Sanctuary Living - Offer An Offering

The next requirement of those who are living during the Day of Atonement according to Leviticus 23:27 is to "offer an offering." There was an offering that was offered on behalf of the people on the Day of Atonement.

There’s something that I do want to emphasize right now— that the Day of Atonement included time for forgiveness. Even on that day the daily sacrifice was offered. So forgiveness was still possible during the Day of Atonement because you had the daily sacrifice like any other day.

Anti-type – Offer Offering

How can we offer an offering today? One thing that we can do is identify what the work of the priest and the offering of Jesus our sacrifice. We are to stop living as if ain’t nobody done nothing for us. Christ has done much for us to offer us forgiveness. But not just forgiveness...forgiveness and cleansing. (1 John 1:9) And it’s about time that we started living as if forgiveness and cleansing were possible and operative as a result of the work of Jesus on our behalf.

Also, Romans 12:1 says: “Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship.”

We offer an offering by both identifying what the offering that Christ has done for us as well as offer ourselves a living sacrifice. That’s how we can have this offering mindset in the antitypical day of atonement.

Audio 55 – Day of Atonement Living

You may have heard that we are living in the Antitypical Day of Atonement, but what difference does that make?

How are we expected to live during this time frame?

Join Elder Cox as he applies the requirements of the congregation during the ancient Day of Atonement service to those of us who live in this modern age.

Sanctuary Living - Do No Work

The people of God were required to refrain from work (have a Sabbath) while the priest was performing his duties in the Sanctuary on the Day of Atonement. This command is found at Leviticus 16:29, 31, Leviticus 23:28, 30, 31. Just like on the 7th day Sabbath, the people of God were to set aside all work. They were to be involved in a total disengagement from the present world. Here the people of God had a special Sabbath to keep. They must set aside their daily regular work. It is a time to place God and the interests of spiritual things in the forefront. To do this, one must totally set aside all other things.

Anti-Type Sanctuary Sabbath

Now in the anti-typical Day of Atonement, we cannot totally and fully rest from all work, but there is something in this command that is of interest. First, at this time, we note that there is a predicted revival of the Sabbath in Isaiah 58. This predicted revival of the Sabbath is also alluded to in Revelation 14:7 as the fourth commandment (Sabbath) is quoted. During the Day of Atonement, we have a revival of Sabbath interest and we as Sabbatarians have the job of preaching and teaching this important truth in these last days.

But more than that, Hebrews 4 reminds us that the Sabbath rest must be totally and completely internalized in the Christian. We are to have a life of Rest. A life where we rest in the work of Christ on our behalf.

Finally, we live all of our days placing God and eternal interests at the top of all that we do. As our heavenly High Priest does His important work in the Sanctuary above, let us live so that we will not be overtaken by the cares of this life, but place God above all things (Luke 21:34-36). Let us have a Sabbath Reform that is informed by the Sanctuary service.

Holy Convocation in Sanctuary Living

What difference does the sanctuary make for our daily living? Often the question is asked, "Is it True?" However, this question of relevance is often the unasked (and sometimes asked) question. In the next series of posts, I want to look at the question from the standpoint of what the Day of Atonement meant to those who lived during the typical Sanctuary service.

There were a number of things that the members of the congregation had to do on the ancient Day of Atonement. The first of these responsibilities that we will discuss is the call for a holy convocation. This is found in Leviticus 23:27.

Come For Holy Gathering in Sanctuary

Here the people of God had to come to the Sanctuary for a holy gathering (convocation). Here the people of God came to be in tune with the priest who was doing this great work.

The people did not just come without thinking of the importance of the day. They knew that this was a solemn service where their eternal interests were vitally at stake.

Likewise, those of us who find ourselves in this anti-typical "Day of Atonement Period" should seek to do the same thing. While it is not possible for us to go to the heavenlies to actually participate in a group meeting up there, we can do a few things on this earth to show our solidarity with the heavenly high priest and his great work on our behalf.

Come to The Heavenly Sanctuary

First, we can go by faith into the heavenly sanctuary. The Bible says to "Boldly come to the throne of Grace." (Hebrews 4:16) We come to the heavenly sanctuary as we think about and identify with the great work that our high priest is doing up there. We come to the gathering as we make the work that is being done there the center of our thoughts. Just as the cross should be at the center of our thoughts, so should the work of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary occupy our thoughts and minds.

Meet With Other Believers

Second, we can have this holy gathering as we meet with other believers who have this heavenly view in mind. The Bible says to not neglect the gathering of ourselves together, Hebrews 10:25)\. We must come together in our holy gatherings down here as we look to the great work up there.

To do this, we are to learn of Christ as our High Priest. We are to learn of what Christ is accomplishing now. We are to cooperate with that great work that Christ is doing. And finally, we are to gather with one another as we all look to that great work that Jesus is bringing to culmination in the Sanctuary in heaven.

Dr. Calvin Rock and Reform in Adventist Preaching

[caption id="attachment_2347" align="alignright" width="175" caption="Adventist Co-Founder James White"][/caption]Dr. Calvin Rock wrote about the content and purpose of Adventist Preaching in his influential Ministry Article of September 2000 entitled "Black SDA Preaching Betwixt and Between." We have looked at that article periodically on the website and will look at it again. This time we look at it for his definition of Adventist preaching.

He writes:

Adventist preaching...essence is clearly one of reform---Sabbath reform, health reform, family reform, stewardship reform, etc. Preaching that does not ring with the certainties of Daniel and Revelation; that is not flavored with the symbols of the sanctuary; that does not uphold the law of God; that does not honor the prophetic gift of Ellen white; that does not extol justification by faith is not Adventist preaching. It may be truth, but it is not Present Truth; it may constitute an engaging performance, but it does not constitute the remnant proclamation.

There are a few things that are interesting about this quote. First it makes "reform" that upon which our preaching rests. It is not simply about preaching truth. Certainly it includes preaching truth, but it is a certain kind of truth. It seeks to preach an end time message. It seeks to preach getting better. It seeks to prepare a world. All of these things require change. And it is to us as Adventist preachers to proclaim these truths.

So we preach "present" truth. This is a truth that is needed right now. We teach truth that reforms and calls the hearer to a better way of living. Finally it has at its base that which we agree with others as well as that which has been given to us to teach for we preach the gospel through the symbols of the Sanctuary as we uphold the Law of God while keeping ahold of the prophetic gift. But we must never forget the truth of justification by faith.

If You Can, You Must Do...The Church Needs You

Ellen White makes an interesting statement on page 85 of the book Counsels to Writers and Editors. In it she says: "It is the duty of all who can write, especially those who minister in holy things, to exercise their talents in this direction."

Here Sister White encourages all to write if God has given you that talent. we have come to a point where we need an all hands on deck mentality. We cannot wait for an assignment from our oveworked pastor or conference official. We cannot wait until someone gives us a test to inform us of our abilities. We cannot wait until someone in church office resigns or retires opening the door for us. No we are to find what we can do, and do it with all of our might and strength.

Today, we are in an era where the power of the author has been magnified. If you can write you can reach literally millions very quickly. Ellen White spoke about our publications going out like the leaves of autumn, but I wonder if she would even be surprised at the power that the web has given to all of us.

But more than the writer. There are other talents in the church that we have not given to the Master. There are computer professionals who have some time while the church's web presense languishes. There are teachers who could be holding GED programs or the like. There are health instructors who could be focusing on the "right arm of the message." There are pleasant people who could be giving much needed ministries of encouragement. There are people with Biblical knowledge who could be giving Bible studies and readings. If you want to see an explosion...just think what would happen if those of us who have been given talents had the audacity to use them for the mission of Christ in the world. It would literally "turn the world upside down."

The church needs you. If you are waiting for an assignment, then Jesus gave it to you when he said "Go ye therefore and teach all nations..." "Ye" means me and it means you. If you need an ordination, then you got that at baptism. If you need a position, then you got that cause you been called an ambassador of God.

In short, if you can...Go head on and Do....The Body of Christ needs it...And we need it right now!

Church Hopper or Minister

[caption id="attachment_2337" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Photo by Marco Gomes"][/caption]I recently heard a preacher preach about a common phenomenon in all of Christiandom, the church hopper.

What is a church hopper? It is one who simply moves from church to church following the next big "high." When a new exciting pastor comes to town, they go join it. We often see this when a Mega Church grows at the expense of many smaller churches. In the city in which I live, I have seen some jump from church to church as pastors come and go. One very dynamic preacher left town and the migration to another powerful speaker started. Then a new preacher came to town and now the "place to be" moved to that new locale.

However, sometimes a church hopper moves to a new church for added responsibility. Sometimes a church hopper comes to a new church because the leader of the new church has inspired action that gives added spiritual growth and ultimately a stronger witess in the community and the world. Sometimes church hopping may strengthen the member. Sometimes God may even call you to move to another church and the community is strengthened. Sometimes church hopping can be a blessing.

However, much of the time people church hop not to be involved in the church community or to be stronger witnesses in the larger commuinity, but to find better religous entertainment to consume. That entertainment may be preaching, singing, or programs put on by the church.

But then there are other hoppers who have been displaced or run off by new leadership. Sometimes when a new pastor comes to town current leadership of a church takes the time to move on. Other times pastors move some current leadership out. Some pastors displace the leadership in a church when they come into a church. These people have been sat down by the pastor for whatever reason. Sometimes the pastor has a valid reason for setting them down, sometimes they don't.

The preacher's main point is that none of these really increase the number of Adventists. Neither does it really increase the amount of people who have heard the message we have been called to preach. Tithe may increase at that local congregation, attendance may increase locally, but church hopping does not normally increase the number of Adventist members in the city.

Why are we here and what are we to do? If we are here to "preach the Gospel of the kingdom for a witness to all the world." Then it is time to judge our ministries and our work by whether it is providing a witness in the world and whether we are warning the world of the coming crisis. It is time for us to stop acting as if church is solely about our needs and our entertainment and recognize the responsibility of church membership and Get in the game. It is time for all members to move into that category of member that is not just an attender but a minister.

All Eyes on Atlanta – Ted N. C. Wilson To Address Church On Sabbath – What I Want To Hear

New General Conference president Ted N. C. Wilson will address the world church this sabbath in perhaps his most listened to sermon to date. This has been an interesting election for a number of reasons. I hear some jubilant voices who have almost a "we won" tone.

Then there are those who are fearful of what they think may be a retreat to an earlier era that they fear will not work in today's world. These argue that Adventism must be a "big tent" where anyone can become a member regardless of their views on evolution.

As I look at this sermon this weekend, I will be listening to echos of Gospel. I will want to hear a word of forgiveness and power that comes to us by the power of Jesus Christ. In short, I hope to hear about why I am a Christian.

In addition, I want to hear echoes of our peculiar movement. I want to hear a reminder of the role and the importance of this movement specifically. It is too easy to forget that there is an assignment given to this movement, and I hope that we will hear a word of that. In short, I hope to hear about why we are Adventist.

I also want to hear about the plans for the forward progress through mission. I hope to hear not a reheated fossilized message that does not address the needs of today, neither do I hope to hear untested conjectures that may not work.

Finally, I want to be inspired by its connection to the Holy Ghost. I don't want to just hear truth, I want to hear inspired present truth.

Remind us that we are Christian, remind us that we are Adventist, inspire us to God's mission in the world by a connection to the Holy Spirit. And then the people will be ready for 5 more years of work, toil, and life in this world, "should Jesus delay his coming."

Further Thoughts On Restructure of Our Divisions

This union of churches idea is interesting to me. It appears as though it simply eliminates the conference level and with it a lot of expense. There definitely seems to be an upside with what looks like a lot of cost savings.

However, I wonder about the ramifications of such a move. Will such a move effectively eliminate the voice of the layperson from directing the church. I mean now, the conference is elected by lay people and the workers in a conference. However, will eliminating the conference level leave those lay people, and workers who are not politically powerful, from the table of decision making? Is such a move the best?

It is true that the discussions and decisions have to be made on how this will work, but I do wonder about whether the average pastor and average lay person will have as much say in the leading of these Union of Churches and in the leading of their local conference.

For that reason alone, I wonder if the elimination of the Union level might be brought to the table as a cost saving device as well. How many of us even interact with out union officials. We do see the conference officials often, but the union? Division, GC?

I'm all for monetary savings and am not philosophically against restructure, but I do think we need to be very careful about how we consolidate power. If done in the wrong way, we will never be able to get it back.

The Conference Level And Re-Structure At General Conference 2010

I thought it interesting that the last Adventist News Network is reporting that

The revised Church Manual also introduces a glossary of frequently used terms, including a definition of "union of churches," a church governance structure in which a group of local congregations reports directly to a union, eliminating the conference or mission level of administration. Delegates will approve several recently formed unions of churches at Session, as well as consider whether to expand the structure's use.

As Samuele Thomas Sr. used to say when he preached..."Did you Get it? or Did You Miss it?"

Eliminating the Conference Level

Yes there seems to be talk about eliminating the conference level altogether. Now if you are a loyal reader of SabbathPulpit.Com, this would not have taken you by surprise. We talked about this four years ago in 2006. I discussed Harold Lee's article on this page.

I talked about the annual council when this came up at this link. That article also has a pdf document of the different proposals for structural change.

In this article, I looked at 5 different options talked about in that document.

Finally, I talked about what structural change might mean for the regional (black) conferences at this link.

Well, it is here folks. There will be discussion about a so-called "union of Churches" which is simply a union conference. There is talk about eliminating the conference level.

Can We Afford Both Levels?

To be honest, I think that we can no longer afford nor do we need both the local conference and the union conference levels. It is a throwback to an earlier era. My only concern is that the members of the local church still retain its ability to affect and vote for its local leadership whether that be a "Union of Churches" or a "Conference." This re-structuring cannot be a way to remove the ability of the member to participiate in the choosing of the direction of the local church and the level right above the local church.

But after having said that, there is a lot of duplicate leaders and offices that really need trimming. I mean do we really need a religious liberty director at the conference level? Don't all the hard cases go up to the Union anyway? Do we really need the local conference Sabbath School leader? And if we do need both of them, how about a union leader and his staff, and then a conference leader and a regional conference leader if it is in the east. No we need restructuring.

I Hope This Is Not Simply A Power Grab

I suspect a lot of tentative decisions and discussions have taken place on this subject. It is my only hope that whatever happens, it will not amount to simply a power-grab by a few leaders, but it will be a principled decision for the good of our World Church by people at all levels of the church including the local conference and local church levels.

The Adventist Basics In Adventist Preaching

You know those who play Jazz music know of a concept of "standards." These are the basic songs that you must know if you are to be an acceptable musician. They consist of old tried and true songs that have been passed down from generation to generation of musicians. Musicians don't have to play it in exactly the same way, but they must know the "tunes" and be able to play them when called upon.

The last few months, I have been looking at some old sermon material that my father has showed me. Specifically they are the very old book Public Evangelism by J. L. Shuler published in 1939. In addition there is the book Evangelistic Methods: Step by Step by Fordyce Datamore published in 1957. And then there is God Made An Evangelist by E. E. Cleveland published in 1994.

These books primarily are "Evangelistic" sermons and methods for doing evangelism. Many of the principles are still being used, although modified, by evangelists today. There are a lot of things of interest in these materials to me, a seminary trained homilititian, and we will discuss these over time on the website.

Basic Sermons Passed Down

But one thing that was striking is the consistency of the sermons in the books. There were a number of basic sermons that seemed to be passed down from generation to generation of Adventist Evangelist. There were a few new sermons or different sermons, but in general they were the same sermons with only a change in sermon title and/or illustrations. Shuler even suggests that the great Adventist Evangelist should be always on the lookout to have modern and appropriate titles to "speak on the old-time truths of the message."

Shuler's Daniel 2 sermon was titled The Fate of Europe. This became simply titled "Daniel 2" by Datamore. Finally Cleveland gave it "The Great Prophetic Metal Man. Does He Live Today?" Shuler added other possible titles as "Seven Words That Changed History." Those words were "They shall not cleave one to another." And so on with other sermons like the Second Coming, Millennium, and State of the Dead.

Of particular interest was the Sabbath. Here evangelists would use titles like "What Day Should Christian's Keep" and "The Missing Text" which goes through all the texts that refer to Sunday in the Bible. These sermons took on titles like Mary's Mother's Birthday and "The Father Didn't, The Son Wouldn't, The Apostles Couldn't. Who Did."

What is interesting though is that while the titles changed, the basic idea behind each of these sermon/lectures was a number of texts that would be presented to prove the validity of the claims of the Evangelist. These basic sermons were the "standards" or the "Adventist Basics" of the Adventist Evangelist. (note: Instead of using the term "standards" which has a specific meaning among Adventists, I will use the term "Adventist Basics" for understanding.)

Listen Over And Over Again

Daniel 2 had to be preached under whatever title. Daniel 7 had to be preached as well. The history of the papacy had to be preached. Revelation 12, 13, and 14 as well. These were the "Adventist Basics."

And just like a jazz audience who have heard the standards over and over again, they never tire of hearing them. So the Adventist audience who have heard Daniel 2 wonder how the preacher will present it this time.

But the "standards" or "Adventist Basics" did not just include the books of Daniel and Revelation. In the 16 week meeting the preacher had to preach why the preacher accepts the Bible as the Word of God. There were also sermons on Family life like Cleveland's "Marriage-The Secret to a Happy Home Life." In addition, all of them had sermons on "confession, repentance, and forgiveness."

Building The Framework of Adventism

These basic building block sermons were a solid part of the preaching in tents. They gave a solid foundational understanding of the framework of Adventism. However, in today's world, 16 weeks 6 nights a week will not work. There are just too many nights. That meeting has been truncated to 5 weeks 4 nights a week. And thus many sermons had to be removed. Some of them were the standards. And thus now we are in an interesting position where these sermons that everyone had heard. Whether they agreed with the position or not, they at least have heard them. Now we have generations of Adventists who don't know the "Adventist Basics." They don't know the basic Adventist argumentation. Now these "Adventist Basics" are hidden away in theological texts. Books like "1844 Made Simple" is simply an expansion of a Bible study that every Adventist had heard in the evangelistic meetings. It was an "Adventist Preaching Standard."

I do not think that we can simply go back to the past. Neither do I think that we can or should attempt a 16 week, 6 night a week meeting in 2010, but we have to find a replacement for that meeting that will pass on the "Adventist Basics" to another generation.

The Impossibility of Separating Doctrine From Life

Many Christians separate doctrine from their daily lives. This idea is manifested in the idea of "doctrine is less important than relationship." Some who each this argue that doctrine is good and fine, but a personal, vibrant relationship with Jesus Christ is more important. This is the common way that this is taught. We hear about how Adventists know too much doctrine, but don't know the Man behind the doctrine.

There is definitely value in reminding people that the Christian walk is not merely a thing of the "head," but it is also a thing of the "heart." I think this is a part of what these sisters and brothers are preaching when they push this idea, but it has the side effect of making people think that a proper and good relationship to God can be obtained devoid of doctrinal understanding. Often little definition is given for this "relationship with Jesus" beyond a comparison to a friendship.

This idea makes doctrine something that is "nice to know." It is not important or even valuable. It is an impediment. What this view misses however is the is a valid definition of doctrine. Doctrine is not esoteric, useless, or irrelevant facts. Doctrine is simply codifying our understanding of God. Certainly it will change as we learn more, but it is simply not possible to not have doctrine. We may have a doctrine we have not thought about much. We may have doctrinal understandings that center in irrelevancy, or we may have doctrinal understandings that focus totally on things that are relevant to daily lives. We simply cannot dispense of doctrine.

While it is true that having a growing connection to the Divine life is more important than merely knowing about the Most High, it is also true that one cannot fully separate our learning about God from our real relationship to God.

In short, if you are growing in your relationship with your wife, would you stop learning about your wife? Will you get to a point that you no longer study to find out what makes her happy? Do you stop learning about her using the tools you have access to? How is that any different from learning all you can about God?

Ultimately it is a false dichotomy. You will not be growing in this "relationship with Jesus" if you have no desire to grow in your knowledge of Jesus Christ (Doctrine). In fact, how can you even know the difference between the false Jesus and the true Jesus unless you have some kind of learning to back it up. I know my wife immediately from her voice, from the way she looks, and from the things she does. How is it that I can be ready for the last day when God will have a people who "follow the lamb withersoever he goest." (Revelation 14:4) If I marginalize or put down the very pursuit of knowledge of what Jesus is doing and will do in this world and in my own life.

In short, the separation of doctrine from life is not a viable position. The true position is to live out your doctrine. Live out your understanding of God. We don't have to choose between putting an ephemeral and undefined "relationship with Jesus" above our understanding of Jesus. Neither do we have to choose to ignore doctrine altogether while glorifying this disconnected idea of "relationship." We can go another road that is a doctrinally informed and lived life that is empowered by a growing relationship with the Most High.

Thinking About Camp Meeting

[caption id="attachment_2252" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="Photo by Boksi"][/caption]Being a son of an Adventist preacher, I will never forget the camp meetings. We were out there. We were out at the camp when my father and the other workers worked to get the camp in shape for the visitors and members. I can still remember seeing preachers who you normally see gracing pulpits instead cleaning stalls throwing away trash and cleaning kitchens.

I then remember the encampment itself. There were programs for the youth. I still remember the "happy time tent." It was an era when little kids could roam and discover the landscape of our old "Camp Shady Hill."

I remember walking around everywhere. I can remember getting chiggers and mosquito bites. I can remember seeing frogs and other animals as we invaded their teritory. Those were great days.

Then the meetings themselves. Of course you got to hear the other preachers from the conference. You could hear T.A. Mcneally and Butch Rice and the rest of the preachers out there. But then you could also hear the best of the preachers outside of the conference. people like Henry Wright, C. D. Brooks, E. E. Cleveland, and Calvin Rock would come in. Then there would be singers some you have heard of like Walter Artist and some who you may not have heard of although well known out side,

Camp meeting was more than meetings, it was a time to interact with the children of the other workers. Folks who I still remember and many who I even interact with on occassion today. It was a time to become a community. We were a conference. But more than that, it was a time for many, who find themselves at very remote areas, to recognize that there were more Seventh-day people than just the 30 or 40 who meet at their congregaton.

It was a time to be reminded of who we are and why we are here. It was a time to be encouraged that the end is still coming and Jesus is still coming again.

I sometimes wonder what the moving of camp meeting online means for camp meeting. Certainly it is a different era than the era of a 10 year old kid running around "Camp Shady Hill" in the 1970s, but I miss it. Don't get me wrong, I love the ability to turn on camp meeting online. I did it this year. I looked at Kentucky-Tenn, South Central, and 3abn camp meetings online. I love seeing these preachers and musicians sing and preach to the glory of God. I love the lack of heat and travel. In short, I love the convenience.

In an era when camp meeting attendance during the week seems to be going down, one wonders if the one week on an encampment makes sense financially, but I must admit that I will miss it if it goes away. And I will always remember singing and doing crafts at the "happy time tent."

TULIP, Calvinism, and The Great Controversy Theme

[caption id="attachment_2229" align="alignleft" width="274" caption="John Calvin"][/caption]Herbert Douglass, in the book Fork in the Road has written a helpful summary of why Calvinism and Adventism cannot be unified on the idea of what the Gospel means. You may not know it, but Calvinists are the "big wigs" in the evangelical world. From popular scholars like R. C. Sproul to pastors like D. James Kennedy and John McAurthur. Certainly there are some who do not agree with all of the positions of the Calvinistic cause, but many of the popular authors and preachers in the Evangelical world are Calvinists.

The Five Points

By Calvinists, I mean those who hold to the five points of Calvinism, or at least most of the points. This is often referred to as TULIP, In short these are:

• Total Depravity – When humanity sinned it was placed in a position where they can do nothing but sin. It is sometimes called “total inability.”


• Unconditional Election – God unconditionally elected some to be saved.


• Limited Atonement – God only died and provided the atonement for salvation to those who were elected to be saved.


• Irresistible Grace – The grace that saves cannot be resisted by the human being it is given to.


• Perseverance of the Saints – Once you are saved, there is nothing that can remove you from that saved condition.
  

Where the System Begins

They begin their system with the idea of God’s sovereignty. God is ultimately in charge and can do anything God wants to do. No one else has freedom. God alone has freedom. Due to total depravity, we cannot chose anything but sin. Thus God must choose those who will be saved and thereby will be choosing those who will be lost. Humanity can not judge God, the saved should be happy that they are among the ones that God has chosen to save.

Adventism’s Starting Point

Adventism begins with the concept of God giving humanity Freedom. We say that God has given the gift of freedom to all of humanity. We get to choose whether we will follow Satan or God’s government. This gift of freedom has been given to the entire universe of beings, according to this idea.

Interestingly God uses this world to demonstrate where Satan’s principles will lead. Thus God chooses to demonstrate the rightness of God's cause in this system.

Finally, God has chosen all of us in his son to eternal life, and those who do not reject God’s rule of love will be saved at last.

In the end, we have one scheme beginning with God’s sovereignty that makes human freedom impossible. On the other end we have humanities freedom as being something given to humanity by a sovereign God. God wants us to choose the righteous government. But the Calvanistic system makes such a choice impossible unless the one has already been predestined to salvation.

Finally, in the Adventist system, God allows Satan’s choice to play out before the entire universe. Freedom of choice is an important component of Adventism while it is impossible under Calvinism.

Can’t Synthesize the Two

While there are certain similarities between the two groups, and both can recognize that one can be saved while agreeing with the other position. But like my Calvinist friend told me after a long conversation, "You may be saved...but you are wrong on this issue." So we see that we can’t synthesize the two views. And why would we want to? Either the Calvinist view is right, or the Adventism view is right, or perhaps logically another option is correct, but all of them are not right. Because of this, it is time for Adventists to stop getting our “understanding of the love of God” from folks who do not accept at all the freedom of humanity which is at the foundation of the Great Controversy that we preach. It is time to decide if we are Adventists or not. If not, then Calvinism might be an acceptable alternative, go ahead and look into it, but if you are going to be Adventist, then it is time to stop running behind the evangelical teachers who have different presuppositions than we have. If we are going to be Adventists, be Adventists.

They Don’t Mix

No Adventism and Calvinism don’t mix. It is time to stop acting as if it does. It is time to stop acting like the contradictions that we are currently spouting are actually “paradoxes.” It is time to stop telling our people that our evangelical friends have Jesus and we have the law, so go to them to get Jesus and come to us to get the law! No! If we ain’t preaching Jesus, then we need to start preaching him in the context of the message that God has given to us. Be not deceived our Calvinist brothers and sisters do have a place for the law, and it is an important place, but it is just not the same place we have for the law and for Jesus in our understanding.

So what is the answer? Maybe it is time to start reading Steps to Christ again instead of Experiencing God. What’s the answer? Using The Great Controversy Theme as a hermeneutical key to interpret everything. Otherwise we will continue to drift wondering why we even exist as a people.

Audio 54 - Sabbath As Permission to Stop

Are you tired of the never ending push to more and more activity? The Sabbath is God's vehicle to provide for all of God's beings much needed rest. Listen as Elder Cox talks about the Sabbath as permission to just stop.

Salvation and Our Works

Descriptions of the Christian life often take one of two turns. The Christian life is either one of hard drudgery as we seek to either gain or retain salvation. In this model some being or entity is meticulously keeping track of our actions to immediately send us to hell if we die after committing a sin that we have not or could not erase through a prayer of repentance. The great desire of Christians who hold this model is to hope and pray that they will have the fortitude and strength to become, by God's grace, worthy of eternal life.

The other model has us without any worry whatsoever for Christ has done it all. We will live better automatically by the slow progress of Christian life. One need not do anything but simply passively "rest" in Jesus. As we do less and less Christ will do more and more. Again the direction of this model of Christianity is the eternal life of the individual Christian. Here, because Christ has given us salvation, we need not work for it. And thus, presumably, believing in that will allow us to be changed people. Here the great desire is to remove from people the fear of loss of salvation and allow them to live in the certainty.

It seems as though we bounce back and forth between the two poles. We move from emphasizing Christian responsibility to assurance of salvation. When one side is emphasized, we seem to feel as though we are missing something, and we probably are, and then we go back to the other side. Bouncing back and forth between works and lack of works.

Is there a way out? I think that both models have within them the core driving force of "personal individual salvation." We are meticulously trying to keep track of our sins due to that fear of losing salvation. Or we are constantly trying to affirm our personal individual salvation to get above that fear in model two.

Is this our only choice? Must We Choose Between Passivity and Legalism? Those who hold to model one are right, the Christian life does require effort. It does not come naturally to those of us who are born in sin. However, they are wrong in tying our salvation to that growth. Those who hold to model two are right in separating growth from our salvation. They are right in noting that growth comes from salvation and not the other way around. However, they are wrong in making growth a simple matter.

Both models err in making the ultimate purpose salvation of individuals. They ignore or limit the Great Controversy and the ultimate vindication of God's plan as a part of the Christian life. Yes hard work is needed, but it is not to gain salvation. Salvation provides the tools to battle with Self on the great battleground. Salvation has been given to us as Christians and it is important to live in that belief.

However, if one is saved, one will work. One will even "labor to enter the rest." There will be a struggle with self. There will be a struggle with sin. But this is not to gain salvation. This is to make sure that we do not, by our actions, make God look bad. It is to demonstrate our love for God.

It is not simply "love God and do as you please." Your sinful nature will continue to clamor for the wrong things. We will have to deal with the old man and fight the old man until glorification removes that sinful nature from us. But we don't do it to gain salvation. That is not our great desire. We don't even do it to retain salvation. We do it for God and we do it for the world.

In the end, we need a change in look. We must get past the idea that the whole universe revolves around our salvation. God has given that to us. Now it is about showing an demonstrating our love for the one who has done so much for us. Even if it means working hard and doing what our flesh does not wish to do.

Adventist Television Reflections

I must admit that I haven't looked at much Adventist television. It had been maybe 10 years ago since the last time I had looked at 3ABN and I hadn't gone back. At that time it seemed to be a haven of poorly produced traditional preachers preaching about historic themes. It appears as though the programming has been divesified into more than just preaching and the quality of the programs look and feel a bit better. But I havne't looked a lot at 3abn maybe I will...

Well recently I began looking at the Hope Channel. I always saw that Hope Channel as the official response to 3ABN. Less rough around the edges and more "mainstream." So I looked at it and saw a number of programs.

There is a program where they simply talk to various singers in Adventism. It really reminds me of a "TBN Praise the Lord"-Like program with only the singing. Then Elder Don Schneider of the NAD comes with his program that seems to be the talking portion of the "TBN Praise the Lord-like" program. This seems to emphasize what particular Adventists are doing that affect the world. There is no studio audience like on "Praise the Lord." Sometimes the studio audience feels contrived especially with the applauding every couple words, but it does at times provide a give and take that can be helpful. I do at times miss the genuine moments of spontaneous celebration of the Goodness of Jesus. But that's not a big deal.

There is also a weekly Revelation Seminar-like program hosted by Jon Paulien and Graeme Bradford. They are looking at the big picture of the Book in what feels like it may be a "scaled down" seminary course. Paulien talks about the book from its big picture "Chaistic" structure that you can see in such books as the Daniel and Revelation Committee Series. I say it is "Revelation Seminar-like" but it really does feel like professors are teaching rather than evangelists. What I mean is that they are much more careful with their language than many preachers. They definitely present their conclusions in much the same way, but they are more guarded and precise in their language.

The Sabbath School presentations are also interesting. There is the small 4 person Sabbath School U that takes students from Andrews and its seminary and lets them discuss the weekly lesson. Added to that is the much larger Hope Sabbath School with Pastor Derek Morris. Morris class is in the traditional vein of a teacher in front of a group although he does make a strong effort to involve the group. It appears that there are around 20 in that group. These programs really are like the various Bible Study programs that you can find on Christian television. Although what is different about this is that you have a group rather than one individual.

Surprisingly I even saw a "Gaither Family-like" group singing. You know where Bill Gaither brings a large group of Christian singers together to sing songs. I gotta admit I love those programs. I love all kinds of Gospel music especially the country gospel that is usually emphasized in those Gaither programs. I must admit that I also really zero in when Whintley Phipps or T. Marshall Kelly sing on there. Well I was surprised to see a Gaither like singing with Adventist singers on the Hope Channel. The signing felt like there was a "damper" on it. There was a more somber tone throughout much of it. But be that as it may, I, being a life-long Adventist, couldn't allow the novelty to pass without checking it out.

All in all I like Hope channel. I suspect that it was designed for folks like me. Because fo that, I do understand those who say that this is geared towards Adventists though. At best it is geared to those who like to watch Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) which I must admit I look at as well. Hey I even catch a sermon on the Word network from time to time. So while there are programs that may appeal to that community, there are other programs that are designed specifically for our community like the very good documentary program on Ellen White.

The picture of Adventism presented does feel "user friendly." I think that it is solidly in line with the fundamental beliefs, so you may still hear such terms as "Babylon" or "remnant," but these terms are carefully defined when they are used. I get the feeling that our "inside language" is limited as well.

There may be a bit for the unchurched like the Loma Linda Program that feels like it was produced for the "health channel" in a reality-show like atmosphere. But there is not really a ton for that group, but to be honest, such programming would probably have to be a totally different network. For example, I doubt many "unchurched" people are watching TBN or many other Christian Television programs. But that is just my thoughts and I could be wrong.

At any rate, there must be a moment when the church can give information to its members. This is a great vehicle for that. However, in the end, this is only part of our goal. We still have need for active work outside of our homes. If our televisions cause us to become more and more sequestered then it is a problem whether we are watching Hope, TBN, Word, or CNN.

In the end, Hope seems to be a vehicle to give information and entertainment to a segment of the Adventist population. A secondary goal may be to provide a humane picture of Adventists studying the Bible and singing songs and doing mission work to the outside world. It appears to do both of those jobs pretty well.

Package of Beliefs or Mindset

Is Adventism primarily a package of beliefs or a mindset? It would seem that the dominate view is that it is simply a package of beliefs. These beliefs are either important or not so important or kind of important depending on who you ask. This package includes the sanctuary, state of the dead, and Sabbath. Some lament the objective fact that many are no longer preaching sermons on these doctrines. However, when you dig a little deeper and ask them what kind of sermon they are referring to, it seems as though they mean sermons that didactically defend or teach these doctrines.

While it is true that there is a time to hear these doctrines defined and defended, I question whether the 11:00 service Sabbath morning is that best time. No wonder people got turned off on these doctrines. They may have simply heard them taught over and over again until they assumed that all know them. I mean do we really need a sermon every week (or every other week) that simply delineates why a doctrine is true?

The key thing that is missing in this analysis however is that Adventism is more than a package of beliefs, it is a mindset. The Sabbath flows from that mindset. The Sanctuary doctrine was once an organizing principle that helped to describe the mindset. Our great problem is not that we don't hear any sermons calculating 1844 anymore. Our great problem is that there is no underlying "Adventist" mindset through which we preach any of our sermons. In short, if T.D. Jakes preaches a sermon on the Goodness of God, that does not mean Adventists should not preach a sermon on the same subject. Adventists must preach sermons on the same subject. My contention, however, is that when an Adventist preaches that sermon it will include aspects, views, insights, and even definitions of "goodness" that come from our interaction with Sabbath, Sanctuary, Bible Wholeness, and yes the Third Angel's Message.

We don't need a regurgitation of a package of beliefs that no one sees having any relevance to daily living. We need a deeper understanding of who we are that will affect any sermon we preach. Even, yes, on those occasions when we preach from the package of beliefs.

Adventists and Pollution

Pollution is an interesting issue among Adventists. I have heard preachers downplay the importance of taking care of the environment for, they argue, "God is going to clean up everything at the Second Advent anyway." This attitude seems to be to promote disobedience to God who gave us care over this world. Just as we would not eat anything and destroy our bodies for "God is going to clean up everything at the Second Advent" neither should we cavalierly ignore the cry for a better environment.

Interestingly enough, a youtube channel entitled "Adventists About Life" have discussed this very topic. Here is the video. Dr. Allen Handysides argues "Do We Care? I care, for this is God's world and it wasn't meant to be polluted by plastics."

Doctrines and Preaching

Now we know that we must only preach the Gospel. This provides a problem for those of us who feel the need to preach such doctrines as the Sabbath, State of the Dead, and Sanctuary. Some of us might give in to the temptation of sometimes preaching Gospel and other times preaching these doctrines. Such a temptation is understandable in light of the belief that we need these doctrines, but it is problematic in that it places some doctrines above Gospel.

Some preachers get around this by only preaching doctrine "sometimes" and emphasizing the Gospel above these said doctrines. they preach "doctrine" because they Adventist, but preach "Gospel" primarily because they are Christians. I wholeheartedly understand this decision in light of the fact that we must major in Gospel preaching, but I do not think that is our only choice.

Other preachers see the deterioration of our understanding of doctrines in modern day Adventism. In light of that, they emphasize the doctrines. You can hear their sermons as these few "true believers" preach discourses on the law and its importance. They preach the sabbath as the seventh day and meticulously calculate 2300 to come out to 1844. I understand this decision as well in light of the fact that we do have a message or a perspective that God has given to us to give to the world. But that is not our only choice either.

E. J. Waggoner wrote in Bible Studies on the Book of Romans:

Nothing can be added to the preaching of the righteousness of God by faith of Jesus Christ. What about these doctrines, as the Sabbath, immortality, etc?-Since the “kingdom of God and His righteousness” is the one thing needful…all of these doctrines are simply divisions, lines depending upon the one thing,-all summed up in the doctrine of the righteousness by faith. We can preach nothing else…

Waggoner is noting that you do not choose between Gospel and doctrines. No! You preach gospel totally. If you want to preach the Sabbath, then please show us how it is connected to Gospel. Show us how it is connected to the Good News. Please connect it to the larger framework of what God is "up to" in this world. Don't just get up and preach the Sabbath as the seventh day and sit down. We must turn the page and move towards a so-what that tells us how these doctrines are connected. And dare I say, if you can't connect the doctrines to Gospel, then PREACH ON SOMETHING ELSE UNTIL YOU CAN!

As preachers, let us take seriously our call to bring good tidings of great joy. Whether you are preaching Revelation, Sanctuary, Sabbath, or even State of the Dead. If you do that, then our preaching of this message will align with and join in with the messages that Ellen White identified as the beginning of the Loud Cry...

The Cross and Preaching

Christ Centered Adventist preaching must uplift Christ in its core. Ellen White wrote on page 156 of Gospel Workers:

Of all professing Christians, Seventh-day Adventists should be foremost in uplifting Christ before the world. . . . The great center of attraction, Christ Jesus, must not be left out. It is at the cross of Christ that mercy and truth meet together, and righteousness and peace kiss each other.

The key here is that the cross of Christ must be at the center of any great Adventist preaching, according to Ellen White. The cross provides the place where mercy and truth will unite. If you want to make sure that you are providing the balance between mercy and truth, then you must have the cross of Christ at the center of all of your expositions.

In the 1888 era, Ellen White again argued for the centrality of Jesus in great Adventist exposition. She noted in her celebration of the preaching of A. T. Jones and E. J. Waggoner on pages 91-92 of Testimonies to Ministers, that their message

"was to bring more prominently before the world the uplifted Saviour, the sacrifice for the sins of the whole world. It presented justification through faith in the Surety; it invited the people to receive the righteousness of Christ, which is made manifest in obedience to all the commandments of God...This is the message that God commanded to be given to the world. It is the third angel's message, which is to be proclaimed with a loud voice, and attended with the outpouring of His Spirit in a large measure.

What we see here is that the cross and the power and pardon that we receive from there is at the center of our presentation. She even calls it the third angel's message that is to be proclaimed. Again it is only at the cross where justice and peace meet.

No we do not preach the cross sometimes and some conception of "Adventism" at other times. If Sister White is right here, then we must only preach the cross and uplift the savior. This point is key to any Adventist preaching methodology.

Laypeople Have Lost Their Job

There was a time when all Christians were supposed to pray for the prayer of a righteous man avails much. (James 5:16) We were told that we need to pray for our civic leaders. We were told to pray for the leaders of the church and for the direction of the church. In fact, we were told to pray about many things.

However, at some point, we decided to make a set of people responsible for our praying. They are called "prayer warriors." They have the special gift of prayer and have gone through the training so that they can go on prayer offensives to take down the kingdom of the evil one.

Under this new idea, there are those who have the special calling to simply pray. This seems to be a continued movement towards firing the lay people. Years ago all members were all supposed to give Bible studies and work for the salvation of souls. Now we have Bible Workers who take care of that responsibility. Even the Pastors are no longer evangelists in many cases, we have professional evangelists for that work.

The "praise team" concept that we have borrowed from evangelicals seems like a development that will allow the people to sing praises to God, but in many cases the only people you hear are the leaders singing in the microphone.

How about preaching. Instead of developing the talent of the local elders, in many cases (in America) we simply bring in professional preachers. We save the local elders to preach when most of the church is away at camp meeting or Christmas.

So now we come to prayer. That is now in the hands of a select few who know the ins and outs of the discipline. One Wonders what is next. Soon the only contribution that Christians will have is give tithe and sit down and consume the religious entertainment that has been provided for them.

I ain't got a problem with praise teams, but maybe every so often we aughta just cut down the volume on the leaders mics and have an old fashioned chorister lead the people in praising God. It may not sound as good to our ears, but there is something about a congregation with voices (some flat, some sharp, and some on the wrong note) that sounds REAL.

Maybe it is time for a revival of Bible Work. Not just dropping off the Amazing Facts lessons, but working with someone, reading the Bible and learning where texts are located. And maybe just maybe we aughta tell the prayer warriors that we are happy they are there, but in reality every believer is a prayer warrior and we all will pray for the coming kingdom.

Adventists used to say that lay-people will finish the work. Well if lay-people will finish the work, perhaps they aughta start working. By God's grace, we will move closer to God and to each other and learn the skills to interact with the world from a spiritual and yes Adventist standpoint.

i'm Tired of it

I gotta admit, I am tired of the end time speculations. As I say this, I must hasten to add that many readers of this website have probably not heard much of this. But it is there. Running a website like this gives you a steady diet of those who think you are too liberal to be trusted, or too conservative to be saved.

so I admit that my exprience is not everyone's expereince. Many never hear about the end time. But I am on 4 email threds now, only one I originally subscribed to, where end time speculation is running rampant. Many of these scenarios are not even realistic. Some would make Hal Lindsey look like a sober presbyterian amalenialist in comparison.

You know, I wonder how much of this is end time fatigue. I can remember hearing reports of "the sunday law" being on president Reagon's desk. We were assured that it was there. I can remember every economic downturn of my life hearing about how this was the last one that we would not come out of it. I just get tired of it. I sometimes understand those folks who just go on without thinking about it.

There is actually a cottage industry built around end time speculation. Certianly Left Behind and those kinds of things but what is surprising is that the fringes of that movemnet and our own sometimes coincide. Its as if we are almost to the point that the only way you can talk about the end time, and get anyone to listen is to also talk about politics, economics, and health.

What always interests me, is how little Jesus' only words are talked about in this context. We will got to Daniel 11:45-12:1. We will go to Revelation 13..and currently popular Revelation 18. We will sometimes even go to Ezekiel and JEremiah. But very few go to Matthew 24. Very few talk about he signs given by Jesus himself.

If You Wrong...Man Up and Say It!

Someone sent me an email in November of 2008 with a certainty that is undeniable. He clearly said that the end was here. The economic crash was prophesied in Revelation 18 and there would be no recovery. He then told me that the "judgment of the living" was about to close right now.

I questioned his interpretation of Revelation 18 and wondered about some of his other positions, but I simply said one thing, "If you are wrong...don't just make more predictions....if we are here in 2012...then just admit you were wrong. The person never returned my email.

It is interesting how these things go. Individuals will make outlandish prognostications about the end of time that look closer to the left behind series than the Great Controversy and then when it tappers off, these same people make more predictions. They simply forget their earlier predictions and if pressed will say "God held back the winds." Imagine my surprise when these same people become seen as "prophecy experts" or "Great students of prophecy" when their only claim to fame is a string of unfulfilled predictions.

So now instead of learning how to treat others better and instead of learning more of God, we are speculating about the laws that are to be passed and the instruments of torture that will be used against God's remnant. Is this the end? I don't know. I just wish some of these soothsayers who call themselves prophecy students would admit the same thing.

Stop Fighting...Nobody is Winning

I remember looking at a TV show a while ago where a soldier thought that WWII was still going on long after the final defeat of Germany. The warrior was in a cave with his last orders from command and never received notice that the war was over. Sometimes in our churches it seems that many are just like that warrior. I hear people fighting "those who emphasize jewelry, makeup, and movies" going on in some contexts. They wonder why Adventists spend so much time teaching and emphasizing the doctrines. They wonder why your average Adventist can cite 1844 but can't tell you about the Jesus they love. People of this mindset seem to assume that we are living in an era where doctrinal understanding flourishes while love and knowledge of Jesus languishes.

On the other side are those who see that the doctrines are totally ignored in today's Adventism. They find it ridiculous to argue that Adventists overemphasize lifestyle issues and wonder where are these Adventists who can derive 1844 from the Bible. They believe it is high time we stop leaving the doctrines aside. they argue that yes we need Jesus, but Jesus calls us to doctrinal integrity.

I agree that it is ridiculous to argue that your average Adventist knows 1844 or can defend the State of the Dead or even the Sabbath. I doubt many modern Adventists could defend 1844 from the writings of Ellen G. White let alone the Bible-alone standard that we are called to use. Certainly there are groups out there that emphasize these doctrines. Probably there are some who do it to the detriment of a Jesus emphasis, but to spend your time fighting a battle against the Ellen White Worshipers is to fight a very limited fight. Come on, who worships Ellen White?

However the other side, a smaller but more vocal group, in its emphasis of the doctrines. Also miss a key point. We need more than just a regurgitation of doctrinal facts. It takes more than just proving your point, relevance must be a part of any theological discussion. Tell me why I care if the doctrines are true in your presentation.

Along those lines, I think that the Sanctuary message has marvelous keys for connection. Its "story-like" presentation of the gospel appeals to the narrative angle.

In addition, today there is a call towards spirituality and prayer. What is better suited for that discussion than the Sanctuary where every sacrifice was a prayer. We cannot simply continue to use the "brute force method" of relevance and assume that we will win the day. The day where you simply attempt to prove you are right and therefore you win is over.

So where do we go from here? We need to get past the "1844 is true...no it ain't" arguments that have characterized a lot of theological discussion since the 1980s. No one is listening to that anymore. Folks wonder "what is 1844?" We also need to get past the "theater...no theater" arguments because it is irrelevant as well. We need to start over. If you want to teach modesty, teach it, but don't teach rules that condemn one form of jewelry and not another one. If you want to teach health, teach it, but don't teach rules that allow obese people talk about their vegetarianism as if it is some kind of virtue. If you want to teach love and grace, stop acting as if everyone else is teaching doctrine.

In short, the old fight is over, and no one won. Lets come together on the platform of truth and attempt to understand what vision our doctrines give us to understand Jesus, His love, and His work in us and for us and the entire world.

End Time and Contemporary Living

I was listening to an Adventist preacher this weekend who said that the Second Advent is not receiving the emphasis among Adventist preachers that it once did. His point was that our reason for being is not simply to "Spread the Love of Jesus," but to specifically tell the world of the second Advent that is soon to take place.

Interestingly enough, it does seem that much Adventist preaching does seem to take on the characteristics of the fads and popular approaches current among evagelicals. Many are seeking to preach the message of "God is gonna hook you up" that is so popular right now. Some are preaching exactly what their congregations wish to hear rather than a prophetic voice that calls them to change. Some messages are only theraputic to be a salve or an elixir to help us make it through another week. And some are simply time wasted. But then there are those who engage in speculation about end time events. They purchase excitement at the expense of their credibility. These are the ones who forever find Sunday Laws on president's desk or who predict every economic downturn is the final one.

But then, there are those who attempt to preach a relevant word in the present tense, but also attempt to help us look to the future. In some ways it is a difficult undertaking. It is not always easy to preach about the end time without degenerating into speculation about Jesuits and secret meetings. It is not always easy to preach a relevant word to contemporary society without degenerating into preaching an empty shell that assures a "breakthrough."

Perhaps our end time preaching should be less about events and more about the mindset that will make it through. Perhaps, if we talked about the mindset then we will realize that that mindset not only has future implications, but it will help us through even the difficulties of today. Perhaps God's work for us and in us in the present time is exactly what is needed to make it through our contemporary problems and our future problems.

And maybe just maybe our end time focus would move from the fear that is based solely in self-centeredness to an assurance that is based in God's work for us which will most assuredly work "out" of us.

Audio 53 - Sabbath and Victory

When Sabbatarians speak about the Sabbath, they often defend the correct day. Sometimes they speak about the correct way to keep the Sabbath, but we often neglect the Spiritual power that comes to the Christian.

In this audio, Elder Cox, talks about the Sabbath and how it points you to victory.