Analysis of The Letters

Well, if you’ve read the two letters that have been posted this week, then you probably have a few thoughts of your own. I encourage you to share them in the comments. Here is my analysis of the letters, both of Jim’s and Cress’ response. I must tell you that the reason I even started this series of posts is because when I read Jim’s letter I thought it represented most of the issues that concern the historic Adventist community as a whole. However, I will say that some of these issues are not as important, in my opinion, than others. In fact, I will state that I think one of the most important issues, the nature of christ, has been clumped together with (what I perceive to be) non-issues like the 144,000 and the trinity. That being said, here is my analysis of the letters.

My first impression after reading Jim’s letter was that he had probably left the church for some reform off-shoot group. However, this is not the case. He has moved from South Dakota back to the Texas conference, but is still a member in good standing at this time. That is of some interest as we find in James Cress’ response that Jim had submitted a hand-written request along with his letter to have his name removed from the church rolls (he confirmed this to me during our phone conversation as well). Jim’s motivation appears to be from frustration. After joining the church several decades ago as a young adult, Jim has witnessed what he feels is the erosion of the pillars of the faith, the foundational doctrines of the church, if you will. He feels, like so many other historic Adventists, that the average sermon heard on Sabbath morning these days could just as well be heard on Sunday in any number of the evangelical churches. More and more there is less and less distinction between Adventists and “mainstream” churches of the day.

Jim’s letter does appear, at first glance, to be simple a long laundry list of fault-finding within the church. However, he does state in his opening paragraph that his intent is not to criticize or complain. Perhaps his motivation is found a little further down where he states he desires to practice and teach these principles to others. While he surely did not think that this letter sent to the various conference offices would spark any real reformation, perhaps the true reformation had already taken place in his heart. At this point, Jim appears to me to be stating his case for why he feels the denomination has strayed from it’s path, and why he requested to be removed from the books.

That being said, here is an excerpt from my initial response to Jim’s letter via e-mail:

I am glad to hear that you are not being “sucked in” to the new church that is emerging around us. … The letter you have written seems like you are convinced of the apostasy within the rank and file of the “official” SDA denomination. I’m not up to speed on all of the issues that you raised, but I must admit that I agree with the majority of the items you listed. Have you gotten a response from any level within the church?

I guess if you take this line of thinking to it’s ultimate conclusion, then we would have to consider two things to be true:

(1) You are no longer in the SDA church, not because you left, but because the church left
(2) You would want to depart from fellowship with such individuals and find other like-minded believers to fellowship with OR
(3) You would continue to fellowship within the defunct church in order to “witness” and perhaps lead some of the souls out of deception and into the light of the present truth, as originally given to the Advent movement.

What are your plans going forward? Are you still doing the colporteur work? I know that this work has been near and dear to your heart for some time …

Obviously, since Jim has not left the church in the year since the original letter was written, we can conclude that he has chosen option # 3, to be a light of truth in what some would consider a fading movement of destiny.

Now, as for James Cress’ response, I would have to agree with one of the comments on the post where the letter appears: it is a diplomatic letter, but that is not all it is. I found it interesting that Cress feels the need to delineate the timeline of the letters during his opening paragraph and salutation. I’m not sure the purpose or need of this timeline, unless it is to point out to Jim his apparent hesitation in sending the orignal letters to the church offices (which I’m sure Jim was already aware of).

Next, it is interesting to note that Cress agrees that there are some serious issues raised within the letter that should be addressed. However, instead of identifying which issues he feels are serious enough to warrant consideration, he takes the time to identify two items that he feels are conflicting with each other and “frivolous”. He actually takes the time to compare the issue of changing fundamental beliefs to having a church manual, and gives a line of reasoning which concludes that having the one prevents the other from forming a concrete creed-like set of beliefs. Interestingly enough, I have not heard of the concern about a church manual before, and this is one area that I will be addressing later after further study. However, on the issue of the fundamental beliefs, I do agree that the founders did not want a concrete creed set … but they didn’t want any of the pillars of truth removed from the foundation either! Any cursory student of the Spirit of Prophecy will tell you that these pillars include such modern-day anathema subjects such as 1844 and the investigative judgment. Modern church theologians appear loathe to discuss these in any depth. Desmond Ford would probably fare much better today in front of a board of modern-day peers than he did in 1980 at Glacier View.

Cress closes out the letter with a personal reading recommendation that I think displays the attitude of the leadership of the church pretty well. He recommends that Jim read the 35th chapter of Patriarchs and Prophets and prays that Jim will soften his judgmental accusations against his brethren. First, I didn’t find any of Jim’s issues to be accusatory towards any particular person or persons within the church organization. In addition, I didn’t think they were judgmental, but simply a statement of grievances about the direction of the organization as a whole.

Have you, dear reader, recently read the chapter in question from Patriarchs and Prophets? If not, I would encourage you to do so as well. Interestingly enough, it is about the rebellion of Korah in the wilderness against Moses. While Cress’ letter and closing paragraph intimate that his reason for having Jim read this chapter is to quiet his questioning and accusations against the leadership of the church, I have a different view of this passage. It seems to me to be very interesting the attitude of Korah and his group, versus that of Moses and God’s true followers. Notice this particular quote from the pages of inspiration:

“They had been flattered by Korah and his company until they really believed themselves to be very good people, and that they had been wronged and abused by Moses. Should they admit that Korah and his company were wrong, and Moses right, then they would be compelled to receive as the word of God the sentence that they must die in the wilderness. They were not willing to submit to this, and they tried to believe that Moses had deceived them. They had fondly cherished the hope that a new order of things was about to be established, in which praise would be substituted for reproof, and ease for anxiety and conflict. The men who had perished had spoken flattering words and had professed great interest and love for them, and the people concluded that Korah and his companions must have been good men, and that Moses had by some means been the cause of their destruction” - PP pg 401-402

Ellen White mentions several times in her writings that the children of Israel in the wilderness is a pre-figure or type of the modern church movement. Interestingly enough, if you look at which group is giving a “new order” of things, who is substituting praise for reproof (pleasing those itching ears), I think it is clear which side the spirit of Korah is on! I would submit to you, dear reader, that in the modern rebellion of Korah, the spirit of Korah has taken over the movement of destiny that was founded upon the hope of our Lord’s second coming, and the three angels’ messages.

Don’t be fooled … God is still in control, and there will be a great shaking within the church, the tremors of which are already being felt within the church. It is God’s church, and he will separate the wheat from the chaff. In the final conclusion of the conflict, God will have a people who will stand righteous in Him, victorious over sin, and ready for translation … vindicating his character. If you have never heard of this before, or are unfamiliar with the Last Generation Theology, then I encourage you to take a minute to request a copy of “The Last Generation” from M.L. Andreasen. This special pdf report is available through our newsletter-sign up box in the top of the left-hand column during the month of January. Be sure and sign up to get your copy.

In conclusion, I think that Jim’s presentation was civil, polite, and concerned. He simply stated his reasons, for any who might care, of why he was leaving the church … because the church had already left him! His response from James Cress was not one that would be considered a surprise. Politically correct, Cress responds in an authoritarian way, dismissing the frivolous concerns while never addressing any of the more serious matters. In addition, he cites a passage of the SOP (which he feels will influence Jim, since he is obviously still a believer in the Spirit of Prophecy) that emphasizes not questioning the leaders that God has put in place, and not rebelling against the word of the Lord. Oddly enough, this passage would appear to be more of a reproof against the new order that has already taken root in the upper echelons of the church. I think this correspondence shows quite clearly the stance of infallible superiority that the leadership of the church feels in it’s heart. While this is not to be unexpected, I think the end of the age is upon us, and as we near the return of Christ, things within the denomination (not to be confused with the true church - the followers of Christ) will become worse. It is my prayer that each person reading this website will be spurred into deeper study of the issues at hand, and draw closer each day to our Lord, Jesus Christ. Even so, come quickly Lord Jesus.