understand ecclesiastical pushing study: Neal Wilson.

Please cite a letter from a mother without deep pockets to a College Board that resulted in the dismissal of a College President and a number of faculty. To vote with one's feet is
the most powerful thing the common man can do next to the pen. Your implied cowardcy is the last resort of one without substance in their cause. Tom

Maybe I was too cynical when it came to faculty involvement with the new Forum chapter at Southern. And I do realize that culturally the place is not as rigid as it used to be. Today students can work at Starbucks and go to the movies without getting kicked out. In life-style matters, Ellen White's authority no longer seems to be important. And I'm sure that educated people around Collegedale still have their own viewpoints on matters that were supposedly settled more than hundred years ago. I don't contest any of this. My point is simply that universities without academic freedom is a sad thing to behold. Southern--and the other SDA universities--seem to me to be glorified bible colleges with residential scholars who get to display their credentials but not their skills. This is no country for thinking men or women. Or have I overlooked some adventist academic niche where scholarship is alive and well, where bold papers are published and debated? I find it interesting that the "Seeking a Sanctuary" debates are based on work done by outsiders. There are obviously many on the inside who could have written that book, but for that they would have needed immunity from theological prosecution. Or is that again way too cynical an assessment?

Aage Rendalen:

I would have you consider the recent publication "Christianity and Homosexuality: Some Seventh-day Adventist Perspectives." The contributions made to this book are from many Adventist professionals who are still working for "the Church."

http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2007/12/21/christianity_and_homosexuali...

I can agree that our institutions need to have more academic freedom--the Theology Departments need not have the spiritual burden of the campus, often placed on them; let the professors teach about the many theological issues. This generation of Adventists (should they remain in the church) are going to be the ones who publish bold papers and transform our institutions into the "Adventist academic niche where scholarship is alive and well."

Places like Hartland and Weimar Institute are where the fundamentalist wing in the church are making camp. They are loosing the universities and colleges to more progressive-minded individuals, like those professors at Southern, Andrews, Loma Linda, PUC, and La Sierra.

I'm excited for the future of our institutions and church--this is an exciting time to be a part of the "great change" in Adventism; liberalism and progressivism is on the rise, amen.

Adentist Academic

When the academic theologians get as progressive as Paul. "I know nothing but Jesus Christ and Him crucified"---then I will believe they are part of the body of of Christ. Until then I believe they are covering their base towards sustentation.

I am waiting of just one to say publically "No Scripture is of any private interpretatin.". Tom

Was this book published by an SDA House? Is it promoted in the ABCs?

Not until SDA theologians, geologists and professors are able FREELY to write and discuss with their students the problems faced, they are not "ready for prime time" to claim free and open academic inquiry. That is one reason I would not recommend a grandchild of mine to attend an SDA school. (Too late for the children who all have SDA diplomas.)

Elaine

I like the tight wire walk of Alden Thompson. He has a grace about him that is charming. I don't know how he can do it with a straight face. Most others find an obscure topic and pound it to death. Imagine a major work on God painting Himself in a corner. Or if they are ambitious they do a broadside against guys like us--hoping that the next turn of the wheel will get the eye of the G.C. and a presidency of a conference or a college. The big men on campus these days, as always, are the yes men. Don't ask a question unless you are sure the teacher knows the answer!

I used to get a kick out of the Board Meetings at LLU. Someone would ask: "Tom what are other good universities doing?" I would give an answer and then someone in the back of the room would say: "Yes but is there any word from the Lord?" Then another back bencher would quote some inane passage from E.G. White and "kill" all rational thought. I never had the guts to say: That quote is from an apostate King of Judah. Tom

Tom, I also appreciate how Alden Thompson carries off what he does.

My son was in his class on questions in the Bible (not sure exactly how it was listed) and as the only non-theological student in the class, he found it most interesting, and he always respected his honesty. Thompson would directly answer the "hard" questions, especially those in the OT. He didn't duck or slink, of try to "whitewash" them but handled them directly, acknowledging that they were either completely contradictory or anachronisms, or defined them.

Most SDA answers to difficult questions, merely skirt around them. Angel Rodriguez in the Review has tackled some, but the answerer always gets to select which ones they will answer, unlike a teacher who can't continue to punt.

Remember, Richard Rice has written books "The Openness of God" that shook up the "brethren" who saw that it was not reprinted and placed on the ABC shelves. I've often wanted to go there and ask for some "censored" books just for the fun of it!

Tom and Elaine,
You have wandered far afield in your remembrances of Adventism past.
Adventism has changed considerably over the past twenty years, and continues to change thanks to creative students like Raymond who deserves to be commended for his efforts to create a Forum Chapter at Southern Adventist University. Let go of the past. Be supportive of the people who are trying to make the changes that you have desired.

Bonnie, it's hard to "let go of the past" when it is still prominently demonstrated by Adventist publications, e.g. The Review, The Record, and possibly other union papers. They so liberally quote and reprint articles by EGW and promote a 6-day Creation, etc., that is difficult to see that the official church has "changed considerably" over the past twenty years. We still are not ordaining women, and there are many more changes needing to be made. Perhaps you can name the official "considerable changes" during the last 20 years. Not only have no changes or deletions been made to the 27 Fundies, but new ones are being added.

Yes, it is to be hoped that the young people there can affect changes. The only hope is that nothing similar to the AAF Des Ford presentation will not be repeated. How can that be guaranteed?

Bonnie

Thank you for your editorial injunction. If you rerread my post to Raymond: I did him and his cause no harm. Mr. Blair
was much closer to ad hominem. It is only when someone attempts to rewrite that past that I call for the record.

I don't appreciate a challenge to my memory. But that is
o.k. I have no animosity toward Seventh-day Adventism past or present. I have a burden for honesty. Every human effort has its warts. It is just when someone attempts to varnish them over that I speak out. (Like saying we are progressive not like those old conservatives).

But I make you a promise. Since I am troublesome to you and your journal I will cease my commentary. But please! I am an old man but I have very good recall thank you. Tom

Hey Tom and Elaine,

I have appreciated your comments and memories. I hope you continue to share your perspectives.

It does seem to me that the idea that Adventism has progressed or changed in any substantive way cannot be supported.

When all is said and done, the traditional interpretation of the official fundamental beliefs remains the same.

25+ years ago I was one of those forward thinking SDA college students who subscribed to AAF, and could not wait for my copy of Spectrum to arrive.

As a keen observer of Adventism, and a member for 45 years, I finally woke up to the fact that nothing had changed.

Yes, the dance might be different, but the tune is still the same.

What was Adventism 100 years ago, is still the Adventism of today.

It seems that each generation has to grapple with the fact, that to dismiss the peculiarities of Adventism, and make it more in tune with the Christianity of the New Testament, requires that one dismiss Adventism.

Randy

Tom

Those of us who leave are tempted to think that those of us who stay lack integrity.

Those of us who stay are tempted to think that those of us who leave lack courage and stamina.

Perhaps we can all agree that there is more than one honorable way, and more than one dishonorable way, of dealing with a very difficult set of circumstances. Thanks!

Dave

In response to one of Elaine's earlier comments: Yes, at Southern they are "sufficiently aware and knowledgeable about the entire Christian heritage of which Adventism is a late and very small part." Dr. Pettibone, who has been an attendee at the SAU Forums, was very efficient in helping us to examine the Christian Church as a whole beyond just Adventism.

Chad Stuart SAU Alum

Tom & Elaine:

As one who reads your stories with much sympathy, I have often asked myself why not join the Episcopal Church or convert back to my ancestral Judaism, maybe Reformed?

In my family there are many Catholics, former Adventists, and one current Adventist (my father's mother); there are several great-uncles, aunts, and distant cousins who are Adventist, but I don't know them well. I currently live with guardians, one who is a Lutheran minister and the other a Catholic who serves as president of the congregation.

My father and uncles were compelled to attend Adventist academy while my mother was forced to go to Mass; both of them had less than ideal experiences with Seventh-day Adventism and Roman Catholicism. They let their parents have limited religious influence on us children.

Ultimately, should I leave Adventism for the Episcopal Church or the Association of Unitarian Universalism or Reformed Judaism (the only three faith traditions that appeal to me, other than Adventism) the issues debated may change, but the fact of there being differences will not.

Adventism has much that inspires me--from people, to theology, to its service to others. It also has much that discourages me--separate white and black conferences, fundamentalism, failure to ordained women to the ministry, exclusion of homosexuals, obsession with exclusionist theology.

Yet with both the inspiration and discouragement--for the better and worst--Adventism has been an identity that has shaped my human experience. The question that looms for me is whether the future of Adventism is constrained by its past or if the future depends on those of us who dare push the boundaries and discover in the process that what may seem to be vitol issues today, will with time, find themselves in the dustbins of history--such is the story concerning the aftermath of the Disappointment; those experiencing the intense emotion of that time had a choice to accept that all is lost or engage the matter further, I submit that for all of the conservatism and fundamentalism that we may find in the church, Adventism has striven to "engage the matter further." I join that tradition with my membership in the Forum.

Raymond Thompson

Tom
Stop feeling sorry for yourself and take a little of your own medicine. It's not that bad!

Change in the church happens when we accept the possibility of something different, and let go of the mistakes of the past. Forgiveness is a key element for change to occur. Of course, it is difficult to forgive an entity rather than a person, precisely because an entity rarely asks for forgiveness. Thus, the importance of symbolic actions like individual churches ordaining women (Sligo, Loma Linda, La Sierra), conferences that equalize credentials of men and women pastors (Southeastern California, Northern California), and presidents who ask for and get women elected to high office (Jan Paulsen/Ella Simmons). It is also why a Forum chapter at Southern is such great news.

Dave is right, we all come to the idea of change differently, and why. Tom, Elaine, please forgive me for pushing my understanding of change. Raymond has again spoken very eloquently in response to the comments in this thread. I need not have worried about him.
He is one of the reasons that I hold out great hope for the Adventism of the future.

Bonnie

Since I have been challenged and maligned since I promised not to breach your Web-Site, I have decided to expand my response to this blog. The introduction of the idea of a Forum at SAU was based, in part, upon the letter of a Mrs. Woolcock as the source uncovering the trouble at SMC, I was provoked, memory as poor as it is, to set the record straight.

The primary issues were enjoined much earlier than 1985-86. The first salvo was from a Vance Ferrel (sp) a self supporting fanatic out of some piney woods of Tenn. It was exacerbated by a casual remark by the President of the College in his Sabbath School class. He stated, in passing, that it was unfortunate that the book Messages to Young People had ever been published. He went on to say that it was a cut and paste job and not part of her original work. He said that the compilers had clobbered together a lot of negative comments of E.G. White about the sins of young people: the result being a turn-off of the Spirit of Prophecy by sensitive collegiate young people.

At that time, a daughter of one of the McKee family “left” the church or chose to be hostile toward Adventism in general. The McKee’s immediately placed the blame on several of the faculty in the Department of Religion who were attempting to explain Righteousness by Faith as per Luther and Calvin in the face of the Brinsmead agitation and the purge at Andrews.

Since the McKee’s had deep pockets their voice was heard all the way to the Potomac.

I was a member of the Board of Trustees of SMU for 11 years. I was bombarded by letters from Vance and from Mrs. Mckee—nasty in the extreme. (Unfortunately they were “lost” when I moved from my position in the School of Dentistry to Vice President for Academic Affairs at the Medical College of Georgia.

I was later a member of an ad hoc committee at the Constituency Meeting of the Southern Union to “study and bring a recommendation” on the theological situation at SMC. I took a minority position. The majority position was read to the entire constituency by the presiding officer Elder Neal Wilson. Comment was invited from the floor. I asked to be heard. My request was granted. I told the following story: It seems that a new personnel director had been appointed at a mill in North Carolina. He determined that he would have 100% participation in United Way.
One employee boasted that he had never and would never contribute to United Way. The Director called the employee into his office and pushed two pieces of paper before the employee and said: “One is a pledge to the United Way and the other is your resignation. You may sign either. I don’t care which. The employee signed and left. As he closed the door on the Personnel Director’s officer his friends asked “Did you sign?’ To which the employee responded; “Yes”. Of course they all said why? He said: “No body every explained United Way like he did!” I said, nobody every explained E.G. White like this Committee did. Even Neal smothered a laugh.

The Constituency voted in favor of the committee report. At the next Board Meeting Neal Wilson and the President of the Southern Union had their mandate and they called for the President either to remove three Professors of Religion or resign. The President chose to resign. I chose to tender my resignation also.

I have never been part of a kangaroo court before or since.

I have a high regard for Christian men and women in Adventism.
I have a minimum high regard for power politics in church or government or for that matter factious comments from self absorbed kids like Mr. Blair.

Bonnie may my remarks only strengthen the newly formed chapter of Adventist Forums a SAU. Progressive or Conservative, please stay close to the Truth as we know it from Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, and Paul. Never-the-less I intend to find other venues for future commentary. Tom Zwemer

Bonnie

Things have turned out exactly as I feared!

Elaine and Tom express themselves a little too forcefully, as they often do. This time you nudge back ever so gently. Elaine takes it in stride and continues being Elaine, which is just fine! It's all a part of the give-and-take and she can handle it.

Blair offends Tom by suggesting to Raymond that Tom might be a quitter. Instead of proving Blair wrong by taking some blows and standing firm, Tom proves Blair right by announcing his departure!

Then BONNIE apologizes! Why am I not surprised? But not to worry. Knowing and working with you is the greatest!

Thanks!

Dave

If our theology never needed re-visioning or if our practices never required updating we would have to either be static or Godly. Christianity from the NT church to White and us today has been on the move- from a community constantly seeking to balance between embracing the uncircumcised gentiles or restricting itself to those who underwent Jewish rites to a small American denomination struggling with issues ranging from Arianism to atonement, from military service to asking if it is appropriate to own a bicycle.

Clearly we Christian Seventh-day Adventists have no problem with internal discussions started in places like Raymonds Adventist Forum at SAU leading up to conferences similar to that in Acts 15 or, surprising to us, questions asking if the Adventist message challenges slavery.

Our denomination is very much about present truth. This effort by SAU faculty, staff and students is one of many venues in our church where we come together as a living community constantly renewing and challenging itself.

Of course the above is repeating much of what Bonnie already said far more eloquently.

Thank you again Raymond!

I don't think Tom is a quitter. My aunt and uncle never "left the church." I agree with Tom that "the church" is not Adventism, it's the Body of Christ. God is so much more than Seventh-day Adventism! It's interesting that my uncle happens to be named Tom, as well.

He was part of the Maryland--I think Silver Springs/Fredrickville--fiasco and the GC basically said to the pastor, "teach the sanctuary message or resign."

The letter that was sent to him (and others) read, ". . . we're sorry you've left Jesus' Church." The arrogance it takes to even utter, let alone commit to paper, the thought. Tom and Elaine have much wisdom to share and their experience is important they may no longer "be Adventists" by others' standers and they might have chosen to no longer be members of the church, but they are far from a "quitters."

Tom's a spiritual man who knows a Risen Lord. I admire his conviction, the courage it takes to still be a part of a group of Christians that--at times--can hurt, very deeply, genuine souls among us. Tom and Elaine's Christ-inspired love is best exhibited in their continual involvement with those of us at Spectrum and Adventist Forum.

There stories are our stories. I respect them and embrace them, in love, as my brother and sister. I've never written this to either of you; and now seems like an appropriate time, I appreciate your opinions.

Also Tom:

On other posts it was written that I was a bigot, redneck, fundamentalist, racist. . .

I know the God that I serve and the special call He has for my life, as do you. Sometimes we can be less than fully understanding. These informal, impersonal venues often do not allow themselves to fully express what people mean to have understood in their written posts.

Know that both your and Elaine's opinions are important to me--regardless of what my opinions may be; fellowship isn't consensus and debate, it's dialogue and understanding.

Shalom my friends and Happy Sabbath.

Tom
I regret your announced departure and hope that after a little rest you'll be ready to jump back in. I promise to welcome you and give you a hard time whenever I think you need it, just as you do me. All the best!
Dave

Raymond,

While appreciating your sentiments I feel the need to gently point out that there is a difference of substance, not degree, in the vantage points of those within and without Adventism. That substantial difference is ones belief that Adventism, despite it's challenges, is the community of faith one wishes to be part of and work to improve.

That does not mean that ex-Adventists or non-members feel any less ownership of our church. It does mean that where we look for solutions they often point out irreparable challenges that they don't imagine can be fixed.

Those of us within Adventism are committed to being a part of our church and it growing as a community. Those who have left Adventism have decided to walk away from our specific community. So when we have conversations on challenges facing Adventism you will find that ones outlook is indeed shaped by the kind of investment one has in our denomination.

Tom,

In the brief time that I have been participating in this forum, I have found great insight, wisdom and humor in your contributions. We are all the richer for it. Looking forward to hearing more from you soon...

Frank

First, kudos to Southern, to Allison and Raymond and Lisa and Ben and any of their ilk who allowed and maybe even encouraged this squalling birth of another forum. Despite the brickbats and asides hurled here, you all should know that every one of us is heartened by emerging seekers within a true sanctuary--a safe, secure place for growing active individuality, rigorous thinking, and redemptive dissent.

As an Adventist academic (though not a professional theologian), I appreciated the tenor of Aage Rendelen's earlier remarks about implicit and explicit academic freedom. This is indeed a large matter.

I am not certain Fritz Guy would have produced anything more profound than the substantive, superb work he's accomplished at La Sierra had he stayed on at the University of Chicago. Perhaps he would have. More likely, however, he would have produced something different, not something exponentially more penetrating or sagacious.

Naturally, freedom is relative. Here at Union College, where we're ascribed minor prophet status in the heart of flyover country, I actually do feel free to probe where I please, to write what I want (obviously, if one peruses my books), to teach how I choose. In essence, I do feel more freedom here than I would at a public university. Here I'm free to speak with candor about God in College Writing, to extol the Prince of Peace in a Nonviolence and Peacemaking course, to pray before every class, to reach definitively into the void of young adults' lives with the Holy Spirit of the living I AM.

Moreover, in this environment I often raise concerns and questions about traditional Adventist approaches, taking care to offer in the end a winsome, trenchant, Christ-centered alternative. I suppose I don't share every niggling question or outrage that occurs to me, but that's part of being a mature instructor. (Even in public institutions, professors aren't totally free to bring up thoughts of sedition or violent protest, for example, without grievous consequences.) The Apostle Paul points out in I Cor. 10:23, "'All things are lawful,' but not all things are helpful."

My father and mother were both public teachers, I was educated publicly through university, and my wife is currently a public teacher, so I'm aware of the various laudable benefits of the public realm, and also its sometimes insidious constraints. Yet I'm also keenly aware of the historic Adventist tendency to react out of fear and envy to form heinous truth squads of orthodoxy.

How shall we relate? Following is a portion of a prayer I wrote in a recent book (with the blessings of Union College, via sabbatical leave):

"Forgive us [Adventists] for using institutional rigidness to crush hopeful creativity and helpful dissent.

"Forgive us for placating church bullies while our weaker brethren--the youth and young adults--leave, squashed and disillusioned and angry, never to return.

"Forgive us for officially encouraging individuality of thought but in actual practice rewarding unquestioning conformity.

"Forgive us for confusing indoctrination with education, mistaking what to think for how to think.

"Forgive us for not showing our children that following You is the most creative, sensible, fearless, freeing, fun adventure in the world.

"Forgive us for succumbing to negativity and cynicism instead of living with defiant optimism."

With that in mind, count me among the realists who work with defiant optimism in an Adventist tertiary institution.

I wouldn't be anyplace else.

(Rejuvenating Sabbath.)

Bonnie

I am a very poor promise keeper. But I have received a number of private e-mails urging me to continue, at least with my stories; So one more story.

The story: My second son attended GCA academy for one year and two weeks. At the end of the second week of the second year, he demanded to come home and go to the local high school which was three block from our home. The reasons are beyond this story.

Of course we agreed. I bought him a full set of auto mechanics tools, gave him our two car garage, built a car port for our two cars and a barn with three horses for our younger daughter who also had all of boarding academy she could stand. (He built a four wheel drive monster truck out of a used Datsun. She raised a quarter horse Filly. He is now surgical nurse at Trinity Hospital and She is Associate Dean at the Medical College of Georgia. Both have a tight hold on sanity and Salvation.

My son made friends with a young class mate at high school. They decided to go to a skating rink for Sat. evening. The friend stopped at our house to pick up our son. Our son was still in the shower. So I took to entertaining the young lad. Our son had informed us that the boy had just come forward at a revival meeting at the local Baptist Church. So I directed the conversation toward the Gospel. He replied, that he could tell in one sentence if I were a true Christian or not. I said, “Is that right? What is that sentence? He replied: “Say the first lines of the Lord’s Prayer. Which I did: “Our Father which art in heaven, Hallowed by thy kingdom come. Thy will be done (on) earth, as it is in heaven.” At which point he stopped me and said” “See you said (on) not (in)
God’s will is to be done “in” earth—we are dust, earth, God’s will is to be done “in” us not on dirt!” I said, “Good point, but in the Greek the preposition in, on, to, by, etc are all the same word. One would have to know the context to use the correct preposition in English. He replied, “Now I know for sure you are not a Christian because you used the Greek. If you use anything but the King James you have a devil in you. I said. “Son, you are a guest in my home and a friend of my son. Let us just say we have a different view of Scripture and wish each other the best. When we get to heaven let us ask Jesus just exactly what He meant—I bet He will say I meant both! I came to rescue each one of you and to restore the earth to its rightful place in the Kingdom of God.

I was a baptized member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church from the Spring of 1939 until the Summer of 1982. During that time I held every lay office of the church, taught eight years at Loma Linda, and served for seven years on the Board at LLU and eleven years on the Board at SMC.

I continue to fellowship with local Seventh-day Adventists, I carry on a dialogue with active officers in the Seventh-day Adventist Church and I correspond with officers of the local and union conferences. I have no animosity toward any Adventist. I do have a burden for the Gospel plus nothing.

I am reminded of Christ’s condemnation of the Jewish leaders of His day as found in Matt. 23: 15 “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrities! For ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him, twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.”

My burden is the Gospel, plus nothing. Therefore, I find the SDA eisegesis of Dan. 8:14; Hebrews 8 through 10; and Revelation 14: 6-12 in a category along with my young friend’s view of “in” and “on”. Furthermore, I cannot see the Gospel emerging from a forum that refuses to apologize for Glacier View and its sequla.

You have taken me to the woodshed at least twice: Once on Cliff’s Graffitti “In your face tome” and then when a youngster attempts to rewrite the history of SMC.

The early founders of Adventism had to find a New Testament verification of their view of Dan. 8:14 and its connection with Hebrews 8-10. They thought they found it in Rev. 14: 6-12.

Some went on so far as to define a “final perfect generation” as per Great Controversy pages 621-623.

Yet the academic trend in SDA colleges is boasted as “progressive” in which they carry a “make my day, punk! Attitude against anyone who in finds within Adventism a kernel of the Body of Christ.

Since no Scripture is of any private interpretation, let me explain: the generic significance of Rev. 14: 6-12.

Revisiting The Three Angels Messages
Revelation 14: 6-10

Rev. 14: 6And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. 8And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. 9And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. KJV

Verse 6 tells us that the Everlasting Gospel exists. The Christ Event is history. It is presently Good News that salvation is offered to all those who dwell on the earth.

Verse 7 tells us that the Good News of Christ’s victory over sin and death brings each one to the critical moment of decision or judgment. Is God who is says He is or is God who the Devil says He is? The critical hour”, the moment to decide for the good or evil side is now man’s. The rest of the universe has come to consensus that God is Just and the Justifier of those who believe.

The point is simply: one cannot hear the Gospel—the full story of the Christ event without having to make a choice, a decision, a judgment. Is the Christ event “true” history? Was that event necessary? Was that event sufficient? That is was the event sufficient to not only settle the Great Controversy but to settle my personal redemption?
Verse 7 goes on to declare that a decision in favor of God compels adoration, love, gratitude, and worship.

Verse 8 tells us that when Christ cried out: “It is finished” Babylon fell! The prince of this world had been unmasked and dethroned. His claim to and his hold on the earth has been broken.

Verse 9-10 tells us that to give support, honor, obeisance, allegiance, and/or worship to the Adversary of Heaven is to share in His fate: be that support physical or intellectual the fate is the same.

Therefore, the message of the Three Angels of Revelation 14 is a validation of AD 33 rather than some future date derived from complex numerology of Old Testament Apocalyptic literature.

Thus, Revelation 14:6-10 is not a proprietary Scripture, but an open invitation and assurance to any and all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Even so Come Lord Jesus—

Praise be to God!

I engaged in on-line Spectrum to bring that perspective to a group of alleged thinkers.

I get in reply: A spanking and a “don’t let the door hit your behind on the way out!”

When you find a scholar outside of paid SDA clergy who agrees with E.G. White’s reading of Rev. 14: 6-12 please let me know by express means.

May we all come to a full understanding of Salvation in Christ alone

A fellow sojourner and friend with a desire to share Truth
not revisionary history. Tom

Tom, thanks for the story, but also for the true meaning of the texts you illustrated above. I've also been waiting many years for ANY non-SDA scholar to agree with EGW's interpretation of the scriptures above. We're getting too old to ever see that day, I'm afraid. There are also other "unique" SDA interpretations of Scripture that no one other than SDAs have produced. That should raise a red flag for any serious Bible student, shouldn't it?

Tom & Elaine:

I once had a good friend of mine ask me if I considered myself a Christian without the writings of Ellen White? I thought that that was an odd thing to ask, but I told him that to believe in Ellen White's writings makes me no more or less of a Christian.

It defines my Christianity through the Adventist experience. I've come to understand that Adventists have been poor stewards of Mrs. White's life work and mission--she was by no means perfect, saintly, without her own struggles in life; we Adventists all too often forget that she was human.

Her writings for me have the same inspiration that Max Lucado, Martin Luther, Ty Gibson, Rob Bell, John Spong, Marcus Borg, etc. have. Her claims at special divine guidance need to be understood and presented better than they have by the church in the past.

I seldom quote from Mrs. White to prove a theological point, she has always served as more of a devotional source for me, however, I would like to quote one part from 'Counsels to Writers & Editors.'

"There is no excuse for anyone in taking the position that there is no more truth to be revealed, and that all our expositions of Scripture are without error. The fact that certain doctrines have been held as truth for many years by our people is not a proof that our ideas are infallible. Age will not make error into truth, and truth can afford to be fair. No true doctrine will lose anything by close investigation."

I thank both of you for your willingness to share your stories.

May our Lord continue to bless us all on this journey to understand Him better and to serve Him more fully.

Add my plea to your list Tom. Who else embodies the institutional memory of our SDA history in this blog better than thee? You are a national treasure of truth, don't shut yourself up and allow us to make up our own histories.

Arlyn, institutional memory is a very important part of Adventism's heritage. While "unofficial" it is often much more truthful than the church's story. We know where and why the bodies are buried.

Thank you Tom for sharing your memories and understanding.

Like you, I have spoken to several SDA academics who privately shake their heads at the IJ doctrine, and yet through their silence publicly give it approval.

More than one have said to me, you know what they did to Des Ford, don't you? As to their credibility with me, enough said.

Raymond, thank you for sharing that quote. It is an excellent example that shows the chameleon-like nature of Ellen White's writing. You can find a supportive quote from her, regardless of which side of any topic or disscussion you may have. It is also most often the case that you can find a quote that says just the opposite.

Randy

Tom

Welcome back!

I promised you that if you returned I wouldn't treat you like a baby but like an adult with whom it is possible to speak frankly. So here goes:

I hope you are at least as hard on your Presbyterian brothers and sisters in Christ as your are on your SDA spritual siblings.

Let's take the worst possible view of EGW for the sake of the discussion, which would probably be that she was a fake and a fraud in every cell of her body. Nothing but a lying cheat who sought only to exploit others.

Yet even if she were that evil, it would still be the case that she never burned anyone alive for not believing what she did, never created generations of Christians with needless and intense anxiety by teaching that God determines before we are conceived who will be saved and who will be lost and never depicted God as a savage monster who will punish endlessly people who are in hell through no fault of their own.

I am weary of being told by extreme Calvinists that our understanding of the Gospel is inferior to theirs. It isn't. I can think of no greater perversion of the Gospel than TULIP. And yet often it is the standard by which we SDAs are measured. I am pleased that we don't pass the test!

Like you, and presumably those in your Presbyterian congregtion, not all Calvinists now believe everything or act as he did.

Indeed, Karl Barth, often regarded as the greatest theologian of the twentieth century, who hung pictures of Calvin and Mozart in his study at Basle, Switzerland, was as close to being a universalist as one can be without openly declaring it.

If we can recognize and appreciate the very real differences between a John Calvin and a Karl Barth in their tradition, why can't we recognize the differences between a Uriah Smith and a Fritz Guy in ours?

I say "theirs" and "ours" because you really aren't a Calvinist. No matter what your official denominational membership, you are a Wesleyan who attends a Presbyterian church and I'm OK with that.

John Calvin, like Martin Luther, was a true reformer who did much good. He was also a cold-hearted and mericiless killer who mistakenly thought that God is as heartless as he was.

If we take into account the millions of indigenous peoples around the world that the Calvinsts slaughtered because they believed that they were God's elect and the natives weren't, a fact of history we often overlook, the Calvinists are among the most bloodthirsty people in human history.

If I had to choose, which I don't, I'd take EGW with all her faults and Adventist doctrine with all of its defects any day of the year.

I think you would too. I'd just like to hear you say it.

Welcome back, Tom!

Dave

Thank Dave,

I’m back because there is no other place to go for an old man steeped in Adventism yet with a burning desire for Truth what ever the cost.

The reason there are no “burnings at the stake today” is not because of ecclesiastical maturation but because of the Enlightenment encased in the U.S. Constitution.

I can accept the difference between Uriah Smith and Fritz Guy. The problem is the Church has trouble recognizing the difference between It and me on Dan 8:14. It seems that Fritz Guy apparently is willing to let it pass while neither the Church nor I am willing to be as accommodating with each other. So I fellowship outside of membership—letting everyone know exactly where I stand on the 28 Fundamental Beliefs. Most I agree with, but not enough to “please” the powers that be or me! If we lived in Loma Linda, Betty and I would attend the University Church and keep our mouths shut and our minds, hearts, and ears open—the music is worth the price of admission. Though the head pastor seems to be auditioning for “The Price is Right” . Living on a hill top with Southern pine 360; any degree of freedom is not possible in the Bible belt.

In my library, among others, I have the following Books: Desire of Ages, a Reader’s Digest Version of the Life of Christ, Great Controversy A Reader’s Digest Version of parts of the reformation and selected parts of early SDA Church, (by the way good readings) Mount of Blessings a commentary on the Sermon on the Mount—that misses the point. Christ Object Lessons, a commentary on the Parables of Jesus that continues the idiom of Desire of Ages: The SDA Bible Commentary—a fair, and seldom biased commentary of both the Old and New Testament: The Westminster Confessions—pretty hard nose doctrine—but softer than Calvin. On the other hand, The Presbyterian Church U.S.A.’s Contemporary Declaration of Faith one would swear was written by Dr. Graham Maxwell. I keep them all within arms length.

No, E.G. White didn’t burn anyone to death but she did consign a number to hell, and the number of suicides she caused is innumerable” (as you well know) mostly among impressionable academy aged students.

I have been just as hard on “TULIP”. My Presbyterian pastor says he would rather preach on procrastination than predestination. (I only “lost” four members of my Sunday School Class over a lesson on the Covenant that touched on predestination but I gained five others.)

(You know me well enough to know I couldn’t sit on the back bench at the Augusta Seventh-day Adventist Church and not speak my mind.)

I know Fritz Guy. I have worked with Fritz Guy. I like Fritz Guy. I have a minimum high regard for Karl Bath as a person. His personal life was a lot like Bill Clinton’s . I like: Graham Maxwell, Edward Heppenstall, Paul Heuback (sp) H.M.S. Richards, and Jack Provonsha, that is when I could understand him. I also enjoy Alden Thompson. He certainly is one fine gentleman. He did a fine job on summarizing Consultation I and II and keeping his head and seat in the process.

I particularly like John R. W. Stott, Fred B. Carddock, (Overhearing the Gospel, Cherry Log Sermons, As one without Authority etc), a number of the associate editors of Christianity Today, also some Romans-- Hans Kung, Thomas Cahill, Theodore M. Hesburgh and many other good Christian writers. (Some day I must do a profile of “Father Mac” a crude but pure practical Jesuit Priest serving as Provost of the School of Dentistry and the Athletic Department at Marquette University.) There are very few Christians that measure up to Father Mac. And that is for sure!

It seems to me that Christianity rises or falls on John 1:29 “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.”

Not some concoction of a disappointed few on Oct. 23, 1844. Is the Truth more important than sustentation? Is not salvation worth the price: of saying candidly, we were wrong! Forgive us, and let us Praise the Lord together? Worship when you will but not to gain heaven but to honor both the creative and redemptive Power and Grace of a loving Savior.

We don’t curse Uriah Smith, Fritz Guy, E.G. White, Des Ford or even Neal Wilson and Robert Brinsmead. We come to the Cross as sinners all and confess that Jesus Christ is Lord of All. Even So Come Lord Jesus. Tom

David,

You have needlessly constructed a reverse straw man. To plead that EGW is not as bad as Torquemada is faint praise indeed! "I'm not as bad as Sister so-and-so..." I say, "Well-duh!"

It is simplistic and ignores past history to say that she "never created generations of Christians with needless and intense anxiety..."
which she certainly did in saying that we should never say we are assured of being saved; that we should perfectly represent Christ before the Second Coming; that the theater, fiction, card-playing and dancing were never to be engaged in by Christians and much more. As a young person growing up and deeply indoctrinated in the SDA educational system, these were part and parcel of the young Adventist's indoctrination (or brainwashing). Tom, I am sure could validate what I have said as we come from that same era.

It is more harmful in its lifelong guilt that can be eradicated only at great personal courage and time. Minimizing her influence today ignores the manner in which she has been used in the past and fails to recognize the impact she has had on thousands of young and vulnerable minds.

I have just ordered a new book "Bondage of the Mind: How Old Testament Fundamentalism Shackles the Mind and Enslaves the Spirit" which has been praised by both Michael Shermer and Dinesh D'Souza which should prove most interesting. This fundamentalism is still alive and well in much of Adventism today.

Tom,

Welcome Back!! Without an understanding and repeating of our past history we are doomed to repeat it!

Pat

"Innumerable Suicides"?

Wow, where have I been?

JG

JG

I don't know if the suicides are uncountable, but I can name five! But for the sake of surviving family will not. The upper teen ages are the most vulnerable. Boarding Academies are not the Schools of the Prophets for many. What they need most is listeners not preachers. If I understand correctly that is David Larsen's mission. Tom