QOD conference bulletin five

By David Larson

Photos by Bronwen Larson

A reflection on the Sabbath meeting

“Dave Larson  and I wept unashamedly as we received communion together ministered from the front by Angel Rodriguez, Colin Standish and George Knight (if the significance of this teamwork eludes you ask either of us),” wrote Jon Paulien, Dean of the School of Religion at Loma Linda University, to his faculty about Sabbath Morning, October 27.  “I have long prayed to experience a day like this.”

Were our tears for the needless pain our church has suffered since the publication of  Questions on Doctrines fifty years ago, or for the visible prospect that it is ending?  Both!

“Look!” Jon had whispered.  I then really saw what previously I had only looked at.  Angel Rodriquez, Director of the General Conference Biblical Research Institute, was standing behind the Bread and Wine of the Lord’s Supper.  Collin Standish, the President of Hartland Institute who is an eloquent spokesperson for the school of Adventist thought that finds QOD objectionable, stood beside him to our right.  George Knight, a retired historian of Adventism and prolific writer who is an equally persuasive advocate of much of QOD, despite the historical shortcomings that he has confirmed, was at his other side, to our left. 

Never had I even imagined such a moment!  “Quickly,” I whispered to Bronwen, my wife.  “Take a picture before it is too late.  People may not believe this.”  The result is a little fuzzy, but maybe that, too, is significant.  The blurriness of tears can make some things more clear.  The Dean of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary at Andrews University asked Bronwen for a copy of her photograph. [see above] History has been made!

Earlier in the morning Michael Campbell welcomed us to worship and then dismissed us for the Ordinance of Humility, one place for men, another for women and yet another for couples.  After washing each other’s feet as Jesus washed the feet of his disciples shortly before he was crucified, we returned to the Seminary Chapel for the Lord’s Supper. 

We all stood as the bread was distributed, sitting only when we had received our portion.  “Take, eat; this is my body.”  Then again we all stood as the unfermented wine was distributed, once more sitting only as we received our cups.  “Drink ye all of it.  This is my blood which is shed for you.” 

Then a congregational hymn:

I’d rather have Jesus than silver or gold;
I’d rather be His than have riches untold;
I’d rather have Jesus than houses or lands,
I’d rather be led by His nail pierced hand.

Than to be a king of a vast domain
Or be held in sin’s dread sway,
I’d rather have Jesus than anything
This world affords today.

The Scripture was John 1: 1 – 3 and 14:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  The same was in the beginning with God.  All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made…..And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten son of the Father,) full of grace and truth.”

Following the prayer by Ed Reynolds, Ron Knott and William Fagel thrilled us with a stirring duet:

I hear the Savior say,
“Thy strength indeed is small;
Child of weakness, watch and pray,
Find in Me thine all in all.”
Jesus paid it all,
All to Him I owe;
Sin had left a crimson stain,
He washed it white as snow.

“You have been good,” Angel Rodriquez declared with a [relieved?] smile to those of us who had participated in the conference since Wednesday evening.  His Homily was titled “Looking Back:  Profiling the Future.”  It invited us to mentally leave our “scholarly bags” in the foyer and, for a few moments at least, to worship the One about whom there had been so much scholarly discussion.  “Be sure to pick them up again on your way out,” he implored, “because you must continue your work.  But for now let us worship.”

Another congregational hymn:
All to Jesus, I surrender;
All to Him I freely give;
I will ever love and trust Him,
In His presence daily live.
I surrender all, I surrender all,
All to Thee, my blessèd Savior,
I surrender all.

Speaking in both Spanish and English, Johnny Ramirez-Johnson articulated the thoughts and feelings of all in a passionate final prayer and benediction.  Finally Julius Nam thanked the conferees for their participation, invited us to continue tearing down the walls that we have built between us and wished us God’s blessing.

The Spirit of Worship continued over lunch at the Wolverine Room of the Campus Cafeteria, albeit in a less formal and more convivial fashion.  Like those who do not want to leave a good party even though it's time to go, we lingered, chatted, took pictures, more pictures and still more pictures. 

The photograph that means the most to me features Julius Nam [R], Michael Campbell [L] and Jerry Moon.  These three young men brought together -- for half a week -- people from all over the world with very different convictions about QOD, accomplishing something that no one else had been able to do in fifty years.  The good results of this historic meeting are beyond calculation.  God has only begun to make good use of their talents and dedication!    

Comments

[Michael Peabody]

Wow . . .

I pray this spirit of cooperation and dedication will continue to inspire and move this great body forward even as we dance on shifting sands.

[Hedrick Edwards]

Here I go blogging again, something for which, up to this point, I have had scant regard. But I could hardly restrain myself from making this comment.

From all the excellent reports I've been reading, it appears that, in the final analysis, the ethos of the QOD conference was not only clarifying but also unifying. It proved to be a catalyst of historic significance in which divergent theological positions long held proved to be no insurmountable barriers to spiritual renewal, fellowship and solidarity. In this I find cause for rejoicing and for hope.

Technical theologians will continue to have their different viewpoints and particular emphases from which to challenge one another; but the larger issue is the spirit of reconciliation in practice. This baby should not be discarded or neglected, even if some of its bathwater needs to be thrown out from time to time. Is it not true that the whole purpose of "God with us" in the incarnation and atonement of Jesus Christ is to establish as foundational to his kingdom a ministry of reconciliation for the whole world, for the entire universe in fact?

If this is the common ground on which we all can honestly stand, why should it matter at all whether the denomination is viewed as sect or non-sect?

Preoccupation with matters of such trite self-interest could be a powerful diversion from taking the next logical step. That is, to use our various gifts to translate and re-present in various ways the ministry of reconciliation and healing on a planet that is plagued so desperately by alienation and brokenness of all kinds. The essence of the theology that was reviewed, it seems to me, is too profound and too relevant to the situation in which we are embedded to end with learned treatises and inspiring conventions. Some are already on there way to take it to this next level.

[Elaine Nelson]

Congratulations to the three wonderful young men who were able to put together such an historic event. The church will be forever in your debt. May the wonderful spirit of harmony continue on forever!

[arlyn]

I had the privilege to talk with Dr. J. Nam after the conference and was struck by his humility even after pulling off such a groundbreakingly warm, lively yet cordially Christ-like seminar of very opposing views.

I believe our church will see more of such "miracles" from his contributions and it gives me grand hopes for the future of our church theologians and theological growth.

God bless you all who participated!

[Gerhard Haas]

As a newcomer to Spectrum and its attending blogs, and as your pretty average member and participant in a local Adventist church, I was delighted to find and read the reports of this conference, something which we normally wouldn't read about in the Review. (Or only in a much pasturized version--which may be as it should be.)

In any event, I'm envigorated to learn that our church and its leadership, administrative and profesorrial, is maturing to the level that such conversations and examinations of our doctrines can take place without any concern or fear for the "foundations," or any individual's sincerety.

At the local church level, where I live and breath, we of course tolerate a huge latitude of religious ideas about both Christianity and Adventism. No one is disfellowshipped from Sabbath School or shunned because their beliefs veer a little (or a lot) to the right or left, up or down. For example, I'm still an elder even though I believe that Martin Luther had as much "spirit of prophecy" as Ellen White did (am I not German and didn't he single handedly steer the church back to Christ). And it would never occur to me to distance myself from the deacon who thrives on the music of the praise team and thinks that maybe Jesus really did make wine that was not just completely grape juice. (I'm not linking the two.) We're both just delighted that we see each other most Sabbaths and can honestly praise God together after having spent all week fending for ourselves in the crowds of friends, colleagues or family members who look to Donald Trump and Christopher Hitchens for inspration, rather than the songs King David.

So these reports that have detailed such a disciplined and but diverse discussion of important, but not saving or damning issues at the highest levels of our church, with the brightest minds, are very reassuring. Those of us in the pews want to know that the leadership has a forum for hashing out these issues. And we want to know that they really were, and continue to be hashed out, not just reaffirmed. Only with a whole lot of people talking about these infinitly elusive concepts that will challenge us through eternity, can we be assured that the understanding of our relationship to God and his turned-human Son, will not be hijacked by any one individual claiming special insight and authority.

Keep up the good work and praise God for his having taken the risk of giving us just enough brains to try to understand him at least a little, but not too much to make us think we have the complete corner on truth. Meanwhile we pray that we can tackle the really big issues with love: staying clear of the vacuum seal grip of popular consumer culture and looking to and following Jesus so that people we love who really don't think they want or need him will stop and listen when we say his name.

Shabbat Shalom

[Dr. Thomas J. Zwemer]

David

I was touched by your account of the last session of QOD. I know those tears were for real. Let me share with you two stories:

1. At the urging of my father, my Uncle, a Dutch Reform stalwart, attended an evangelistic series presented by an itinerate SDA evangelist. My uncle and his wife attended every service. The evangelist, of course, assumed they were “ripe” so he suggested he visit them in their home. Of course, they were a very hospitable Dutch couple. The evangelist, after a brief introduction, stated that they had “heard” all of the “truth”. Now was the moment of decision; they could come forward at the “call” and be bound for heaven or they could refuse and be bound for hell. My uncle, bless his heart asked: “Do you plan to be in heaven?” The evangelist replied in the affirmative:
My uncle answered, “Then I would just as soon be in hell!”

2. During my tenure on the Board of the Augusta United Way, I met a Presbyterian minister, of a very prominent Presbyterian Church—“Ike’s” church when in Augusta, Ga.

Betty and I attended several of his worship services. The format of his homily was
a. This is what the Bible says.
b. This is how I understand it.
c. This is the life style it suggests.
d. I hope you agree.
e. If you don’t we are still friends, and
f. God still loves you.
g. Amen.

Betty and I found that so compelling we became members: About 2 years after Glacier View.

The bottom-line is we would rather have Jesus than Neal Wilson et al. Tom

[Pat Travis]

Tom,

That was my experience at Reformed Theological Seminary exactly.

I am but a "whisker" from the PCA...but they too only have "some of the invisible church."

All the Best Tom

pt

[David R. Larson]

Tom

Well, now, are there not Calvinists and Calvinists?

Some of the most generous people I know are in that theological heritage.

I work with some PCA people at "Progressive Christians Uniting" and years ago the PCA used our Loma Linda abortion conference as a template for theirs, inviting me to participate as an "ecumenical visitor."

So I know that all the good things you say are true.

I also have met some TULIP Calvinsts [Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistble grace, and Perseverance of the saints] who would make many SDAs look like flaming liberals. Some of these people really aren't fun to be around.

The lesson for me is that we can find good and bad in every tradition.

Didn't we once hear story about a farmer who had both wheat and weeds in his field...........?

Thanks!

Dave

[Dr. Thomas J. Zwemer]

Dave

Some telling points well made and well received.

Thanks and God's speed.

Tom

[Pat Travis]

Dave,

Some Adventist are "flaming liberals."

and... their are "perfectionistic" Adventist.

and...there are Calvinist and there are Calvinist.

That aside, I had the priviledge of auditing a class on Election and also The Atonement under Roger Nicole. For any unknowing readers, Dr. Nicole is a Reformed Baptist Swiss theologian whom is well acomplished in all the biblical languages and speaks 7 contemporary languages.
He also was one of the founders of the Evangelical Theological Society.
SDA contacts were that Leroy Froom sent him a set of "The Prophetic Faith of our Fathers" for his input.
He is now 92.

Personal note...Dr. Nicole recognized that I had difficulty and disagreed with the Calvinist doctrine of "Particular Election and Reprobation". He was like getting into a steel trap as far as the doctrine...yet with humility that the elect did not know their specific status outside of their trust in the cross.

I shall never forget, That every time he saw me he said, "Hello Brother" in that Swiss voice (In the Christian Sense)There were higher priorities for Him than "Calvinist distinctives." Could the same always be said of we SDA's!

Ladies, that "extreme conservative" has written position papers favoring the ordination of women...if...they recognize the creation order and the final authority of scripture.

pt

[David R. Larson]

Great, Pat!
How fortunate you are to have known and studied with Roger Nicole! I'm sure it was a good experience. Keep up your studies!

Dave