I feel compelled to comment on the recent cancellation of “The Record Keeper” online video series. Although I will question the official decision and its reasoning, I want to make it clear that the problem does not lie with the General Conference. Remedy would be much simpler if it did. It runs much, much deeper than that.
First of all, saying there were “theological problems” with The Record Keeper just doesn’t cut it, and for two main reasons. Over the last 50 years, I have participated in at least that many evangelistic series. There may have been one or two that featured flawless theology, but I don’t remember them. I do remember often cringing at some of the statements made. And from Adventist pulpits? Don’t get me started.
But then, I remember some Sabbath School classes I taught 40 years ago that I would like to have back. My understanding of the Bible, and therefore my theology have undergone significant changes. For that matter, anyone who reads widely from Ellen White’s writings can see large shifts in emphasis over her lifespan, and even complete reversals. Closed door, anyone? Six-pm Sabbath?
We are a large and diverse church. We are human. We don’t get everything exactly right. It’s OK. God remembers that we are dust. We’re the ones who forget.
Just so no one misses the point, I’m saying “theological problems” is not the real reason. If it were, things would get cancelled left and right. Theological problems are the pretext. But once again, I’m not blaming the General Conference.
The problem is trying to serve two masters. From the little I’ve seen of The Record Keeper, I have no doubt it would be an excellent vehicle for outreach to a particular audience. That audience would not be aware of theological problems. What a blessing it would be if they could be won to Christ, and become aware of those problems. I wouldn’t withhold my well water from a person dying of thirst because it’s iron-heavy and not very tasty. Once they’re hydrated, they can become a water connoisseur.
The problem is the existing membership. You and me. We elected the General Conference. And The Record Keeper does not match the tastes of a North American church, more than half of whom are over 50 years old, or a third world church won by those over 50 using 19th century approaches. Ten years ago I described the dilemma the church faces today.
“[P]astors and administrators [are] in a bind between reaching the lost and placating the saints. If we allow contemporary and/or rock music, we lose the older members; if we don’t, we lose the young people! Older members provide more financial support to the church than do younger ones. If the older members go, their financial support goes with them. The church must receive financial support to survive. But if we don’t reach the young and the unchurched, we have no reason to exist” (Dead Languages, Adventist Review, 2004).
The General Conference finds themselves in that same situation. The tools we have used for many years are not effective with affluent, educated contemporary audiences. Would The Record Keeper have been? Many think so. We may never know. The real tragedy here is that it seriously damages the likelihood of further experiments. We won’t find effective tools without experimenting, and sometimes failing. But if we never experiment, failure is guaranteed.
The problem isn’t the General Conference. The problem is a self-satisfied membership that refuses to move outside its comfort zone. Ironic, isn’t it? Because the Faithful and True Witness in Revelation tells Laodicea, tells us, our comfort is our problem.
Well said Ed – thank you.
I believe also, there might be some outside of the NAD who are afraid of anything unorthodox – eg; women in the pulpit, etc. But, as you said, it’s us – not our leadership.
Yes, I mentioned that many outside of the NAD were won using 19th century approaches, and may be uncomfortable with many of these things. But around the world, their children and grandchildren are increasingly educated and affluent, and neither we nor they are reaching those younger generations. It is a demographic disaster.
There should be absolutely no struggle how to reach the old and young alike. “we won’t find effective tools without experimenting?” Really? What about the over 100,000 pages of inspired writings we’ve been given thought how to reach the lost? What about the instruction we’ve been given to be medical missionaries, restaurant owners, to run sanitariums, to be Bible workers and give cooking classes, to open outpost centers and schools of the prophets? What about the instruction to have our churches be training schools? The only way we could be lost in the dark trying to experiment to find ways to reach the lost, is if we completely neglect Ellen White’s writings? We’ve been given a divine blueprint. Let’s use it!
The early Adventist pioneers eagerly embraced new methods of outreach. However, it didn’t take long for the movement to become an institution, and institutions resist change.
This is not new:
” When new methods have been advocated, so many doubtful questions have been introduced, so many councils held that every difficulty might be discerned, that reformers have been handicapped, and some have ceased to urge reforms. They seem unable to stem the current of doubt and criticism. . . . We need now to begin over again. Reforms must be entered into with heart and soul and will. Errors may be hoary with age; but age does not make error truth, nor truth error. Altogether too long have the old customs and habits been followed.” Testimonies, vol 6. pp. 141-2.
God is a creative being. He made us to be creative as well. If you want to see the Gospel radically re-articulated, speaking to a secular culture, you need look no further than the Gospel of John.
A tragic commentary on a courageous decision.
Perhaps some among us are unaccustomed to church leadership which places the written counsel of God above cultural trends, scholarly speculation, the vagaries of experience, and the misbegotten quest for “relevance.” Thank God we now have such leaders guiding the denominational ship of state. True revival and reformation means going all the way back to the Biblical worldview, by which all else—in our lives and in the world about us—is measured.
It is really quite sad to keep hearing this never-ending mantra that “the young want the church to change (presumably in the liberal direction), so if the church doesn’t stop being so rigid about things, the young will leave.” Those with this seemingly inflexible mindset have probably never been to a GYC convocation, and seen the thousands of educated and passionate young who gather there each year to listen to our distinctive message preached and to share it with the world. This past January in Orlando, FL, thousands of the young assembled to pass out The Great Controversy in the city’s neighborhoods, accompanied by our General Conference President. So-called “progressive” Adventists have reacted with unreasoning rage to the GYC phenomenon, primarily because their own cherished paradigm of youth ministry is dashed to pieces by it.
Even sadder is the perpetuation in this column of liberal Adventist urban legends regarding Ellen White supposedly reversing herself under inspiration. The fact is that a careful study of Ellen White’s writings lends no credence to the theory that she taught on the basis of visions that the whole world was lost after 1844, or that she taught on the same basis the idea that the Sabbath began at 6 p.m, only to reverse herself later on the basis of a contrary vision. This mythology of a contradictory Ellen White is by design on the part of those who would eviscerate her authority as God’s prophet. If they can prove she contradicted herself while claiming to be inspired, we then are free to differ with and discard her counsel when we so desire. The only problem is, the critics can’t prove their case.
The late novelist Gore Vidal perhaps said it best, when he spoke of America being “the United States of Amnesia.” Americans are notorious for forgetting the past, and it often shows. Why, for example, do we not remember that this “relevance” argument has been used by the mainline churches for the past hundred years, for which reason most have abandoned Biblical faithfulness in order to “keep up with the times.” And it hasn’t worked. Their churches are empty as a result. Just ask the Methodists, the Episcopalians, certain branches of Lutheranism and Presbyterianism, and a whole lot more.
When I was working as an evangelist for the Greater New York Conference, the church plant with which I was working rented one of the oldest Episcopal churches in New York City. Founded in 1749, it had featured John and Charles Wesley as speakers. George Washington worshiped there. On the walls can be seen the names of wardens and vestrymen across the decades of American history—a Who’s Who of American aristocracy. This church could easily seat 2,300 worshipers. Yet on Sunday morning there are barely fifty.
That would seem strange, from the perspective of today’s church-growth gurus. After all, you can believe anything or nothing and still belong to that church. You can believe Jesus was just another good man, you can accept Darwinian evolution, and no one will question your church membership. You can live with your Significant Other, of the opposite or the same gender, and no one will care. You can divorce your spouse for any or no reason, and never have your actions questioned. So why aren’t all the beautiful, secular-minded people of Manhattan flocking there? Because even they know that when you stand for nothing, you fall for anything.
The solution to the church’s present dilemma is not misguided creativity and tampering with God’s message, but rather, a wholehearted return to the Bible and the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy, daily immersion in these materials on the part of us all, and a consequent saturation of our spirituality with God’s view of reality and our present societal malaise, rather than fumbling about to craft our own identity.
I’m always at a loss when reading your comments, mainly because they concern things I did not write. The only paragraph which approaches relevance to my column is the one about Ellen White. Even there you are talking about something I did not write. Nothing in my blog claims “Ellen White supposedly reversing herself under inspiration.” The first part is the impossibility of the statement. If she was “under inspiration”–an interesting formulation–then it would not be ‘she’ who was reversing ‘herself.’
Leaving that aside, it is quite clear that she believed in the ‘closed door’ and the Sabbath being observed from 6 pm to 6 pm. She did not claim these beliefs were founded on a vision, but she did believe them.
But you go beyond this to attributing motives, and evil ones at that. “This mythology of a contradictory Ellen White is by design on the part of those who would eviscerate her authority as God’s prophet.” You know, I was always taught that ‘evil surmising’ was a bad thing to do. It’s even worse when that evil surmising happens to be false. I have a sermon I give on Ellen White. The first time I gave it, a young woman came to me and said, “I’m not an Adventist. I’ve never been able to sit through a talk on Ellen White before, but after tonight I can see her value.”
Almost everything else you wrote is so far off from what I believe or advocate, there’s no point discussing it. I would request in future you limit your comments to what is actually written.
Ed, you raise some excellent points about problems we face as a denomination, and the response to this situation from many young creatives seems to confirm your fears regarding future endeavors. However, TRK producer Jason Satterlund has released this video response to the whole situation, and you may find some hope in his perspective. http://youtu.be/6GOoaEHMaLg
For the creatives out there tempted to write off the possibility of ever collaborating with the church because of this shutdown, please take note from the one who perhaps has the most reason to feel that way, yet doesn’t…
americanprofessor ,
Well Said!!
americanprofessor I’ve seen the Record Keeper several times now. I realize full well I am looking at an allegory. There is a precedent for allegory in the Bible. Technically 7 lean cows could not eat 7 fat cows. They don’t have the teeth for it. And the GC would never have allowed Jesus to tell the story of the Rich Man and Lazarus, much less include it in Scripture. The Record Keeper does an excellent job of introducing the story of the war in Heaven, something most Christians know little about. It puts flesh on angels and broadens the perspective of Christ’s mission to Earth and what it was about. It’s a good starting point for a discussion. A friend of mine became an Adventist because he picked up a copy of The Great Controversy thinking it was science fiction. By the time he finished it, he was looking up the location of the nearest Adventist church. It was seeing the war between good and evil in a cosmic context that did it for him.
I think it was a huge mistake to abandon the Record Keeper. I think every Adventist whose tithes and offerings went to fund this million dollar project should be give a copy of it for free. Let us decide if what we paid for is worthy. We don’t need a GC nanny state. We work for Jesus. HE is our immediate supervisor.
Just sayin’
Tom King
TomKing1 americanprofessor