Better Together

There is one dynamic duo that sticks out in my mind that was better together than they were apart, Bill Belicheck and Tom Brady. This past football season has been unlike any other over the last 20 years and it’s not because of COVID. They each had their own personalities and it’s documented that over the years their relationship soured. The greatest coach and quarterback of all time found their ability to work together strained due to changes in philosophy. Are they still better together? We will never know, but at least one of them has done well without the other.

When I was a Platoon Sergeant in the Army I’d often tell my guys that our working together, supporting one another, and single mindedness was critical in accomplishing the mission. My job was to take care of my troops so that they would take care of the mission. We worked better together. 

What about our association? I have grown increasingly concerned that we don’t work as closely together as we need to in order to carry out the mission of God. Instead, fault lines run deep and some have grown weary due to a lack of theological and structural integrity. My hope is to draw out those who desire to work more closely together, who see the need for change so that we can become more effective and efficient in taking the Gospel to our neighbors and the nations. Consider this a call to mission and unity that seems to be lacking in our ranks.

The question posed here is one that I spent several hours discussing with pastors, seminarians, and church leaders the other day in response to my recent article Whose Tent Is It Anyway?. Each was asking that question themselves, openly pondering how much of a benefit our association is to them and their ministry. It is a healthy exercise to evaluate ministry partnerships on a regular basis for churches and pastors alike. In our association most recognize that there are many struggles we face moving forward and it seems we are short on answers.

My aim here is to share what I and many others believe are foundational issues within our denomination. It is out of love, concern, and desire for reform that I write these things. I and many other like-minded individuals want to be part of the solution. We want to work together. We desire unity of faith and practice. We want a functioning association of churches that treasure truth over peace. We desire biblical christianity. However, that doesn’t mean we will hang on forever. There comes a point where the fields have become too overgrown with weeds, chock full of rocks, and pestered by vultures hovering to pick up seeds that the only viable option is to move onto a new pasture.

Theological Issues Align Us With Mainline Liberals

What are mainline churches? These are Protestant churches that have traditionally been the backbone of American Christianity, but have trended towards theological liberalism since the modernist/fundamentalist controversy. They can often be characterized as socially and politically active in fighting for LGBTQ, abortion, and  social justice issues. Usually they reject the supernatural in Scripture, its infallibility, inerrancy, and sufficiency. This also leads to a rejection of Christ as truly God and truly man and the exclusivity of salvation only in Him. It creates a form of functional Universalism.

Does this theological liberalism sound like your church? Lord willing, I hope not. It certainly isn’t my church. Due to our inclusive nature as an association, this kind of false teaching is able to find a home. In fact it already has. Our statement on abortion would fall into the liberal false teaching camp. If you haven’t read it you can check it out here and here. In short our position is that abortion is the taking of a human life and is morally wrong, except in the case of rape, birth defect, or any other reason that isn’t tied to convenience. To the writers and those who affirmed this statement, I’m praying for your repentance for such an unbiblical stance. For the Psalmist writes, “For you formed my inward parts; you knitted me together in my mother’s womb.” (Ps. 139:13) How could such a statement by a Christian association of churches be written and passed when the Scriptures are so clear on the value God places on the pre-born?

We don’t affirm Christian beliefs nevermind conservative Evangelical ones. Sure we passed a Statement of Faith in 2017, but what did that actually do? At least one conference rejected it according to a denominational official. A different denominational leader confirmed that many Ministerial Committees are unwilling to use the Statement of Faith as theological criteria to ordain clergy. Even more churches have summarily rejected the statement. One pastor shared with me that an Advent Christian Church in his town has about ⅓ of the congregation remaining in fellowship despite their rejection of Christ’s pre-existence.

Despite individual pastors and churches remaining faithful we're not held together by anything secure and we’re unable to hold each other accountable. Our lack of a theological foundation betrays our best ideals and instead exports the secular ideology of today: a postmodern religion that treasures universal acceptance and rejects God’s truth as knowable. Believe whatever you’d like, I’ll believe whatever I like, and George will believe whatever he likes. We can all be brothers and sisters in… name. This rejects biblical, historical, and orthodox Christianity. We all bear some level of guilt by association. Why? By remaining in the same association of churches we inherently endorse others who bear the name Advent Christian. We might not endorse all of their conclusions, but we do bear witness to the shared faith. John writes, “I rejoiced greatly to find some of your children walking in the truth, just as we were commanded by the Father.” (2 John 4) He rejoices in seeing his fellow brothers in the Lord walking in the truth of the Gospel. He is equally distressed when he finds that some might be persuaded to forsake the Apostolic teaching.

When he writes, “And this is love, that we walk according to his commandments; this is the commandment, just as you have heard from the beginning, so that you should walk in it.” (2 John 6), there is an explicit demand by John that we live out the commandments of Jesus. These commandments are to love God and love our neighbor. What kind of love rejects the glory of God for the glory of men? How much must we hate our neighbor that we endorse his lies rather than winsomely correct her with truth?

Structural Issues Make Us Impotent

When John writes his letters that are found towards the end of our Bibles there is a level of authority he is executing. One might say that his authority is derived from his apostleship and you’d be right. However, he refers to himself as the “Elder” in both 2 & 3 John. He is appealing to the church as an elder of another. His appeal is as one with the same authority many of us possess as local church elders rather than to his apostolic authority. When Paul writes his letters he often appeals to his apostleship, but also as a brother in Christ that is culpable for their actions. I think there are many ecclesisatical structures we can infer from the Scriptures, but the one we have now isn’t one of them. If the Executive Director, ACGC President, Regional Superintendent, or Conference President were to express concerns to a church about false teaching they have no authority apart from the relationships they’ve built. A church could simply say and many have, “Buzz off, we like things just how they are no matter what you say.” This goes against the spirit of associations and submission to God-appointed leadership.What kind of authority should they have? I’m not sure, but certainly more than they currently wield.

Listen to the words of John the Apostle, “If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house or give him any greeting, for whoever greets him takes part in his wicked works.” (2 John 10-11) He is addressing the false view of Christ found in the early church where people rejected His full humanity. We know there were also some who rejected His full deity. The three Epistles of John in their totality demonstrate that a core issue of the faith is the nature of Christ. Unfortunately, it seems the nature of Christ is not something we as a denomination have taken seriously. We have embraced false teachers and taken part in their wicked works.

Our structure has led to impotence. The Executive Council apparently has no authority to enforce the Statement of Faith. Churches have already forsaken Christ by rejecting His nature. We have rejected biblical morality by endorsing the murder of preborn children. And everyone is looking around not knowing who is in charge. There was supposed to be a focus group established to address our structural problems. Where is this group? Have they met? What are their findings? I would love to hear their suggestions as they seek to lead in this area of needed correction.

Character Issues Undermine The Gospel

“Therefore, my brothers, whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm thus in the Lord, my beloved.” (Php. 4:1)

“So then, brothers, stand firm and hold to the traditions that you were taught by us, either by our spoken word or by our letter.” (2 Thess. 2:15)

When you know the truth and cower in the face of opposition it rejects the power of the Gospel. It is a display that our faith is not in Christ but in man. We treasure what others think about us rather than Christ.Instead of standing firm in the faith we’d rather back down assuming that Jesus was lying when He said, 

“So everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven, but whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.” (Matt. 10:32-33)

If you embrace the Statement of Faith and believe it is faithful to the Scriptures yet reject the thought of it uniting us together in faith and practice then you lack conviction that comes with the truth of the Gospel. It isn’t a case of trying to be humble and charitable. It is a case of openly embracing non-Christian and unbiblical religious systems that minimize Christ, His work, and serve not the Gospel of Christ, but a man made gospel that trusts not in God. This man made religion finds its hope and trust in men.

A Ligonier article puts it perfectly, 

“But he also knew how likely it is for those who profess to be God’s people to waver on such matters, so he wrote Philippians 4:1 as a way to make it crystal clear that the responsibility of those called by the Lord is always to stand firm upon the rock of Apostolic and prophetic revelation. In other words, believers are always to plant their feet firmly in what has been revealed in sacred Scripture.”

Where are the men and women willing to die for the truth? Where are our Lady Jane Grays, Jan Hus, and Polycarps? Is it time for reformation or a time to go the route of J. Gresham Machen? We are at a crossroads where the current climate of theological inclusivism and functional universalism is untenable. The history of our denomination has been described to me as one where lines in the sand aren’t drawn for theological and biblical reasons, but relational ones. It is out of love and concern for my brothers and sisters in Christ that I draw this theological line in the sand in the hopes of seeing a work of God and revival. Let our fervor for relational unity be surpassed by our zeal for the truth and sharing it with the world.

Bad Theology Hurts People

I’ve cited the Epistles of John above and a theme found throughout his letters is that false teaching hurts people. We should be concerned for the spiritual well-being of those who reject the deity or humanity of Christ. Our churches should weep when we reflect on the fact that many believe that Jesus did not exist eternally. Hearts should be pained to hear that fellow Advent Christians reject the biblical teaching on God’s triune nature. Effort should be made collectively to call each teacher who teaches a false Gospel or untruth about Christ to the right belief. Let us actively pray that The Lord rescues them and those who have been deceived. 

John rejoices multiple times in his letters when he finds believers walking in the truth. Not only are God’s people hearers of the truth, but doers as well. False teaching robs the church of experiencing the shared joy found in the risen Christ. It breaks the fellowship apart by rejecting key truths of the Gospel. This pains the church and most importantly it grieves the Lord who has died for her. That the church would trade truth for a false sense of unity is to trade her birthright for a bowl of stew.

Have we done all that we can to call the church out of Babylon? Do we actively seek to call our Advent Christian brothers and sisters back to their first love and to right belief? In talking with much older pastors it seems that efforts have been made for decades. With that in mind, I make the following plea. Believe in the Gospel of Christ; believe that Jesus is Lord over all creation; eternally pre-existent; truly divine and truly man; sinless and perfect; He died for your sins and mine; raised three days after His death; and currently sitting at the right hand of The Father. May this be the faith that we call our erring brothers and sister back too.

So What Are Our Options?

In speaking with multiple people over the last couple of days it seems the picture of our future is unclear. Here are a few options I can think of that would address some of the concerns outlined above. These are listed in order of my personal preference and I’m happy to accept alternative solutions.

1. We could do a complete structural overhaul that better reflects the Scriptures.

A structure that would see authority vested in leaders appointed by our triennial delegate body. One that would appoint and affirm leaders that are bold yet gentle. Those who treasure the Gospel, faithful to the Scriptures above all else, while remaining charitable towards others. This overhaul would allow for those duly elected and appointed to exercise God-given authority in keeping us accountable to our shared faith and practices adopted by the delegate body.

2. We could realign conferences theologically rather than geographically.

This would allow for greater cooperation between churches so that they can work together in leadership training, church planting, mission, and church revitalization. It would alleviate some concern regarding culpability of apostate churches and false teachers while staying under our broad theological tent. Our relationships, not shared faith, would continue to bind us at the highest level, while at the conference level we could exercise greater accountability according to our shared faith and theology. Those who seek greater practical and theological alignment in addition to accountability can willfully submit and partner based on their shared convictions. This could spur on missions similar to how narrower theological and missiological associations have done such as Acts 29.

3. Some could start an entirely new association/denomination.

This is not the preferable choice, but it was one that came up in more than one conversation. It would be the easiest and meet the least resistance. Due to the history and strong relational ties I am quite pessimistic that this option would gain much support. However, one must ask at what point do things become so untenable that this becomes the only choice? One thing I find encouraging is that other denominations have gone this route successfully while still maintaining some level of communion with others such as the Anglican Communion and Presbyterians/Reformed.

4. We could do nothing and just learn to live with those in our communion that embrace false gospels, reject biblical truths and orthodoxy.

As one person told me “we could try and live with it.” This is a very real possibility and maybe the most “Advent Christian” answer one could muster: it’s the easiest route and wouldn’t rock the boat. This approach also rejects all the admonitions found in the New Testament towards the church to reject false Gospels and false teachers. If this is the route we take then we should probably do away with the Statement of Faith and Declaration of Principles because they aren’t being used anyway. This would allow us to fully embrace what is already actively practiced--religious inclusivism wrapped in theological liberalism.

Let Me Finish

With so many options it can be a paralyzing force. However, the Gospel has always brought with it a sense of urgency, especially for Adventists like ourselves. We should urgently seek the truth, the Lord, the good of our brothers, and the expansion of Christ’s Kingdom. It is time for bold leadership grounded in the Scriptures and untamed zeal spurred on by the truth of the Gospel rather than tepid apathy that strangles excitement and extinguishes joy.