By Colleen Tinker
When I was still an Adventist, I believed that I saw the flaws of the organization and that I had divorced myself from the historic, cultic beliefs and practices of my religion. I doubted the investigative judgment; I questioned the food laws, I wore tiny pierced earrings, and I embraced coffee (albeit with low-level guilt). I did not identify myself with the “conservatives” but considered myself to be more progressive—more evangelical than the mainstream organization.
I would have argued if anyone had said that the “reform dressed”, vegan, NEWSTART Adventists at self-supporting institutions such as Weimar Institute were really like me under the hood. No, they were not. I was sure.
Because I lived in that rarefied atmosphere of being a loyal Adventist while personally rationalizing the organization’s beliefs and practices, I understand the indignation of Adventist thought leaders when they write letters taking us to task for thinking that Adventism is defined by the Adventist press.
Not many weeks ago I received an email from an Adventist theologian who said, “Relying on Adventist Review for Adventist information gives you only a very narrow slice of modern Adventism. For those who once ‘trusted’ the church, that would be the right target; but for those who have a more exploratory bent, it misses the mark.”
My answer to that writer is the same message I would give to any Adventist who claims not to believe traditional, historic Adventism. As long as one stays Adventist although not endorsing its beliefs and practices, he cannot be loyal to anything. His heart is buttressed with rationalizing, and he cannot risk believing that his worldview may actually be flawed.
Where the rubber meets the road
I spent years in that “more exploratory” place, including my stint as managing editor of Adventist Today where I rubbed shoulders with some of Adventism’s best minds including the late Ray Cottrell, arguably Adventism’s most luminary Hebrew scholar. The problem is that in that “place”, one must live with unresolved cognitive dissonance. There actually is only ONE Seventh-day Adventism. There may be as many interpretations and permutations as there are members, but those differences are merely rationalizations so one can live with oneself.
No matter how an Adventist describes himself and his beliefs, he is still endorsing Seventh-day Adventism by staying Adventist. Those who receive their income from the organization have an even greater internal dissonance because they receive their livelihood from the “official” Adventist church. It’s misleading and confusing for someone who disbelieves official “Adventism” to represent it, endorse it, and receive one’s income from it. If one doesn’t believe, it’s a conflict of interest to claim it as one’s identity and to represent it to others. If a person doesn’t really BELIEVE it, he’s not “Adventist”.
If, on the other hand, one really believes himself to be “Adventist”, it’s internally dishonest to reinterpret Adventism to be more comfortable. No matter how progressive, every single Adventist is ultimately loyal to the Adventism of the official organization. When Adventists pay tithe, they support official Adventism. When they work for an Adventist organization, they get paid by that same official organization.
We live near Loma Linda where the most conservative, unadorned, dedicated vegans and the most flagrant, red-meat-eating, jewelry-wearing Adventists meet and claim with pride the edifices of Loma Linda University and Medical Center as their own. Progressive Adventists claim to oppose the beliefs and decisions of Ted Wilson and the General Conference, but where the rubber meets the road, Adventists know they are “family”. They circle the wagons and defend it, even if it annoys them.
At least, they have circled the wagons historically. It remains to be seen what will happen in the wake of this year’s Annual Council where, on October 14, the Executive Committee passed the so-called “Unity Document” (Regard for and Practice of General Conference Session and General Conference Executive Committee Actions) by a vote of 185 to 124. This document establishes procedures for disciplining churches, conferences, and employees for failure to comply with policies such as not ordaining women.
Nevertheless, no matter how disparate one’s interpretations of Adventist beliefs, Adventists of all stripes share a worldview: the nature of man, the importance of the health message (even if one cheats and has wine and meat occasionally), the importance of the seventh-day Sabbath, the importance of Ellen White (even if her role is seen in various ways), and the great controversy paradigm. It is this worldview that actually defines Adventism.
One can deny being an Adventist who trusts the church; one may claim an exploratory bent, but ultimately Ted Wilson and the most progressive Adventist are alike under the surface: they see reality through a “great controversy lens” that unbiblically redefines humanity, the Lord Jesus, and the future. †
- April 20–26, 2024 - April 18, 2024
- We Got Mail - April 18, 2024
- April 13–19, 2024 - April 11, 2024
Nailed it again, Colleen. So heartbreaking to see the delusion they all remain under…no matter how conservative or liberal…they are all united under the same yoke of bondage in a false gospel.
In 1980 after hearing some of the allegations being made by various people such as Desmond Ford, Water Rae, and Robert Brinsmead I decided to “lay all of my Adventist beliefs on the altar” of the Bible and the gospel in particular. I had been an EGW believing SDA for the previous 29 years and it was extremely traumatic for me to get deprogrammed from Adventism. I totally set aside all of my EGW books which covered a whole wall in my study. I called my SDA pastor in several times and he didn’t have answers for anything and later on left himself. When I got Des Ford’s Glacier View study on Daniel 8:14 that was the clincher! I did not wish to be a part of a denomination that had used such deception since the very beginning the deception embraced not only false doctrines but the way EGW’s writings were prepared and much else. Also the history of the way honest, sincere people of God were treated and demonized by the SDA Church for departing from its cardinal doctrines were indeed shocking. I had made contact with pastors and members of other churches in the small town where I lived and they were most kind and encouraging. I started to fellowship with a home group and then later on with a newly formed nondenominational church. Over the past 38 years I’ve been part of the larger body of Christ wherever it seemed the best at the time. I am currently a member of a Lutheran Church which is very gospel oriented and outreaching in the community as well. I have been saddened to see several of my former SDA friends go into New Age things or become agnostics, skeptics, and somethings atheists. Leaving Adventism strengthened my faith and was a big step forward. It was good to get rid of the “excess baggage” of Adventism. After I set aside my EGW books I’ve never been able to read her again. I sold them to a used book service at the time. I have never missed them. I appreciate especially the writings of Dale Ratzlaff which are unvarnished and very clear in those exposing of the false, cultic beliefs of the SDA Church. I’m grateful for the work of Proclamation and Life Assurance Ministries in providing information to help former, questioning, and transitioning Adventists as well as being of service to those who questions about Adventism.
Just one more comment with reference to what Colleen states above about the wide factions among Adventists still having commonality. I observed all the years as SDA that this church has engendered a sense of loyalty to the organization that NO other has ever done–including the Roman Catholic Church. I tended to be part of dissident groups most of the years I was SDA and always chafed under the top heavy kind of organization with four levels of church government above the local church, each having a full bureaucracy, offices, CEOs, etc. We have churches in liberal California where virtually “anything goes” to ultra conservative historic Adventists like Wildwood or Weimar. My conclusion is that at this point the conference doesn’t really care about much else a local church does AS LONG AS THE MONEY IS FLOWING INTO THE COFFERS OF THE CONFERENCE. It’s all about money and statistics–not about Jesus and integrity. So the right wing historic kind of Adventists get along just fine with the ultra liberal kind of Adventists. Their commonality is NOT the gospel but LOYALTY TO THE ORGANIZATION AND SUPPORTING IT FINANCIALLY. I had a friend who is now deceased that was a retired pastor that I attended college with in the 1950s and he didn’t believe in EGW or SDA distinctives but yet would be part of a “Revelation Seminar” to be conducted in his local church where he still preached some. Those seminars are the epitome of deception to get people into the SDA church. So, Colleen, I agree very much with what you say above.
Thank you, Tom. You hit it on the head with your point about the money!