admin

21 Oct

MELT AND FLOW

One of my favorite books from graduate school wasn’t even required. I found it by following a footnote to an appendix and a book review, and thence to the full citation and to the card catalog at my graduate school library, and finally to the shelf. This was years before the Internet and the process of tracking down information could be tedious at times, but if you were simply following a whim, the search itself could be a treasure hunt.

The book was Models of the Church, by Avery Dulles, S.J., a survey of historical metaphors for the church and how they have shaped the Church and its practices.

I found it fascinating because it gave me a visually stimulating index card that I could carry in memory. The models functioned as bins that I could toss ideas into, empty out occasionally or transfer questions, skepticisms, and enthusiasms back and forth between them.

Avery Dulles–who became a cardinal between the first and second editions of the book–suggests there are two types of models. Explanatory models synthesize what is known and believed; exploratory models open our thinking to new possibilities. He gives us five historical models that have described and shaped the Church through history: Institution, Mystical Communion, Sacrament, Herald, and Servant, and adds his own–Community of Disciples.

Dulles proved to be eclectic in his tastes and ecumenical in his reach. He provided the models to all Christians, not just Catholics, in the hope that they would prompt discussion and practical use by academics, pastors, and laypeople.

Early in life I discovered I could remember ideas and concepts easier if I could put an image to them. I also found that I had an odd propensity (or was it a compulsion?) to associate an image or a person with a recurring and routine activity that I did every day at the same time. Sometimes there was no conscious link that I could see between the persons and the activity, they just popped up on my mental screen.

This still happens to me. When I shave, I hear myself answering the question of my seven-year-old son as to why I lather up. I lean over to turn on the shower tap and an image of a friend from high school comes into view. I water the plants in the garden and hear my grandfather’s tips on watering. I’m on my hands and knees, clearing away volunteers between the established plants and I hear a woman I worked for as a teenager proclaiming, “A plant out of place is a weed.”

I’m a creature of habit, believing that certain tasks can be trained into muscle memory and into the humming little centers of automation in my brain, thus freeing up the vast open spaces there for more imaginative, more interesting things. Now and then, this gets me into trouble when habits become ruts and ruts cause the little mining cars of blind knowledge to overrun some needed action because the operator is asleep at the switch.

One of my earliest models of the Adventist church was abstract until I gave it an image. My grandparents, stalwart Adventists who had both converted as young adults–my grandfather from the Church of England and my grandmother from generic Protestantism on Vancouver Island–often spoke of Adventism as being “the Truth.” This made little sense to me at the time, but it had the advantage of stickiness. Later, I thought of the monolith from “2001: A Space Odyssey,” as the image most appropriate for this abstraction: self-contained, enigmatic, unbreakable, and conducive to violence in the wrong hands.

Another common phrase was “the [Adventist] Church will go through to the end,” conjuring images of enormous snowplows or battering rams or a ship steady on course carrying hundreds through a gale at sea.

My experience of model-making is not unique. We humans are meaning-makers and metaphor-eaters. We leap from one image to another in conversation as from one ice floe to the next. To change the metaphor slightly, some images are so easily grasped and understood that they become solid bridges over which thousands travel daily. They make communication easier. As symbols they can be molded, shaped, and compressed to contain multiple meanings that can be triggered by the mere mention of the word in the right context.

Clinging to one model to the exclusion of the others leads to distortion, says Dulles, but he notes that when a particular model seems to answer several problems and promises to clarify yet unknown difficulties, it becomes a paradigm, capable of containing whole systems of thought, processes, and actions.

I see the Institutional model as dominant among many administrators in the Adventist Church. It presents a hierarchical structure with the members passively receiving the authoritative decisions of “the ruling class.” To a lesser extent, the church as Herald is also current. This model emphasizes mission and proclamation over against Mystical Communion and the church as Sacrament. The power here resides in the word preached and taught.

Models arise in context, however, and contexts can differ. Friction between them comes from holding historical models that cannot meet current needs or that conflict with other models. The Servant model, one that many progressives in the church seem to hold, sits uneasily with the Institutional and Herald models. It takes a dialogical position with the world, it calls for modeling the church after Jesus’ teachings, and emphasizes justice and mercy over proclamation and mission.

Dulles offers the Discipleship model as the church community set apart from the world and yet deeply in tune with its needs. It incorporates the best of the previous five models and tries to avoid the worst. Disciples are servants who work within a structure that is both a mystical communion and a sacrament. Proclaiming is but one part of its work in the world.

I offer another model complementary to discipleship. It is a via negativa, revealing something important by what it is not. It is not hierarchical nor authoritarian. It emphasizes change, transition, adaptation, and naturalism.

My model of the church is an ice cube on a hot sidewalk. As it melts it slides smoothly along until the bulk of the ice is transformed into liquid. Eventually, the liquid evaporates, completing the cycle from solid to liquid to gas.

I intend by this model that the calcified institutional form of the church should transmute into a flowing community of local churches and their members, and then in due time, be absorbed into the life of the Spirit in the full transfiguration of all things. Innovation begins at the root.

In tandem with the discipleship community, the ice-cube model suggests the church as a hierarchical institution will, of necessity, give way to local churches in fellowship with each other to provide the water of life to their own contextual communities. And when the final day comes, the community of disciples will be drawn up by the Spirit, together with all those whom God has called from every nation, religion, tongue, and people. “And thus, we shall be together with the Lord.”

Barry Casey has published in Adventist Society for the Arts, Brevity, Faculty Focus, Lighthouse Weekly, Mountain Views, Patheos, Spectrum Magazine, The Dewdrop, and The Purpled Nail. His collection of essays, Wandering, Not Lost: Essays on Faith, Doubt, and Mystery, was published by Wipf and Stock in November 2019. He writes from Burtonsville, Maryland. Email him at [email protected]

21 Oct

WHAT IF…?

I didn’t win the $1.337 billion Mega Millions lottery.

I’ll bet you didn’t either.

I would assume, though, that many of us played the “what if…” game.

The first thing I would do if I won a huge lottery, of course, would be to pay my tithe and give a generous offering to the church. I have been assured by more than one pastor that the church would gladly accept my ill-gotten gains.

Next, I’d take care of my children and grandchildren. I like Warren Buffett’s philosophy on this–give them “enough money so that they would feel they could do anything, but not so much that they could do nothing.”

Then I’d work on building a bigger library in my basement.

Finally, I’d probably tell my wife I’d won some money, just to see if there was anything she wanted.

I don’t think anybody really expects to win the lottery, but it is fun to play “what if….”

Well, “what if…” you could significantly change, or even start the Adventist church all over again today? I mean it in the sense that an appellate court hears a case de novo. That means that as we play this mental game, in addition to what we know now, we assume we have all the knowledge and understanding available to us that were present when the church was originally established, but we start again, brand new.

The world has changed dramatically since our church was founded, but has the church? Should it?

In the mid- to late-1800s, the birth and growth of the Seventh-day Adventist Church was powerfully influenced by the current events. Notwithstanding renewed interest in the second coming of Christ, manifested most prominently in America by William Miller and his date-specific predictions, the predominant Christian belief was in the imminent establishment of Christ’s kingdom on earth, with the promise of a thousand years of righteousness, peace, and prosperity.

The knowledge of medicine was rudimentary. Most medical facilities were tuberculosis sanitaria, or glorified health spas for the rich and famous. Most “educated” physicians were the products of relatively short courses at proprietary diploma mills.

Poverty and civil unrest in the new Kingdom of Italy, and the Potato Famine in Ireland, sent a wave of unwelcome Roman Catholic immigrants to the “Protestant” United States. In 1888, the American Sabbath Union was formed by representatives from major Protestant denominations (It continues as The Lord’s Day Alliance and is an ecumenical Christian first-day Sabbatarian organization that lobbies for the passage of Sunday-rest laws). It had some very powerful congressional champions in the late 1800s.

Into this environment came a new church. It addressed these social, political, and theological positions aggressively, but not always winsomely. It espoused the soon return of Christ, a radical dietary and health message, and the seventh day of the week as the true biblical Sabbath. It accused the Roman Catholic Church and “apostate” Protestantism of attempting to break down the wall of separation between church and state. This defiant organization had the temerity to clothe itself in the mantle of the Three Angels’ Message of Revelation, and to call itself the Remnant Church. It claimed it did so with the endorsement of a last-day prophet.

In response, mainstream denominations labelled it a legalistic, quasi-Christian cult.

Religion in America is much more diverse today. The three major religious traditions in most states are Catholicism, white evangelical Protestantism, and the religiously unaffiliated. The controversial theological and political issues facing many churches are now same-sex marriage, abortion, the role of women in ministry, public funding of private religious schools, and immigration reform. To many of the unchurched, “Christianity” and “evangelical” are words of contempt and derision.

How has Adventism responded to these changes?

It really hasn’t. It appears that the things for which we are still best known to the public, in no particular order, are: (1) an emphasis on last-day events, the second coming of Christ, and a day of judgment; (2) a concentration on health; (3) worshipping on Saturday instead of Sunday; and (4) having a founding prophet.

For the most part, those to whom I speak think we Adventists make good neighbors, but they are rather confused about Adventism. They usually know about our hospital systems. They believe we are all non-smoking, teetotalling vegetarians. They know little about our religious beliefs, and are either unaware of, or are too polite to mention, our rather embarrassing beginnings. A few still aren’t sure if we’re Christian. The majority vaguely remember that we had a prophet, but they’re not sure if it was Joseph Smith or Mary Baker Eddy.

So, what if…?

This game is not new, nor is it original with me. Many Adventist thought leaders have been playing it for years. George Knight and William G. Johnsson, among others, have written extensively on the subject. If you haven’t heard, or read, some of their reflections and projections, it is probably because they are so painful that they have not been widely disseminated. It is not easy to admit we might need to change, or that we are a deeply divided church. Change implies error, which is particularly embarrassing for us. We have boasted for years about our “remnancy” and have preached that we are the ones who will in perfect unity finally and perfectly reflect the character of Christ to the world.

When we speak about possible flaws in today’s Adventist church, we usually focus on organizational, administrative, or doctrinal issues. But if I could change the Adventist church, I wouldn’t start by changing its fundamental beliefs (much) or its administrative and organizational structure (much). I also wouldn’t begin by addressing the major controversial religious and political issues facing Christianity today. While each of those arenas may need to eventually be addressed, I believe our primary problem is much more basic–we are viscerally afraid of God.

We whistle in the dark, and pretend we are not really afraid, but our presentations of last-day events, the day of judgment, Christ’s work in the heavenly sanctuary, the second coming of Christ, and the final destruction of the wicked are dripping with fear. In the short term, fear may work well as a motivator, and may be necessary for immediate survival. Over a longer period, however, it is usually detrimental to performance, relationships, and well-being. A constant state of fear causes chronic stress, and eventually either breaks one’s body and spirit or leads to a complete disregard of important warnings. We’ve all heard recalcitrant smokers say, “Well, we’re all going to die of something, it might as well be lung cancer.”

If I could change the church, I would change its focus.

I would focus it on what Jesus said His mission was. Both the Bible and our prophet claim He came to show us the true character of the Father. That was the basic problem of sin in the first place—we, as creatures, did not trust God or believe He had our best interests at heart. The serpent in the garden claimed the Creator had lied to us, and that He was holding us back from our full inherent potential. We literally fell for the shiny object–a beautiful, shimmering, miraculously talking snake. Since then, because of our lack of trust in God, we have taken the gifts He gave us to help reconcile us back to Him and have legalistically either turned them into heavy ritualistic burdens or made them into objects of worship themselves.

The legalistic solution to this problem is to attempt to either appease our angry God or somehow buy His forgiveness. The biblical solution is to learn to trust Him.

To trust God, we must first find Him trustworthy. This was Christ’s whole mission on earth. In the upper room, Christ reminded the disciples that in His life and work on earth, He had irrefutably revealed the loving and trustworthy character of the Father to the universe. Moreover, He told them He was going to die as if He was a sinner to demonstrate that the Father had not lied about sin leading to death. If this led us back to trust, there was no need for us to die.

Our primary mission should be spreading the Good News that God can be trusted and that He is searching for friends whom He, in turn, can unconditionally trust for eternity with infinite freedom. To become such friends, we must believe that He can heal all that is wrong with us. That is a promising message of love, and love obliterates fear.

It might be well for us Adventists to remember that we are not the first Sabbath-keeping, tithe-paying, Bible-believing people with rigorous dietary restrictions and prophetic “proof” that we are God’s special people. I imagine there were many colorful, wall-sized charts, graphs, and beast-filled illustrations predicting a glorious future for Israel that went up in flames in Jerusalem in 70 C.E.

Mark Johnson, MD, is a retired public health physician and the chairman of the Boulder Vision Board. Email him at [email protected]

21 Oct

WHAT WE DO WITH WHAT WE DON’T (KNOW)

As churches and denominations, we tend to spend quite a bit of time writing down, debating, defining, and then re-defining what we say we believe. In our faith community, our core statement of doctrine is the “28 Fundamental Beliefs.” But for such a large number of “fundamentals,” it is surprising how much of what is core to our faith and faithful living is mentioned only briefly or even not at all.

And then there are all the things we actively disbelieve. A few years ago, one of my assigned textbooks for a class in systematic theology was a book that set out to define Christian faith by what we do not believe about life, God and faith.[1] It’s an interesting approach and there is some value in clearing away some of our misnomers and assumptions—and stating those things explicitly—but at 400 pages, it is not such a snappy way of describing or sharing what we believe or a guiding framework for what it means to live well.

But for all we specify about what we do believe and what we don’t—after all, we do spend a bit of time in some parts of our faith community critiquing the different beliefs of others—perhaps our most defining attitude is what we do with uncertainty, the things we don’t know. In “an increasingly unpredictable, complex world, it turns out that what matters most isn’t IQ, willpower, or confidence in what we know. It’s how we deal with what we don’t understand.”[2]

Informed and good thinking, determination and a sense of assurance are valuable to a credible faith, but what we do with what we don’t know might be more important for sustainable faith and what our faith might offer to others. As 1 Peter 3:15 put it, we might be ready to explain our faith, but verse 16 counsels that this must be done “in a gentle and respectful way.”[3]This calls for something more than a well delineated list of what we do—or don’t—believe. It is a call to live and believe with humility, courage and curiosity.

Humility

In a personal letter, C S Lewis—writer, Christian apologist and long-time tutor at Oxford University—summed up this important goal of his teaching: “One of my main efforts as a teacher has been to train people to say those (apparently difficult) words ‘we don’t know.’”[4] Those “apparently difficult” words don’t come easily to any of us—and perhaps even less easily to people of faith, those who feel like they ought to have the answers.

But to admit “I don’t know” is an important spiritual discipline that we need to practice, precisely because it does not come easily. “Yes, we know that ‘we all have knowledge’ about this issue,” wrote Paul to people who did know how to answer the specific question. “But while knowledge makes us feel important, it is love that strengthens the church. Anyone who claims to know all the answers doesn’t really know very much” (1 Corinthians 8:1, 2).

Humility is not trying to doubt things we know and firmly believe, but it is to honestly admit when we don’t and that there is often some margin between. If we can simply answer that we don’t know, we are relieved of the burden of knowing the answers and respecting the person whom we might otherwise be trying to convince of something we, ourselves, are not certain about.

Courage

It takes courage to admit that “all that I know now is partial and incomplete” (1 Corinthians 13:12) and then to seek to live well, as if our lives depended on it—because they do. But whatever we believe, most of us still must get out of bed tomorrow morning and make countless choices throughout the day, some of which might seem inconsequential but many that might cost us something and all of which will compound into a much larger life trajectory. All of which is decided with incomplete knowledge, human inconsistencies, and growing fatigue.

Yet so many of us keep doing it. If we were truly certain about everything, life would require little courage. But we keep showing up, even when it might not make sense. We courageously do things we don’t have to do and when we can never be sure of their outcome. We are brave when we are kind and still more courageous when we allow ourselves to be vulnerable.

Curiosity

What we don’t know and what we don’t understand are also an invitation to curiosity. Honest humility about our incomplete knowledge is not a cause for shame, but an opportunity for wonder. There will always be more for us to learn, create, discover, and grow. Curiosity should be a practice of our faith—in a God who made us and our world, in our recognition that the world is not what it was intended to be, in our hope for a world that will be redeemed and re-created.

By its beauty and its tragedy, by its wonder and its brokenness, our world is riddled with questions, urgencies, and possibilities. “They are an invitation to engage in an apologetic that is more concerned with ‘gentleness and respect’ than merely ‘giving an answer.’ They are an indication that Christian apologetics must shift its approach from having all the answers, to being present in the questions.”[5] One of the greatest gifts we can give—to our world, to others—is our curiosity and attention.

We live on fertile ground for humility, courage, and holy curiosity. What we don’t know or struggle to understand offers us the space to be most human and most faithful. More than further refining or adding to our doctrinal statements, whatever we might be for or against, our faith must be shaped by our listening and living. And the invitation we can most usefully offer to others is to join in with this incomplete project of humbly and courageously learning, discovering, and working together. What we do with what we don’t know is what makes our faith most real.

Nathan Brown is a writer and editor at Signs Publishing near Melbourne, Australia. His Christmas devotional book Advent: Hearing the Good News in the Story of Jesus’ Birth is great for seasonal reading and gifting. Email him at: [email protected]

[1] Christopher Morse, Not Every Spirit: A Dogmatics of Christian Disbelief (2nd edition, T & T Clark, 2009).
[2] Jamie Holmes, Nonsense: The Power of Not Knowing (Crown, 2016).
[3] Bible quotations are from the New Living Translation.
[4] “To Father Peter Milward, September 26, 1960,” Letters of C S Lewis (Harcourt Brace, 1993).
[5] Daniel Montañez, “From Truth to Trust: Reimagining the Future of Christian Apologetics,” The Anxious Bench, <https://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2022/08/from-truth-to-trust-reimagining-the-future-of-christian-apologetics>.

21 Oct

CAN INSPIRED PEOPLE MAKE MISTAKES?

THE CLOSETS Having come into Adventism from the outside world, there are some distinct advantages. That is to say, in the area of assumptions. I do not have multiple generations to point back to. As a matter of reality, no one in my extended family had ever heard of Adventism. Therefore, I was not weaned upon Ellen White. And so, the glasses that I use have a different set of assumptions than those whose inner child is dominated by their parents’ version of Ellen White.

Now, don’t get me wrong. When I came into the church, I devoured her writings. I finished the entire Conflict series within three months before I was even baptized. Her views were broad and profound. I was like a soul lost in the desert of this world’s confusion. She helped me comprehend the breadth of the whole plan of redemption from Eden lost to Eden restored.

I was so blown away by the message of Jesus’ soon coming, I started giving my own Bible studies on Daniel and Revelation before I’d even finished my own baptism. Within my first few years as an Adventist, I listened to our entire church tape library of sermons (which consisted of around a thousand tapes). This helped expose me to all the great preachers and teachers like Brooks, Richard, Maxwell, Venden, and Halverson. I was so zealous, I even read many of the pioneers’ own writings! I became a devout Seventh-day Adventist, giving 150% commitment to the Lord.

But unfortunately, I was also exposed to all the skeletons in the church’s closet and the critical spirit that often goes along with it. The deeper I dove, the less I was becoming like Jesus, and the more I was becoming like Saul–“If anyone else thinks he has grounds for confidence in the flesh, I have more.” Phil 3:4 (CSB). And nowadays with the Internet, any Adventist can find the motherlode of denominational laundry. 1850, 1870’s, 1888, 1905, 1919, 1957, 1980, etc. And these issues inevitably cluster around Ellen White.

It all reminds me of my Finnish grandmother’s survivalist stew called, Mojakka (pronounced moy-yuk-ah with emphasis on the “yuk” part when you’re a kid). Her recipe was basically, throw giant chunks of everything in the pot and cook it to death. And sadly, the Seventh-day Adventist church’s closets are packed to bursting with nepotism, semantics, polemics, revisionism, and apologetic gymnastics, all an effort to avoid the complex questions raised about her theology. And the greatest sin of all these histories that no one is talking about? The trail of wounded souls who have often left God altogether because of the “yuk”.

So, if you really want to save your children, and save the church, then it’s well beyond time for some transparency, to open the closet and let whatever comes out tumble into the full light of accountability. Because if we don’t, the church won’t survive the raw truth (or even the fabrications) of the Internet. So, hang on to your hats, because this is going to get bumpy.

OMNISCIENCE Among those most revered in the Judeo-Christian faith were the prophets. And rightly so, as a prophet is defined by Webster as: “one who utters revelations”, and “the final authoritative revealer of God’s will.” They are the ones who communicate with God directly. So, in a sense, to disagree with a prophet is like disagreeing with God. But there are many over the centuries that have “profited” as prophets.

Which is why there are many specific signs of a true prophet found in Scripture. Such as the one I want to discuss today in Deuteronomy 18:21-22. It basically says, “if their predictions do not come to pass, that prophet is not from God”. And so, to ask the question, “Can inspired people make mistakes?” may seem like a bit of a misnomer.

Yet, there is a curious exchange between the disciples of the prophet John and Jesus in Matthew 11. In vs 2-4, “John the Baptist, who was in prison, heard about all the things the Messiah was doing. So, he sent his disciples to ask Jesus, ‘Are you the Messiah we’ve been expecting, or should we keep looking for someone else?’” In response, Jesus healed loads of people and then said, “John is more than a prophet, he is a messenger sent to announce the My coming”. And then in vs 11 He says, “I tell you the truth, of all who have ever lived, none is greater than John the Baptist!”

So according to Jesus, he is the greatest prophet that ever lived. the “messenger” meant to prepare the people for the advent of the Savior! So, what did John do as this “chosen one”? He sent his disciples to question if Jesus was even the Messiah?! Wait, what? Why? I would argue that it was because his theology was influenced by his environment. The Jews had mistakenly mixed the prophecies of the glory of the second Advent and completely missed the humility and suffering of the first. Think about it! What this implies is that the greatest prophet that ever lived, the messenger of the Lord, had bad theology! John had mistaken theology because his thinking was confused by the theological beliefs of his culture.

So, did Jesus reject the Baptist as a prophet because he had errors in his theology? No, rather Jesus doubled down on his gift! Don’t miss the most important point: Jesus still commended John and considered him inspired even with bad theology! Why? Because being inspired, and being omniscient, are not the same thing. Omniscience, infallibility, and inerrancy are defined as, “Universal complete knowledge. The capacity to know EVERYTHING.” And that gift belongs solely to God alone! We, as human beings, are erring, Spirit-led yes, but erring children, up to our necks in something we only barely comprehend.

And that is exactly why I love God so much! Because in the latter half of Matthew 11:11 it says, “…Even the least person in the Kingdom of Heaven is greater than he is!” Wow! What a statement. In the eyes God, a repentant addict, struggling parent, or a check-out clerk, are greater than a prophet in God’s kingdom! How beautiful is our God! We can see this same principle in Hebrews 11:28-39, “All these people earned a good reputation because of their faith, yet NONE of them received all that God had promised. For God had something better in mind for us, so that they would not reach perfection without us.”

Our weak trembling steps of faith, stretching out feeble hands to our Savior, have the exact same hope as the heroes of old! I mean really, David, the man after God’s own heart, was a murderous adulterer. Sampson wasted his life with relationships, and Jonah ran away from God, yet they all still fulfilled their destinies. Or consider the prophet and high priest Eli. He was a terrible parent, enabling his children right in the church! Yet, all these broken, erring, hopeless cases were the very people God loved and called His own! And all this proves one thing. People do not lose their gifts simply because they make mistakes.

GROWING UP So, let’s make this simple. Think back to when you were 15. Would you seek out your 15-year-old self for life advice? I was a moron at that age. The meaning of life was friends, cars, and adventure (In retrospect, perhaps I haven’t learned a lot since then). And yet, that was the age Ellen was when she received her calling. Think seriously about it. Would Mrs. White in her 80’s has the exact same perspectives she had when she was 15? Of course not! She changed and matured just as we all do. And that includes her theology.

Just like the rest of us, when Ellen was young, her ideas were molded by her parents. And her parents belonged to a strict sect called the Methodist holiness movement, based in perfectionism. Because of this, she began her faith life with a fearful melancholic view of God, one that was synonymous with the legalism of the Puritan era. Just like John the Baptist, Ellen shared the theological views of the culture around her. But she grew out of those rigid views over time. And this maturation is obvious in her writings as well.

You can see it in her publications before and after 1888. She transitioned from Early writings to Desire of Ages, from Testimonies to Christ’s Object Lessons. That sickly, socially-rejected girl became a powerful woman who firmly trusted in Jesus as her hope for salvation. And I’m positive there are many of us who can share the exact same testimony of how God led us into clearer and still clearer views of His love.

To put some boots to this point, W.W. Prescott, among his many achievements in the denomination, the man who assisted with the development of the Desire of Ages in Australia, was the compiler of the book Education, as well as being the one in charge of revisions to the Great Controversy under the direct authority of W.C. White. He had this to say about the writings of Mrs. White: “It is firmly settled that phrases and historical statements in these books have to be corrected just the same as in other books.” (W.W. Prescott, G. Valentine, RHPA, p. 263).

THE FUTURE Her books were never written with the intention of being interpreted word upon word, replacing the study of the Scriptures. Her books were written as principle upon principle, to edify and guide. She never intended her teachings to be taken as theologically infallible. So “yes”, inspired people can make mistakes and still be inspired. Ellen White was just a normal human being with a deep abiding love for God, one who longed for Jesus to return like the rest of us. Someone who had an intimate connection with the Spirit of God and was still learning as she grew.

In the end, the Three Angel’s Message she so deeply believed in is, at its core, the Everlasting Gospel. And so, in hoping against hope, dreaming of the future of Adventism, it is my longing to see an honest church. One willing to be deeply blessed by Ellen White. But no longer willing to replace Jesus and His word with the idols of men. Because our job as “messengers” was never to blow the trumpet about the denomination or Ellen White. Our job is to announce the coming of the Lord!

Shayne Mason Vincent until the end of September 2022 was pastor of the Casper district in Wyoming. Email him at [email protected]

21 Oct

REDEFINING ADVENTISM

The very title, “Redefining Adventism,” is provocative to some, and a “hair-on-fire” threat to others. So, let me define how I see redefining. First it is not degrading, dumping, or abandoning salvific pillars of the faith we hold and teach. It is an attempt to make present truth… well… present, and attractively applicable to contemporary people inside and outside the church.

The very name of the denomination lays out two major components of belief: Sabbath as the seventh day of the week and looking for the return of Jesus in His second advent/coming.

As Adventists, we speak and write often and passionately about “present truth.” At the same time, we tend to look back to the idealized historical “golden days” and pioneers of the church. There is a danger that we can be so focused on the methods and wrappings of the past that we make the core beliefs of the church look quaint, like the straw-brimmed hats and horse drawn buggies of the Pennsylvania Dutch. “Back to the Future” was a stellar title for a movie, but not much of a cogent mantra for a current and future movement. After all, a movement moves. It is not a static monument to the past.

The church has essentially held to core beliefs, and at the same time has been able to make a bridge between the past and the present. Things have changed. The Old Testament sacrificial rituals ceased. The Jerusalem Temple was destroyed. Past practices gave way to present realities and a focus on both the current situations and solutions, with an eye to future changes. Look at the conversion of Cornelius in Acts 10, and the council of Jerusalem in Acts 15. These were seismic shifts in how things were done. These shifts made truth truly present.

We need not, in fact should not, abandon pillar beliefs that are salvation related, but there is value in how we (wrap) present them to others. As an example: when I was a kid, it was fun and acceptable to wrap gifts in the colorful Sunday funny papers. The gift was encased in colorful panels of recognized cultural icons. Sometimes the gift might be wrapped in a recycled brown paper bag (we were “green” and did not know it). Today, if you gave a gift to your fiancé, or a dignitary, using those wrappings, it might evoke a seriously different response. The gift might be the same, but the presentation/wrapping could seriously detract from the gift itself.

What might a redefining of Sabbath look like?

Past truth style: “The Bible says the seventh-day is the Sabbath, and I can proof text it, so you must keep the seventh day as Sabbath!” This can look like my need to set you straight; it is information based.

Present truth style: “God is so loving and kind He designed a special down time every week so we would not burn out. It is a time when we can connect with family, and with Him in worship. He called it ‘Sabbath,’ and it happens every Saturday!” (An appeal to current needs. Relationship based, not just information based). Or “Birthdays are great celebrations! God wants to celebrate the birth of our world – not just once a year – but once a week. The seventh-day Sabbath is a celebration of His goodness and loving power. Come join me as we celebrate His creative work for, in, and through us!”

Same truth. Different presentations.

What might “redefining” the Advent look like?

Past truth style: “EARTH’S FINAL WARNING!”** There is terror and trouble ahead! You better be prepared for the wrathful return of the Almighty. If you are not ready – it is as Jonathan Edwards said – ‘God holds you over the pit of hell, much as one holds a spider…over the fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked…. You hang by a slender thread, with the flames of divine wrath flashing about it, and ready every moment to singe it.’”

Admittedly, that’s compellingly graphic, but not very appealing unless you are a masochist. It’s like Barron Von Trapp, in The Sound of Music, lining up his children for a chilling inspection to spot any defects that causes them to stand ram-rod fearful (but not lovingly) in his presence.

Present truth style: “Jesus said He would return to earth, and when He does, it will be magnificent! It is like when dad went away/deployed, and we all longed for his return. We waited and looked forward to that so we could be together again after a long absence. We looked eagerly for that time, and to a happy reunion where we could be together again, and we could invite our neighbors to rejoice with us!”

Same truth. Different presentation.

I spent a combat tour in Vietnam and did not see our children for a full year. Suppose Ardis had prepared them for my return by saying, “Dad is coming back, so you better have your hair combed – every single one in place – and be sure your shoes are polished, and that your room is without a speck of dust for his inspection. If there are any flaws, he will give you a whipping that will make you sorely sorry!” Would they eagerly anticipate my return, or dread it, and hope that my return would be delayed?

Rephrasing Redefining

Maybe redefining would best be called reframing. Rather than focus on the negatives, focus on the positive aspects of Sabbath and the second coming, as well as other doctrines. Fear can motivate people, but fear wears off quickly. Fear is a poor long-term motivator. Positive anticipation is much more productive and long lasting.

In the Gospel of Luke 15, there are three stories of being lost. The sheep is lost: one out of a hundred. The coin is lost: one out of ten. The son is lost: one out of two. When each is found, there is positive joy and open celebration. The focus of each story is on the “found” portion, not a long lament on the “lost” negative portion.

Look at Daniel 7:22. It talks about the judgment (the very word frightens most people) and says, “…the Ancient of Days came and pronounced judgment in favor of the saints of the Most High, and the time came when they possessed the kingdom.” Like the stories of the lost in Luke, the focus is on the positive reality of judgment. Oh, to be sure, there are beasts and scary things Daniel writes about, but they all lead up to a superbly positive climax for those who love and receive God. That is the Good News we are to proclaim. That is the focus we are called to share.

The whole sweep of the Great Controversy theme through history leads to one conclusion: God wins! And those who have a positive relationship with Him are winners too!

Keeping Sabbath won’t save me. Knowing all the dates, details, prophetic interpretations, and speculations about the time of Jesus’ return won’t save me. Fear, demands, and proof-texts won’t save me. The only thing that will save any of us is an abiding, positive, ongoing relationship with Jesus. Maybe we could focus more on the Son than the signs, on the relationship than the rules.

Perhaps redefining Adventism is more about reframing how we share. How we see and wrap our message. That might really be the essence of present truth: the kind of truth that reflects the incredibly good news of the Gospel–good news as an invitation, rather than band news as a threat. The kind of present truth that motivates us positively Monday morning, and every day.

Dick Stenbakken, Ed.D., retired Army Chaplain (Col.), served as director of Adventist Chaplaincy Services at the General Conference and North American Division. With his wife Ardis, he lives in Loveland, Colorado. Email him at [email protected]

**The title of a currently advertised Adventist evangelistic promotion piece.

21 Oct

DISAPPOINTMENT REVISITED

When asked to imagine the Adventist Church in 2022, my mind mysteriously jumped to 1976.

In 1976, when I was 7, the United States celebrated the bicentennial of the Declaration of Independence. I remember a great celebration, where almost everything was red, white and blue for almost the whole year (including Colorado’s license plates).

As one raised Seventh-day Adventist and who attended Seventh-day Adventist parochial schools, I remember hearing the history of the church’s formation. So, it struck me forcefully that October 22, 2022, marks the 178^th anniversary of the Great Disappointment.[1]

I did a bit more math as well. In 2022, we are celebrating William Miller’s 240^th birthday.[2] We are celebrating Joseph Bates’ 230^th birthday.[3] We are celebrating James White’s 201^st birthday.[4] And we are celebrating Ellen G. White’s 195^th birthday.[5]

In other words, our pioneers (and William Miller) all have attained (or are approaching) their own bicentennials, and the bicentennial of the Great Disappointment itself creeps inexorably towards us. We have been living in the “in-between time” after the Great Disappointment and before the Second Coming for approaching two centuries.

Our pioneers are now much like the heroes listed in Hebrews: “Yet all these, though they were commended for their faith, did not receive what was promised, since God had provided something better so that they would not, without us, be made perfect.” (Hebrews 11:39-40, NRSV).

This isn’t the first time the church has dealt with this tension.

The early church also experienced it at the time the Gospels originated. In that moment, when most scholars agree that most of the Epistles had already been written, the early church reached a point where it knew that it needed to preserve the story of Jesus. The church saw that those who were eyewitnesses to His ministry, death and resurrection were dying. And He had not yet returned

That moment is why we have the Gospels. They were written to preserve the story of Jesus in the “in-between time.” Today, then, what do I value about Adventism’s similar “in-between time?” This article lists three of the things I value about our Adventist church as we move forward. These are things I continue to value, even if I myself don’t live to see the Second Coming.

Joy in the Sabbath – Treasuring our day of rest and gladness.

I admit that when I was younger, sometimes my attitude toward the Sabbath was a bit like those Israelites described in Amos 8, who couldn’t wait for the Sabbath to end, so that they could get back to their own business.

Then I went to graduate school at a state university. For the first time in my life, I wasn’t in an Adventist parochial school bubble. What a difference.

There, I learned the absolute freedom that the Sabbath brings to us. As I set aside the books on Friday night and spent the rest of the next 24 hours in worship, contemplation of nature, and fellowship with friends and family, I could feel my body and mind regaining a balance. More importantly, I could sense my connection with God being refreshed. Through this, I found myself being able to say that the Sabbath truly is a delight (Isaiah 58:13).

As we go forward in the “in-between time,” I find myself being able to sing with my whole heart (in words from an old hymn):

A day of sweet reflection
Thou art, a day of love,
A day to raise affection
From earth to things above.
New graces ever gaining
From this our day of rest . . .

Living the Christian Life as Holistic – not just a once-a-week Thing

In the words of George Herbert’s hymn:

Sev’n whole days, not one in sev’n,
I will praise Thee;
in my heart, though not in heav’n,
I can raise Thee . . .

Many Christian denominations agree that we should live the Christian life wholistically.

Yet as I see it, the Adventist Church’s role as a pioneer on what we often call the “health message” has been a particularly important and meaningful application of living the Christian life wholistically. It is true that the rest of the world (including science) has discovered the scientific reality behind much of what the Adventist church has been preaching since the late 19^th century on many health issues, such as vegetarianism and the importance of fruits and vegetables to a balanced diet. Yet the Adventist Church continues to preach that this scientific reality is also a matter of living one’s spirituality wholistically.

This emphasis on living a unified wholistic Christian life not only in worship but throughout the week–and most importantly as an aspect of the “health message”–is a part of Adventism I treasure each day as I continue to live in the “in-between time.”

Humility as a Treasure

The Great Disappointment itself was a truly a deep lesson to the Millerites, which helped shaped how the Adventist church developed as a new denomination within the Christian community. The fact that Ellen White was a woman was also an unexpected development of the Spirit. In these two foundational elements of the Adventist tradition, I see God teaching his church humility. Yet this humility at the founding of Adventism is another renewal of lessons long a part of Christianity.

The first and most surprising moment is the very essence of Christianity itself: the crucified and resurrected Redeemer himself. In the words of Paul: “For Jews demand signs and Greeks desire wisdom, but we proclaim Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles . . .” 1 Corinthians 1:22-23 (NRSV).

The second moment comes from the story of Peter and Cornelius in Joppa: “While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’” Acts 10: 44-47 (NRSV).

The early church learned humility and surprise by the fact that the Messiah suffered, died, and was resurrected, and because Gentiles received the Holy Spirit like Jews. The Adventist movement learned humility and surprise (among other things) through surviving the Great Disappointment and finding the Holy Spirit poured out on a rather frail young woman.

I don’t think any Adventist can deny being surprised by how long the “in-between time” has lasted. Yet the surprises that God gave both the early church and the early Adventist movement lead me to value these lessons of humility and surprise as we continue forward in the “in-between time.” And I trust that God has more similar wonderful surprises in store for his church.

Shawn P. Nowlan is an attorney currently working for the federal government in Denver. He is a member of the Boulder Adventist Church. Email him at: [email protected]

[1]Conceding that the General Conference itself wasn’t established until 1863, it still remains true that the movement is about 200 years old, all things considered.
[2] Miller was born February 15, 1782.
[3] Bates was born July 8, 1792.
[4] James White was born August 4, 1821.
[5]Ellen White was born November 26, 1827.

21 Oct

Living For the Other World

“Live holy and godly lives as you look forward to the day of God and speed his coming.” 2 Peter 3:11-12 NIV

I am yet to meet an Adventist Christian who doesn’t have an agenda for present-day Christianity. Often, we are ready to offer advice, and plenty of it–the church shouldn’t do this; the leadership should do that.

“When will they start listening to someone like me?” we frequently hear. We even utter it, too. And we have so much to say.

My recent journey into my personal views on what’s important for my own church led me to the observation that the celibacy of thoughts doesn’t go very far. One needs a partnership with deeds! It is precisely this that I learned by looking into the life of the early Christian church.

It’s amazing what a bit of “dusting off” of one’s spiritual journey can bring out. I discovered that without a vision for the future, my present life offers, at best, illusions of happiness. To illustrate, here are two wise comments.

C S Lewis wrote that “if you read history, you will find that the Christians who did most for the present world were just those who thought most of the next. It is since Christians have largely ceased to think of the other world that they have become so ineffective in this one.”

An ancient history academic from the Cracow’s Jagiellonian University, Aleksander Krawczuk, compliments Lewis and says that “in early Christianity, it was different. They were aloof, meek, humble, persecuted, disinclined, suspicious and suspected. After all, they lived in the constant expectation of the return of Christ. The present world, they thought, will cease to exist at any moment. It is utterly ridiculous to even speculate about their views on government or politics. They weren’t interested. They didn’t care. They believed that the world is about to be dead. Important for them was to prepare oneself for Christ’s coming.”

Whew! Have we Christians ever strayed sideways from the days when hope was printed on our forehead and the reason to be on this earth was to tell someone to be ready. After all, it’s the Lord who is coming back.

Maybe, rather than worrying about how the church is behaving, and how policies are applied, we ought to be living like the early church. Individually. With no apprehension. Right now. Ourselves!

Rajmund Dabrowski is RMC communication director and editor of Mountain Views. Email him at [email protected]

20 Oct

DEPARTMENTAL DIRECTORS VOTED IN AT RMC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE

RMCNews – Denver, Colorado … At the outset of the October 11 meeting of the RMC Executive Committee, Mic Thurber, RMC president, welcomed new members to the committee: Ana Alvarez, layperson from Colorado Springs Hispanic; Randy Fueilly, layperson from Durango; and Anton Kapusi, pastor from Pueblo.

Following their individual introductions, and a presentation of present activities and plans to the new Executive Committee, all RMC departmental directors were voted for the current quinquennium. The directors, who are committee invitees, left the deliberations in order for the committee to discuss and vote on them to continue in their current positions. RMC president, Mic Thurber, whose wife Jana was being voted on for her positions as Prayer Ministries Coordinator, Women’s Ministries Director, and Ministerial Spousal Support Director, also left the room. Doug Inglish, RMC vice president for administration, chaired in his absence. All directors were returned to their respective positions, and Thurber resumed the chair.

Darin Gottfried, RMC vice president for finance, presented a current financial statement. “Through August of this year, RMC total tithe is down by 2.01% or (236,957.58). Our base tithe, which excludes windfalls, was down by 5.17% or (609,254.58),” he reported.

The Committee accepted the financial report subject to audit. The audit review was presented in which RMC received a favorable opinion. Also voted was establishing the RMC compensation review committee for the quinquennium.

Gottfried informed the Executive Committee that at their next meeting, he will present a preliminary budget for 2023.

Inglish reported pastoral vacancies in six districts, including Aurora First Church–Lead Pastor; Colorado Springs Central–Lead Pastor; Golden Church–Lead Pastor; Fort Morgan District–Lead Pastor; Littleton Church–Associate Pastor and Lead Pastor; Palisade District–Lead Pastor. The committee was briefed on where each of these churches stand in the process of finding the next pastor.

A motion was passed to close the Holyoke church following a report that the church voted in business session to close.

It was also voted to extend an invitation to fill an Executive Committee opening for a layperson from Wyoming. The name will be released if and when that person accepts the position.

The committee was briefed about bringing Good News TV, an independent ministry not affiliated with RMC, to the Denver area. The presentation was made by Luke Skelton, supported by local church leaders who are helping to make it possible. The ministry has been registered with the Secretary of State office in Colorado as a non-profit, received their Tax Identification Number, and has applied for 501 (c)3 status. According to Skelton, they have been up on free, over-the-air TV on channel 26.5 for several weeks, bringing a select variety of programs from Hope TV, 3ABN, and other ministries. Viewers are already calling in.

With travel plans to attend meetings in Chicago regarding the upcoming Pathfinder Camporee in Gillette, Wyoming, Mic Thurber asked Doug Inglish to chair the remainder of the meeting.

A report was given by Lisa Cardinal from the subcommittee appointed to make recommendations on the protection of employees who may disagree with the action of the constituents to allow for ordination of candidates of either gender. In the preceding committee meeting, which set up the subcommittee, a temporary policy was suggested by RMC president Thurber and approved, which is as follows:

No worker will lose his or her job because of their personal view on women’s ordination.
No pressure will be brought to bear from administration for a worker to change his or her view on women’s ordination.
No worker will be kept from any normal advancement opportunities because of their personal view on women’s ordination.
No potential worker who is otherwise appropriate for a given position when coming into our conference will be denied it by conference administration based on their view on women’s ordination.
Attendance and participation in fellow pastors’ ordinations has always been voluntary in Rocky Mountain Conference. That practice will continue.

A survey of conferences who have moved forward on ordination for either gender indicated that they have had no problems with employees who did not agree, but that if any problem arose, they were confident that there were already policies in place to deal with dissension that became inappropriate. It was the opinion of the subcommittee that RMC also has policies sufficient to address inappropriate dissension, which place the Executive Committee as the final arbiter of any such cases, and that no further policy is necessary. Upon their recommendation, no action was taken.

The status of the Bloomfield NM Hispanic Church, which has considered moving to the Texico Conference, was discussed. Further investigation is needed to know what will be required to complete the process.

The committee discussed the emphasis Risk Management has placed on having clear separation between RMC and independent ministries over which we have no oversight. Donations, seats on the board, and even rental of facilities must be carefully monitored in order to not become entangled so that courts could find us financially liable for the actions of such a ministry. It is possible to engage in a level of cooperation while clearly remaining separate organizations, but it is vital that RMC oversee relations with any such entity. This is not a value judgment on these ministries. Our administration and affected departments (such as Property and Trust) are already reviewing all such relationships and making necessary adjustments.

The committee accepted proposed dates for 2023 meetings which are as follows: February 21, April 11, June 27, August 22, October 17, and December 12.

The next RMC Executive Committee meeting is scheduled for December 12.

–RMCNews

20 Oct

COMMENTARY: REMEMBERING REFORMATION DAY

By Nathaniel Gamble

October 31 marks a very special occasion and it’s not Halloween. I’m talking about Reformation Day, the anniversary of Martin Luther posting his 95 Theses against Indulgences in 1517 and starting (unbeknownst to him at the time) the Protestant Reformation. Reformation Day has been observed intermittently since the late sixteenth century, gaining in popularity and international celebration as the centuries progressed. The 500^th anniversary of Reformation Day was observed throughout the world in 2017, and was the occasion for several Lutheran, Reformed, Anglican, Anabaptist, and a few Roman Catholic commemorations.

Seventh-day Adventists, however, have never really paid much attention to Reformation Day. For various reasons, some of which include jobs, school, family, and church responsibilities, Adventists have mostly been unaware of the importance or significance of Reformation Day. But I believe Reformation Day is an excellent time to demonstrate a winsome witness as a Seventh-day Adventist Christian and invest more deeply in Seventh-day Adventist religious liberty concerns.

For starters, Reformation Day provides us with an opportunity to get to know our neighbors. All of us have friends, family members, and work associates who identity as Catholic, Lutheran, Baptist, Methodist, Episcopalian, and Mennonite, to name a few. Do you know anything about these religious identities? Did you know your Lutheran friend’s religious heritage developed from Luther’s insistence on justification entirely being by Christ’s grace? How about your Baptist neighbor, whose religious tradition goes back to English believers who maintained that those being baptized must be old enough to make a decision for Jesus for themselves? Did you know that both the Methodists and Episcopalians have roots in Anglicanism, which began as King Henry VIII’s own version of Christianity? And did you know that the Mennonites used to be persecuted for their Christian beliefs by Lutheran and Anglican churches, but not by Baptist churches? All of these groups can be traced back in one way or another to the Protestant Reformation, and getting to know these histories will help each of us deepen our relationships with those who call these histories their own.

Perhaps more pressing, however, is the continued need which Reformation Day occasions: to be like Jesus by protecting the freedom of others to practice religion according to their conscience. For all his good, Luther often encouraged princes and other government authorities to forbid the practice of any form of Christianity in their lands except his own. The reformers Huldrych Zwingli and Heinrich Bullinger followed suit in Zurich, as did Martin Bucer in Strasbourg. John Calvin encouraged the same policy in Geneva, even going so far as to encourage the banishment of Jerome Bolsec for denying double predestination and involving himself in the execution of Michael Servetus for denying the Trinity.

Additionally, all these reformers fiercely argued for directing persecution and capital punishment against Anabaptist Christians, and most also argued that Jews and Muslims should be deprived of their religious liberties. Except for Anabaptists, who believed everyone should have the freedom to practice religion according to their conscience, Protestants and Roman Catholics in the sixteenth century felt that religious liberty only applied to their own groups instead of to all groups. For Seventh-day Adventists, the freedom to worship (or not worship) according to your conscience is sacred and must be afforded to everyone–something we learned from the Anabaptists.

So, what should an Adventist do with Reformation Day? My suggestion is to use it as an occasion to better understand God and others. Spend the day reading some histories of the Reformation to better know and understand the world we live in today. I recommend starting with John Bossy’s Christianity in the West, 1400-1700; Diarmaid MacCulloch’s The Reformation: A History; or Brad Gregory’s Salvation at Stake: Martyrdom in Early Modern Europe. Alternatively, you could search for Reformation Day celebrations near you and attend one. Doing this will expose you to the religious experiences of others while providing you with a platform to share Jesus’ love. Of course, there’s always the option of throwing your own Reformation Day celebration. This could be a neighborhood block party, a lunch with a few friends whose Christian denominations you’re interested in learning more about, or just a small family get together to praise God for the ways he has led believers in the past as you look forward to the future he has in store for you.

Finally, consider getting involved in local, national, or global religious liberty efforts. Visit the North American Division Public Affairs and Religious Liberty webpage at www.religiousliberty.info and check out the many resources available to Adventist church members. It identifies several ways to defend and work toward religious liberty for everyone from a Christ-centered perspective. Whatever you do on Reformation Day, do it to the glory of God.

–Nathaniel Gamble is RMC religious liberty director. Photo Win van ‘t Einde on Unspash.

20 Oct

OUTDOOR SCHOOL FOR WESTERN SLOPE

By Rachel Williams and Elizabeth Boden – Grand Junction … Hiking, rock climbing, rappelling, CPR, and water ecology were included in the 2022 outdoor school activities for 5^th – 9^th grade students from Adventist schools in Grand Junction, Delta, and Cortez. The school was held at New Beginnings Ranch, September 25-28. Attending this year were 29 kids and 12 adult volunteers.

One of the first activities was hiking to the top of Lone Cone Mountain. Part of the group stayed at the base of the mountain to study the flora of the forest, while a smaller group climbed to the summit. The Lord was with them during their climb, blessing them with sure footing as rain on the decent made the rocks slick and the ground muddy. All arrived at camp safely, though tired. It was truly a great experience and a blessing to be able to enjoy God’s creation.

The group enjoyed stories and worship by the fire before a good night’s sleep, excitement building as they looked forward to rappelling and rock climbing the following morning. Breakfast came early at outdoor school, with many activities to fit into the schedule. Tuesday morning, the decision was made about who would get to climb first. As kids separated into groups and headed off, many helpers were there to guide the way. Rock climbers and rappelers were in the hands of Dr. DuWayne Carlson, Brian Montag, and David Hanes; those interested in water ecology went with Joel Reyes; and those wanting to learn CPR and first aid gathered with Brandon Hart, RN.

A pond at the New Beginning Ranch was perfect for water ecology, with students examining living organisms under a microscope and being taught about the benefits of water. The CPR class was filled with valuable information on assessing an emergency, the ABCs of CPR, how to avoid getting injured while helping someone else who has sustained injury, how to treat a burn, and how to help a person who is choking.

At the end of the first aid class, Brandon Hart held a Q & A with many students interested in what it’s like to work at a hospital and deal with medical emergencies. “Safety first, when climbing or rappelling,” was explained as a great opportunity for kids to be able to receive instruction and on how to accomplish it. The students were blessed to have quality instructors to facilitate activities like rock-climbing and rappelling.

On the final day, everyone was involved in camp clean-up, and most tasks were completed quickly. Rachel Williams and Elizabeth Boden reported, “We had a few students go above and beyond what was asked of them. What great examples they were. We opened each day with worship by the fire and closed each evening with worship, stories, S’mores, and time with friends.

There are not enough words to express appreciation to Dr. DuWayne and Karen Carlson for their dedication to keeping the Ranch open and providing a wonderful learning opportunity for children to learn about God’s world.”

— Text and photos by Rachel Williams and Elizabeth Boden