COLLEEN TINKER
We had been out of Adventism only a few years. My very Adventist parents-in-law were visiting one afternoon, and our conversation fell into a discussion of whether or not eating meat was permissible for people who wanted to be obedient to Jesus.
Of course, Seventh-day Adventism officially allows for the eating of “clean meats”, those approved in the levitical laws found in the book of Leviticus. Yet at a practical level, Adventism’s current recommendation is vegetarianism if not strict veganism. In fact, many who are committed to devout obedience to Adventism’s health message espouse raw foods as the way to enhance physical and spiritual health.
At the time of that conversation in our living room, my mother-in-law was a committed vegan. Our defection from Adventism and our understanding that Jesus declared all foods clean (Mark 7:19) was deeply disturbing to her. The fact that her elder son had not only abandoned his abhorrence of clean meat but even relished bacon created a cognitive dissonance in her that she couldn’t resolve. She blamed herself for not having taught him Adventism correctly, and she feared not only that he would be lost but also that he would one day hunt and shoot her when the death penalty was passed in the time of trouble.
As we talked, I naively said, “Jesus ate fish in His glorified body when He appeared to His disciples after His resurrection.” My intention was to stress that flesh foods cannot be sinful or harmful if Jesus ate meat in His eternal body.
Without missing a beat, my mother-in-law replied with utter confidence, “But Jesus didn’t have the health message.”
Without missing a beat, my mother-in-law replied with utter confidence, “But Jesus didn’t have the health message.”
Check mate—in a one-sided way.
I realized that I had no words that could break through her Adventist paradigm. This woman whom I admired in many ways—her quick, incisive humor reflected in her son, my husband—her brilliant mind which could grasp complex ideas with lightning speed, her awareness which made her a surprisingly personalized gift-giver—had no crack in her Adventist fortress through which logic or the words of Scripture could penetrate. She was buttressed with the Three Angels’ Messages and protected by Adventist relativism.
At first I didn’t understand her certainty that Jesus’ meat-eating after His resurrection didn’t inform Adventist vegetarianism. I did realize that Adventism and her horror at our departure had drawn an impenetrable barrier around her ability to assess Adventist beliefs—at least in our presence—and I remember realizing that as an Adventist I wouldn’t have been shocked to hear her response. After all, I didn’t grasp, as an Adventist, that Jesus was Yahweh, the I Am—eternal, almighty God. That realization was new to me, and that understanding was part of my horror now at her words.
Only later, when I talked to Richard about the exchange, did I understand her internal reasoning. How could she say that God the Son, the Creator of everything and the Author of Scripture, “didn’t have the health message”? Where did she think Ellen had gotten the “health message”?
“She believes in ‘present truth’,” Richard said. “God hadn’t yet revealed the end-time truth of vegetarianism. That information came through the end-time prophetess Ellen White. He didn’t have to give that message in Bible times because meat hadn’t yet become so diseased and dangerous. Vegetarianism is ‘present truth’ for the end times. Jesus lived before that truth was revealed.”
Of course! Suddenly it all made sense. My mother-in-law could explain any inconsistency between Adventism and Scripture by appealing to the Adventist safety net: ‘present truth’.
Relativism Camouflaged In Piety
Adventism, as most of us know, developed after William Miller’s failed prophecy that Jesus would return on October 22, 1844. The novel doctrine that Jesus began His work of investigative judgment in heaven instead of returning to earth on that fateful day became the cornerstone of the fledgling Seventh-day Adventist movement. James White, a young man from the antitrinitarian, restorationist Christian Connexion along with Joseph Bates, a retired sea captain—also from the Christian Connexion—partnered together with James’ new wife, Ellen Gould Harmon, to found what became the Seventh-day Adventist organization.
The three founders brought unique offerings to this new movement.
The three founders brought unique offerings to this new movement. James, an entrepreneur with a penchant for theology (firmly physicalist and antitrinitarian), was the initial writer and theologian. Ellen, a young woman given to visionary trances, provided the “I was shown…” that gave divine authority to the novel theology being developed, and Joseph Bates supplied the money for the initial costs of printing and purchasing a press for the emerging new religion.
As this new movement attracted other disappointed Millerites who couldn’t face their own moral failure of date-setting, Seventh-day Adventism developed a unique set of doctrines that was intentionally different from mainstream and Reformed Christianity. One of their early decisions was that they would never have a creed. Creeds, they said, were statements of belief that could never be altered—they would prevent ongoing discovery and revelation. After all, the Bible, they felt, would be subject to ongoing insights and understanding. Creeds would lock them into a specific set of beliefs, and they wanted the freedom to receive ongoing new revelation.
In fact, early Adventist minister John Loughborough wrote,
“The first step of apostasy is to get up a creed, telling us what we shall believe. The second is to make that creed a test of fellowship. The third is to try members by that creed. The fourth to denounce as heretics those who do not believe that creed. And, fifth, to commence persecution against such.” (Knight, George, A Search for Identity: The Development of Seventh-day Adventist Beliefs, p. 22. Quoted on AskAnAdventistFriend.com.)
The Adventist founders’ disagreement not only with the idea of creeds but also with biblical orthodoxy concerning the Trinity—most of the founders were Arian or semi-Arian—established them firmly OUTSIDE the bounds of Christianity. They used normal-sounding Christian words to write and speak of their beliefs; they taught strict morality, obedience to the Ten Commandments, and they advocated an ascetic lifestyle free from self-indulgence of any kind. Yet behind their good advice, they taught an unbiblical view of the nature of man, a physical, non-trinitarian god, and they denied human depravity. To top it off, they taught an incomplete atonement that Jesus had to continue in heaven beginning on October 22, 1844.
Such an unbiblical organization would, of course, need the wiggle room to morph its teachings and beliefs because truth was not its foundation.
Such an unbiblical organization would, of course, need the wiggle room to morph its teachings and beliefs because truth was not its foundation. By refusing to admit that the Bible yielded eternal truth, by retaining the “right” to change and alter its beliefs and practices as new ideas were discovered, the Adventists moved outside orthodoxy and formed a false religion. Even though they say the Bible is the source of all their beliefs, they do not believe the Bible is inerrant. They retain the right to receive prophetic revelation concerning the Bible and “truth” indefinitely.
(For a deeper look at why Adventism is outside the Christian tradition but is, in fact, an opportunistic cult hiding under the banner of “Christianity”, see The Tree: Are You Connected? by Rick Langer, published in the Fall, 2007 issue of Proclamation!)
To cover the unbelief and arrogance of retaining the right to determine and to morph their interpretations of the Bible, the founding Adventists developed a deceptive term to deflect people’s attention away from their narcissistic control and to make them feel “secure”: “present truth”.
Of course, Adventists are quick to say that God’s word never changes. What changes, they say, is the way the Bible is applied. The website AskAnAdventistFriend.com explains present truth this way:
The idea of present truth, then, is that God can give us new insight to help us better understand His Word and apply it to situations that might arise at a given time. But these “new truths” are always consistent with other truths in the Bible.
In this way, present truth teaches us how to live out the truth of the Bible in the here and now.
James White explained:
“Present truth is present truth, and not future truth, and…the Word as a lamp shines brightly where we stand and not so plainly on the path in the distance” (White, James, “A Sketch of the Rise and Progress of the Present Truth”, The Review and Herald, Dec. 31, 1857, p. 61.)
Not surprisingly, Ellen White had much to say about “present truth”. In fact, when I did a search for the words “present truth” on the Ellen White Writings website, I retrieved 4,484 results! I will share just a few below:
“The present truth, which is a test to the people of this generation, was not a test to the people of generations far back” (White, Ellen G., Testimonies for the Church, vol. 2 [Pacific Press, Mountain View, CA, 1868], p. 693).
The third angel’s message is present truth for 1898, and the health question is as closely connected with the message as the arm is with the body. Therefore light must be given to the best methods of introducing health reform. Meat is the greatest disease breeder that can be introduced into the human system (HFM 41:1).
Opposition is the lot of all whom God employs to present truths specially applicable to their time. There was a present truth in the days of Luther,—a truth at that time of special importance; there is a present truth for the church today. He who does all things according to the counsel of His will has been pleased to place men under various circumstances and to enjoin upon them duties peculiar to the times in which they live and the conditions under which they are placed (GC 143.3).
Let not the canvassing work be left to languish. Let the books containing the light on present truth be placed before as many as possible. The presidents of our conferences and others in responsible positions have a duty to do in this matter (The Southern Watchman, April 25, 1905; Testimonies for the Church 6:329).
What About Now?
The idea of present truth didn’t die with the pioneers. Their refusal to be saddled with a creed or other permanent statement of belief set the stage for Adventism’s continuing ability to morph and “shape-shift” with the times. Ironically, though, Adventism has actually adopted a form of a creed expressed in their 28 Fundamental Beliefs.
To be sure, the Fundamental Beliefs are subject to change when the General Conference meets and votes to alter the wording or to add statements to their existing document. Yet even these Fundamental Beliefs, which define Adventist doctrines and practices for the whole world-wide organization, are founded on something even deeper—an unstated worldview which depends upon Ellen White’s scriptural interpretations.
It is this unstated worldview which arguably holds Adventism together even when individual congregations or even members stand on “present truth” to say they no longer adhere to a traditional Adventist viewpoint.
It is this unstated worldview which arguably holds Adventism together even when individual congregations or even members stand on “present truth” to say they no longer adhere to a traditional Adventist viewpoint.
When Adventists talk about their beliefs and practices, it can be confusing to “outsiders” looking in. It is the permission of “present truth” that allows Adventists to say they don’t personally believe all 28 Fundamentals.
Southern California Adventism provides excellent examples of leaders who claim “present truth” to justify their “progressive Adventism” while claiming they are operating within the Adventist tradition.
Tim Gillespie, the pastor of the progressive Crosswalk Church in Redlands, California, with satellite campuses in other states, recently appeared on the Loma Linda-based Adventist podcast Seeking What They Sought. When the hosts asked him what he believed a Seventh-day Adventist is, he responded:
I think an Adventist is someone who doesn’t believe in settled truth. We believe in present truth; we’re non-creedal. So we should be a group of people, as I understand it, who are constantly seeking a better expression and a better understanding of truth.
I was on a panel one time…There was a guy way on the conservative side who kept saying, “Settled truth; settled truth.” So I raised my hand and said, “Are you an Adventist?”… He got a little offended. I said, “You keep saying this word that I’m confused by. As an Adventist, I don’t think we believe in settled truth. My understanding is that we believe in present truth, as God is continuing to unfold it.
I think that a Seventh-day Adventist is A: someone who is interested in the second coming of Christ—believes in that; [who] obviously has a passion for the Sabbath in the way that they define it, and then I think, thirdly, it’s somebody who believes God is continuing to speak, continuing to work, continuing to even speak prophetically through people—but we’re not codifying that “prophets” if you will—[a label] which I think is a mistake that we have done in the past, but that we are looking to see God’s new revelation, His progressive revelation in our lives. To me, anyone who walks in that door [his church] is an Adventist.
The website Ask An Adventist Friend explains present truth this way: “The concept essentially acknowledges that circumstances change, and because of this change, some messages of truth from the Word of God may be more applicable or more useful at a given time”.
This relativistic view of truth allows Adventists to self-style their Adventism while still claiming to be loyal Adventists. Loma Linda University Church (LLUC) senior pastor Randy Roberts did a video presentation two years ago for Praxis, the young adult ministry at LLUC, entitled “Why I’m An Adventist”. In it he explained his view of present truth without using the term:
“As the world changes and as time changes, God will send the Holy Spirit to us to help us understand how we live out the principles of the Bible. In that way, Scripture is both timeless and timely” (Roberts, Randy, “Why I Am an Adventist”, Praxis, Loma Linda Church, August 21, 2021).
What’s Wrong Here?
The bottom line problem with Adventism’s present truth principle is that it is based on a deception. As we know, Adventism claims that all of its beliefs are based on the Bible. Yet we realize, if we dig below the surface, that the biblical proof-texts supporting the Adventist distinctives do not actually teach what Adventism interprets them to say. The same problem is true for the biblical support for present truth.
The proof text for present truth is 2 Peter 1:12 as translated in the King James or the New King James Version. Here is the text in the NKJV:
For this reason, I will not be negligent to remind you always of these things, though you know and are established in the present truth (2 Peter 1:12).
This verse, though, doesn’t support Adventism’s “present truth” in context. Not surprisingly, Peter has been used here as a proof-text for an unbiblical idea. When we read this verse in other translations, however, its true meaning is even more clear. Here it is in the New American Standard Bible, 1995 version followed by the English Standard Version:
Therefore, I will always be ready to remind you of these things, even though you already know them, and have been established in the truth which is present with you (2 Peter 1:12, NASB95).
Therefore I intend always to remind you of these qualities, though you know them and are established in the truth that you have (2 Peter 1:12 ESV).
Contextually, it is clear that Peter is not referring to a morphing, moveable “truth” or application of principles. He is reminding his readers that they know and have the TRUTH, an eternal reality. They are already established—grounded, rooted, and growing in the eternal truth of the gospel of the Lord Jesus. They do not need new light, new revelations, new interpretations of the old texts of Scripture. Certainly they do not need a new prophetess, nor do they need to look for ongoing ideas from visionaries who think of new ways to apply Scripture. No!
Peter is reminding his readers NOT of a moving “present truth” but of an established, eternal truth that has anchored them in reality.
The irony of this inclusive, egalitarian approach to present truth with its permissive reinterpreting both Scripture and the words of Ellen White is that, underneath the surface, there is a consistent Adventist foundation.
The irony of this inclusive, egalitarian approach to present truth with its permissive reinterpreting both Scripture and the words of Ellen White is that, underneath the surface, there is a consistent Adventist foundation. It’s not often acknowledged or even “seen” as a foundation, but the fact is that the great controversy worldview with its unique interpretation of reality binds all Adventists together, from the most historic to the most progressive.
Oh, they may find themselves worshiping in different congregations from each other, but if “outsiders” attack, all of them will circle the wagons and defend their religion.
The great controversy worldview has a few consistent beliefs that unite Adventists:
- A belief that Satan and Jesus are engaged in an ongoing battle for souls, and Adventists’ personal obedience helps expose and defeat Satan;
- A physicalist worldview that denies humans have an immaterial spirit that survives the death of the body;
- A denial of human depravity—the fact that we are born spiritually dead and must be literally born again;
- A belief that sin is physical, inherited from our ancestors (no spirit, no literal spiritual death);
- A belief in a Jesus who could have failed;
- A belief in a godhead that does not share substance;
- A belief that Ellen White is important in some way;
- A belief that the Sabbath is intrinsically holy and will be honored for eternity.
These beliefs, unlike other Adventist practices and doctrines, shape Adventists’ reality. They can espouse “present truth” and adopt personal versions of Adventism while remaining loyal to the organization because, at the bottom line, “present truth” is only an excuse.
The real organizing principle of Adventism is its worldview, and that worldview has grown out of its anti-trinitarian root and the extra-biblical revelations of its founding prophet. Present truth is the way Adventists can appear pious and loyal by appealing to this founding principle, but they are anchored outside biblical Christianity. They are anchored in a false gospel shaped by founders who refused to be disciplined by God’s word when they learned their expectations of Jesus’ return had failed.
Like Mormons who must always have a “living prophet”, ironically, Adventists are not satisfied with Scripture alone. Ellen White is their larger-than-life example of present truth, and because of her, they feel safe applying new understandings to old beliefs whenever it seems necessary.
“Present truth” is the principle that allowed my mother-in-law to say that God the Son ate fish after His resurrection because He did not yet have the health message, and “present truth” permits Adventists to place their own heads over the word of God.
“Present truth” is an excuse to dismiss the inerrancy of Scripture as “fundamentalist” and rigid, but it removes the security of living in the eternal, revealed will of God. “Present truth” denies the truth of Hebrews 4:12–13:
For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And there is no creature hidden from His sight, but all things are open and laid bare to the eyes of Him with whom we have to do (Hebrews 4:12, 13).
Present truth is a beautiful deception. Truth is eternal, not time-bound, and in the long run, only those who place their trust in our sovereign, triune God and His inerrant, eternal word will be able to know the truth and be set free. †
- How can I be born again? - November 14, 2024
- November 16–22, 2024 - November 14, 2024
- We Got Mail - November 14, 2024