hello mr nam
i liked so much your commentary about adventism,despite
your commentary over one place in the heaven with two apartments holy place and holy of holys,it is difficult
to understand how can it be,because all the heaven god
dwells ,therefore all the heaven is holy of holys,it is impossible there in the heaven has one place more holy than other. your commentary over adventsm to expire before the end
it is very important, because many people figure out that
adventism will be save,but god has a people what shall follow
the standart of faith,and these people shall display to the
world the true behavior of remnant church.because all the
christianity they are laudiceia church and not only adventists are laudiceia church.very very important you have
written over adventsm because few people i have seen to talking about this matter,despite your sanctuary with two
apartments,congratulations for you commentary about the adventsm.be rigth about this ,the most part of adventist in the world are not prepared to receive this good news.
laercio

"Could it be that it is this underlying physicalist view of reality which has undergirded Adventism’s continuing literalism in the reading of the creation account in Genesis and the book of Revelation when so many in the evangelical world who are otherwise conservative in their reading of Scripture have embraced the evolutionary account of the origin of life...?"

Not a convincing line of thought. Makes one curious if this is what you teach at LLU?

The dangling thought, the dualistic nature of Adventism, allows for a small church on one hand to preach the imminent coming of Jesus (persecution, fleeing, destruction, etc.) and on the other hand to launch a campaign to purchase a $30,000 organ to celebrate the glory of God.

Just a trivial aside. Reid Memorial Presbyterian Church in Augusta, Ga. received over 1 million dollars to up-grade their pipe organ. The church voted to re-do the entire sanctuary in order to make the sanctuary a sound chamber fit for the organ. As a result all the wood was removed and replaced with stone, The seat cushions were removed and the themostat was set at 57 degree F.

The organ sounds just great. Nobody back six rows can understand the spoken word without a "supplied" hearing aid.
Women over 55 have to wear their fur coats in the Summer.

People over 80 stay home and buy for two dollars DVD's of the service.

Praise the Lord and pass the carraige robe. Tom

Julius,

Thanks for your thoughts!

It's interesting to compare the literal "physicality" of American Adventism as many here have experienced it, to the description Alden Thompson (I believe it was him) gave of his experience teaching German Adventist seminary students. He found that the literal realities so readily accepted in American churches,(a physical holy and most holy place in heaven and many more literal beliefs similar to this) were viewed largely in symbolic terms by the German students with whom he engaged. Something that initially caught him by suprise.

Thus, it seems that global Adventism may be more a bit more varied in its relation to this approach to Scripture and life. That's why I find myself nodding my head with this connection: "Could it be that it is rugged physicalism—the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness in this space with the brand new raw material of this new world—that drives both America and Adventism (and Mormonism as pointed out by Bull and Lockhart)?" I can certainly see at least an indirect interplay between the two.

It also seems that we are selective in our material views of God and apocalyptic portions of Scripture, in a way that I sometimes question. As an example: we have no problem with a symbolic reading of the sea beast in Rev. 13 or the land beast and its two horns in Rev. 14, but the New Jerusalem's gates and walls are understood by many of us (at least in American churches) in a totally literal manner. We simply seem to pick and choose where we inject totally face value readings into a type of literature that by its very nature is totally poetic and symbolic.

Thanks...

Frank

Another possible reason is that literature is not always a required subject, especially for college SDA students, unless they major in the humanities. The confusion between literal and metaphorical, analogical, and the languange and imagery used in all literature of that period is not widely understood. Also, the various genres:
poetry, songs, apocalyptic, etc., that are used in the Bible and the ability to differentiate is not for the unlearned.

While the Bible is an easy book to read; understanding and proper interpretation is not for many who are not versed in literary analysis and intrepretation, as were all Bible students a hundred years ago.

Added to that is the hermeneutical and exegetical understanding and one can end up with the very literal reading of the Bible which is always to be found in the fundamentalists, of which Adventism began.

Even the simple can understand all that is necessary for salvation; however, to enjoy the beauty of the language it requires a better understanding which gives it more meaning.

Disclaimer: The first half of this comment is censored heresy from another site. Proceed at your own risk and peril.

As knowledge has increased, Adventists have traveled the world, and attended the universities of the world. And now we have the internet, so that which has been hidden is being revealed…and shaking our material church with it’s ‘we have the truth’ celestial geographical theology to it’s foundations. Critics and even occasional infiltrators(gasp!) have not missed opportunities to point out inconsistencies and problems. Everything which can be shaken, is being shaken, and I fear that many of us are living lives of quiet desperation. Some of us may even be closet atheists or agnostics. I sometimes find myself ‘beating against
the rocks of infidelity.’ In principal and concept, I think Adventists are on the right track. But in the details, we probably have many things to learn…and many things
to unlearn. The Harry Anderson paintings, as much as I love them, may not be the view of the future which we actually see. Our mental images of the way things are, and will be, probably need reprogramming.

On this Fourth of July, I can’t help but wonder if the Mark of the Beast might be the rejection of the U.S. Constitution, and acceptance of a corrupt, dictatorial ‘New World Order’ theocracy. The seventh-day Sabbath might be a side-issue to the greater issue of freedom. The U.S. Constitution provides for responsible freedom, which includes religious freedom.

May we never go along to get along…or purchase peace at any price…or negotiate with terrorists. The religion of Jesus Christ is a non-corrupt, minimalist religion, which at some point in the future, may not include Churchianity as we
know it, Adventist or otherwise.

Perhaps someone could get Madonna to do a ‘Material Girl in a Material Church’ music video! Or how about 'Dogmas are a Pope's Best Friend'? Sorry! I just can't shake my anti-Catholic upbringing. Now they're really gonna get me!

Speaking of music, the posts regarding pipe-organs caused me to further reflect on the concept of the material church. I love pipe-organ music, and subscribe to an organist magazine. Often, organ installations are exorbitantly expensive, and are not consistent with the character and teachings of Jesus. A small, high-quality, pipe-organ, located in a rear balcony works just fine...especially if the church has good acoustics. Unfortunately, so many churches are very poorly designed, and do not emanate a simple, pure, excellence. The architectural and acoustical mediocrity do not inspire reverence and awe. Then, huge-expensive pipe-organs are added to this deplorable environment with high hopes and inflated egos. The result is disasterous. Ironically, the Catholics seem to get it right more often than the Protestants. Now the Protestants are gonna get me, too! Nuff said.

i should like that some one dwelling there on north america
comes to any one there and speaking to him,the united state
of america is beast apocalyptic which john quoted in the bible.i should like to know how this person would react for
this statement.united state of america ending with freedon
religios,it is difficult to believe,and now you come to one seventh day adventist and say to him, our organization,in future close gather together with them to persecute the true
christians,worst it is true,it is very too much difficult
to believe that united the states of america shall forbid
any one to worship the true god,and also is very difficult
to believe that seventh day adventits shall follow the beast.
adventist have a big problem they learning about many things
that is true but they teaching anothers things that is not true.learning one thing and teaching another thing,if you don't believe it study carefully and you see the truth.
i am adventist i love this doctrine but the money shall speak
higher than doctrine and men selling themselves thinking
be making o good work.our world every day is worse ,hungry,
thirst,homeless,why not to gather together with two beasts to aid the world ,this things already happen but few people
have seen them,the problem is global, i do not live there,i live here on brazil but i am prepared to resist ,to die,
to live, any situation less to forsake my god that died for me.this world shall not improve any more then i am prepared
to know the difference between the holy and the profane,this matter which mr nam has written has come in the convenient moment,the world is worse every day and i must behave like
three hebreus in the furnace,before the gold atatue ,do not lay dow my knees before it.
think well
laercio

Thanks for a fascinating and thought-provoking post, Julius. Like Frank, I found myself nodding along at several points, particularly your thoughts about the rugged physicality of American and Adventism being connected and the literalness/physicality with which Adventists interpret certain parts of the Bible. I remember being quite shocked when I started to realize that much of my childhood understanding of God/heaven (especially the specific physical details) weren't shared by other Christians but were actually unique to my Adventist Sabbath School classes--a space no doubt filled with Harry Anderson pictures.

Part of my study in Chemical Education involved reflecting on the Periodic Table. Is it a conceptual structure be heuristically discovered or a model/map to be used as the means of discovery?

Piaget's ideas came into play. We tried to discover when young people are able to move from Concrete to Abstract thinking in Science.

It seems to me that too many of us fail to make the transition. Concrete models are useful up to a point after which they become a hinderance to further learning.

Maybe this is why Adventism does well among less educated and less well among those with higher learning?

A couple of years ago I was asked to teach 'The Sanctuary' to a class of teenagers.

I took a Monopoly Board into the class, laid it on the floor and asked the youngster to tell me about it. They were able to explain with great enthusiasm the essentials of London's Geography and the workings of captialism etc.

We then put down a picture of the Sinai Sanctuary from which they were easily able to explain the essential relationsips of Salvation. None of them were confused between the Concrete and Abstract manifestations.

why the bible looks easier understanding to people versed in literary analysis and interpretation?how do i become my self
versed in the bible?is it versed in the bible a living
person who knows the true god and the jesus the savior of world?the most part of the cultured men know too much about the god,but they do not know nothing the true god.
one thing is to talking about god,another thing is know this
powerfull god in my life,i do not need noone versed man to
teach me god ,i know him ,i live him,i do not know about culture,chemistry,atoms,but i know the biggest god who has made every thing,god is not abstract,the salvation is not abstract,i am depeding on god all the time,he's my best friend,if i know him so anything what you shall say about him
i shall know it is true or not true.the bible needs to be read
without none tradition or culture in mind,because whom gives
the interpretation is god himself.the teenagers are not
confused about concret and abstract because their minds
are not yet full of culture and traditions and every thing else that disturb relationship between god and them.
salvation is not abstract,culture is abstract,tradition is abstract,tradition blinded the jews péople and shall blind
every one who allow it inside his mind.when i speak of god
is because i live god.i do not speak because someone has said,
i speak because he is my best friend,he is concret,and
i hoping that you think the same
laercio

Is not God a Spirit? Are not spiritual things, spiritually discerned?

I'm having an identity crisis, and changed my name from David to Orthodoxy(not verified).

The small local Lego church pictured at the beginning of the article is cute. But for those of you who think bigger is better...check out the Mega-Lego church at www.amyhughes.org/lego/church. This church illustrates a rear balcony organ installation.

The floor is constructed of Legos, of course...but this church doesn't have a theological Lego to stand on. They just 'Lego...and let God!'

Laercio, none of us are a-cultural, or without culture. We do not see anything except through the glasses of our backgrounds, traditions, and experiences. We see and interpret our routine life including our spirtual life with those glasses. It is not an evil thing, not at all. It is the result of our being material, embodied creatures. When God became flesh -- Jesus -- he operated within the context of a culture at a particular period in time, and the traditions that came with that place and time (and gender!). He cooperated with some expectations, and surprised people in other areas, but He had just as much of a material and historical experience here as we do.

I can understand why you'd want to say something like "You don't need literary analysis to understand the Bible." I do disagree with you, but understand why we wouldn't want to say that only scholars have a chance to know God or whatever He has to tell and show us. Nobody here is suggesting that's true. At the same time, there is the danger of underestimating the value of deep study about the cultures in which the Bible manuscripts were written and preserved, the environment and events that helped to shape the people, and all those interesting, material things that give our own lives such rich color and made the lives of people in the Bible times rich as well.

God may be beyond culture -- but that is because He probably not half as confused by our differences as we are. According to Genesis 11, He was the one who confounded our language and had us scatter. According to Acts 17, He is the one who knows where we all are at any given moment and has set our material limitations. He knows us and understands us. That is why I'd say culture doesn't phase Him and He is more than capable of getting His messages through to us in material and spiritual language that we can understand. Sometimes, you are right, that means we must be willing to think that our traditions are not the only way to see things. But just as often, He can and does speak to us in familiar terms.

What an interesting and thought-provoking posting stimulated by Bull and Lockhart. They continue to stimulate new and interesting observations, and I'm glad this one was posted.

As an organist who loves excellent pipe organs in acoustically appropriate housings, I'm intrigued with the tie-in to this topic.

While we are to live as if the world will go on and on, we are also to keep looking over our shoulder for the Second Coming, keeping our lamp filled. For me, playing and listening to pipe organs helps keep my oil lamp filled and trimmed.

While I know a long conversation could and may continue on the obscenity of expensive pipe organs in the face of world hunger. and at the risk of offending those who believe that, the pipe organ embodies the physical-ness of music--one can SEE the pipes and the magnificent instrument, AND one can hear, but not exactly touch the intangible uplife, awe, and magnificence of the sound. I am closer to heaven listening to a pipe organ and on top of a mountain than just about anywhere.

Having said that, I support every sacrifice to feed the hungry.

Can we do both?

The physical-ness of Adventist symbols reminds me of being an English teacher and teaching/reading the Narnia series to class. One mother, a devout Adventist preacher's wife, objected to the fantasy and science fiction. I wonder if today she is taking her grandchildren to see Prince Caspian?? I hope so.

How do we know that the sanctury in heaven is an actual place? Isn't the place "where God is" the most holy place of all? Is He a physical being that occupies space? Does He move around? Wouldn't where He would be at a particular time, the Most Holy Place?

if we think about the jesus'death, he died because of my sins.
but if we are going to think who sent him to the cross,
then we will reach men full of culture and traditions what
sent him to the cross.culture and traditions severed jews rulers of jesus christ and the people followed the jews rulers full of culture and traditions,you and me knew how
these things ended.when you know culture in the brazil it
should be easier to preach the gospel here,if i know the culture
there where you dwell it should be easier to preach the gospel there,paul the apostle before meet christ was versed
in culture and traditions,and spoke eigth language,versed
in the gamaliel'feet,very inteligent man,but nor saul neither
gamaliel were wise,because they knew about god but they did not know the god of love.paul used the culture to preach the
gospel but it was in second planning,in first planning was christ.the scholar or people making literary analysis of the
bible are resposible for to teach the true.the true between
the concret and the abstract,but they make the literary analysis and they are more empty than a can of beer.
the people in this time and that time[jesus time] follow the scholars ,if you to search in the great controversy,ellen
wrote there that ,people looked for your shepherds asking to
them,why did not you teach the truth to us,and i think this
situation shall happen also to ministers adventists,beacause
they know the truth but they do not teach the truth,the holy
and profane walking inside the church together and the resposibles are doing what to show to the people these mistakes,what nothing,anything,everyday they baptize children
what have less age to baptize ,here they baptize child with less than nine years,come on,where they are putting their mind
in a few time they will baptize babys ,i do not doubt of this,
they present baby here when nor his mother neither his father
attend our church,come on ,come to the reality,the people rely
in the scholars,they rely men who know traditions and cultures
they rely men who are versed in the bible,therefore if i come
and say that; you are doing the big mistakes.they shall say
no,no,no, the shepherd is a man of god,therefore he knows what
he does,to understand the bible i need to know about traditions and culture of that age ,but i can't allow this culture or traditions to remain on my life.these things what
i have spoken are not abstract,they are concret,because i see
here on my country.but i am not scholar, people look for me
and say,he is fanatic,can it be,jesus also was a fanatic and
anothers things else.hoping each stay far away of tradition ,
laercio

The Sabbath School quarterly this quarter has a two part series on Peter. Now there was a material guy. Yet as he was sinking beneath the waves, he cried out" "Lord save me lest I die." That was real water, that was a real threat of drowning, that was a real cry for help, that was a very God a very God and man a very man who reached out and saved Peter.

Peter's cry is the cry of each real soul who recognizes their real lost condition. We hare dealing with a real adversary, a real sin problem, in real time and cry out in real fear of damnation without the real covering of Jesus Christ. What kind of crown I'll get. What kind of gate I'll walk through. What kind of dwelling I'll have, or even what kind of fruit I'll be able to pick and eat. Are for future reality. This one thing I know, I am a great sinner and Jesus Christ is my personal Saviour 24/7. I am proud to present Him, crucified, dead, buried, risen, ascended, and sitting on the right hand of God Almighty now and for ever more. To me that is not only literal but close at hand.

Now the Investigative Judgment that is another story. Both Jesus and Satan know in detail my life, my hope, and my salvation--it is not in dusty books it is written in the palms of my Savior's hands, feet, side, and brow. He borne it all for me. Thanks be to God, now and forever more. Now that is materially real as much as I am flesh and blood with a blood line back to Adam.

We only play games when we want to avoid a difficult task. Telling like it is, is getting harder and harder for Seventh-day Adventists. There is very little money in the Gospel, there are hordes in eschatology. Just click the dial and count the mega churchs that have purloined the beasts of Daniel and Revelation from Uriah Smith et al. We have dealt with images so long wse don't know real from nonsense. Tom

Laercio,

You seem to be presenting an either/or situation, especially in your earlier post.

Yes, the truth of the gospel is simple enough for anyone to understand. And the only way it can be fully understood is through the preaching of Christ, and the power and conviction of the Holy Spirit bringing the message home to our hearts and understanding. It is between us and God alone.

However, the Bible becomes a much richer and more nuanced treasure, when one can understand it through the linguistic, historical, and cultural grid within which it was written. This is where the work of linguists, scholars, expositors, theologians, and archaeologists can be extremely valuble. Not as the last word on the Bible's meaning, but to enrich our understanding. To ignore such resources not only impovershes us, it can cause us to miss contextual elements which by their absence may lead us to twist or miss a more accurate reading of the text.

This is simply part of the work of responcible exegesis. Without it, we can make less than responcible applications to our lives. Yes, the Holy Spirit can get the message across to us directly. But, the Holy Spirit also places people with various gifts within the body, who can help us understand the Word even more clearly and deeply. This is simply the reality of spiritual gifts at work, as the Bible itself says they should. To ignore the gifts working together is to discount different avenues through which the Spirit is trying to work for our benefit.

I think, Laercio, we're not looking at either/or, but both/and. Otherwise, even preaching and teaching would not be necessary. Just let everyone sit with their Bible on their own at home.

Some thoughts...

Frank

Laercio,

Referring primarily to your post at 1:00.

Thanks...

Frank

My spiritual identity crisis is deepening. Orthodoxy is now orthodoxymoron. The idea is to be orthodox and unorthodox simultaneously. Some will undoubtedly think this is moronic(not verified).

Regarding the material church: Where does Jesus tell us to build churches and go to church? Didn't Jesus tell us to pray secretly? I have concluded that church attendance is optional...but highly recommended. I consider church to be a necessary evil, wherein the Kingdom of God is established in ways not possible on an individual basis. But it is easy for the material church to supercede the spiritual church, and to become counterintuitive and counterproductive. Centralized passive collectivism is vastly inferior to decentralized rugged individualism. But in the material world which we live...we probably need the material church. Just beware of Salvation4Sale signs...

hi frank
i have understood your commentary about,scholars,expositors,theologians,
and archaeologists,some times can it be valuble,but i should like that you
think about some things what i shall speak you.last year we have studied one
lesson which spoke over archeology,do you remember?that lesson spoke about many
things like ,stones ,lost city and every thing else.many years ago scholars skeptic
said did not exist ur of the chaldees,abraham's born city,but some years ago some
scholar found this city and now what happened ,scholars skeptic become themselves
believer at god?no,no,no,they did not become themselves believer at god ,why not?
because there was a city ,in this city there was many men named abraham,but this do
not prove who abraham's story is true.why not?which proves there are that abraham
did offer his son to god?where do i find proves about abraham's story?
no one place i find proves over abraham's story except in the bible,scholars proved
there was a city but they cannot get to prove there is a god,many people died in the
papal persecution and none of them knew anything about stone of roseta or ur of the chaldees and every thing else.jesus said ,he that hath seen me hath seen the father.
where i have seen jesus,in the stones,or maybe in the ur of the chaldees or in the
jordan river,no ,no i have seen jesus in some people faithful at god.many people
say;do not look at me, look to jesus because he is our example.where is jesus now?
in the heaven,then who has seen me has seen jesus,because christ lives in me.
this is real concret and not abstract , many people are suffering in this
world do not work to present them archeology or culture or traditions,the only thing
that work is jesus born,death and resuscitated,think about.
laercio

"Now the Investigative Judgment that is another story."

Posted by: Tom Zwemer | 07 July 2008 at 4:13

Tom, The IJ must weigh on your mind something terrible. I cant really grasp bringing it into a discussion on materialism in the church.
In fact the last time I had a conversation in the real world about the IJ was about 15 years ago.
We all come from very different places dont we?

Hi Laercio,

It sounds like we are talking about two different things. I agree, no amount of archaeological, manuscript or cultural evidence will make a believer out of someone who is determined in their skepticism. Faith by its very nature always leaves room for doubt and rejection. It can never be based on airtight proof.

But, I was not addressing how to convince skeptics. I was merely pointing to the resources and gifts that God has given his church through these branches of study that, rightly used, can build believers up in the faith... resources that can help us to read the text that bares witness to our faith more intelligently and clearly.

Can one be saved without any of these tools at their disposal? Certainly! Can one be lost with all of them at their fingertips? Ditto! However, one who truly has faith, can make more accurate interpretations of the biblical text, and clearer applications of the text to their lives, as they learn to read and study it more contextually. That is the purpose of such disciplines.

For me, this is cause for gratitude that God would place such gifts and gifted people in our midst.

Thanks...

Frank

Michael

Without IJ there would be no Seventh-day Adventist Church--it is the corner stone of their views on everything from the trinity to the person and work of Jesus Christ including The Atonement, and of course, their entire soteriology, and most of all their view of individual and corporate eschatology. Naturally, they avoid direct discussion ever since Glacier View but it is still the 800 pound Gorilla that haunts them.

My point is to bring the discussion back to where they took the wrong fork in the road. Unless and until that issue is resolved frankly, openly, and honestly with due Exigesis rather than a self-serving eisegesis the church is going to remain in a wilderness of confusion and double talk. At the time of Glacier View, I suggested that within 40 years there would be no Seventh-day Adventist under the age of 40 who had at least a B.A. degree with a minor in critical thinking. Take a good look at the demographics today and read the thread on SDA colleges. There are some very dear and sincere Christians among Seventh-day Adventists--but the future of the corporate body is very bleak as long as it clings to a scrap of flotsom out of the 19th century. It is not to taunt but to attempt to redeem that I try to bring the discussion back to the point of stiff-necked administrative decision making winning over frank clear and persuasive exigesis. If you are a student of the incident you will recall the failed attempts of Consultation I and II in which the scholars took the fall for the third and final time. So we spill ink on Gay membership and other impossible dreams rather than address the great divide between Adventism and Christianity. Tom

Tom and Michael:

Did God the Father, Son, or Holy Spirit require the sanctuary service? Or was it Satan who required the sanctuary service? The sanctuary service involved sacrifice(killing) and ultimately human sacrifice. When we hear about heathens sacrificing their children, we cringe in horror(I do). But isn’t traditional Christianity centered in God the Father sacrificing his child? Is there a problem here? I think so. Does the sanctuary service involve a sort of appeasement of ‘the gods’?

It seems to me that Satan had more to do with the sanctuary service than God. Jesus did away with the sanctuary service. It further seems that Satan claimed ownership of the human race, and required worship, and that God had to literally strike a deal with the Devil to liberate us. Jesus waged spiritual warfare with all the forces of hell and won, thus opening the door for our liberation. The death of Christ on the cross was symbolic of a victory which had already occured. God could, and did, forgive sins throughout the Old Testament. But there was this stupid Satan problem. The spike that was driven through Christ’s heel continued through the serpent’s head. Unfortunately the serpent is still writhing and will continue to do so until human beings win a spriritual warfare with the forces of hell in a manner similar to that of Christ. Jesus showed the way, but he has had few takers for nearly 2,000 years now. Ellen White tried to rev up the troops, but had few takers really. So this thing keeps dragging on and on. A concerted spiritual warfare might well culminate in what is known as Armageddon. Satan and his cohorts will not give this earth up without a huge fight.

The substitutionary atonement was not to satisfy a bloodthirsty God…but rather to silence the demons infesting this earth. The crucifixion of Christ was the first payment, and when a critical mass of human beings do what Jesus said to do, the 2nd and final payment will be made. Might this be the final application of the atonement that Adventists catch so much flack over? Does Satan, rather than God, require the so called Investigative Judgement? Isn’t Satan the ultimate legalist? Retentive to the nth degree? I’d say so.

I believe that Ellen White is right on so many things(especially in principle and concept), but one must read between the lines, with massive doses of reasoning and critical thinking. Rejection must be counterbalanced with acceptance on an ongoing basis and in a prayerful devotional context. This isn't a task for whimps!

Tom

Reducing Adventism to the IJ debate may reflect your experience. I don't reoognise it. I do recognise the distress of academics in their conflict with the seeming power of administrators in former years.

I was a teacher myself at the time of Glacier View and one of those asked to sign away academic license. We all refused and life went on. Now as an Adminstrator - one of the vilified class of whom the Spectrum community is so suspicious, my experience with colleagues would suggest a wide range of views and less authoritarian than the sergeants of former years. Variance in perspective between academic schools of thought is pretty disparate at present

Christianity is itself a very wide spectrum and not with disarray.

The Anglican Communion has been meeting in York this past week. Their divisions are deep. Attempts to be literal in Biblical interpretation are purile when one accepts female Priests but not Bishops.

Ireland used to be an exporter of religous workers, with umpteen seminaries, they can barely fill one at present. The moral behaviour of their Priests and activities in their Institutions has eroded confidence in all but the most devout.

Various manifestions of Christianity may be well represented in the United States, but some of them are pretty weird.

Placing Adventism on one side of the road and Christianity on the other is a pretty crude analysis.

Tom, I think you hit the nail on the head.
The fact that the IJ doctrine continues to be a fundamental belief, and the cornerstone of Adventism's theological paradigm continues to baffle me.
I continue to be amazed that even after Cottrell's paper "Sanctuary Doctrine--Asset or Liability" was presented in 2002, that there fails to be an absolute outcry by those in Adventist academic circles regarding this ongoing doctrinal travesty.
I seriously have to question the sincerity and integrity of those who continue to support this doctrine, especially those who do it by their silence. Where is the leadership among the academics, and those who claim to be trained in theology and biblical languages.
Sadly, this ongoing silence indicated a malaise towards truth and integrity.
You are right, in that without this doctrine, there would be no Adventist Church. Since Ellen White repeatedly gave this doctrine her authoritative endorsement, if it was to be disregarded, so would she have to be.
Without the IJ doctrine, no longer would people fear a time of trouble. No longer would people lack the assurance of Salvation as promised in John 5:24 and Romans 8:1. No longer could the dreaded Sunday Law be used as that hammer during the Revelation seminars.

For those who dismiss the IJ as a relic of Adventism's past.... please give your head a shake, wake up, and smell the coffee!

Orthodoxymoron,

Are you saying that Christ's atonement on the cross was not complete?

Are you saying that humans must win the battle in the same manner that Christ did?

Are you suggesting that Satan is controlling when Christ returns?

Do you feel the Christ has not returned because somewhere, somehow, God's character is still in question?

I read through your post, and I failed to see anything that you provided scriptural support for. I certainly have not seen scriptural support for you thesis.

What I see is conjecture and surmising. Please show what in scripture might give you reason to believe as you do.

Confused and bewildered by your post,

Randy

Coming back on the BA's in Critical Thinking.

I reckon that the majority of those with degrees in Critical Thinking will have problems with:

Creation, Recent Creation, The Garden of Eden, The Flood, The Red Sea, Immaculate Conception, Water to Wine, Ressurection of Lazarus, Resurrection of Christ, Vicarious Atonement, Pentecost, Damascus Road, John's Revelation and much else in addition to a concept of the accountability of God and his people.

Our beliefs are all faith statements.

Victor,

You said, "Christianity is itself a very wide spectrum and not with disarray." .... Placing Adventism on one side of the road and Christianity on the other is a pretty crude analysis."

The foibles of various Christian groups do not measure up to the basic dichotomy of SDA theology. On the one hand we preach salvation through grace, based on the death and resurrection of Christ; but on the other hand, we hang on to the time line that insists that an investigative judgment started in 1844. Investigation of what or whom?

Originally, that INVESTIGATION was an investigation of our records of behavior, which, included, in a major way, the observance of the fourth commandment, and is still the same as far as EGW is concerned. It was meant to demonstrate that individuals were "safe to save".

Since the Glacier View Inquisition, some more astute minds saw that that didn't make sense if our salvation was exclusively dependent on God's grace through Christ, and so now, the INVESTIGATION has become a vindication of God, with GOD'S CHARACTER AT STAKE, and is now about proving that God is fair (as if anybody in this universe still doubts that). That question is a non-issue based on the Christ event.

This is a much more serious issue than whether or not individuals within a religious group have morals (SDAs included).

Victor

We have differing view points. If you were there shame on you.

The academics, particularly Andrews stood by and held the coats. Then they tried to recapture some status by the Consultations to no avail. Now they are just employees--grab a broom brother! Tom

Randy:

I'm sorry for the bewilderment and confusion. My post arises from my own bewilderment and confusion with the legion theologies of Christendom...all claiming Biblical authority. I am a Red Letter Christian. I have decided to follow Jesus. The teachings of Jesus are very different than the rest of scripture, although Jesus can be seen from Genesis to Revelation. I have a problem with the Old Testament, especially. Mostly regarding ethics, atrocities, rules, attitudes...and the absence of Satan. The following are two references...one from Leviticus and the other from the Desire of Ages(which contains scripture). Mine is a radical and heretical view...but it seems to make sense...and I am not employed by a church...so I don't have to worry about being fired...which I most certainly would be! I don't get paid to be good...I'm good for nothing! Here goes:

The Lord said to Moses, “Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron, and say to them: ‘A priest must not make himself ceremonially unclean for any of his people who die, except for a close relative, such as his mother or father, his son or daughter, his brother, or an unmarried sister who is dependent on him since she has no husband–for her he may make himself unclean. He must not make himself unclean for people related to him by marriage, and so defile himself. “‘Priests must not shave their heads or shave off the edges of their beards or cut their bodies. They must be holy to their God and must not profane the name of their God. Because they present the offerings made to the Lord by fire, the food of their God, they are to be holy. “‘They must not marry women defiled by prostitution or divorced from their husbands, because priests are holy to their God. Regard them as holy, because they offer up the food of your God. Consider them holy, because I the Lord am holy–I who make you holy. “‘If a priest’s daughter defiles herself by becoming a prostitute, she disgraces her father; she must be burned in the fire. “‘The high priest, the one among his brothers who has had the anointing oil poured on his head and who has been ordained to wear the priestly garments, must not let his hair become unkempt or tear his clothes. He must not enter a place where there is a dead body. He must not make himself unclean, even for his father or mother, nor leave the sanctuary of his God or desecrate it, because he has been dedicated by the anointing oil of his God. I am the Lord. “‘The woman he marries must be a virgin. He must not marry a widow, a divorced woman, or a woman defiled by prostitution, but only a virgin from his own people, so he will not defile his offspring among his people. I am the Lord, who makes him holy.’” The Lord said to Moses, “Say to Aaron: ‘For the generations to come none of your descendants who has a defect may come near to offer the food of his God. No man who has any defect may come near: no man who is blind or lame, disfigured or deformed; no man with a crippled foot or hand, or who is hunchbacked or dwarfed, or who has any eye defect, or who has festering or running sores or damaged testicles. No descendant of Aaron the priest who has any defect is to come near to present the offerings made to the Lord by fire. He has a defect; he must not come near to offer the food of his God. He may eat the most holy food of his God, as well as the holy food; yet because of his defect, he must not go near the curtain or approach the altar, and so desecrate my sanctuary. I am the Lord, who makes them holy.’” So Moses told this to Aaron and his sons and to all the Israelites.—Leviticus 21:1-24 (New International Version)

“When the loud cry, ‘It is finished!’ came from the lips of Christ, the priests were officiating in the temple. It was the hour of the evening sacrifice. The lamb representing Christ had been brought to be slain. Clothed in his significant and beautiful dress, the priest stood with lifted knife, as did Abraham when he was about to slay his son. With intense intrest the people were looking on. But the earth trembles and quakes; for the Lord Himself draws near. With a rending noise the inner veil of the temple is torn from top to bottom by an unseen hand, throwing open to the gaze of the multitude a place once filled with the presence of God. In this place the Shekinah had dwelt. Here God had manifested His glory above the mercy seat. No one but the hight priest ever lifted the veil separating this apartment from the rest of the temple. He entered in once a year to make an atonement for the sins of the people. But lo, this veil is rent in twain. The most holy place of the earthly sanctuary is no longer sacred. All is terror and confusion. The priest is about to slay the victim; but the knife drops from his nerveless hand, and the lamb escapes. Type has met antitype inthe death of God’s Son. The great sacrifice has been made. The way into the holiest is laid open. A new and living way is prepared for all. No longer need sinful, sorrowing humanity await the coming of the high priest. Henceforth the Saviour was to officiate a priest and advocate in the heaven of heavens. It was as if a living voice had spoken to the worshipers: There is now an end to all sacrifices and offerings for sin. The Son of God is come according to His word, ‘Behold, I have come-in the volume of the Book it is written of Me,-to do Your will, O God.’ ‘With His own blood’ He entered in ‘the Most Holy Place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption.’ Heb. 10:7; 9:12.”—Desire of Ages p. 807-808(Home Library Edition)

Sorry, I didn't finish, Randy. Please re-read the post you found bewildering and confusing. The big questions are...2,000 years after Jesus died on the cross...why are we still here, and why is the world so messed-up? My answer is that humans have not done what Jesus said to do. They still serve Satan. Very few humans have decided to follow Jesus...historically or presently. Satan still controls this world.

Victor

P.S. I overlooked your comment on critical thinking. Are you saying that you don't have trouble with the doctrine of Immaculate Conception? Do you know what the doctrine of Immaculate Conception states? It is a Roman Catholic doctrine that states that Mary was conceived without sin thus Jesus Christ could be without original sin. If you hold to that view, I would keep it very quiet since you hold an administrative position without tenure.

Your citation of theological troubles around the world is simply a crude way of begging the issue. For shame for a man of letters.

Tom

Tom

Though I appreciate your thoughts on your view of the IJ, I feel my point still stands.
For you the IJ is like rose colored glasses that you cannot possibly see anything without affecting whatever you are looking at.

Do you find it amazing that many Adventists go long lenghts of time without having a conversation about it or really worry about it like you do?

Lets give you a good hypothetical. Your basic question is what is God doing since 1844. Really isnt it? Some people think he is doing one thing, others say no he isnt. ( I greatly simplify I know)

Here is the hypothetical. SO WHAT? The IJ is not the foundation of Adventism. Neither you or I consult whatever positions we may hold on the IJ before we worship or pray or marry or visit the sick or tell someone of Christ or baptise or go to a funeral. Neither you or I believe that what we believe about what Christ is doing at any particular time in history is the make or break point of Christianity. And dont say the Church does because it doesnt.

You have a point of view that I feel is right on. You always bring us back to Christ. That I find admirable. Frankly those who have such a problem with academic technicalities have the cart before the horse and with your viewpoint of Christ first it kind of amazes me how a couple things can throw a person for a loop.

Michael

Thanks.

I disagree about the foundation of Adventism. If it does not stem from a revisionary doctrine of Oct. 22, 1844 then it has no roots at all. The Sabbath, health reform, dress reform, authority all go back to Portland, Maine, to Battle Creek, to Takoma Park to St. Helena and back to Takoma Park.

I do not have a fixation except to say whoa! Let us not fiddle while ignoring the basic premises upon which the Church stands. In the church's out-reach eschatology always precedes Gospel. That should not be. Fear always precedes Grace. It is the Holy Spirit that convicts of sin, not some slicked down pacing figure in a dark blue suit. The theme of SDA evangelism is triumphalistic, ego-centric fear mongering. Amazing Facts is a prime example. I only insist on Amazing Grace as the way to the heart of the sinner.

Believe me, Michael I am outside of the loop! The cry of the SDA church has always been the "Truth and nothing but the Truth" and yet it White washes the most glaring bit of eisegesis. As superficial as Barnhouse was, he had it right on the corn field bon mot.

The IJ is not a minor issue--it colors or discolors everything within the framework of the Seventh-day establishment. If Spectrum is to be a voice of reason it should start at the beginning. That is my point. If one's basic premise is wrong the end point will be in error also. The lament is people, good sincere people, are voting with their feet and their purse. Spectrum says it wants to turn that trend around. I merely refer back to the fundamental problem--that has to be made right before the Gospel can take its rightful place at the center of Christianity. Tom

Michael

Thanks.

I disagree about the foundation of Adventism. If it does not stem from a revisionary doctrine of Oct. 22, 1844 then it has no roots at all. The Sabbath, health reform, dress reform, authority all go back to Portland, Maine, to Battle Creek, to Takoma Park to St. Helena and back to Takoma Park.

I do not have a fixation except to say whoa! Let us not fiddle while ignoring the basic premises upon which the Church stands. In the church's out-reach eschatology always precedes Gospel. That should not be. Fear always precedes Grace. It is the Holy Spirit that convicts of sin, not some slicked down pacing figure in a dark blue suit. The theme of SDA evangelism is triumphalistic, ego-centric fear mongering. Amazing Facts is a prime example. I only insist on Amazing Grace as the way to the heart of the sinner.

Believe me, Michael I am outside of the loop! The cry of the SDA church has always been the "Truth and nothing but the Truth" and yet it White washes the most glaring bit of eisegesis. As superficial as Barnhouse was, he had it right on the corn field bon mot.

The IJ is not a minor issue--it colors or discolors everything within the framework of the Seventh-day establishment. If Spectrum is to be a voice of reason it should start at the beginning. That is my point. If one's basic premise is wrong the end point will be in error also. The lament is people, good sincere people, are voting with their feet and their purse. Spectrum says it wants to turn that trend around. I merely refer back to the fundamental problem--that has to be made right before the Gospel can take its rightful place at the center of Christianity. Tom

Michael,

You said,"The IJ is not the foundation of Adventism. Neither you or I consult whatever positions we may hold on the IJ before we worship or pray or marry or visit the sick or tell someone of Christ or baptise or go to a funeral. Neither you or I believe that what we believe about what Christ is doing at any particular time in history is the make or break point of Christianity. And dont say the Church does because it doesnt."

Are you kidding???!

Sorry to insert myself to this discussion Tom doesn't need my help. I just couldn't keep still after reading your posts, Michael.

I don't know you - how old you are - your background, but I think you're the one with rose-colored glasses if you think the IJ isn't at the very rock bottom core of SDA theology. Sure, if you fall into the queue that leads from cradle roll - to academy - to college - and a desk in Silver Springs there is no reason to reflect on matters like this, except when pesky people bring them up; but for me, this bit of SDA uniqueness has changed my whole life.

Let me introduce myself - I think of myself as a first generation SDA, although I have found some Adventist roots. I was baptized at 16 and graduated AUC where Dr. Stafford taught me to read - with my intellect and my soul; and the religion department did its duty by demanding enough hours so as to give me a minor in religion; and where the education department made me memorize the book EDUCATION. As a result, and years later, I found some disturbing stuff in my personal studies - issues that weren't obvious issues before Des Ford came on the horizon. Actually, he was already in the midst of his Waterloo when I emerged from my geographical semi-seclusion (working in northern Canada). Ever since, I have watched the PR departments of the church (and there are many) work hard to overcome the backlash Glacier View caused. The result was that, as Bull and Lockhart point out, Adventism is again embracing a more traditional facade. But, this is not without a few compromises. Apparently they have worked beautifully, if they have produced the beliefs that you have stated - that the IJ doesn't really matter, all things considered.

One more Scripture/Ellen White reference which sheds light on the sanctuary, atonement, and salvation:

‘”When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another.” Thus Christ on the Mount of Olives pictured to His disciples the scene of the great judgment day. And He represented its decision as turning upon one point. When the nations are gathered before Him, there will be but two classes, and their eternal destiny will be determined by what they have done or have neglected to do for Him in the person of the poor and the suffering. In that day Christ does not present before men the great work He has done for them in giving His life for their redemption. He presents the faithful work they have done for Him. To those whom He sets upon His right hand He will say, “Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.” But those whom Christ commends know not that they have been ministering unto Him. To their perplexed inquiries He answers, “Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.” Those whom Christ commends in the judgment may have known little of theology, but they have cherished His principles. Through the influence of the divine Spirit they have been a blessing to those about them. Even among the heathen are those who have cherished the spirit of kindness; before the words of life had fallen upon their ears, they have befriended the missionaries, even ministering to them at the peril of their own lives. Among the heathen are those who worship God ignorantly, those to whom the light is never brought by human instrumentality, yet they will not perish. Though ignorant of the written law of God, they have heard His voice speaking to them in nature, and have done the things that the law required. Their works are evidence that the Holy Spirit has touched their hearts, and they are recognized as the children of God. How surprised and gladdened will be the lowly among the nations, and among the heathen, to hear from the lips of the Saviour, “Inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.” How glad will be the heart of Infinite Love as His followers look up with surprise and joy at His words of approval!’—Desire of Ages pgs. 685 & 686 (Home Library Edition)

My main point is that Satan is the legalistic, beady-eyed, kill-joy...not God! The substitutionary atonement was to pay-off Satan...not to satisfy God. To be right with God...we need to be right with God...not simply declared to be right with God. But being right with God does not imply perfection. We can always do better. It's like the Japanese term, 'Kaizen', which means continual improvement. You never, ever 'arrive'. This was Des Ford's point...but his solutions didn't work. He proposed simplistic legalism in place of complex legalism. They are two sides of the same stupid coin...

One last item: The following video illustrates one of my material church weaknesses(vices?): http://youtube.com/watch?v=nKImiR7a4zw&feature=related This is my favorite material church. It is Saint Sulpice Roman Catholic Church in Paris, France. When it comes to 'big church' sometimes mother knows best...

Thanks Sirje
Please do join in any conversation.
I appreciate your life experience.
Are you trying to say that you DO consult your viewpoints of the IJ before you do any of the things you mention?
Like,
"Dr. Stafford taught me to read - with my intellect and my soul; and the religion department did its duty by demanding enough hours so as to give me a minor in religion; and where the education department made me memorize the book EDUCATION. As a result, and years later, I found some disturbing stuff in my personal studies - issues that weren't obvious issues before Des Ford came on the horizon. Actually, he was already in the midst of his Waterloo when I emerged from my geographical semi-seclusion (working in northern Canada). Ever since, I have watched the PR departments of the church (and there are many) work hard to overcome the backlash Glacier View caused."

Or,
"The foibles of various Christian groups do not measure up to the basic dichotomy of SDA theology. On the one hand we preach salvation through grace, based on the death and resurrection of Christ; but on the other hand, we hang on to the time line that insists that an investigative judgment started in 1844."

You say it like they are mutually exclusive. You contrast the first that all agree upon as being somehow impossible if you have reason to believe in the second one.
A false choice.

I lied...one more: http://youtube.com/watch?v=2mHOfP4MEfc&feature=related This one makes me cry every time I watch it. This is the part of Catholicism that I like. The music, church, and organist are all Roman Catholic. Fox's Book of Martyrs, the Great Controversy, the Crusades, and the Inquistion are parts of the ultimate material church that I despise. Can these Siamese Twins be separated without destroying the organization? I have not written these people off. In fact, my hope for a better world involves a thoroughly reformed and purified Roman Catholic Church. This view gets me in trouble with everyone...

Michael,
Yes, they sure are mutually exclusive. Pray tell, what is the IJ for - 1) purpose; 2)who gets judged; 3)what does it (IJ) matter if you have accepted the work done on you behalf by Christ? Isn't it superfluous? The Gospel commission was not to go around the world and pronounce a judgment to come, but the "good news" of salvation. The verdict was delivered at the cross (John 12).

As to your first question, no, I have never consulted the church's stand on the IJ before anything I've ever done; however, most of the rest of SDA theology is based on the IJ. As so many have said, after all that was said and written after Glacier View, "if it weren't for 1844 and the 2300 day prophesy, there wouldn't be a SDA church". That is the reality. Of course it doesn't have to be that way but a change away from those "pillars" is not about to happen any time soon. I suppose we could go on our merry way and just ignore them, but for the periodic reminders from our SS department and certain anniversary sermons.

I have problems with the scriptural(Dan. 8:14, Heb. 9;12) and numerical aspects(2300 days/years, 1844) of the Investigative Judgement...as well as that it is something which God needs or requires(the Lord knows them that are his). But if it is something which Satan requires as a part of a legalistic, lawyer-like, celestial courtroom, universal power struggle, legal wrangeling regarding the souls of men and the fate of the human race at the end of this present darkness...then I am all ears. It can help to explain why 2,000 years after Jesus paid it all, and saved the human race...things are worse than ever. Does anyone know how many people have been tortured, injured, or killed in wars since Ellen White died in 1915? So what went wrong? We can't say everything is fine when it obviously is not. I don't think Ellen White was kidding when she wrote, 'Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then shall the Lord come to claim them as His own.'--Christ's Object Lessons, pg 69. Try taking the teachings of Jesus seriously, and start talking about them and implementing them at the local church or conference level...and see how much trouble you get into. How about the 28 Fundamental Teachings of Jesus Christ? How about Teachings of Jesus Seminars? This applies to all Christian churches. Christianity is a religion about Jesus...not the religion of the teachings of Jesus. Who needs the Anti-Christ? To answer Des Ford's question, 'Investigative Judgement: Theological Milestone or Historical Necessity?' The answer is both. The early Adventist/Millerite mistakes should be freely admitted...but the Investigative Judgement should be promoted and defended on a conceptual level...extrapolating from the issues involved in the Great Controversy between Christ and Satan in the Conflict of the Ages. This isn't a fairy-tale.

Sirje and Michael,

I'm sorry for intruding into this conversation, but to me, the idea that the judgement to come and the 'good news' we are proclaiming are mutually exclusive, as you are saying Sirje, seems to be a dichotomy that the NT writers simply would not recognize.

Paul spoke of future judgement as part of his gospel:

"This will take place on the day when God will judge men's secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares." (Rom. 2:16)

When speaking with Felix, it says that, "Paul discoursed on righteousness, self-control, and the judgement to come." (Acts 25:25a) This is in the context of Paul speaking to him about faith in Christ Jesus. IOW, the gospel. If someone like Paul tied present justification and future judgement together in his proclamation of the good news, it would be a safe bet for us to do the same.

And the message of judgement tells us that God will consummate what he inaugurated in and through Christ. The kingdom that began as a tiny seed, will fill the whole earth. The powers that have held sway through oppression and evil in this present age will be weighed in the balance and found wanting for the age to come. And all who not only name the name and claim the grace of Christ, but who live lives that are consistent with that claim, will recieve the promise of present justifcation...final salvation.

This final point is consistent with Jesus' saying "..not all who say to me, "Lord, Lord," will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven..." (This is in the context of the SM, Jesus' exposition of the Law). The same with Peter urging us to "make our calling and election sure..." Or Paul saying, "For if you live according to the flesh you will die (Greek-future tense), but if by the Spirit you put to death the misdeeds of the body, you will live (again, future tense). Or what Paul says about himself, "Not that I have already obtained all this (bodily resurrection), or have already been made perfect, but I press on to take hold of that for which Christ Jesus took hold of me." These texts all convey the idea of not simply relying upon a past verdict of pardon, but living in continual reliance upon the One who gives pardon and power now, and promises us an eternal future.

In this light, the connection of future judgement with present justifcation thus assures of God fufilling his gracious promises towards us. God promises to judge for us and not against us. But this also calls us to live responcibly towards Him and others, as grateful recipients of the grace and promises he has lavished upon us. It tells us that God is calling us all to account, and places before us the question, what have we done with the grace and gifts we have recieved? It is a guard against our human tendency to presume upon the giver of the gifts. It is a call to live lives that bear the true fruit of justification and not lives that are mere legal fictions.

Whether or not one accepts the 1844 dating, I have a hard time seeing how this can be gotten around. Justification and future judgement are not two contradictory teachings, but two sides of truth held in tension by the truth of the gospel. They ultimately hold together in the one who is our Savior, our Lord, and our Judge.

Thanks...

Frank

The Great Commission:

"Then Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."---Matthew 28:18-20(NIV).

Have Christians been busy doing this for 2,000 years...or doing everything but this? Is this the Great Ommission? I'm guilty too. I'm no poster child. By the way, why does Jesus say 'all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me?' Given to him by whom, and when? Did he win this authority away from Satan during his earthly ministry? Is this the first part of the deal with the Devil(Holy Place phase)? Is doing what Jesus told us to do the second and final part of this deal(Most Holy Place phase)? Is this where the Investigative Judgement comes in???

Frank,
Thank your for your post. You are always welcome to comment on anything, especially since you do it so well.

Sirje ,said
"Yes, they sure are mutually exclusive. Pray tell, what is the IJ for - 1) purpose; 2)who gets judged; 3)what does it (IJ) matter if you have accepted the work done on you behalf by Christ?"

By your own logic you should be fine with the IJ. If you believe that, "what does it (IJ) matter if you have accepted the work done on you behalf by Christ?" as you state, why all the angst? Even by your own line of reasoning belief in and accepting Christ makes the rest trivial or of no consequence doesnt it?

"The Gospel commission was not to go around the world and pronounce a judgment to come, but the "good news" of salvation. The verdict was delivered at the cross (John 12)."

You are mixing whos responsible for what in this paragraph but if you believe that the verdict was delivered on the cross, by your own words the IJ shouldnt concern you.

"As to your first question, no, I have never consulted the church's stand on the IJ before anything I've ever done; however, most of the rest of SDA theology is based on the IJ."
Posted by: Sirje | 11 July 2008 at 3:48

Flesh that one out for me. Prove how most everything in Adventism is based on the IJ. You cant just throw that one out there and be credible.

Just an afterthought: Was John Harvey Kellogg's 'The Living Temple' a protest against the 'material church'? Has anyone read this book?

Michael/Frank/et al,

"Flesh that one out for me. Prove how most everything in Adventism is based on the IJ. You cant just throw that one out there and be credible."

OK.

First, I don't recall saying anything about there NOT being a judgment. As you say, Frank, the NT is full of references to a judgment. However, when Adventists talk about THE judgment, they mean the Investigative Judgment. The IJ is exclusively an SDA term an carries with it a whole host of connotations and causes a debris field of fallout throughout Bible exegesis. So let's agree that it is the IJ that we're all talking about.

Michael you said, "You are mixing whos responsible for what in this paragraph but if you believe that the verdict was delivered on the cross, by your own words the IJ shouldnt concern you."

It shouldn't concern me except I find it is Biblically non-existent and, as a false paradigm, distorts the Gospel. If that is what my church preaches, I should be concerned.

When I was teaching an academy biology class, one of the lab exercises listed a substantial series of math computations for the kids to perform. The very last directive said something like, DISREGARD ALL PREVIOUS DIRECTIVES AND STEPS. Only one boy put down his pencil and sat there with a Cheshire grin on his face. The rest worked feverishly until, some time later, when moans reverberated throughout the room.
Adventist theology is still working on those computations and hasn't read the last directive delivered from the cross - IT IS FINISHED.

You asked me to demonstrate how "most everything in Adventism is based on the IJ", so here it goes:

1) The IJ infers that God doesn't know, on an on-going basis that I am His child; and needs to look that fact up in a book.

2) The IJ anthropomorphizes God and the spiritual realm in which He exists. It relegates salvation to what happens in which room IN HEAVEN. It places God within our time frame which is calculated by the movements of the earth. If Christ was "slain from the beginning of creation", influencing the cultures prior to His sojourn on earth, then His death and its meaning is also able to penetrate beyond the constraints of time as we calculate it. This makes a date like 1844 of no relevance in the grand scheme of things.

3)The IJ judgment infers that salvation is conditional on our behavior, right up to "when our name comes up". As a youngster, my husband used to go to bed grateful his last name stared with a W.

4) The IJ forces us to interpret the tearing of the curtain at the hour of Christ's death. It robs us of the assurance of direct access to our God through the merits of His blood, exponentially keeping that curtain in tact; and diluting Christ's last words, IT IS FINISHED.

5) The IJ makes the Christ event secondary to the OT Temple cervices, forcing us to keep referencing the OT system for the meaning of Christ sacrifice, instead of referencing the Christ event to give meaning to the OT services. This takes Christ's death and resurrection out of its proper place as the MAIN EVENT of the entire Bible, which was only crudely demonstrated to the OT culture prior to that event. Why play around in the shadows when the real is with us?

In the last 20-30 years, Adventist's reading of its own theology has seen a change to accommodate some of the issues that surfaced in Glacier View. The under 30 group of SDAs are now focusing on the spiritual aspects of what it means to be a Christian, pretty much ignoring the historical, and (still on the books) theology. There's been a herculean attempt to wed the IJ to "salvation, freely given, by the grace of God". As a result, the IJ now is all about "vindicating God" in the eyes of the universe. This supposes that there is a whole host of beings, waiting with baited breath to see if GOD REALLY IS FAIR AND LOVING; and IF we, His faithful children, based on their description in Revelation 14, are able to keep all the commandments of God. In other words, they are waiting to see IF THE SYSTEM WORKS.

6) This scenario presupposes that we, and the rest of the universe, have the right to judge God; that there is some basis, other than God, to which His fairness needs to comply. This diminishes God from being THE ALPHA AND THE OMEGA and the very one that sets the norms.

In general, the IJ makes us into navel-gazers, concentrating on whether or not we measure up enough to make the grade and be "safe to save". It colors who we are and what our lives should be focusing upon. Even our evangelism can become a jewel gathering exercise, rather than the natural outflow of concern and care for our fellow man.

The quotes that "meat eaters won't be translated" also colors our health message (the meat eating being one of the hallmarks of the unsaved).

Some of this stuff may be foreign to you, depending on how old you are and on what coast of the US you live on. In practice, not much of these concerns impact Adventists today, judging by some of the comments here and watching the focus of the denomination, but the basics of this type of paradigm, centered around the IJ, are still part of the 28.

I assume, when you asked me to show how the IJ impacts everything SDA, you are stating that, in practice, who really cares? And you would be right.

Christ's own description of the meaning of His life and the death to come, in John 12, states that the CROSS is where the judgment of the world happens. This is not talking about a specific time and place, but the meaning of the cross event. Salvation has to do with what we understand and accept about Christ's death and resurrection. This brings the judgment to each individual as he confronts those events. The blood of Christ is either applied there to our accounts or not, if we reject it. What we decide about Christ and His mission, colors everything else we believe and do from that point forward. This is the motivation for the Christian life, not the preparation for an investigation of the minutia of everyday living. This is what gives the Christian his freedom to live and love freely and selflessly. The IJ draws those activities into a self-centered scrutiny and makes us focus on ourselves rather than the world we are supposed to serve.

A few years ago I ended up in a Church Board meeting in a discussion about broadening our views and being a more accepting church family. By a few of the most vocal people, and as in the case I suspect of a whole lot of SDA Churches, this was depicted as a blatant move to become permissive and an open endorsement of sinful behavior. At one point (really it was the end of discussion) when I was accused of touting "cheap grace" because I stated that salvation was based on grace and not appearance. One of the stern voices stated that salvation was based on the OT Sanctuary System. Although I know some in the room were not entirely comfortable with that statement nobody was quite sure enough to speak up and state anything to the contrary. It was at that moment that I realized literally that we, SDAism, have (because most churches represent church teachings of the last 60 - 70 years or more) such a tangled view of salvation that nearly no one can speak with positive assurance of salvation. It was also at that moment that I determined to keep one eye on the door and preferably have it open to facilitate an exit.

I sat through a couple of lectures by Richard Davidson two years ago. He is an extreme case of physicalism. Going to great lengths to ascribe physical details in the Bible to Heaven. It really after a while becomes confining. At times even absurd.

Sirje

I see much I can agree with you on, however many of those things you percieve much differently than I do.

"You asked me to demonstrate how "most everything in Adventism is based on the IJ", so here it goes:

1) The IJ infers that God doesn't know, on an on-going basis that I am His child; and needs to look that fact up in a book."

In your list, I see no mention of the 1000 years that the saved will be going over the books. Here you make assumtions that the accounting system is contraChrist because he doesnt need his memory jogged. The books are the evidence where the universe can see. They are for (our) benefit not his.

"3)The IJ judgment infers that salvation is conditional on our behavior, right up to "when our name comes up". As a youngster, my husband used to go to bed grateful his last name stared with a W."

You, contend then that everyone will be saved? So why have a judgement?

"There's been a herculean attempt to wed the IJ to "salvation, freely given, by the grace of God". As a result, the IJ now is all about "vindicating God" in the eyes of the universe. This supposes that there is a whole host of beings, waiting with baited breath to see if GOD REALLY IS FAIR AND LOVING; and IF we, His faithful children, based on their description in Revelation 14, are able to keep all the commandments of God. In other words, they are waiting to see IF THE SYSTEM WORKS."

Not only whoever may be in the universe but those who are saved and review the books for the 1000 years.

Your ommission of those that are in heaven reviewing the books and the fact that you think the evidence in those books is for Gods defence instead of our satisfaction or our peace of mind leads you to your position IMO.

Notice how your list use's words like infers and forces. Clearly it's the perceptions rather than facts that you disagree with.

Perhaps the differences in our perceptions answers things best.

No Michael.
That 1000 year research project in heaven is another anthropomorphing of the spiritual. Do you serioulsy believe that after those who "make it to heaven" are going to wonder if the whole thing was fair? Do they, or anyone else, need proof of God's goodness? Whatever the 1000 years symbolizes, the Bible no where states that the saved will be pouring over any books. Do you doubt God's fairness even now? If not now, why then? and why, if we who are sinful, are able to rest assured of God's love, the UNFALLEN universe is still wondering?

That 1000 year interpretation is also exclusively SDA, which brings up the issue of what is literal and what is symbolic or a metaphor. The book of Revelation is filled with sea monsters, scrolls that are eaten and digested, women escaping into the wilderness and a whole host of other pictures and numbers. What determines our relegating some of those numbers to symbolic interpretatins and others, like the 1000 years, to the literal?

To sum it all up, I'd like to post the words to a song by Gloria Gather, sung to the tune of Sibalius' FINLANDIA.

I THEN SHALL LIVE

I then shall live as one who's been forgiven;
I'll walk with joy to know my debts are paid.
I know my name is clear before my Father;
I am His child, and I am not afraid.

So greatly pardoned, I'll forgive my brother;
The law of love I gladly will obey.
I then shall live as one who's learned compassion;
I've been so loved that I'll risk loving, too.

I know how fear builds walls instead of bridges;
I dare to see another's point of view.
And when relationships demand commitment,
Then I'l be there to care and follow through.

Your kingdom come around and through and in me;
Your pow'r and glory, let them shine through me.
Your Hallowed Name, O may I bear with honor,
And may Your living Kingdom come in me.

The Bread of Life, O may I share with honor;
And may You feed a hungry world through me.

Amen, amen, amen.

That is the GOSPEL and all it accomplishes.

This is best appreciated as sung and can be viewed here:

http://togetheroneservant.blogspot.com/2008/01/i-then-shall-live.html

Sirje Amen Tom

The whole SDA contrived conception of the IJ, sanctuary, humans and angels judging God is ridiculous on its face: proving that people will believe anything clearly illogical if it is repeated ad infinitum.

Any Bible position adopted by only a small and very late group of people, one never before interpreted similarly in nearly 1800 years, should raise the question of how such an eisegesis originated when all the great Christians throughout the centuries were unable to see it? The reason:
there is none, just as the emperor has no clothes.

I'm going to try this one more time. Christianity's track record is not very good. What Would Jesus Say(WWJS) about Christianity not doing what He said to do?

The Great Commission: "Then Jesus came to them and said, 'All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."---Matthew 28:18-20(NIV).

Have Christians been busy doing this for 2,000 years...or doing everything but this? Is this the Great Ommission? I'm guilty too. I'm no poster child. By the way, why does Jesus say 'all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me?' Given to him by whom, and when? Did he win this authority away from Satan during his earthly ministry? Is this the first part of the deal with the Devil(Holy Place phase)? Is doing what Jesus told us to do the second and final part of this deal(Most Holy Place phase)? Is this where the Investigative Judgement comes in? If Jesus paid it all, and won the victory...why are we not in Heaven...or at least in a better world? We are perilously close to exterminating ourselves. Is Satan still the 'god of this world'? Did humans and demons kick God out of the Garden of Eden? Did Jesus try to free us from this demonic rule.

I have problems with the scriptural(Dan. 8:14, Heb. 9;12) and numerical aspects(2300 days/years, 1844) of the Investigative Judgement...as well as that it is something which God needs or requires(the Lord knows them that are his). But if it is something which Satan requires as a part of a legalistic, lawyer-like, celestial courtroom, universal power struggle, legal wrangeling regarding the souls of men and the fate of the human race at the end of this present darkness...then I am all ears. It can help to explain why 2,000 years after Jesus paid it all, and saved the human race...things are worse than ever. Does anyone know how many people have been tortured, injured, or killed in wars since Ellen White died in 1915? So what went wrong? We can't say everything is fine when it obviously is not. I don't think Ellen White was kidding when she wrote, 'Christ is waiting with longing desire for the manifestation of Himself in His church. When the character of Christ shall be perfectly reproduced in His people, then shall the Lord come to claim them as His own.'--Christ's Object Lessons, pg 69. Try taking the teachings of Jesus seriously, and start talking about them and implementing them at the local church or conference level...and see how much trouble you get into. How about the 28 Fundamental Teachings of Jesus Christ? How about Teachings of Jesus Seminars? This applies to all Christian churches. Christianity is a religion about Jesus...not the religion of the teachings of Jesus. Who needs the Anti-Christ? To answer Des Ford's question, 'Investigative Judgement: Theological Milestone or Historical Necessity?' The answer is both. The early Adventist/Millerite mistakes should be freely admitted...but the Investigative Judgement should be promoted and defended on a conceptual level...extrapolating from the issues involved in the Great Controversy between Christ and Satan in the Conflict of the Ages. This isn't a fairy-tale.

I suspect the above is not a part of the Adventist spectrum, to any significant degree. Is it a significant part of the spectrum of any Christian church? Maybe this is why I don't go to church very often. When I do go, it is to an ultra-liberal, non-invasive, Episcopal church. Odd man out. Game over.

Not many people of moderate persuasion have much sway in the church any more. I was reminded why recently when the Episcopal Church did two important things: It elected a woman bishop to head the denomination, and it backtracked on appointing gay bishops. The first move seems Christian. Women deserve to hold church office as much as political office (one diocese, however, was so incensed that it voted to leave the church, and worldwide there are still Anglican movements that do not permit women to be bishops or ordained priests).

The second move was an act of cowardice because it did not reflect the ideals of love in Christianity and was motivated by reactionaries in the Episcopal denomination. Countering a long tradition of laissez-faire tolerance, the reactionaries have gotten tough and threatened to form their own church if gays are promoted in the priesthood. The worldwide Anglicans are more intolerant, upholding that homosexuality is forbidden, unnatural, wrong or an outright sin, depending on who is doing the disapproving.

You'd think that someone would stand up and ask a simple question: Who are we to condemn gays if Christ didn't? In fact, who are we to condemn any sinner, since Christ didn't? Christianity is about forgiveness, and for the past two decades, as fundamentalism swept through every Protestant denomination, moderates and liberals have been driven out, and were roundly condemned as they left. Along with them went tolerance and forgiveness, not to mention love.

Did Christ teach love or is that just a liberal bias? In the current climate, it's hard to remember, but one thing is certain: Once a tight cabal of fundamentalists takes over any denomination, Christ's teachings go out the window. The reversal of Christianity from a religion of love to a religion of hate is the greatest religious tragedy of our time.

Those of us who haven't been swept up in worldwide fundamentalism, which has corrupted Islam, Hinduism and Judaism as well, have been caught in a double bind. We can't join any sect that preaches intolerance, yet we can't fight it, either, because by definition fighting is a form of intolerance. To escape this double bind, moderates have stayed silent and stayed home. But that tactic failed. As healthy as it is to nourish your own devotion and faith, it's disastrous to allow extremists to take over the church, because the statehouse, the board of education, the Congress, and eventually the presidency are next.

Perhaps civil society will solve the problem of religious extremism. So far it hasn't. America finds itself in the sad plight of being the world's most prominent secular society hijacked by sectarians. One can only hope that the church comes to its senses and regains its moral center. If that doesn't occur, the core teachings of Christ will be lost, for all intents and purposes, to this generation.

Deepak Chopra is the author "Peace is the Way," which won the Quill Award in 2005 as well as 41 other books. He is also the founder and president of the Alliance for a New Humanity, an international network of people from all walks of life who are networking together to see a positive change take place in the world.

This article appeared on page B - 7 of the San Francisco Chronicle