Not to be meanspirited, but I wonder if Ryan can blend what he is saying above with his participation in this:

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Adventist+against+Prop+8+&se...

Only a few days ago I was scanning through the latest Alumni Journal of LLU Medical School. In celebrating its 100th anniversary, there were pictures of the medical students being instructed by Dr. Abbot on hydrotherapy, and one patient was sitting all wrapped in a blanket with her feet, probably in a tub of water. This was the "latest" therapy of healing at that time.

Fast forward: today, LLU Medical School has all the latest equipment and trains competent health care professionals with the latest medical information.

If our theology were to be compared with the health work, both originating at the same time, would it have made much or little progress from that time? No one would think of basing the health work on what EGW wrote and promoted then; yet there are those in the SDA church who do not want to move one iota from the theological and doctrinatl positions taken more than 100 years ago.
If any institution has not advanced in that length of time it has become outdated and no longer has a message to the world. The message originating with Adventists was the nearness of the Second Coming. Is that still relevant or could there be much more serious concerns in our world then focusing on an event anticipated since the first century and not yet consummated?

I don't know Elaine... who knows how differently the early church might have functioned if they'd known people would still have been mucking about 2,000 years after them? Would they have proposed a different kind of strategic plan? Would they have been as open to innovation? Who knows?

What I can see for us at this point is that we've been without a foreseeable future for so long it's as if it's blasphemy to ask "What if we'll be here another 200 or 2000 years -- what then? What kind of church would we want to see? What kind of world would we hope to see? What healing contributions would we want to make to that world? And how can we start now?"

As I just said to a friend, this article represents the Paulsen that inspired me in the 1990s.

Ryan, more specifically this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90ANZiOK0o0

Thanks, Rondo, for pointing me to the YouTube video. I'm proud of Ryan Bell and the others for speaking out for religious liberty and equality for all God's children. I'm proud of our church for its longstanding support of protecting the rights of minorities.

I'm not sure what your cryptic issues are, but I respect both our General Conference President as well as Ryan Bell, who is working hard in Hollywood, California, to advance the Gospel in creative ways. Keep it up, Ryan!

Thanks for posting this article. It lifted my spirits.

Ryan, thanks for taking the time to think carefully and gloss on Elder Paulsen's articulation of hope and healing in the context of historic Adventist theology applied today.

As an Adventist young person, I find it faith affirming to see more and more leaders dismissing fear and raising our spiritual consciousness and widening the borders of what we think of as being a "church." From navigating globalization as a truly globalized faith community to the continuing march of civil/religious liberties for all humans regardless of identity, these are exciting times to be part of a church that sings: we have this hope.

Thank you, Ryan, for answering the question that I also was wondering about...

I have a little paper back by John R. W. Stott entitled: "Who is my Neighbor?" It will fit in a shirt pocket with ease-24 pages. It is about the Theology of Compassion.

The Adventist Church early on had a balance between the theology of the end-time with the theology of compassion.

That morphed into the theology of piety with the business of healing.

Now when I want to learn more about Christian Neighborliness I read Tony Compolo, or Philip Yancey, or John R. W. Stott I don't watch Doug Batchelor. That is why Ryan's commentary on the message of Jan Paulsen is so welcome.

In my professional career I sponsored four mission trips to Chiapas, three to Puerto Rico, one to Jamaica, two to Costa Rico, and many into the inner cities of Georgia and several needy rural areas. What I learned was the profound way it changed the careers of my students.

Yes the theology of compassion is also the theology of redemption. "There but for the Grace of God, go I"!

Tom

Ryan,

Thanks for the input and the link to Paulsen's message.

If I reviewed his address, as a secretary, I would have suggested that he add John 10:10 at the conclusion.
I will post something next which is where the SDA is failing in its leadership as far implementing the theme of what Paulsen is promoting.

I'll be..what I can't utter here! Unbelievable! I didn't think it possible to find a quote from a leading SDA speaking out against social injustice before it became socially acceptable, but Paulsen has apparently come across a quote from Arthur Daniells:

"This isn’t new territory for us. Hear the words of former General Conference president Arthur Daniels spoken about the ministry of Ellen White: 'Slavery, the caste system, unjust racial prejudices, the oppression of the poor, the neglect of the unfortunate,—these all are set forth as unchristian and a serious menace to the well-being of the human race, and as evils which the church of Christ is appointed by her Lord to overthrow' (Life Sketches of Ellen G. White, p. 473)."

Good for him! I thought the only injustice SDA leaders had ever spoken out against concerned the non-granting of sabbath privileges.

A request. Can anybody find a quote in which a leading SDA supported the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and 60s--when it mattered? I'd love to be shocked again. And, likewise, anybody ever speak up against South African aparteid prior to the GC statement that was issued five minutes before it crumbled in the late 1980s?

Paulsen, indeed a very decent man (how could he not be, being a countryman of mine), is right on when he says that a church needs to speak to its own times. One problem with the SDA church, as I see it, is that it has always calculated that it could better accomplish its mission if it did not speak truth to power. As a result it has no heroes--that I know of. Saints, yes; heroes, no.

One of the major faults in the SDA and almost all other Christian denominational pulpits is the meistic centered nurturing theme.It promotes, if not outright perpetuates carnality, immaturity and selfishness.
Until the homiletic departments at the seminaries and the leadership get a clue as to the real mission, most SDA will continue to be neutered and whore after the world

SEE THE FOLLOWING: GW 196-199

A Division of Labor

A serious and perhaps unsuspected hindrance to the success of the truth is to be found in our churches themselves. When an effort is made to present our faith to unbelievers, the members of the church too often stand back, as if they were not an interested party, and let all the burden rest upon the minister. For this reason the labor of our most able ministers has been at times productive of little good. The very best sermons may be preached, the message may be just what the people need, and yet no souls be gained as sheaves to present to Christ.
In laboring where there are already some in the faith, the minister should at first seek not so much to convert unbelievers, as to train the church-members for acceptable co-operation. Let him labor for them individually, endeavoring to arouse them to seek for a deeper experience themselves, and to work for others. When they are prepared to sustain the minister by their prayers and labors, greater success will attend his efforts.

Nothing lasting can be accomplished for churches in different places unless they are aroused to feel that a responsibility rests upon them. Every member of the body should feel that the salvation of his own soul depends upon his own individual effort. Souls cannot be saved without exertion. The minister cannot save the people. He can be a channel through which God will impart light to His people; but after the light is given, it is left with the people to appropriate that light, and in their turn to let it shine forth to others.-- "Testimonies for the Church," Vol. II, page 121.

Educating Church Helpers

The minister should not feel that it is his duty to do all the talking and all the laboring and all the praying; he should educate helpers in every church. Let different ones take turns in leading the meetings, and in giving Bible-readings; in so doing they will be calling into use the talents which God has given them, and at the same time be receiving a training as workers.
"In some respects the pastor occupies a position similar to that of the foreman of a gang of laboring men or the captain of a ship's crew. They are expected to see that the men over whom they are set, do the work assigned to them correctly and promptly, and only in case of emergency are they to execute in detail. "The owner of a large mill once found his superintendent in a wheel-pit, making some simple repairs, while a half-dozen workmen in that line were standing by, idly looking on. The proprietor, after learning the facts, so as to be sure that no injustice was done, called the foreman to his office and handed him his discharge with full pay. In surprise the foreman asked for an explanation. It was given in these words: 'I employed you to keep six men at work. I found the six idle, and you doing the work of but one. Your work could have been done just as well by any one of the six. I cannot afford to pay the wages of seven for you to teach the six how to be idle.'

"This incident may be applicable in some cases, and in others not. But many pastors fail in not knowing how, or in not trying, to get the full membership of the church actively engaged in the various departments of church work. If pastors would give more attention to getting and keeping their flock actively engaged at work, they would accomplish more good, have more time for study and religious visiting, and also avoid many causes of friction."
Some, through inexperience, will make mistakes, but they should be kindly shown how they can do their work better. Thus the pastor can be educating men and women to bear responsibilities in the good work that is suffering so much for want of laborers. We need men who can take responsibilities; and the best way for them to gain the experience they need, is to engage with heart and mind in the work.

Saved by Effort for Another

A working church is a growing church. The members find a stimulus and a tonic in helping others. I have read of a man who, journeying on a winter's day through deep drifts of snow, became benumbed by the cold, which was almost imperceptibly freezing his vital powers. He was nearly chilled to death, and was about to give up the struggle for life, when he heard the moans of a fellow-traveler, who was also perishing with cold. His sympathy was aroused, and he determined to rescue him. He chafed the ice-cold limbs of the unfortunate man, and after considerable effort raised him to his feet. As the sufferer could not stand, he bore him in sympathizing arms through the very drifts he had thought he could never get through alone.

When he had carried his fellow-traveler to a place of safety, the truth flashed home to him that in saving his neighbor he had also saved himself. His earnest efforts to help another had quickened the blood that was freezing in his own veins, and sent a healthy warmth to the extremities of his body.
The lesson that in helping others we ourselves receive help, must be urged upon young believers continually, by precept and example, that in their Christian experience they may gain the best results. Let the desponding ones, those disposed to think that the way to eternal life is trying and difficult, go to work to help others. Such efforts, united with prayer for divine light, will cause their own hearts to throb with the quickening influence of the grace of God, their own affections to glow with more divine fervor. Their whole Christian life will be more of a reality, more earnest, more prayerful.
Let us remember that we are pilgrims and strangers on this earth, seeking a better country, even a heavenly. Those who have united with the Lord in the covenant of service are under bonds to co-operate with Him in the work of soul-saving.
Let church-members during the week act their part faithfully, and on the Sabbath tell their experiences. The meeting will then be as meat in due season, bringing to all present new life and fresh vigor. When God's people see the great need of working as Christ worked for the conversion of sinners, the testimonies borne by them in the Sabbath services will be filled with power. With joy they will bear witness to the preciousness of the experience they have gained in working for others.

CONGRATULATIONS IF YOU GOT TO HERE!!!!!!

Ryan wrote:
--
Our anti-creedal position stands over against our ever-expanding list of Fundamental Beliefs; our belief in 'progressive revelation' over against our claim to have the truth.

I am one that believes this dialectic tension is good for the church and that our determination to live in that tension is generative and healthy.
--

I would love to see more on this, why opposite beliefs make us healthy. for instance would we be unhealhy if we had gone without a creed/fundamental beliefs like our pioneers wanted? Our we really better off because we have people claiming we have the truth? Wouldn't we be better off to acknowledge we don't know all the truth and continue to seek progressive revelation?

So Ryan believes the tension is good for us, it does not seem to really make sense however.

Ron

Aage Wrote

--

One problem with the SDA church, as I see it, is that it has always calculated that it could better accomplish its mission if it did not speak truth to power.

--

To a large extent, all you need to do is follow the money to understand what we care about most. We are funding an organization propagating an organization. I wonder if one of the reasons we’ve been willing to do this for so long is our “purpose” around preparation for transport out of here. It not only legitimates our use of resources (as long as you don’t think about causality very much), but it takes our focus from issues presenting in the present and places it on a removed, heaven-future. There is such a gap between how we see ourselves in this heaven future and how we find ourselves in the moment, that we have a hard time spanning the gap and pursing right action to get us moving from here to there. “There” used loosely in this case.

Having said all of that, just reading the last few entries of this blog gives me hope that there are enough people who care about the SDA community, with enough insight, willing to speak-risk-act, that we may be able to create something good together, now. Like a heaven hors d'œuvre.

From the latest Adventist Review online:

"Female Senior Pastors Double in Ten Years

"One in 10 U.S. churches employs a woman as senior pastor, double the percentage from a decade ago, according to a new survey by the Barna Group.

"Most of the women--58 percent--work in mainline Protestant churches, such as the United Methodist Church, Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and Episcopal Church; only 23 percent of male senior pastors are affiliated with mainline churches, the survey said.

"The UMC and its forerunner has ordained women for five decades; the ELCA and its predecessor has for almost 40 years, and the Episcopal Church has ordained women since 1976.

"Barna's survey found that female pastors tend to be more highly educated than their male counterparts, with 77 percent earning a seminary degree, compared to less than two-thirds of male pastors (63 percent)."

Another indication that Adventists are far behind the curve and becoming the tail rather than the head in initiating justice, especially within their hallowed ranks.

As Aage wrote "I didn't think it possible to find a quote from a leading SDA speaking out against social injustice before it became socially acceptable."

It has become very socially acceptable by the leading Christian denominations to recognize their female pastors as being as well qualified, if not better (according to the seminary graduates), and yet recognition within Adventism is more in tune with the 18th or 19th century than the 21st. How much longer must we wait?

Elaine, I can only assume that Andrews Seminary charges substantially less for women than men given opportunities are not equal. Is it a 50% tuition or so? :)

" I can only assume that Andrews Seminary charges substantially less for women than men given opportunities are not equal. Is it a 50% tuition or so? :)

Posted by: Ariel (not verified) | 22 September 2009 at 5:58

Is it possible to determine if that is an accurate statement? The only reason that comes to mind is that many of the male seminary students have been sponsored by conferences and will employ them upon graduation. This usually includes a stipend, I believe.

Why would Andrews reduce tuition based on sex? That seems very discriminatory, and if it is true, what is their defense for such apparent discrimination? Is it an admittance that because the women have fewer opportunites on graduation? Or, that they are "needier" or just what? Could you or someone verify that information?

Ryan wrote:"What I ultimately long for is an Adventist Christianity that is open enough, theologically, to allow God's people to follow the movements of God's Spirit in response to the challenges we face today."
I long too, but I am not sure any more. It seems to me that we have deliberately ceased to be 'truth seekers' and instead became self-appointed 'guardians of the truth'.

Ryan,

As always, very well written.

I agree, the tension is good. I've been asked before, "If you don't agree with what is taught/believed/practiced, why don't you just leave?"

And yet, to leave, to avoid conflict, that is to ignore the love I have for others. True love is willing to confront - not in a mean-spirited way. Not in a harshly, critical way. But in a loving, other-centered way.

(I'm a little confused as to why people can't correlate this post with your stance on Prop8? Recognizing theology is one thing, accepting sinners into the fold is quite another. We don't shun the prideful, the hateful, or the others - why are we shunning homosexuals?)

Anyway, thanks for a great article Ryan!

Women being better educated at seminaries does not carry any weight with me since more than 99% of seminaries are theological deception centers. Even many SDA ministers do not know how to preach a sermon or present the gospel in a balanced manner. I hear SS teachers ask the question...What is the gospel? in a class of members who have been in the church for decades and the answer is the same old shallow simplistic lopsided answer.
Those who have a clue regarding the strategic and tactical devices of Satan know that he would heavily influence teachers in seminary so he can deceive and dumb down those listening to preachers who present false doctrine.

There are 2 -2.4 billion "Christians" on Earth and 99% are deceived per SDA beliefs...GO FIGURE

Elaine Wrote

--

Why would Andrews reduce tuition based on sex? That seems very discriminatory, and if it is true, what is their defense for such apparent discrimination? Is it an admittance that because the women have fewer opportunites on graduation? Or, that they are "needier" or just what? Could you or someone verify that information?
--

Elaine, it was a tongue-and-check question to illustrate an issue, not suggest a fact. So sorry! I’m quite sure tuition is equal. And I’m quite sure the opportunities are not. Yet.

Without question, there are some giants at Andrews some of whom are women. (Amazons I guess one would refer to them)

The question is why do they graduate some many pigmies? Or is it that the Southern Union Conference gets all the rejects on the cheap? The only SDA pastors of the Augusta SDA church in the past 42 years that had even a toe hold on the Gospel were trained outside of Andrews. Are Andrews alumni that ignorant, or muzzled, or afraid.

There are solid Augusta Seventh-day Adventists who travel up to 150 miles to try and find a pastor with something redemptive to share. If the Seventh-day Adventist Church has the final message for the final generation--here in Dixie that word would be oops.

If what they send South is any indication, then Andrews should refund all of the tuition. The young associate pastor at Augusta gets to speak at the eleven oclock service once a month.

Then he speaks for over an hour. In a year and a half he has yet to utter a single coherent paragraph unless it was a passage from the King James Version. Then he could make absolutely no connection with his train of thought, if he had one.

The Church would be far better off it adopted a Quaker style service.

I believe the problem is that Augusta, Ga. was once part of the Carolina Conference. Then it was incorporated into the Georgia-Cumberland Conference--so the church remains an appendix, simply a vestigial organ. Once, I brought eight SDA dentists to Augusta and the Conference President and his slate of officers would make periodic visits to Augusta. Then, except for one, they wiped the slate clean over Davenport.The dentists returned to LLU, or died with one retiree remaining as head elder--an Island of enthusiasm in a sea of despond.

That is why Jan Paulsen's appeal is so heart rending--A theology of relevance to a world dying of its own folly. Let go, let go, of self vindication and point to the One Who in the most selfless act of all time vindicated the Character and Purpose of God.

As it stands Adventism is a mirror image of gluten--whole wheat flour washed until every nutriant is washed away until only a gray tastless mass remains. Tom

Hey Tom,

I appreciate your posts. I haven't been here too long on this blog but I have been in the denomination long enough to know your words are valid.

I did find a fairly competent teacher...Tim Jennings..Not saying he is at the top but he sure beats the light thinkers out there.

Do you know who is supposed to be the best SDA preacher in America so I can go online to his church and sample a few sermons?
As far as I know, it is pretty pathetic out there.

George Whitefield would love to live today...he would go ballistic!!!!

Tom, I enjoy your posts!

We are surrounded by all the information we need to make good decisions on many controversial issues, but we are ignoring obvious right action and affirming that which makes us comfortable by quoting texts. That is, until the pressure is so great that even our death grip won’t prevent us from getting dragged along.

The Bible may be the most beautiful book on the planet, but it’s the last place we should look for answers if we ignore context. Jesus worked within the limitations, mental models, and consciousness of the people he walked among. Limitations, mental models, and consciousness have changed a lot.

Going to the Bible to discover God is a bit like reading about the world’s tallest roller coaster instead of just riding it.

Jim

The best active SDA preacher I know is Smuts Van Rooyan (sp)

Central Calif the last I knew.

I think Alden Thompson is also great---tends to be somewhat of an apologist--but a great mind and heart. He is still at Walla Walla.

Generally one can find a good writer in Ministry or Liberty Mag's.

I always came away from Graham Maxwell, Paul Heubach, and Jack Provoncha knowing more about myself, more about the teacher, and more about my Lord than when I came in. I think anyone who occupies the pulpit should keep those goals in mind. Tom

Adventists who spoke out on civil rights? E. E. Cleveland for one. Warren Banfield.

The white leadership, at the time, was oblivious--oblivious, for one thing, to our pioneers, who were abolitionist and non-violent.

Best preachers today? Try Randy Roberts, Chris Oberg, Karl Haffner. Among others.

Ariel, I considered that your remarks could have been tic, but with the prevailing lack of female pastors, it was not too difficult to consider it.

More interesting, would be the percentage of female seminary graduates hired compared with the males.

Smuts van Rooyen is at Glendale City Church in Southern Calif Conf.

I would add John Nixon and Henry Wright to the list of best preachers. Both available online.

It's one thing to read Jan Paulsen's theology and another to look at the impact of his GC presidency. What comes to mind is the book and film_The Shoes of the Fisherman_. Briefly, he is held captive by the bureaucracy. Specific situations requiring decisive actions from the top, on behalf of oppressed minorities, such as those I witnessed, make it difficult for me to believe in Adventism.

A part of the problem with the quality of SDA theological education, I suspect, is the policy of excluding non-SDA theologians from making any substantial presentations to Seminary or other students. I admit its 20+ years since I sat in a Seminary class, but it was unthinkable back then, and maybe still so today. As a result, those interested in Christian theology have to hear it from second-hand sources, or go to other schools to learn from the best thinkers. Like many other readers of this site, I eventually found my soul greatly nurtured in a different grad school where all viewpoints were respectfully argued, but there was no space for mental laziness. Can someone working at the SDA Seminary or one of our colleges share what the actual policies are regarding bringing someone like Moltmann to teach for a quarter, or even a week-long series?

Horatius Bonar and John Stott are two of my favourite Advent preachers who discovered their real identity. I believe they found it where Paul found it: "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world." Gal 6:14.

We have two options. Either we preach Christ crucified, the wisdom of God and the power of God, or we preach human philosophy.

"The Cross of Christ" by John Stott is, I believe, a "must read" for any serious study of the first Advent. Life for the sinner through the death of the Divine substitute, our Sin-bearer is the message that we humans need. There is a world out there and a community in the church that carries a load of sin and guilt that only the blood of Christ can remove. Why are so many Christians today embarrassed by the cross? Why do we try to gloss it over or even neglect it?

Horatius Bonar still preaches to me through his books. Few Christian preachers have ever preached Christ as Bonar preached Him. One of his best for me is "The Rent Veil", published in 1875, in which he presents Christ crucified as the true veil, rent on the cross, opening a new and living way through the living veil, the blood-soaked veil, His body. Here is revealed the Way back to the very heart of God - the Divine mercy seat. It is a blood-soaked Way.

From page 60 of "The Rent Veil" I quote a small snippet of Bonar. "The rent veil is liberty of access. Will you still linger? The sprinkled blood is boldness, - boldness for the sinner, for any sinner, for every sinner. Will you still hesitate, tampering and dallying with uncertainty and doubt, and an evil conscience? Oh, take that blood for what it is and gives, and go in. Take that rent veil for what it indicates, and go in. This only will make you a peaceful, happy, holy person. This only will enable you to work for God on earth, unfettered and unburdened; all over joyful, all over loving, and all over free."

How many discussions and presentations in blogs and books and sermons and even our sabbath school lessons truly take seriously the atoning sacrifice of our Lord as the wisdom and power of God? Is Christ crucified the heart and soul of our belief and our doctrines? Do we honestly strive to understand scripture and life in 2009 in the the light of God's wisdom and power revealed in Jesus, our substitute, on the cross? Why do people tell me they know all that so why preach it so much?

Do we prefer to substitute the work of the Holy Spirit in us for Christ crucified? Surely the Spirit leads us to Calvary, daily, or He leads us nowhere. The cross is where we grow in grace and holiness.

Do I detect in the emphasis on the great controversy theme, a subtle way of shifting attention away from Christ crucified, our Sin-bearer? I read the other day that "The Bible never gives humanity too prominent a place in the plan of salvation." Really? Why then did God take a human body? It seems these days to be more about the rest of the universe. Fortunately, the Bible says precious little about that - hardly enough for a whole shift in theology to bolster a languishing 1844 investigative judgement doctrine.

Maybe Bonar had it right in 1875. "The Rent Veil," Chapter 8, "The Blood Within the Veil," begins this way.

"The day of Atonement brought the three courts of the tabernacle into one."

Simple. Why complicate it? The world needs righteous grace, freely given for the sake of Christ. We need a way back to God. Christ crucified is the wisdom and power of God that inspires our mission as individuals and as a church. If we miss that, where does our power and message come from?

My main point is that we must make the main point the main point. We cannot afford to be side-tracked.

The Seventh-day Adventist church, I believe, has a Divine mandate to preach Christ crucified. Forgiveness, justification by faith in Christ's finished work on the cross, the gift of his righteousness, of eternal life, the assurance of being accepted in the beloved, the new birth, the gift of the Holy Spirit, the power to overcome are all God's gifts in and through Christ crucified, the atoning sacrifice. Everything we preach, every doctrine we teach and believe and live should be understood in this light that flows from the cross of Calvary.

If we took up this challenge, would it make a difference? What else, who else but Christ crucified, risen and ministering the gifts of His sacrifice for us can meet the deep needs of the world we live in?

"But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ."

Aage, you will find contemporary support for the Civil Rights Movement in the words of Charles Bradford and E. E. Cleveland. Harold Lee and I coauthored biographies on both of these giants of the faith and included a chapter on their social concerns and action in each volume:

Chapter 7 in "Brad: Visionary Spiritual Leadership" (2005, Center for Creative Ministry and Bradford-Cleveland Institute, Lincoln/Huntsville) and Chapter 7 in "E. E. Cleveland: Evangelist Extraordinary" (2006, Center for Creative Ministry and Bradford-Cleveland-Brooks Institute, Lincoln/Huntsville).

Both include release of documents which had previously been withheld from publication.

Monte Sahlin

"been withheld from publication."

When any religious institution is so fearful of releasing documents, how is that different from The LDS with their contrived history who anathematize those who write studies and are either prevented from publishing, or the writer is excommunication, publicly?

The Adventist church has a long history of concealing important information. Has that ceased?

A recent civil rights edition of the Adventist Review contained an article on four Adventist students who had driven down from California to Alabama to join the marches in Selma in 1965. They ended up being photographed behind King as he spoke. (I believe Bill Knott wrote this article.)

These students reported how their colleges in California had responded to the movement, and how Oakwood and Alabama churches responded to them when they found out what they'd come to town for.

So there were individual Adventists who were engaged in the movement. Monte has also pointed out a couple of employees who spoke to it.

But by the report of those who participated, the denomination itself took no stand, colleges were various levels of hostile, and churches on the march routes were indifferent-to-dismissive.

Outcomes for the four students: 3 of 4 left the church shortly after their experiences, disappointed with the church's approach to this civic/justice issue. One of the three returned after 25 years.

This isn't necessarily an argument for church engagement in civic issues. But there are a number of contemporary issues that the church has remained silent on (or hostile to) in the US and abroad, and the younger folks care about this sort of thing. I think it's a mistake to underestimate how much.

KM, I most certainly agree with you that it is the younger folks who care about contemporary issues of civil rights and justice. It is the older folks, raised to embrace doctrines, that disagree on them today, but it is considered immaterial for the younger generation. After all, if we don't listen and nourish the young among us we will continue to be nothing (in the first world countries) but old gray heads awaiting the grim reaper.

The Adventist church was not the only denomination that refused to endorse the civil rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s. Taylor Branch, in his monumental biography of M.L. King, points out that the majority of African-American baptist churches in the South refused to support him. Main stream Americans in general were wary of Martin Luther King. The Readers Digest, a fairly good barometer of white America's thinking, had not published a single a positive article about Martin Luther King by the early 1990s (when I did an MA thesis on US race relations, as seen through the pages of the RD).

Racism, of course played a part in the refusal of some churches, such as the SDA church, to endorse the civil rights movement but it surely was not the only reason. Black churches opposed King because they feared the backlash of Southern racists. To them King was unnecessarily stirring up a hornets nest. Mainstream Americans of a libertarian bent, such as the people represented by Readers Digest, agreed that blacks should one day get their full civil rights, but only when white people were convinced that they had improved themselves enough to merit such distinction.

In retrospect it's sad to see such widespread moral failing. The moral failure of SDA church, for instance, was so profound that it can only point to four students and two or three black leaders having taken a stand when it counted.

Today we're in the midst of another civil rights struggle with another chance to take a stand when it counts but I'm sure that a generation from now, somebody is going to summarize this struggle in words similar to the ones I have used about the 1960s.

Ryan,

Marvelously, wonderfully said.

Thanks.

John McLarty

"What I ultimately long for is an Adventist Christianity that is open enough, theologically, to allow God's people to follow the movements of God's Spirit in response to the challenges we face today."

And just who determines that such movements are indeed a response to God's spirit? Most of what I have seen here are comments by liberals about liberals. Bell's speech against Prop 8 does not impress me favorably at all. Preachers should stay out of politics no matter what you libs think.As soon as they decide politics is their field of endeavor they should surrender their credentials!

"The Lord would have His people bury political questions. On these themes silence is eloquence. Christ calls upon His followers to come into unity on the pure gospel principles which are plainly revealed in the word of God. We cannot with safety vote for political parties; for we do not know whom we are voting for. We cannot with safety take part in any political scheme. {CCh 316.2}"

The story is told, I have no reference, that early in the Adventist movement in Battle Creek, the city had a referendum on the sale of alochol by the drink. Adventists were urged not to get involved in the politics of the city. A delegation of the "wets" came and congratulated the Adventists on their stand. That meeting changed the minds of the leadership--and the Adventists were urged to vote "dry".

It seems that politics is issue specific--not party specific.

Right now the issue is health care, who do you think a Christian should deny health care to anyone and if so on what basis?

Of course the problem is, to take out health insurance is to fall among thieves.

So the issue is not health care but honestly in the market place from Hartford, Conn, to Wall Street to John Hopkins Blvd. and to the corner of Barton Rd. and Campus St.

Current estimates indicate that the Physcian gets less than 25 cents of every dollar spent on health care.

Talk about money changers in the Temple.
Tom

If we refuse to heed Scripture on caring for the oppressed and needy, as Christ in both deed and word demonstrated here, we are turning a deaf ear to the Bible in both testaments which has much to say about aiding those in distress, i.e., the Good Samaritan, is a wonderful example.

Ignoring those needs simply because they have become political does not dismiss us from addressing them and whatever position taken, that Christian demand should always be first and foremost, regardless of politics.

Just as civil rights became political, in no way exempts us from helping those in need and recognizing the oppressed.

I would like to try a little exegesis on Rev. 14: 6

As you recall, Ellen White emphatically stated, following the 1888 General Conference Session, that the Three Angels Messages was “Righteousness by Faith in verity.” A very cryptic statement, never explained or elaborated on by Ellen White. It seemed to put a stop to the controversy without resolving the issue. The focus remained on “The hour of his judgment has come” as being the Investigative Judgment or an end-time pre-advent judgment.

Thus the two statements remain unanswered or explained. Certainly the following two Angels did not said anything to clarify the issue.

I would like to set forth a series of propositional truths that both clarify and illuminate the disputed passages so dear to the Adventist faith.

1. When Adam “fell” Satan assumed “dominion” from Adam—He, Satan, now considered himself the federal position once bestowed on Adam.

2. The opening of the book of Job tells us as much.

3. The third temptation of Jesus, in which Satan offered all the Kingdoms of earth if He, Jesus, would bow before Satan. Again demonstrating Satan’s claim.

4. At the Cross Jesus cried out it is “finished”. Christ had vanquished every claim of Satan. Now Christ claimed rightfully His dominion of earth. He became the second Adam. (The story line of the letter to the Romans)

5. Now John has a vision that recounts the Great Controversy.

6. In Rev. 14 the Angel flies forth crying that Babylon is fallen. Satan has been dethroned. Christ now is King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

7. The message continues: “The Hour of His Judgment is Come!” Having completed his work of redemption and proven Satan’s challenge without merit. The Hour of God’s Judgment has come! “Was the Christ event necessary and was it sufficient to silence every false claim of Satan?”

8. The affirmative answer to that question is the key to Righteousness by Faith.

9. We are all called to make that judgment: for or against the peace and justice of the Godhead.

10. The following angels add that hence forth any who gave intellectual or financial aid to Satan or his agents will have a mark placed in their forehead or in their hand signifying they have sided with Satan and His charges—that God in Christ did not win His case.

“Once to every man and nation comes the moment to decide, for the good or evil side!”

I believe that God won His Case—I accept adoption by the Son of God without any merit on my part. He is my Creator, my Redeemer, by Lord, and My Friend. I can sleep on that assurance. Now that is Adventism I can believe it. It isn’t hatched from a Great Disappointment but from a rational reading of Scripture.

Tom

Perhaps she intended to frame her dictum in a very narrow way, but taken at face value, EGW's statement "We cannot with safety take part in any political scheme" is simply impossible.

Politics is the art of the possible in human affairs, and no matter what line of work you are involved in, you have to engage in politics. Even working as a department chairman in an Adventist institution is a highly political job.

As one of my favorite savants says, "Politics is everywhere."

Don

Don

An apt quote from a masterful political operative. Tom

I have always wondered why Dr. Jan Paulsen didn't include the Theology of Truth?

"I am the Way the Truth, and the Light!" said Jesus.

Pilate asked the burning question: "What is Truth?" While Truth was standing directly in front of him.

It seems institutions, nominal history, and reputations are more important than Truth: even for churches and their paid shills.

Moses, Daniel and Ellen White takes precedents over even Christ and Paul. Tom

Tom

Truth is difficult to find. Where would one look and where should it be expected, if not from one's religious leaders? IOW, who can you trust?

Elaine

It is frequently quite plain what is not Truth! Yet proclaimed as Truth! Yea there is the rub. These neat packages of theology often are prime examples. Theology is most often blaming God for our misunderstandings or fables.

If Theology of Truth headed the list: The list would be a lot shorter for sure.

Tom

Tom writes> Pilate asked the burning question: "What is Truth?" While Truth was standing directly in front of him.

Which tells you something. It tells you that being able to physically see and converse with Jesus did NOT provide overwhelming evidence that He was God. This is also true by looking at the reactions of almost everyone else He came in contact with.

Which tells you that God (if He exists) is not into providing solid proof of His existence. He wants people to follow what is right for rational reasons, not by coercion.

/Bevin

bevin

It is of a truth that the brain id convoluted. That doesn't mean the mind must follow the same path.

Ten to one you didn't read the passage in the Gospel of John, I referred to:

It is found in John 18: 38 as follows: "Pilate saidth unto him, What is truth: And when he had said this, he went out agains unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all." KJV

Pilate saw, recognized, and crucified anyway just to please the crowd.

To deny a Creator is to be a Pilate. Tom

gwalter said:

(I'm a little confused as to why people can't correlate this post with your stance on Prop8? Recognizing theology is one thing, accepting sinners into the fold is quite another. We don't shun the prideful, the hateful, or the others - why are we shunning homosexuals?)

The point gwalter is, Homosexuality is not a Religious Right as so many LSU and LLU faculty and now Senior Pastor at LSU point out in the Prop 8 YouTube piece. One could argue maybe a "Civil Right" to keep peace in a secular society, but to argue for church membership with doctrine against Homosexuality is diluting the Bible message and opens the door for every "comfortable" sin that someone wants to argue is genetically based or a condition one is born with that can not be overcome with the empowerment of the Holy Spirit and brings into question the "form of godliness but denying it's power" in the SDA church.

Look at the Evolutionary doctrine that LSU wants to loosen up on. Go Common Ancestry and Salvation is done away with. Adaption is used in God's creation as a fact, but to extrapolate it using flawed dating mechanisms that have proven faulty and hoax producing only makes LSU a laughing stock.

My additional point is, Ryan Bell, IMO, accepts the rhetorical sermon offer in Geneva by Paulsen, because just about anything can be fit into that sermon as a belief. Ryan has a population he caters to, but to stand for something, empowerment of the Holy Spirit, appears to be lacking in his position in the YouTube piece, and saying, it Paulsen really is this liberal I could accept that, says volumns of Bell ministry. Nothing personal, hope I don't get blocked again for saying what is on my heart.