Mission report from Chiapas Mexico

Exciting things are happening in Chiapas, Mexico. Lela and I were blessed to go on a medical mission trip to the town of Ocozocoautla in Mexico’s southern-most state this month. Dr. Jeff Hardesty, an obstetrician-gynecologist from Loma Linda, and an official ministry of Loma Linda University organized the trip. Each year Dr. Hardesty leads a trip to Chiapas with a team of nurses, physicians and allied health professionals as well as anyone else to wants to go along to carry out whatever missionary opportunities God opens. This is the 9th year a team has gone. Lela and I went down separately from the rest of the team, as we needed to bring our three-month-old son, Josiah because he is still nursing. With Josiah so young, we prayed much before deciding to come, as the region does have some malaria risk, as well as a significant history of kidnapping. To minimize his exposure, we came down three days after everyone else and arrived the evening before the medical outreach was to begin.

Our travel itinerary included dropping off our three older children, Hadassah, Nathaniel and Moriah, with Lela’s parents who live in Phoenix, and who were kind enough to carry out a mission of their own by taking care of them while we were out of country. Then we traveled to Los Angeles where we caught our flight to Mexico City. Here a miracle occurred. We had to go through customs before catching our connecting flight to Tuxtla-Gutiérrez, the capital of Chiapas. If you have ever traveled with us, you known that we always plan ahead, and we bring anything we might need. On this trip, we especially wanted to be prepared to get our three-month-old jewel safely through a week in the mission field (stove, bottle/pump sterilizer, sani-wipes, Clorox wipes, mosquito netting, baby toys, stroller, car seat, bassinet, inflatable baby tub, medicine, thermometer, medications for any condition that might occur, blankets, changes of clothes, diapers, etc.) plus enough clean American food to feed us for a week, PLUS literature. We knew that we were going to be meeting with El Presidente de Ocozocoautla (the mayor of the town where the team carried out its medical mission), so, in addition to the magazines on health, the birth and life of Christ, and the Sabbath which were to be given out to all of the patients and family members and which were generously supplied by Ron Goss of Project Restore, we also brought two cases of full-text Spirit of Prophecy books, all in Spanish, of course, to be given El Presidente as well as the members of his cabinet and other administrators with whom the team interacted.

In Mexico City, we had to deplane, go through immigration, find our luggage, go through customs, re-check in and go back through security in time to board again. By the time we had all of our carry-on items plus our gate-checked items and made it down to customs, we found a line in front of us that snaked back and forth, filling a room about 25 by 25 meters. The time was 3:30 pm, and our connecting flight was set to depart at 4:45 pm, and on Aeromexico, airline personnel seem to like boarding early. This was only the first line where we would have to wait in in order to get through the process by 4:45, and from the looks of things, there was no way we were even going to make it through the first line by 4:45. We had been praying quite a lot before and during the trip, and we needed a miracle if we were going to make it to our destination to join the rest of the team and not get stuck in Mexico City. Lela went over to talk to an official standing off to the side. He looked at us and then the line in front of us, and told her that she was not going to make her flight. Then, looking at Josiah he said, “But for the baby, follow me.” Walking past the enormous line full of people, one-by-one he moved the line barrier pylons to the side just enough to allow us to pass by, stroller and all, and delivered us to the immigration official who examined our passports. In the next warehouse-sized room, we had to find our luggage and get it to the customs agent at the far end of the building. Out of nowhere, two men with carts appeared and told us to come with them. Quickly they led us to the right area where we found the luggage from our plane. The men had not even asked for the name of our city of departure. Passing by all of the large, scary dogs sniffing for South-American contraband, they picked up our bags. Then a woman appeared who began talking to Lela. Lela told her why we were going to Chiapas with a medical team that was already at our destination, and she took us right to the customs official. Because we were bringing our own food, when I filled out the customs form, I had checked the first box which indicated that I was attempting to carry either food, dangerous chemicals or insects into the county. Despite this potential problem, a short conversation between this mystery woman and the customs official, and the official had signed off on our baggage, four suitcases and three suspicious-looking boxes and all, and the men were whisking us through some double doors out of customs.

Now we needed to get checked in for our next flight. Again, out of nowhere, a man appeared and told us to follow him. He asked no questions, but took us down a hall which seemed to be going the opposite direction that someone had indicated we needed to go, up an elevator and down the corridor to the ticket counter, past another giant line, and to the front. Dropping us off at the ticket counter, he gave some quick instructions to us as well as the ticket agent and was gone. Including immigration and customs, this all took about seven minutes, and it was a good thing, because when we got to our gate, passengers were already boarding, and the plane taxied away from the gate several minutes early. After finding our seats, we bowed our heads and thanked God for His blatant miracle in getting us safely on our flight, but as we were about to learn, this miracle was small compared to the work God is doing in the region we were to visit.

Once in Tuxtla-Gutiérrez, we were picked up at the airport by a retired Seventh-day Adventist pastor named Pastor Pedro. Fortunately, he had driven his pickup-truck. During the hour-and-a-half drive to Ocozocoautla, we had time to learn about the work God has been doing in Chiapas. The people of Chiapas are very poor, hence our mission trip to provide medical and surgical care that they would otherwise be unable to obtain. Many of the people are indigenous, descendants of the Maya civilization. The population of the state of Chiapas is just under five million and, to the praise of God, in some areas, as many as an incredible 42% are Seventh-day Adventists! In Tuxtla-Gutiérrez alone, there are over 300 churches and we later learned that they need 40-50 more! There are nowhere near enough pastors to go around, so most pastors shepherd between 20-30 churches each! Nonetheless, by God’s blessing, the growth continues. Unbeknown to us, on Sabbath, one week before our arrival, Elder Ted Wilson had had the privilege of speaking at a special service celebrating and promoting religious freedom and liberty of conscience held in a soccer stadium attended by 25,000 people: 20,000 Seventh-day Adventist members plus “cinco mil” [5,000] more brothers and sisters who were baptized that day! Prior to coming to work in Chiapas just over 25 years ago, Pastor Pedro had worked as a pastor in California for 17 years. He said he came to Chiapas because the need for workers was so great. He also told us that 25 years ago, when he was working for the Chiapas Union, there were only 80,000 Seventh-day Adventists, and now, there are 218,000 members on the books with estimates as high as 300,000 in attendance on Sabbaths! Pastor Pedro said that the church is growing because of Bible studies, Daniel and Revelation seminars, and members sharing the three-angels’ messages with their neighbors. He explained the growth with the word, “laicos,” which refers to lay people working to spread God’s truth. Each church is participating to finish the work.

Every day we were in Ocozocoautla, our group was divided into a medical and a surgical team. Those on the medical team went to the clinic where hundreds of men, women and children came to be treated. Due to the poverty of the region, some suffer months or years with no relief from health conditions, so patients were very appreciative, and many traveled great distances to receive help. Many of the patients had brought their children with them, and these children were able to attend a special children’s program where they received coloring books about health which depicted the eight laws of health. They were artfully illustrated by Sarah Esslinger. Betty Gilbert, from Phoenix Arizona, who has dedicated her life to ministering to children through cradle roll, was unable to go on the trip, but beforehand she spent days making special, colorful take home items portraying the second coming and other Bible themes. These were gladly received and prized by the children in Chiapas. Meanwhile the surgical team went to the hospital in Ocozocoautla and performed hysterectomies, bladder suspensions, cholecystectomies, hernia repairs and other much needed surgical procedures. Pastor Eloy, chaplain for the trip, made sure that each patient received magazines containing precious truth. Eager to learn more, some patients asked for multiple different magazines or for extra copies for a friend. Some patients had unusual or advanced conditions that we do not often encounter in the United States such as a woman with a 6-pound fibroid uterus (usual weight is 2-3 ounces). She was very appreciative to have this taken out of her belly. Another patient had the unfortunate finding of cancer which had spread to different parts of her belly. In addition to optimal tumor debulking, she also received counseling and literature on what she can do with her diet and lifestyle to help her fight the cancer, as well as the wonderful news of a crucified and risen Savior.

The day before the team left, the mayor of Ocozocoautla gave a special thank you dinner for the team which he attended as well as his cabinet members. He gave his personal testimony on how God had given him victory over alcoholism, and he also declared that he believed that God had put him in office in order to help facilitate the care that his citizens were receiving from our team. Wonderful groundwork was laid for further cooperation between his office and our church in Chiapas, and the mayor expressed much gratitude for what the church is doing. With much appreciation, each official received a copy of El Ministerio de Curación [Ministry of Healing], and the local pastors were given a case of El Gran Conflicto for future distribution. Please pray that the important seeds of truth contained in these books will find fertile ground in the hearts of these men and women, and that God will bless and give the increase, and that the church will continue to grow in Chiapas (1 Corinthians 3:6).

Thinking back, now, about the trip, two things strike me most about the people of Chiapas, and one is how readily they received the literature that we brought. For instance, there were always quite a few people outside the hospital each day as we came and went, so we would pass out present truth magazines to them. Not once did anyone turn down a magazine, and when we came back out of the hospital, the people were always reading the magazines, and I never saw one magazine on the ground or in the trash. It occurs to me that we have the Bible and the other writings inspired by the Spirit of Prophecy, namely, the writings of Ellen White. Do we value these as much as the people of Chiapas treasured their magazines? Do we allow hours to pass watching television or doing frivolous surfing on the internet or social media when we could be spending that time reading and coming closer to God? Perhaps it is time to rethink how we spend our free time. The other lesson I took home was the importance of each of us working as God’s laicos—His lay workers—by actively seeking opportunities to share with our neighbors, friends and associates the Bible’s message of love and warning that God has given us as a people. And it may even be that these two lessons fit together, such that the more we treasure and spend time with God personally, the more we would have to share with those with whom God puts us in contact, so I’m making a commitment to God to spend more personal time with Him in the morning each day, so that I can be more useful to Him the rest of the day. Do you want to make that commitment too?

Confrontation between WASC and church could spell religious liberty problems

The General Conference has circulated a five page discussion draft of a new policy on board independence at Seventh-day Adventist tertiary educational institutions. The document emphasizes that board independence does not mean independence from the Seventh-day Adventist Church, its mission, and its educational policies:

Boards of trustees function as stewards of the institution and are given authority to govern within the context of Seventh-day Adventist identity, doctrine, and educational purpose. Board independence therefore must not be interpreted as freedom to disregard denominational interests, policies or goals for higher education. Nor is it the liberty to lead the institution in a direction that runs counter to what the Church intends through its educational institutions.

For Seventh-day Adventists, board independence functions within rather than outside of a prior commitment to the Church and its mission. Broadly stated, board independence is the constituency's confidence and expectation that the board, relying upon its own processes and commitments to the Seventh-day Adventist Church and to quality education, will ensure that the operations of the institution serve the educational mission of the Church and provide practical benefit to the community and the world. Boards must earn and maintain the respect and trust of their constituencies by demonstrating accountability to denominational identity in education, to quality in student learning outcomes, to regulatory agencies and to the needs of society.

Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) has lately been hinting that even denominational schools must be independent from their sponsoring denominations. In a letter to Randal Wisbey, WASC President Ralph Wolff stated:

WASC Standards of Accreditation call for institutions affiliated with or supported by religious organizations to have "education as their primary purpose and [operate] as an academic institution with appropriate autonomy.’ Institutions are expected to have a history free of ‘interference in substantive decisions or educational functions by … bodies outside the institution’s own governance arrangements." (July 5, 2011 letter from Ralph Wolff of WASC to Randal Wisbey)

The 2013 WASC policy manual contains a section titled “Policy on Independent Governing Boards," WASC states, “A general principle of governance is that an educational institution’s board and administration should preserve their independence from donors, elected officials, and external parties, such as ‘related entities’ described above.” Elsewhere, it states that, “A related entity may be a . . . religious sponsor . . .” WASC is thus saying that a higher educational board must preserve its independence from its sponsoring denomination.

There seems to be conflict here. WASC contends that a higher education board must be autonomous and independent from the institution’s sponsoring denomination, but the General Conference policy on tertiary educational boards states that such boards must govern within the context of Seventh-day Adventist identity, doctrine, and educational purpose, and board independence must not be interpreted as freedom to disregard denominational interests, policies or goals for higher education.

WASC has complained about—and the proposed bylaw changes are designed to address—the fact that both Pacific Union College and La Sierra University are affiliated with the Pacific Union, and therefore Pacific Union president Ricardo Graham is ex officio chair of the board of both schools. WASC has even hinted that there is a conflict with having the president of an organizational unit of a church serve as chairman of a college board:

Concerns can arise when the board chair is responsible to a related entity, such as a religious institution, or serves as chair of more than one educational institution. The board chair has a special leadership role, for example, in setting agendas, making appointments, and leading discussions, and therefore can wield more influence than other board members. Whatever loyalties the board chair may have to other entities, the board chair must act in the best interests of the educational institution when acting as board chair. . . . Finally, a serious potential conflict exists if one person serves simultaneously as board chair of two institutions of higher education, which may be competing for students, faculty, and/or resources; therefore this practice is discouraged and will be subject to careful scrutiny by teams. (WASC “Policy on Independent Governing Boards,” emphasis added.)

The GC document deals directly with this issue, as follows:

The Seventh-day Adventist Church recognizes, with certain limitations, that a trustee may serve simultaneously on more than one board. General Conference policy outlines the following framework for persons serving on multiple boards: “Because of the common objectives embraced by the various organizational units and institutions of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, membership held concurrently on more than one denominational committee or board does not of itself constitute a conflict of interest provided that all the other requirements of the policy are met. However, an officer, trustee, or director serving on an organization’s board is expected to act in the best interest of that organization and its role in denominational structure.

Thus, whatever WASC thinks about Ricardo Graham chairing two college boards, it does not violate General Conference policy.

It cannot be a coincidence that the GC released this document two weeks prior to the scheduled vote on proposed La Sierra bylaw changes. Clearly, the GC is acutely aware of the vote on May 23rd and is weighing in with a repudiation of WASC's views on board autonomy. The church leaders in Silver Spring are awake at the switch, so to speak.

A confrontation between WASC and the Adventist Church has clear religious liberty implications. Secular accreditation authorities exist to ensure that educational institutions achieve a basic standard of educational and academic competence, so that the public is not defrauded and public financial aid to education is not diverted into fraudulent enterprises. Secular accreditors have no authority to decree that religiously-affiliated or pervasively sectarian schools must be autonomous from their denominations. WASC is now essentially arguing that that a denomination can found, but cannot actually govern, a tertiary educational institution. WASC's aggressive position sets up a potential First Amendment Freedom of religion lawsuit.

WASC's position vis-a-vis La Sierra and other Seventh-day Adventist is complicated by the fact that it has a former Adventist minister and a former Adventist college president on its staff. Richard Winn is the Executive Director of WASC. Winn is a former Adventist minister who left the church over doctrinal differences. At an Adventist Society of Religious Studies meeting in November, 2011, Winn argued that Adventist institutions such as our colleges need to accommodate “cultural Adventists,” i.e., “Adventists” who reject the church's doctrines but still appreciate the sociological and sub-cultural aspects of Adventist life. He is now in a position to implement his stated ideology. Additionally, Richard Osborn is a Vice President of WASC; he was president of Pacific Union College between 2001 and April, 2009, when Osborn and the PUC board reportedly reached an amicable agreement that he step aside. Osborn's current feelings toward Elder Graham and the Seventh-day Adventist Church are not known.

I have pointed out elsewhere that it is inconceivable that WASC would be taking its current intrusive stance without assurance from LSU insiders that no legal action will be taken against WASC. Randal Wisbey has obviously been complaining to WASC of interference from the larger Seventh-day Adventist church. Possibly, Wisbey is finding a sympathetic ear among former denominational employees now working at WASC. Whatever has happened, the end result has been that WASC has recommended changes to the structure of the board that will allow greater autonomy of the university from the SDA church. Because of the disastrous precedent it would set, however, the church can ill afford to allow these changes to be voted under pressure from secular accreditors.

Cheerful conservatism

I had been invited to bid on two Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) buildings. Both buildings needed new roofing systems installed, and our company had been selected by the State of Ohio to place a bid on the projects. So I scheduled a meeting with the Ohio Regional Directors and was looking forward to it. This could be a feather in our cap. The day of the meeting arrived, and I was running a few minutes behind, but hey – their watches could be off that much. Without even enough time to tie my shoes, I skidded the truck to a stop and galloped across the parking lot to the large steel entry door. Only three minutes late!

I opened the door, and two State Directors were standing there waiting. I noticed two things right away—both men were wearing brown leather oxfords that smelled almost new, and both sets of shoes were tied. I wished mine were. Here is what happened.

When I had stepped into the building, I shut the large heavy steel door behind me and it clamped tightly on my trailing shoestrings. As I went to step forward and shake the gentlemen’s hands, I discovered that nothing was moving from the ankles on down. My feet were stuck to the floor with all the power of a giant sequoia taproot. Thus I unceremoniously toppled like a falling pine tree into the room, ending with my face only three inches away from the gentlemen’s shoes. I hate that sort of thing.

Securely trapped, I asked if they would be uhh…kind-enough-to-open-the-door so I could uh….get up. They barely had enough strength to do this, weakened as they were from laughing. I couldn’t believe their insensitivity.

I have since told this story to many people and numerous audiences. They all love it—I think for three reasons. First is the mental image of the “Human Pine tree” and second, they love it because it didn’t happen to them. Finally, they appreciate the story because of our human capacity for humor. That brings me to the point of this article.

The Lord gifted each of us with a sense of humor and a capacity for joy. Coupled with proper timing, the ability to smile at the humor and unexpectedness of life is a real blessing. As Solomon said, “There is a time to weep and a time to laugh. . .” (Proverbs 3:4). Of course, there is a difference between a “merry heart which maketh good like a medicine,” and foolish jesting. The Bible speaks of this kind of difference. Two points.

“Maketh good like a medicine. . .” This tells us that there is a healing power in a cheerful heart. People who cultivate a measure of humor in their lives are generally healthier than those who have a grim outlook on life. A sense of humor can really help your marriage too. My wife of 30-years (we’re halfway there) and I have countless little quotes that we can pull out when times get tough, and we re-connect our hearts to the joy of humor. I bet you do too.

Now there is a serious side of life – very serious at times. I am not advocating for irreverence in this article–there’s plenty of that going on already. The call to be sober in these last days (1 Timothy 5:8; Titus 1:8; 2:2–6; 1 Peter 5:8) is a call to be discreet, alert, and filled with the Holy Spirit. The opposite of this guidance is to be profligate (there’s my big word for this month!). A profligate life is filled with excess (hedonism), spiritual illness, and general riotous living (drunkenness etc.). And most significantly, a profligate life is a life with no joy. The Profligate Son (you know who I mean) couldn’t find any in joy in the pigpen when the invoice for riotous living came due. He needed what many of us need—to go home. And be reconnected to joy.

God intends that each of us will experience joy in our lives. He doesn’t expect us to go around looking like we just ate a dill pickle. As a friend of mine once quipped, “If you love the Lord, let your face know it.” Joy comes from The Lord. Here are a few of the ways.

Trust. “But let all who trust in you be glad; let them ever sing for joy. Spread your protection over them, that those who love your name may rejoice in you” (Psalm 5:11). If I had to sum up the blessing of the Sabbath in a few words, I would say it this way: “The more I trust, the more I rest.” Rest brings energy, and divine rest brings the vitalizing power of divine joy. It is the love of Christ implanted in us. An energy-less life is usually a joyless life.

The joy of labor. True glory and joy are found in the simple things of life, including work. Man and woman, each working in their own sphere, will experience a measure of satisfaction. Labor brings its own reward, and sweet is the rest that is purchased by the fatigue of a well-spent day.

Get with God. “In Thy presence there is fullness of joy” (Psalm 16:11). People who don’t have time for God, or those who are looking for ways to tear down others and the church are demonstrating a joyless bitterness minus peace (Proverbs 14:10). The solution is to get with Him and resolve our bitterness. Joy will return!

Righteousness brings joy. “Be glad in the LORD, and rejoice, ye righteous: and shout for joy, all ye that are upright in heart.” If righteousness brings joy then it follows that unrighteousness brings…what? Misery. And that should bring us to repentance.

Repentance brings joy (Psalm 51:8-12; Luke 15:7). We live in a time of many moral distractions, and a great many people seek constant change. Lacking peace within, they want to be part of something bigger than themselves – thus they can escape the self they hate. By changing everything around themselves, they seek to change their lives in the process. This is the hallmark of restless progressivism. When we go down this road, we are distancing ourselves from repentance, and thus distancing ourselves from joy. But self-focus is a double-edged sword. Self-righteousness can steal our joy away too (Galatians 4:15) so let’s be balanced. Two sides of the proverbial coin…

Joy can depart through idolatry (Joel 1-2; Hosea 9:1), disobedience/iniquity (Psalm 85:6; Ezekiel 24:25; Isaiah 24:8-11; Zeph 2:15; Deut. 28:63), and pride (James 4:8-10). Though joy has many enemies it has one great Friend. Some of the last words of Jesus are: “These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full” (John 15:11).

In summary, it’s not inappropriate to smile. In fact it’s a good thing! I have benefited from the sense of humor that I inherited from my father (or Heavenly Father). I hope you have too. And our lives have been enriched by the joy we find in countless fellow believers.

There is a myth that I would like to tackle right now: That conservative people are always dour and progressives always have more fun. Like other myths this one rests on a false collective concept, and it just ain’t so, brother. I see much joy and peace in the lives of people who take Jesus and His Word seriously. And progressives having more fun? Perhaps. Fun is an empty substitute for joy. To quote Fritz Ridenour: “Lots of Christians like to think that they are good enough to be saved, and bad enough to have fun.”

Here’s the surprise. It is possible to live a sober, discreet, and alert life and have joy at the same time. Our Lord Jesus was alert, sober and under tremendous trial in the closing scenes of His life. And part of what kept Him going was joy! (Hebrews 12:2). It can keep us going towards eternity. The thought of being with Jesus is a lot more exciting than working for the State of Ohio Department of Transportation. I’m hoping we don’t need shoes there.


PS. By the way, I didn’t get the job (can you really blame them?). However, I did get a healthy dose of not-taking myself-too-serious humor out of it, and the Lord blessed us in many other ways that year, not the least of which was “counting it all joy.”

Surrender

Sometimes stories are like medicine or herbs- more powerful when taken together. These two events happened at the exact same time and really do need to be taken together. Our kids were young and quite a handful. My husband was working nights at the hospital and sleeping days. For quite some time, I had been telling God why my husband needed to work days, not nights. I had a list of good, solid reasons. I knew what I wanted God to do, and although I hadn’t thought about it in those terms, I really wasn’t going to be satisfied with anything but my own way.

Finally, one morning I woke up and was impressed that I just needed to stop griping to the Lord and telling Him what to do. Instead, I should thank Him for the job my husband had and the blessings that God had given me. So that morning, I apologized and began actively looking for the blessings in the job my husband had. I began to thank God for the blessings that I could now see had come from the hours my husband worked. It was so much nicer praising God than complaining to Him. As if the peace and gratitude I felt weren’t enough, that week my husband came home and told me that the administration was changing his shift to days.

At the same time, we had a litter of husky puppies that the kids loved to play with. Our son, Daniel was 7 or 8 years old. He loved Kianna, the mother of these puppies more than all our other pets. He had gone with me to choose her as a puppy. The first night we got her, he had taken her out of her crate and into his bed; he couldn’t bear to have her be sad or alone. More than any of the other pets, she really was his.

We also had a black tom cat. We kind of liked him, and he allowed us to pet him occasionally. But nobody seemed the least bit concerned when he was gone for days on end. One morning early in the week, Daniel looked out the window and was horrified to see Kianna eating a black cat. He wanted justice--nothing that cruel or mean should be allowed to live! It didn’t matter that she had puppies. It didn’t matter that it is a husky’s nature to kill small animals, or that we had tried to make the puppy pen more secure so she couldn’t get out again. It didn’t matter that we couldn’t bring the cat back to life. Nothing I could say to him mattered. All week long he was sullen. By the end of the week he finally came to me and said, “It’s okay, I forgive her.” Later that day we looked out the back door and saw our black kitty alive and well.

That week the Lord brought a lesson home to me. After Daniel had surrendered his feelings of hurt, anger, and betrayal; after he had chosen to forgive & decided to leave justice in God’s hands, then God allowed our kitty to come home. It was not until I had surrendered my will to God and actively chosen to praise Him for the hours my husband had, that God chose to answer my prayers. How many blessings do we miss by thinking that we know best, or by choosing to nurse our feelings? The Psalmist said that if we delight ourselves in the Lord, He will give us the desires of our heart. Our Heavenly Father loves to bless us more than a father loves to give good gifts to his children. Words cannot describe how good He is to us! Oh, that we may learn not only to trust Him with everything, but also to give Him thanks in all things!

Sex

The very word conjures up all kinds of torrid images! For instance: there’s pizza, plumbing fixtures, clothing, brown-sugar-water (Coca-Cola), soap, hamburgers, shavers, tires, cars, valve stems, Old Spice, Valio Fanny pudding and asparagus…(asparagus?). It’s true friends; sex was used to sell each of these items. And that’s just a partial list… We live in a world that is saturated with sex—the wrong use of it especially. Sex is used extensively in marketing (as noted above), entertainment, literature, music, and culture in general. To quote Gallup & Robinson, “Sex sells.” And I believe it’s time that thinking people stopped buying.

But there is something else being sold to us, namely the lie that sex outside of marriage isn’t a big deal! Uh huh... From grandparents to teenagers, moral failure brings some of the sharpest regrets known to man (and woman). As believers, we need to do the utmost to protect young people from the consequences of moral failure and sexual abuse. So let’s dig in.

I’m all about archaeology. Don’t get me wrong; I detest the idea of digging up yet another piece of broken pottery in 114° degree weather in a sun-scorched sand pit infested with camel dung and scorpions. But I like old words and every now and then I dig one up and dust it off so I can say “Just look at that beauty!” Here’s my latest artifact--fornication.

It’s a good word with a lot of Biblical authority. And it is nearly buried under the rubble of our modern sensibilities. Let me be blunt, we updated our vocabulary long ago with the more politically correct term “pre-marital sex.” In doing so, I believe that we ceded Biblical truth to the pop-culture sexual revolutionaries. Strongly implied in the term “pre-marital sex” is that the only problem is timing. This gives the false impression that the main difference between marital sex and pre-marital sex is simply when one chooses to engage in it! And as soon as they “get married”—problem solved, right? Nuh-uh.

My wife and I have worked with hundreds of young people, and helped many of them resolve moral and abuse issues according to the Bible. It is so refreshing to go to a wedding and know that this young couple have confessed every moral violation to each other and invited Jesus to come in and purify their hearts. This allows them to emotionally give themselves to each other, and experience the oneness that God designed for their marriage. If they choose not to resolve hidden moral issues, they will experience a number of consequences in marriage and end with a sexually-tolerant form of lonesome gratification that longs for emotional intimacy. Just getting married doesn’t erase the accumulated consequences of moral failure. Rather, it will bring them to the surface!

I can’t believe that I got this far into the article without humbling myself. Um…I’ve done things that I’m not proud of. For most of my adolescent life, female anatomy was just a rumor that I hoped was true. During the three year equivalent of my “Anabaptist Rumspringa” I did various things that I wouldn’t do again. I resolved those things in Jesus long ago. If I hadn’t, I couldn’t mention it here—I would be trying to conceal them from the fortified bunker of a locked heart.

That brings us back to language. How often do we urge teenagers to maintain purity, to be consistent with their values, and to avoid bad consequences to their health, their future marriages, or their walk with God? These consequences are definitely real, but why would it seem so awkward to say what the Scripture says quite straightforwardly—that fornicators will not inherit the kingdom of God? (1 Cor. 6:9–10). You don’t have to be a wild-eyed “hell-fire” revival preacher to admit that sexual immorality brings upon itself the wrath of God (Rev. 21:8). Yet because of stale political-correctness, we often retreat to the safety of terms like “pre-marital” and “struggling” or “addiction.”

Fornication, quite simply, isn't merely "premarital sex." It isn't only a matter of impatience. It is not simply the marital act misfired at the wrong time. Fornication is both spiritually and typologically different from the marital act, and in fact a mockery of it!

You see, sexual union is not an arbitrary expression of the will of God (much less of random Darwinian processes). It is instead an icon of God's purposes for the universe in the gospel of Christ. Paul's classic text on the one-flesh union of marriage from Ephesians 5 makes no sense if it is presented as it is too often: as a set of tips for a healthier, "hotter" marriage. Instead, this passage is a revelation of the cosmic mystery of Christ.

Fornication pictures a different reality from that of the mystery of Christ. It presents instead a Jesus who uses the Church without joining her in sacred covenant to Himself. It is not just “naughtiness.” To use another word that modern-minded Christians find awkward and antiquated, it is blasphemy--a moral blasphemy with several unique consequences to it. Here are just a few of these consequences; and some of them may surprise you.

Role Reversal If a dating couple gets involved sexually with each other, something strange happens in the relationship. From that point on, the girl becomes more aggressive and the guy becomes more passive. Guilt, shame and fear fill the relationship, and the girl becomes angry from pain and feels unprotected. The guy gives up his leadership as a man. From that point on, he stops caring about the girl emotionally and is interested only in how he can be alone with the girl. She feels unloved and begins trying to "protect” herself by becoming more aggressive—more manly. This sets up a wrong pattern that can be resolved only by the wonderful power of God through repentance and cleansing.

Conflict Within two weeks after a dating couple commits fornication (I wanted to use that word again), they will start fighting. Every time. Unless they Biblically resolve and forsake fornication—guilt, shame and fear causes them to begin blaming one another subconsciously. This leads them to push each other away emotionally, which leads to a loss of communication, which leads to a lack of respect for each other, which leads to… you guessed it—conflict. They will be fighting within two weeks and won’t understand why.

Bad Education Dating couples who commit fornication are teaching each other how to commit adultery. Really? Yes. Fornication and adultery are the same sin—in that they both exist outside of marriage. Sex prior to marriage becomes a mixture of sex & guilt, and after marriage, the only source for that is--adultery.

In order to recover the beauty and the exultation of marital intimacy, we need to speak honestly and bluntly of the ugliness of its counterfeits. In the process we learn not to be ashamed of the Biblical language of "fornication," but instead to be ashamed of fornication itself.

Finally, let us not be afraid to talk about sex to young people, to explain why it is worth waiting for and the consequences of not waiting. I’ve already discussed a few of the consequences; let me throw a positive motivator out there. If you do wait, your sex life will be in the top 2%! Just thought you should know…

Two more. Let us unmask the lie that sex outside of marriage is no big deal. Let us not give people the impression that if they have fallen morally, it will follow them around like a huge black balloon forever tied to their unpardonable midsection. There is hope. Through repentance there is freedom, and through Jesus there is cleansing. God can restore unto you the years that the locusts have eaten (Joel 2:24).

Do you know people who struggle with guilt or lust? Do you know how to help them? Let’s get started.

Jezebel, Balaam, the synagogue of Satan, and corporate responsibility

Christ’s messages to the seven churches in Asia are sobering audits, for the most part. Out of the seven, only Smyrna and Philadelphia are not rebuked harshly. It is helpful to contrast Smyrna and Philadelphia with Pergamum and Thyatira. All four churches have members that are working against the Gospel. Christ refers to those in Smyrna and Philadelphia as the “Synagogue of Satan.” In Pergamum and Thyatira, “Jezebel,” “them that hold the doctrine of Balaam,” and “them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes” are named.

In Christ’s audit, however, Smyrna and Philadelphia are assured that He knows the trouble that the Synagogue of Satan is causing for the true members of the Body of Christ, whereas Pergamum and Thyatira are rebuked for allowing those that hold false doctrines to entice others into sin.

False doctrine is not hard to spot. It is any teaching that contradicts the clear testimony of Scripture, or any way of thinking that exalts human reasoning above the Bible. How would our churches fare if Christ were to send us a similar audit today? Would he commend us for keeping His commands and enduring patiently, or would he rebuke us for allowing members with false doctrines to lead others away from the truth and into sin?

Christ’s rebuke to Pergamum and Thyatira indicate clearly that He believes that we, as a church, are responsible for the doctrines that are taught from our pulpits, in our Sabbath School classes, and in our schools.

Let us heed Jude’s advice, and contend for the faith that was entrusted to God’s holy people. I can assure you that certain individuals whose condemnation was written about long ago have secretly slipped in among us. They are ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into a license for immorality and deny Jesus Christ our only Sovereign and Lord, sometimes with great subtlety.

Dear friends, remember what the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ foretold. They have written to you, “In the last times there will be scoffers who will follow their own ungodly desires.” These are the people who divide you, who follow mere natural instincts and who do not have the Spirit.

But you, dear friends, by building yourselves up in your most holy faith and praying in the Holy Spirit, keep yourselves in the love of God, looking for the mercy of our Lord Jesus Christ unto eternal life.

Be merciful to those who doubt; but others save with fear, pulling them out of the fire, hating even the garment defiled by the flesh.

Now unto him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to the only wise God our Savior, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen.

Josiah: the Lord heals

Since the inception of our health ministry in 2003, my husband and I have sought to publicize the benefits of a balance between an appropriate faith in God and living a healthful lifestyle by following God’s eight Doctors. As we have previously noted, these eight Doctors have been scientifically proven to dramatically improve overall health, mental well-being and longevity. With such inspiring news from science, one can be tempted to forget the source of the power of the eight Doctors and even to question whether God still performs blatant miracles today. Most of us are very familiar with the numerous examples in the Bible of miraculous healings, but in our secular twenty-first century it is easy to conclude that this is not the way the Lord heals today. While it is true that God usually works through His eight Doctors and God-fearing physicians, He still performs miracles today when it brings glory to His name.

With the earnest desire to bring glory to God and remind us all, that God is ultimately in control we wish to tell the miracle story of our son, Josiah George Gilbert Lewis, born Christmas Eve, 2012.

As soon as we joyfully discovered that we were expecting a baby boy in the late spring of 2012, we chose to name him Josiah. We named our little son, Josiah, after the Biblical King, Josiah, who was named in prophesy hundreds of years before his birth. According to the Bible, Josiah was the most faithful king that ever reigned over Israel and Judah, and was responsible for turning the people back to the Creator God (2 Kings 23:25). Our prayer for our little son is that, like King Josiah, he will be faithful to God and turn the people back to serving their Maker.

We also chose the name Josiah because of its meaning which is, “Jehovah heals”. To the Lord's praise, his name, as a promise, has already begun to come to fruition in his short life thus far. At 28 weeks of pregnancy, I was in a terrible car accident where I incurred a level one concussion and a drop in my hemoglobin secondary to a presumed pelvic fracture. To illustrate the size of the accident, our Ford Expedition was totaled. Despite this high impact accident, the air bag miraculously did not deploy which could have been fatal to Josiah. Instead, miraculously, the pregnancy continued safely until full term.

The promise in the meaning of Josiah's name was also fulfilled in the mode of his delivery. At 36 weeks of pregnancy, Josiah was still breech, which would necessitate a cesarean section for delivery. Although c-sections are very common today and usually end up without complications, given my inherited clotting disorders, surgery, in this case, would be much more risky. Miraculously, after much prayer and fasting, Josiah flipped over and became head down or cephalic. Given the car accident, under the careful care of Dr. Yvonne Gollin, Josiah and I received very close monitoring for the remainder of the pregnancy, which necessitated two times per week examining the baby's fluid levels by ultrasound and monitoring the baby's heart rate. During one of these examinations on Friday, December 21, 2012, the ultrasound indicated that the baby was still head down, with a cord around his neck. Then on Monday, December 24, I was evaluated again, and it was discovered that at some point over the weekend, Josiah had flipped back to the breech position, again necessitating a c-section. It is important to note that at 39.6 weeks gestation, the likelihood of a baby returning to the head down position naturally is very low and, in addition, manually changing the baby to a head down position is also unlikely to be successful.  Furthermore, the baby was showing some heart rate changes on the monitoring, likely due to the umbilical cord being around his neck. Given these findings, we decided to proceed with having the c-section the same afternoon on December 24.

From the time that we discovered that the baby was breech at approximately 9 am until the scheduled cesarean section at 4 pm, we earnestly pleaded with the Lord to flip Josiah once again, to a head down position, again claiming Josiah's name as a promise 'to heal' if it was His will. At 2 pm we arrived at labor and delivery at Loma Linda University and almost instantaneously upon arrival, I started having regular contractions despite no contractions throughout the day. How futile the labor seemed since we knew that we were going to a c-section anyway because of the position of the baby, and we were forced to ask ourselves the age-old question of God, “Why...?” As though in answer to our question, the Lord blessed us with a wonderful Christian, Seventh-day Adventist nurse who prayed with us and reminded us that “all things work together for good to them that love the Lord.”   At 4 pm, my classmate from residency, Dr. Sum Cheung came into the room to wheel me back to the operating room. Despite my not feeling any significant movement, we asked to have one more ultrasound scan to see if perhaps the baby had flipped back into a head- down position.  Dr. Cheung performed the ultrasound and much to everyone's surprise and joy, Josiah had miraculously flipped head down again. With joyful praises to God, I exclaimed aloud, “Lord, you are the God that heals, thank you, thank you Lord.” Through God's providence, four short hours later, our precious baby boy, Josiah, was safely born as a small fulfillment of God's promise that He is the Lord who heals and, more importantly, He is the God who saves!

There have been many other miracles since Josiah's birth and we look forward to seeing how the Lord will fulfill His promise in his life. One thing we know for sure is that the Lord promises to heal because he wants to remind each of us of the power that He alone has, to heal us of the worst disease of all, sin (Matthew 9:6).

Our ultimate prayer for Josiah and all of us is that we will choose to have Jesus heal us of sin, so that we can all be together in heaven where there will be no more need for healing.

How to get fired: a guide for the Adventist pastor

On February 22, 2013, Trisha Famisaran, who is assistant professor of philosophy and theological studies and director of the honors program at La Sierra University, preached a sermon at the Hollywood SDA Church, California. For some reason or other the original video disappeared from YT.

On February 22, 2013, Trisha Famisaran, who is assistant professor of philosophy and theological studies and director of the honors program at La Sierra University, preached a sermon at the Hollywood SDA Church, where Ryan Bell is the pastor, titled, “Repenting of Patriarchy and Heterosexism.” Actually, as I think about it, “preached” sounds awfully patriarchal, and I'm not sure what Professor Famisaran delivered can rightly be called a sermon; let's say she gave a talk. This wondrous event was recorded and uploaded to YouTube, so please do not imagine yourself to be under any obligation to take my word about these goings on. Watch the video:

I gather from the video that the Hollywood Church was in the midst of a series called “The five dead deadly sins of the church,” two of which are patriarchy and heterosexism.

Ryan Bell, after a brief but obligatory session of self-flagellation for being a white male, notes that this is the season of Lent. It seems the Hollywood church has adopted the liturgical calendar. If you are a conservative Adventist, it might come as a shock to find Lent being observed in a Seventh-day Adventist Church. Like many Roman Catholic customs, Lent has pagan roots, originating in “weeping for Tammuz” in the ancient Babylonian religion. (Ezek. 8:14-15) Biblical Christianity does not set aside any particular time, other than right now, to repent of sins. (Heb. 3:15; Acts 8:36) But stranger doctrines yet will be heard this February morning.

On the Hollywood Church's Face book page, and in the bulletin for February 22, Ryan Bell quoted Anaïs Nin the French-born authoress most famous for her erotica. Trisha Famisaran also quotes Ms. Nin approvingly at the start of her, um, talk. Anaïs Nin was not famous merely for her fictional erotica, she was famous for her non-fictional diaries which record numerous extramarital affairs, including affairs with high profile personalities such as Henry Miller (himself a writer of obscene material), Edmund Wilson, Gore Vidal and Otto Rank. At one point, Ms. Nin managed to be married to two men at once, Hugh Guiler and Rupert Pole, making her a bigamist. But if you are Ryan Bell or Trisha Famisaran, who better to quote on an Adventist Church's Face book page and Sabbath morning bulletin than the feminist, adulterous, bigamist, pornographer, Anaïs Nin?

It seems Professor Famisaran was at Hollywood church the previous week to view the film “Seventh-Gay Adventist,” and claims to have been involved with that project from the beginning. Since we are expected to repent of heterosexism, Famisaran helpfully provides a definition of that sin: “Heterosexism is the belief that to be straight is to be within the norm and if you're anything but straight, then you're somewhere on the outside and then subject to discrimination.” Notice that this sin that we're expected to repent of isn't defined as hatred of someone because of their sexual orientation; if it were, I'd agree that we should repent of that. But, no, the sin of heterosexism is believing that heterosexuality is normal and homosexuality is abnormal.

Now, around 95 to 97% of the population are heterosexual, heterosexual intercourse has a necessary biological purpose without which humanity would become extinct, and there is universal religious approval for heterosexual marriage. By contrast, only about 3 to 5% are homosexual, homosexual sex has no biological purpose, and it is almost universally condemned by the world's religions. By whatever definition you prefer—statistical, biological, or religious—heterosexuality is is “within the norm” and homosexuality is not. Heterosexuality is normal; homosexuality is not. But among liberal Adventists, it is considered a sin to see the world as it actually is.

If you believe that God inspired the Scriptures, then it seems that God might need to repent of the sin of heterosexism. God has pronounced homosexual acts an “abomination” (Lev. 18:22) and has prescribed the death penalty for male-on-male sodomy (Lev. 20:13). Such abominable acts are also frowned upon in the New Testament. Paul denounces homosexuality as something that results from idolatry and willful refusal to acknowledge God (Rom. 1:24-28), and warns that those who do such things will not inherit the Kingdom of God (1 Cor. 6:9-11) and will be subject to judgment under law (1 Tim. 1:9-10). But Bell, Famisaran and other liberal Adventists don't cotton to all that bible-thumpin'. They know better. After all, La Sierra theologian John Jones has closely studied all these passages and concluded that none of them actually means what it says.

Transitioning seamlessly from the “sin” of heterosexism to the “sin” of patriarchy, Ms. Famisaran asserts that patriarchal societies excuse rape of females just because they are women. But rape is and has always been designated a crime in traditional societies; in fact, female sexual virtue and purity is at a higher premium the more traditionally patriarchal a society is.

It is at this point that we learn that Ryan Bell changed the lyrics of the morning's hymn so that God is referred to as “mother” rather than “father.” “Not every church could pull that off,” says Prof. Famisaran. Or would want to. Jesus taught us to address God as “our father.” (Mat. 6:9; Luke 11:2) Scripture sometimes attributes feminine qualities to God (Isaiah 49:15; Hos. 13:8; Mat. 23:37; Luke 13:34) but never refers to God as “mother,” only ever as “father” or in the masculine pronoun. (Matt. 28:19; John 5:19; 16:13) We should never change the way we address God in order to conform to contemporary culture. That Bell, Famisaran and other liberal Adventists dare to do so shows that they are more enthusiastic about feminist, post-patriarchal culture than about following Scripture's example and Christ's express instructions about how God shall be addressed.

Professor Famisaran launches into a long screed against patriarchy. There isn't a hint of a biblical justification for her animus against patriarchy (“rule of the fathers”) because, of course, Scripture endorses patriarchy from Genesis to Revelation. God ordained patriarchy as part of the created order; Adam was created first and Eve was created as Adam's helpmate. After the Fall, God intended for Adam's headship over Eve to preserve a harmonious institution of marriage. (Gen. 2:18-25; 3:16; 1 Cor. 11:3,7-10; 1 Tim. 2:11-15). There is no hint that this family order is changed in the New Testament; to the contrary, Paul makes clear that “rule of the fathers” is still in effect in the Christian era for Christian believers. (Eph. 5:22-33; Col. 3:18-19; 1 Peter 3:1) There is plentiful evidence that God intends a patriarchal order for his Church as well as for Christian homes. (Mark 3:13-19; Luke 6:12-16; Acts 1:12-23; 1 Tim. 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9; 1 Tim. 3:4)

It is bold rebellion to take that which God has established and call it “sin.” “Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness, who put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” Isaiah 5:20. We've reached the time that Paul warned Timothy about, “when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.” 2 Timothy 4:3-4.

Next, Professor Famisaran confides that she is fond of a certain pop song by one Stefani Joanne Angelina Germanotta, better known by the stage name, “Lady Gaga.” Lady Gaga's elaborate stage shows feature themes of bondage and sadomasochism. The three central themes that shape Lady Gaga's music videos are sex, violence, and power. (According to Wikipedia, that is—I confess to not being a fan.) Lady Gaga reportedly “has the knack of sending rape-like fantasies—in songs and videos that double as catch club hits—to the top of the charts.” Famisaran's favorite Gaga song is “Born this Way,” in which Ms. Germanotta sings:

I'm beautiful in my way 'Cause God makes no mistakes I'm on the right track, baby I was born this way

Don't be a drag, just be a queen * * * 'cause baby you were born this way

No matter gay, straight, or bi, Lesbian, transgendered life, I'm on the right track baby, I was born to survive.

Professor Famisaran interprets this piece, correctly I think, as being a call for the differently oriented to embrace their homosexual orientation. (As an aside, Famisaran proudly relates how, after viewing the film “Seventh-Gay Adventist,” her three year old son said, “momma, when I'm older I can be a mommy like you.” Great.)

There you have it. Lady Gaga has solved the age-old nature vs. nurture controversy: The differently oriented were “born that way.” And that settles it for Trisha Famisaran, professor of theological studies and director of La Sierra's honors program. Those of you who think La Sierra needs freedom from effective church control so that it can be an elite liberal arts college with high academics, here's what you've ended up with: a professor who quotes Lady Gaga as an authority on genetics, psychiatry, and developmental psychology.

The rest of the, um, talk was about the book of Job as interpreted by the Benedictine nun Joan Chittister. I think. Frankly, I zoned out. Oh, wait a minute, something else just caught my attention. In commenting on I Corinthians 12:12-31, which is about how different members of the body of Christ have different spiritual gifts, Professor Famisaran states, “It is God who creates the diverse parts, just as She thinks they should be.” That was the professor's parting comment.

Then Ryan Bell got up and gave a short homily over the communion table complaining of the border fence between California and Mexico. Then he prayed over the wine, implying that not only Christ but also women, gays, lesbians, and the transgendered “knew the cost” and had “paid the price” for something or other.

Stop the Presses

I wrote this column over the course of four days, and finished it on Sunday, March 24. On Monday, March 25, Ryan Bell posted on his web page informing his friends and church family that “the Southern California Conference administration [has come] to the conclusion that they cannot trust me to lead this church as a Seventh-day Adventist Church. . . . they feel that my leadership has led our church outside the accepted framework of Seventh-day Adventism. We have not been able come to an understanding about these things and so my denominational employment will end on or about April 1, 2013” (emphasis added).

If you've come with me this far, you'll have no difficulty understanding how Larry Caviness and the SCC administration made the decision they made. Ryan Bell is a graduate of conservative, self-supporting Wiemar College, and has been an Adventist pastor for 22 years, but, as Bell writes, “sometimes people grow in ways that are incompatible with the institutions they have been a part of.” Bell's personal journey has taken him beyond the parameters of even very liberal Seventh-day Adventism. I suspect that the SCC's decision to fire Ryan Bell was not based solely upon “Repenting of patriarchy and heterosexism;” Bell had long been promoting the “social gospel” (leftist political activism) in place of the actual gospel, and his flirtation with Catholic liturgy is jarring. I would imagine that February 22nd's abomination was the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back, the final nail in the coffin.

This article was to have highlighted how startlingly bold the liberal faction in our church has become. But—praise the Lord!--the piece turned out instead to illustrate how liberal Adventists can press their luck too far, even in liberal Adventist “jurisdictions” such as the Southern California Conference. Those of us who are prone to pessimism, even defeatism, can take heart at this welcome development. All is not lost, and we do ourselves and our cause a disservice when we talk as though it is.

Of course, the La Sierra situation remains unrectified. La Sierra is still turning out radicals like Trisha Famisaran who, at the HMS Richards Divinity School, are teaching religion to the next generation of Adventists. If we are not vigilant, that generation will come to populate the conference administrations and executive committees, and although Famisaran's neo-pagan effluvia smells noxious to us, it might smell sweet to them. We have much work to do, but there is hope.

Social justice--popular piety or modern mania?

I’m going to take a risk in this article. You see, there is a danger in talking about social justice–if you aren't blatantly for it you are branded as being against justice. That is the power of one's position. “Social Justice” is currently becoming the soup du jour of our progressive millennial world. This problem results from a lack of critical reflection. And some folks are pursuing it in a way that promotes a utopian collectivism. More about that later…

Also, the term is ill-defined. Whole books written about it never defined it.  Some people know only that promoting it is a moral imperative, but they are helpless to explain why it is a moral imperative.

Three aspects of this growing phenomenon called social justice are:  Helping the Poor, Utopian Social Justice, and Religious Liberty Implications.  Let’s look first at a positive aspect of social justice.

Helping the Poor Outreach in the Christian life is not optional.  It is not saying, “Hey I have some extra time, let’s do something nice for someone. It’ll make God feel good.” No.

Helping the poor is not only a legitimate part of being a Believer; it can be a barometer of compassion for us individually.  Let us have compassion on the poor/oppressed and let us demonstrate that compassion through action. But who are the poor that we should help?

Right here I need to make a distinction. God does not look favorably on all the poor. That could sound blasphemous to a modern social-justice devotee. Yet it is true. God does not look favorably upon the lazy poor. God does not look favorably upon the disobedient poor. God looks favorably upon the humble poor, and helping them is something we should be about individually. And that is different from the utopian pseudo-political social justice phenomenon that is currently sweeping the earth. Very different.

Utopian Social Justice The utopian tendency in man’s mind is very strong. After all, the original temptation was a utopian one. By eating the forbidden fruit Eve thought to attain a higher level of divine enlightenment. She could be as God. Problem is, she was already in Paradise and had nowhere to go but down.

Since then, mankind has often sought to create a wonder-world where people’s needs are few, their desires limited, and there is no motive for war or oppression. In such a fairy world there would be instinctive harmony between man and nature (basis for environmentalism). To social justice zealots, the highest goal, indeed the Babel Tower of their socialist dreamland is the egalitarian redistribution of all goods and wealth. This is code language for Communism, friends. And one-ism.

Modern social justice is a rallying cause for one-ist ideologies. What do I mean by that? One-ism is the belief that all distinctions must be eliminated, including creation and Creator. One-ism worships and serves creation as divine. Through enlightenment we discover that we are also divine. I repeat–you radically redefine yourself; you become divine through enlightenment.  And if you are divine–you have to be just. Are you starting to see the connection?  Since everyone shares in the “divine power,” if we unite, we can bring the world to a new level of happiness and peace. That is the utopian vision. Think you haven’t rubbed elbows with one-ism?  Let me give you its oft-cited mantra—“I’m spiritual, but not religious.”

True to this vision, activists (even in the church) want us to correct every problem out there.  In their determination to create a utopian world, utopian one-ists say we have to apply their brand of justice to:

• Health care
• Abortion
• Tax Increases
• Gun Control
• Feminism
• Racism
• Carbon emissions
• Homosexuality
• Welfare
• and others…

Liberal Protestantism has largely embraced this agenda as its central message. But the Bible doesn't say that it is our duty to fix every problem out there. In fact, some problems that we experience are consequences–tied to choices we have made. God allows these consequences and gives us the Gospel that we might experience freedom from sin, and rest in the hope of His promise to “make all things new” on That Day (Rev. 21:5). The church’s main message must be the Everlasting Gospel, accompanied by the pragmatic warning of His imminent return. As believers, we look forward to a better city and a better country, “in the renewal of all things” (Matthew 19:28).  The New Testament is stunningly silent on any plan for governmental or social action. The apostles launched no social reform movement. Instead, they preached the Gospel of Christ, planted Christian churches and took care of their own. Our task is to follow Christ’s command and the example of the apostles.

Justice in the Bible is s lot less sexy than what we hear today.  It manifests itself as concern for the poor, primarily the poor in spirit. It quite often refers to the people of God oppressed by their enemies.

And that brings us to the fact that the Bible is absolutely clear that injustice will not exist forever. A perfect social order is coming, but it is not of this world. The Second Coming of Jesus Christ in its fullness spells the end of injustice and every cause and consequence of human sin. We have much work to do in this world, but true justice will be achieved only by the consummation of God’s purposes and the perfection of God’s own judgment on That Day.

Religious Liberty Implications In the wake of communism’s history and collapse, the terms “Marxism, socialism, and collectivism” became unsellable and a “new and improved” substitute was needed. Enter the term “social justice” which is socialism in Skinny Jeans™.

The unbroken line from The Communist Manifesto to its contemporary adherents is the belief that economic inequality is the monstrous injustice of the capitalist system, which must be replaced by an ideal of social justice—a classless society created by the elimination of all differences in wealth and power.

It is thus concluded that it is the choices of the masses (“the market”) that create the inequalities of fortune and fame–and the only way to correct those injustices is to control those choices (restrict liberty).

To further the illusions of social justice, it cannot be conceded that the haves are responsible for what they have or that the have nots are responsible for what they have not.  When I was young, men of achievement were admired for their ambition, risk taking, and work ethic.  Today, the class-envy ideas coming from Washington cause successful individuals to be regarded as privileged at best and dishonorable at worst. The flip side of this is the insistence that the have nots are, in fact, the underprivileged who have been denied their due by an unjust society.  The intrusion of this thinking opens the door for state redistribution as the logical adjudicator of resources.  Two ominous things now happen.  Social justice assumes a façade of religious authority and the role of the state is elevated to oppressor.  It is the point at which theory ends and history begins.

The goal above is the project of a growing number of leftist legal theorists including Cass Sunstein and Catherine MacKinnon, the latter opining that the "law of [substantive] equality and the law of freedom of expression [for all] are on a collision course in this country." Wow!  Such statements rightly energize a lot of opposition, for they are tied to a diminished God and acceleration of state power. Make no mistake “freedom of expression for all” includes religious freedom.  When you kill off God and elevate the role of the state, social justice is born and the result is an enforced love of one-ism. Whatever is socialized is state-controlled.

In spite of the efforts of social justice proponents to explain away its historical relationship to totalitarianism, we cannot escape the fact that authoritarian brutality is the not-merely-possible-but-inevitable outworking of the nature of social justice itself.

In summary, the term social justice is not Biblical. Having compassion on the humble poor and the poor in spirit is very much Biblical. God's justice does not require a forced redistribution of wealth through auto developed temporal social justice. It is communism in code, and socialism in Skinny Jeans®. Because of these truths, I believe the risk I took in writing this article is worth it.

Roger Morneau on the Origin of the Theory of Evolution

First, let me define my terms, and explain clearly what evolution teaches. When I say “evolution,” I do not mean change over time, or even adaptation to new environments. I am referring to the scientific teaching that life came from non-life through random chemical processes, and that all living forms, including humans, evolved by a blind, step-by-step process over vast eons of time. Blind, because the process is unguided. The famous biologist Jerry Coyne had this to say about the philosophical implications of evolution:

Evolution is unique amongst the sciences because it strikes people in the solar plexus of their faith directly. It strikes them at the idea that they are specially created by God, because evolution says you’re not; it says that there’s no special purpose for your life because it’s a naturalistic philosophy; we have no more extrinsic purpose than a squirrel or an armadillo. And it says that morality does not come from God; it is an evolved phenomenon. And those are three things that are really hard for humans to accept, particularly if they come from a religious tradition.

Here, then, is something to ponder: if God does exist and is the Creator, but evolution teaches that we were not created by God, that there is no special purpose to our lives, and that we are not morally responsible, who invented evolution?

One of the most interesting books I’ve read is Roger Morneau’s A Trip Into the Supernatural. After World War II, he was invited to join a secret society of Satan worshippers. After being part of the society for only a few months, God pulled him out, and he was lead to join the Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) Church. While he was still part of the society, he had a conversation with the high priest of the Satanists that contained important information regarding the theory of evolution.

Here is the story according to the priest: prior to the 18th century, Satan, through his study of Bible prophecy, came to the conclusion that Daniel 12:4 was about to be fulfilled and that the Industrial Revolution was about to begin.

At the beginning of the 18th century, he called a general council of all of his spirit counselors, and they formulated a three-part plan to take complete control of the human mind throughout the period of change that was soon to come upon the world.

The first part of the plan was to convince the world that he and his demons did not exist. This part of the plan succeeded fairly well. As Michael Schermer put it, “By the 18th century, astronomy replaced astrology, chemistry succeeded alchemy, probability theory dislodged belief in luck and fortune…” This laid the foundation for naturalistic thinking—the idea that God has never, and still does not ever interfere with the world.

The second part of the plan was to gain control of people’s minds through hypnotism. He chose the brilliant German doctor Franz Mesmer to accomplish this task. By the end of Mesmer’s career, hypnosis was a respected tool of the medical profession. Now, television shows and popular songs can hypnotize millions of people at once.

The third part of the plan was to destroy the credibility of the Bible. This was to be accomplished through the introduction of the theory of evolution. Charles Darwin and Thomas Huxley were chosen by Satan to systematize and popularize this doctrine, in part because they had both been hypnotized as children.

One paragraph of the book in particular bears repeating in its entirety:

To my shock and surprise, the priest then claimed that "the spirits consider anyone who teaches the theory of evolution to be a minister of that great religious system, and the individual will receive a special unction from Satan himself. Satan gives him great power to induce spiritual blindness, to convince, and to convert. In fact, he holds such people in such high regard that he assigns a special retinue of angels to accompany him or her all his or her life. It is the greatest honor that Satan can bestow upon a person in the presence of the galaxy."

So where did such an idea originate according to historical sources? While Charles Darwin gets credit for publishing the first fully-formed exposition of the modern theory of evolution, complete with the driving mechanism of natural selection, the seeds of the theory were planted much earlier. Georges-Louis Leclerc and others in the 18th century argued that organisms had changed over time, and that life had been on the earth for much longer than the Biblical chronology allowed.

One of the preeminent thinkers to propose a rudimentary theory of evolution was actually Erasmus Darwin, Charles’ grandfather. Here are excerpts from a chapter of his book The Temple of Nature, published in 1803:

Ere Time began, from flaming Chaos hurl'd Rose the bright spheres, which form the circling world; Earths from each sun with quick explosions burst, And second planets issued from the first. Then, whilst the sea at their coeval birth, Surge over surge, involv'd the shoreless earth; Nurs'd by warm sun-beams in primeval caves Organic Life began beneath the waves…

Organic life beneath the shoreless waves Was born and nurs'd in ocean's pearly caves; First forms minute, unseen by spheric glass, Move on the mud, or pierce the watery mass; These, as successive generations bloom, New powers acquire and larger limbs assume; Whence countless groups of vegetation spring, And breathing realms of fin and feet and wing…

Thus the tall Oak, the giant of the wood, Which bears Britannia's thunders on the flood; The Whale, unmeasured monster of the main, The lordly Lion, monarch of the plain, The Eagle soaring in the realms of air, Whose eye undazzled drinks the solar glare, Imperious man, who rules the bestial crowd, Of language, reason, and reflection proud, With brow erect who scorns this earthly sod, And styles himself the image of his God; Arose from rudiments of form and sense, An embryon point, or microscopic ens!

Piece by piece, the foundation was laid for the acceptance of evolutionary theory on biological grounds. On the geological front, in 1785, James Hutton published his influential work implying a great age to the geological record. In this article, he applied the principle of uniformitarianism (though it wasn’t called that until later) to the earth’s geological history. This was a necessary development for evolutionary theory, because it provided an interpretation of the geological record that suggested that a great deal of time had passed since earth’s formation and the origin of life.

Satan worked so carefully to lay each piece of the groundwork for the theory of evolution that a decade after the publication of On the Origin of Species, evolution had become widely accepted.

Satan’s goal has always been to unite the inhabitants of the earth in rebellion against God. The Satanist priest claimed that accepting the theory of evolution made a person a de facto member of Satan’s kingdom. I am convinced that Satan is overly optimistic about the extent of his kingdom, and that not all the people he claims as his really are (see Ellen White’s comments on the death of Moses, for example). God is merciful and we must never assume that He has given up on a person or does not have a plan for his or her life. Nevertheless, the worldview that accompanies evolution makes some unequivocal claims: God did not create the world in six days, and the creation was not perfect, so the Spirit of God, who inspired the Bible, is a liar. Thus, human reason must be above the clear word of Scripture.

Once human reason is elevated to the place of highest authority in the universe, the consequences described by Jerry Coyne become inescapable. Bereft of any absolute authority, any arbiter of reality, we are forced to pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps and live a life that has only the feeble, relative meaning we are able to imagine on our own. Our end becomes one of vast nothingness.

The theory of evolution also strips the SDA church of its mission and message, minimizing the consequences of humanity's fall into sin, removing the rationale for remembering the Sabbath day as a memorial of creation, making Jesus’ ministry on this earth of no effect by the outlawing of miracles (such as the resurrection), and ultimately casting doubt on God’s ability to recreate a new, perfect earth.

Many might think that I’m being too hard on evolutionary theory. After all, doesn’t science support it? I have three responses. First, the Word of God is my foundation. The very short section of the Bible that God wrote with His own finger includes this comment: “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy… For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it” (Exodus 20: 8, 11). Exodus also records the belligerent rebellion of a man who collected sticks on the Sabbath immediately thereafter and was stoned. This should make it exceedingly clear to us that God was referring to literal days.

Second, the theory of evolution retains its status as “mainstream science” only because the media gatekeepers vigilantly attempt to keep any evidence or reasoning that might dethrone evolution out of the sight of the public. Questioning evolution in scientific journals or the mainstream media is absolutely forbidden.

Third, the theory of evolution is not supported by geological or biological evidence. Evolution does not spring from careful scientific investigation. It is, rather, the outcome of assuming naturalism, and coming up with the best possible theory of origins in the absence of a Creator.

What about theistic evolution? In its most basic form, theistic evolution rests on a foundation of methodological naturalism, and does not contradict Darwinian evolution. Methodological naturalism states that God does not interact with the world, and thus, miracles do not happen. The most important miracles in question are the creation of the world by God, the virgin birth, and Christ’s resurrection. The list of forbidden miracles should also include Christ’s second coming, the resurrection of the dead, and the creation of the earth a second time. Very simply, no miracles = no Christianity.

Theistic evolution is an attempt to gain the friendship of the world while avoiding atheism. First, this is scientifically unnecessary. Second, James had some strong words regarding those who advocate friendship with the world: “Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God“ (James 4:4).

Let us not capitulate to the demands or the deceptions of the devil in any way. We, as a church, will pay for any wavering on this issue in the souls of our children. If we stand firmly for truth, God Himself will fight for us.

Remember Keyna

Almost two decades ago, God spoke to me. Not in a voice I could hear out loud, but by a distinct impression in my head. It was January in Texas, but it seemed more like Michigan. With two boys under the age of three, I was ready for bed long before I could get there. When I finally made it to bed that night, I just wanted to hibernate. I was already sound asleep when I heard the words in my head, “Go get Keyna and bring her inside. She is going to freeze to death.” Keyna was our aging, three-legged Doberman. She was a good dog, and God knew how much we loved her. She had grown old and grey with us. I remember years before, God had sent a stranger to my door to warn me about someone throwing poisoned meat to the dogs in our neighborhood. That night, I had brought Keyna inside, and in the morning, I saw the meat in our yard. My heart had been filled with gratitude and praise for my sweet Savior’s intervention!

But on that winter night in my sleep, I had no idea God was talking to me. “She has a doghouse,” I thought to myself, “and anyway, she’s old and that’s not a bad way to die.” I didn’t move. I never opened my eyes. I don’t even know that I woke up. Not until the next morning did I realize God had spoken to me, and I realized it because Keyna had fallen outside her doghouse and was dead. I cannot adequately describe my feelings that morning--guilt, shame, discouragement, grief. I would have given anything to go back and obey. But I couldn’t.

The story doesn’t end there though. Several years later our third child was born. Again I was extremely tired. The children were all in bed and asleep. I had finally gotten into bed and felt warm and comfortable. Once I was completely relaxed and starting to fall into the sleep I had longed for all day, there came the thought, “Go check the boy’s covers. Make sure they are warm.” I had put them in warm sleeper pajamas. “They’ll be fine.” Distinctly, the thought came, “Remember Keyna.” This time, I immediately got out of bed. I went downstairs to their room and saw our four-year-old sound asleep with his comforter in a heap at the bottom of the bed; he definitely would have been cold. With a smile I pulled his comforter up and tucked him in. “It was so sweet that God wanted to keep him warm…” I started to leave the room. But there was a firm, “Both boys.” I climbed up into our six-year-old’s bunk bed, and found, beside our curious boy, a tape player I didn’t even know he had taken apart. The wires were loose and exposed. I immediately checked, and found it plugged in also.

Obviously, I needed to teach the children some things about safety. But there were lessons for me too- about learning to listen to the voice of God. He promises to lead and guide us, but we have to learn to recognize His voice. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me… It’s not easy to recognize His voice; so often it seems like any other thought- one of our own ideas.

So many times in life, the lessons God has for us are like layers of an onion. My sweet, kind, merciful, Heavenly Father’s love was like the papery, protective covering. He loved me enough to speak to me- His weak, tired, definitely imperfect child. He wanted me to know that I could trust Him with my safety and of the safety of those I love. He wanted to fill my heart with a desire to always, immediately, recognize His voice, to know His voice, and follow Him; and to fill my heart with gratitude and praise. He does make all things work together for good when we love Him. And I cannot thank Him enough for using my own failures to bless me!

Why I am not a mystic

The English term “mystic” comes from the Greek term, μυστικός, “mystikos,” an initiate into a mystery religion. Mystery religions were cults of antiquity in which participation was reserved to initiates. Although the mystery religions were practiced in classical antiquity, the initiates understood that the mysteries were much older. One of the popular Roman mystery religions, for example, was Mithraism, which took its name from an old Persian god named Mithra, a name that appears in archeological finds dating to 1,500 BC. That Mitra is still a popular surname in India gives some indication of how geographically widespread the cult of Mithra was, in its various forms. Today, the term “mysticism” refers to the pursuit of a direct experience with the divine, the supernatural, or ultimate reality, typically through special practices intended to bring about such experiences. Mysticism is distinguished from normal religious faith by its emphasis on direct personal experiences that the mystic interprets as encounters with the divine. Mysticism has usually been pursued within the context of monasticism; monks and nuns typically live a life of solitude and silence conducive to mystical practices. The core of mysticism is its embrace of techniques that are intended to achieve altered states of consciousness.

Mysticism is not part of biblical Christianity. There is no biblical support for mysticism in general nor for such mystical practices as chanting meditation, transcendental meditation, or astral projection. Mysticism, like the monasticism it has been associated with, appears to have been engrafted into Christianity from Buddhism and other pagan, Eastern religions during the same period of time when countless pagan practices and beliefs entered a deeply compromised church. Roman Catholic mysticism is simply a thinly “Christianized” form of Eastern mysticism. Mysticism has demonstrated the ability to adapt to almost any religio-cultural circumstances.

During the Reformation, the reformers largely rejected mysticism along with monasticism. The mystics focused upon experience, but the reformers insisted that Scripture was paramount, and its general, objective revelation superior to the personal, subjective revelations of the mystics. Martin Luther's insistence on the superiority of Scripture to mystical experience is seen in his rejection of the theology of Thomas Müntzer (1489-1525, executed for his role in the Peasants' War), who was heavily influenced by the Rhineland Mystic, Johannes Tauler (1300-1361). Müntzer's theology was based upon mystical experience; he began to teach the supremacy of the “inner light,” which he interpreted as the revelation of the Holy Spirit, as against the authority of Scripture. Luther's response was to declare that he would still accept Scripture even if Müntzer “had swallowed the Holy Ghost, feathers and all!”

George Fox (1624-1691), the founder of the Society of Friends (popularly known as the Quakers) created a culturally Protestant mystical sect. Fox believed that each person has an “inner light,” which Fox interpreted as Christ dwelling within us. Like almost all mystics, Fox believed and taught that Scripture was not always infallible and could be overruled by the “inner light.” Quaker worship consists of silent meditation; sometimes, a speaker will be led to speak audibly to the congregation, but often the entire hour will pass in silence. The purpose of sitting is silence is to wait for God to speak directly to the individual, i.e., to wait for a mystical experience. Like many other mystics, Quakers tend to subscribe to panentheism (the belief that God is in everything and everyone) and universalism (the belief that everyone will eventually be saved).

Given that the Quakers are mystics, it is not surprising that Quakers have been instrumental in the fairly recent, widespread introduction of mysticism into mainstream Protestant evangelical practice. Richard Foster and Dallas Willard crossed paths in a small Quaker church in Van Nuys, California, when Willard (though a Southern Baptist) was attending there and Foster was called there as a young pastor fresh out of seminary. Both men have been important writers and theorists promoting mystical practices in wider Christianity, but Foster has been especially important. Foster's 1978 book, “The Celebration of Discipline” was a huge bestseller; Christianity Today listed it as one of the top ten Christian books of the 20th Century. Yet Foster promotes the practice known as astral projection:

In your imagination allow your spiritual body, shining with light, to rise out of your physical body. Look back so you can see yourself … and reassure your body that you will return momentarily ….Go deeper and deeper into outer space until there is nothing except the warm presence of the eternal creator. Rest in his presence. Listen quietly...[to] any instruction given. p. 27.

A mystical practice promoted under the rubric of “spiritual formation” is usually called “centering prayer” or “contemplative prayer,” but it is not prayer at all. It is an Eastern meditative practice known as chanting meditation or transcendental meditation. This form of meditation seeks to create a mental void where all conscious thought is blocked out. To achieve this mental void—known as “the silence”--the person repeats a single word or short phrase over and over. In Hinduism, this phrase is known as a “mantra.” The mantra may need to be repeated 20, 30, or even hundreds of times to achieve the mental void. In teaching His followers how to pray, Jesus warned against using “vain repetitions, as the heathen do,” because God hears us the first time we say something (Mat. 6:7). But, again, “contemplative prayer” or “centering prayer” is not prayer; rather, it is a technique for bringing about a mystical experience.

The goal of this technique is the mental void or the silence. Mystics within Christian cultures sometimes argue that at the center of one's being, there is God, and the purpose of the silence is to allow God to speak from within. They believe that the “inner light” is God who dwells within every man. But Christ directed us to pray “Our father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name” (Mat. 6:9). God dwells in heaven (1 Kings 8:43; 2 Chron. 6:30; Psalm 103:19; Mat. 5:45; 23:9), which is an actual place (Acts 1:11; Heb. 1:3; 8:1, 5; 9:24; 1 Pet. 3:22; Rev. 4:1-2). Mystics quote Luke 17:21, “the kingdom of God is within you” as evidence that God lives inside every person, but the Greek word translated as “within” can also be translated “among,” and it is clear from the context that Christ is not saying that the kingdom of God is inside of us. The Pharisees had asked Jesus when the kingdom of God would come, and Jesus responded that the kingdom of God [Jesus Himself] is among you right now. In the following verses, Jesus points out that his Second Advent will also be a visible, physical appearance, just like His first Advent.

The “silence” that mystics hope to achieve by repeating their mantra is really a trance, and it is properly understood as a form of self-hypnosis. When a person is in an hypnotic trance, he is highly susceptible to suggestion. In Christian cultures, proponents of this technique would have us believe that we will encounter the God of the Bible in this meditative trance. But the fact that the technique is not authorized in Scripture, and originated and is commonly used in Eastern religions, suggests that we might encounter some other spirit. Adventist pastor Rick Howard writes:

. . .when a person enters this silence . . . they are entering a place where the powers of evil angels can create whatever illusion they desire. . . . the modern-day Christian, upon entering the silence, will believe they have come into the presence of God, when in reality they are under the control of the same demons as the psychics, spirit mediums, and ancient mystics of the church, those of any religion or group that relies on supernatural experiences as evidence of their contact with God” The Omega Rebellion, p. 51

The spirits that work in the silence will work within a given mystic's belief system. They will not—at least not at first—suggest anything alien or contrary to the mystic's existing belief system. Ray Yungen writes:

Please pay attention to this! God does not work in the silence, but familiar spirits do. Moreover, what makes it so dangerous is that they are very clever. One well known New Ager revealed that his guiding (familiar) spirit candidly disclosed: 'We work with all who are vibrationally sympathetic; simple and sincere people who feel our spirit moving, but for the most part, only within the context of their current belief system.'” A Time of Departing, p. 87

What tends to happen over time, however, is that the mystic enjoys the mystical experiences more than any other aspect of his faith. The experiences are called “extremely pleasurable” and even “ecstatic.” The mystic eventually places more credence in his personal experiences than in Scripture. This makes perfect sense, because the mystic believes he is experiencing God, so why give more credence to an old book than to God?

But, of course, the power behind the mystical experiences is not God, and it gradually and almost imperceptibly leads the mystic toward false doctrine. Typically, the false doctrines include at least one, and usually more than one, of the following four:

1. monism = all is one, all reality is a unified whole, with no sharp demarcation between Creator, creation and creature;
2. pantheism = everything is God, the tree, the flower, the bird the cat, the human—all are God;
3. panentheism = God is inside of everything and everyone; and
4. universalism = everyone will ultimately share in eternal life.

These four false doctrines crop up so frequently in mystical thinking across the ages and across the boundaries of culture and formal religion that the demons working the “silence” beat must all be following the same playbook.

These ideas soon lead to a false ecumenism and a blurring of religious demarcations. Scripture is very clear that Jesus Christ is the only way to God the Father, and our only hope of eternal salvation; those who do not have Christ are lost. (John 3:16, 36; 14:6; 1 John 5:12). But mysticism chafes at such dualistic, black/white, right/wrong thinking, emphasizing oneness and universalism instead.

The doctrine of the atonement tends to be lost in mystical thinking; what need is there of Christ's work of mediation in the heavenly sanctuary when anyone, from any religious tradition—Buddhist, Hindu, Sufi, Christian—can have a direct, unmediated experience with God? The mystic removes 'sin' by performing meditative exercises to bring himself into a perceived state of oneness with God. The atonement, the sanctuary, and most of the rest of the Bible make little sense in a mystical context. This isn't surprising because mysticism is external to, and long pre-dates, Christianity.

What is the Review up to?

A recent article in the Review titled “What is a Mystic?” painted a very different picture of mysticism than what I have just described. The Review article implied that mysticism is really nothing more than a vibrant prayer life and an appreciation for the fine historical hymns of Christendom. But mysticism is thousands of years old; it is far too late to try to redefine it as traditional Christian spirituality. Mysticism is what it is: a dangerous, pre-Christian shortcut to the supernatural that exalts subjective experience and de-emphasizes objective revelation, doctrine, incarnation, atonement, prophecy, and the eschaton.

The Scripture references in “What is a Mystic?” do not support mystical practice. Colossians 2:10 says nothing about a mystical union with Christ; it speaks of righteousness by faith in Christ, as opposed to human effort and legalism. Galatians 3:26-29 addresses a similar concern, namely that salvation comes through faith in Christ rather than through race, status, or gender: “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise” (Gal. 3:26-29). Peter does speak about “participating in the divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4), but the context shows that we do this by faith in God's promises, not by seeking a mystical experience. In 2 Corinthians 2:16, Paul speaks of having “the mind of Christ,” but we assume the mind of Christ by internalizing Christ's precepts as described in the Gospels, not by emptying our minds of conscious thought in pursuit of a mystical experience.

Likewise, there is nothing in the corpus of the writings of Ellen White that supports mystical practice. In the chapter on “Faith and Prayer” in the book Education, it is made clear that prayer is an exercise of faith in God and in God's word, not the pursuit of a mystical experience. The need for faith will never be replaced by mystical experiences in the believer's life. In the chapter on “the Privilege of Prayer” in Steps to Christ, it is made exceedingly clear that prayer is intelligent, verbal communication:

. . . we need also to pour out our hearts to Him. In order to have spiritual life and energy, we must have actual intercourse with our heavenly Father. Our minds may be drawn out toward Him; we may meditate upon His works, His mercies, His blessings; but this is not, in the fullest sense, communing with Him. In order to commune with God, we must have something to say to Him concerning our actual life. Prayer is the opening of the heart to God as to a friend”  p. 93

There is no hint that communication with God occurs in conditions of “darkness” or “silence” or “beyond the plane on which the intellect can work.” To the contrary, prayer is communication:

Keep your wants, your joys, your sorrows, your cares, and your fears before God. You cannot burden Him; you cannot weary Him. He who numbers the hairs of your head is not indifferent to the wants of His children (Steps to Christ, p. 100).

Nothing in the writings of Ellen White can accurately be called “Christian mysticism.” Her writings contain traditional Protestant Christian spirituality.

The article, “What is a mystic?” recommends the English mystic Evelyn Underhill (1875-1941), and particularly her short book, Concerning the Inner Life, based upon lectures given in 1926. Within the first ten pages of this volume (which is available online), you will find references to some of “the usual suspects” of mysticism, including George Fox, Johannes Tauler, and Ignatius Loyola (1491-1556), the founder of the Jesuit order. Underhill quotes with approval (on p. 10) the Ignatian mantra, “I come from God—I belong to God—I am destined for God,” but this mantra seems to deny human freedom, and the necessity of Christ's mediation to our salvation. We cannot will our way to heaven by repeatedly chanting, “I am destined for God.” Underhill also recommends a mantra of the founder of the Franciscan order: “Think of St. Francis of Assisi repeating all night: 'My God and all! What art thou? And what am I?' Is not that a perfect prayer of adoration?” (p. 30-31)

Concerning the Inner Life is mysticism lite. Underhill's most systematic and important work was her 1911 book, Mysticism (also available online). There you will find a thorough discussion of the “Divine Darkness” or the “cloud of unknowing” in which mystical experiences occur. The mystic must “pass beyond the plane on which the intellect can work.” There you will also find a discussion of the “ecstasy” and “rapture” experienced by the mystic when he is in a state of altered consciousness referred to as a “trance.” This condition may involve anesthesia, such that the mystic does not feel pain during the trance. There you will find a discussion of “the dark night of the soul,” during which the mystic can no longer achieve his ecstatic mystical experiences, and must live on the memory of past experiences. There you will learn that Evelyn Underhill is a full-blown mystic in the tradition of mystics down through the ages, including pre-Christian, pagan mystics.

“Over the past three decades American Christianity has been revolutionized by a renewed emphasis on holy living and spiritual disciplines,” writes the author of “What is a Mystic?” Something significant has indeed been happening in American Christianity over the past few decades, but it is not an emphasis on holy living. It is known as the “emerging church” movement, a somewhat amorphous critique of, and alternative to, Protestant ecclesiology, and an attempt to turn mainline Christianity to pre-Reformation (and post-Christian) practices and forms of worship. Introducing mysticism into Protestantism—via the teachings of Richard Foster, Brian McLaren, Leonard Sweet, Phyllis Tickle, Richard Rohr and many others—is central to the emerging church movement. The ultimate goal of the emergents is to win Christians over to a syncretistic, non-biblical worldview that combines elements of Christianity with elements of all other world religions, including paganism. There is no place for biblical eschatology in this worldview; no place for a Second Coming of Christ, a resurrection of the dead, a final judgment of the unsaved, a millennium in heaven, and an Earth made new.

In his inaugural sermon at the 2010 General Conference session, Elder Wilson warned us to:

Stay away from non-biblical spiritual disciplines or methods of spiritual formation that are rooted in mysticism such as contemplative prayer, centering prayer, and the emerging church movement in which they are promoted. Look within the Seventh-day Adventist Church...

Mysticism is not part of our tradition in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, nor should it be. Rather than promote mysticism in our official publications, we need to expose it for what it is: a dangerous, occult avenue by which the adversary insinuates false doctrine into the minds of individuals and ultimately into the church.

Junia: an apostle?

I had a recent discussion with a friend about the role of women and leadership in the church. He cited what he felt was compelling evidence in favor of women serving as pastors and/or elders. The proposition is that Romans 16:1,7 speaks of Phoebe and Junia as a deacon and an apostle. My friend alleged that these are examples of an evolution in biblical thinking regarding women's roles in church authority. I was interested to know if the text supported the claims he proposed. This article will deal with one of these two assertions- that Junia was recognized as a female apostle. Junia is referenced in Romans 16:7 with Andronicus, and referred to in the New King James Version as “outstanding among the apostles" (episemoi en tois apostolos). Several questions need to be addressed:

1. Is Junia male or female?
2. Should the Greek phrase episemoi en tois apostolois be translated “outstanding among the apostles” or “well known to the apostles”?
3. Do other contexts used for apostles help us decide whether Junia should be included or excluded?
4. In my last article “What is an Apostle”?, the “Fourth Phase” of “Apostles” in the New Testament was identified a spiritual gift (Eph. 4:11). Because spiritual gifts are gender inclusive, does it make any difference to argue for masculine or feminine apostleship anyways?

I. Was Junia a Female?

It is interesting to see how different versions have rendered the gender of Junia. The following versions have adopted a masculine (Junias) reading:

Revised Version (1881), Rheims (American Edition), American Standard Version (ASV), Goodspeed, Complete Bible (1903), Modern Reader’s Bible, Moffatt, Revised Standard Version (RSV), Phillips, Amplified New Testament, New English Bible, New American Standard Bible (NASB), Jerusalem Bible, Good News Bible, Living Bible, New International Version (NIV), Darby Bible, the English Standard Version, God’s Word to the Nation Version, New English Translation (NET), and the Young Literal Translation.

On the other hand, the following versions have adopted the feminine (Junia) reading:

Tyndale, Cranmer, Great Bible, Geneva Bible, Bishops Bible, Rheims (“Julia”), King James Version, Weymouth, Lamsa (NT), New American Bible, New King James Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New Century Bible, New American Bible, Revised English Bible, New Revised Standard Version (NRSV), Oxford Inclusive Version, New Living Translation, the Holman Christian Standard Bible, Today’s New English Version, and the Webster Bible.

New Testament Greek scholar Daniel Wallace comments on the gender issue: “The current trends of scholarship . . . [over] the past two decades, the tide has swung decidedly over to the side of the feminine form” (Michael H. Burer and Daniel B. Wallace, Was Junia Really an Apostle? A Re-examination of Rom. 16:7, 76-91). There are several reasons why we should consider “Junia” a female:

1 ) The name Iounian can be accented in two ways- which strongly suggest gender. If it is masculine, the accent is on the last syllable- Iounia’n (technically referred to as the circumflex on the ultima). If it is feminine, the accent is on the penultimate syllable (second to last)- Iouni’an. Accents on Greek manuscripts were not added until the 9th century- but they are “usually decent indicators . . . and reveal is that Iounian was largely considered a man’s name- the bulk of the MSS have the accent on the last syllable" (Wallace).

2 ) Church history reveals an almost “universal sense that this was a woman’s name. . . through at least the twelfth century. . . No instances of Junias as a man‘s name have surfaced to date in Greek literature, while at least three instances of Junia as a woman‘s name have appeared" (Wallace).

In conclusion, “the data on whether Iounian is feminine or masculine is simply inadequate to make a decisive judgment, though what scanty material we do have suggests a feminine name. Although most translations regard the name as masculine, the data does not yield itself in this direction" (Wallace).

II. Was Junia an Apostle?

Dr. Wallace noted that “the first issue [gender] has garnered a great deal of attention, with quite a bit of evidence enlisted on both sides. But the second has been the object of almost no substantive discussion; indeed, most commentators simply assume a particular viewpoint that has surprisingly never been demonstrated.” He goes on to say “there is a growing consensus that Junia is an apostle . . . in fact the vast bulk of translations and commentators indicate this . . . But only rarely is the syntax of the Greek word ‘outstanding’ (episemos) with its adjuncts discussed at all." The two views can be notated as the Exclusive view, “outstanding by the Apostles," and the Inclusive view, “outstanding among the Apostles" (Wallace).

Junia’s apostleship “is simply assumed, with little or no support. For example, Dunn states, 'the full phrase almost certainly means prominent among the apostles'; and he cites other authorities for his defense. Cranfield says, ‘virtually certain- that the words mean outstanding among the apostles’- enlisting patristic assumptions on his behalf. . . Schreiner notes merely that the inclusive interpretation is 'the consensus view', and that it ‘is almost surely right, for this is a more natural way of understanding the prepositional phrase'. . . The inclusive camp may well be traced back to Lightfoot. . . [who] offer no support other than that the inclusive view was adopted by the Greek fathers, his reputation as a careful grammatical exegete was legendary, prompting Schmithals to claim that Lightfoot has shut the door on the exclusive view" (Wallace).

Bible translations have also picked up on this thinking: the NIV and NASB say Andronicus and Junia are “Outstanding among the apostles”; the TEV- “well known among the apostles”; the NRVS and NAB- “prominent among the apostles”; NJB- “greetings to those outstanding apostles”; KJV, NKJV, ASV, RSV- “of note among the apostles”. Only a handful of translations take the Greek syntax to mean that they were not apostles: CEV- “highly respected by the apostles”; Amplified- “They are men held in high esteem by the apostles”; NET- “Well known to the apostles.” It is the opinion of Michael Burer that “inclusive commentators do not adequately discuss the syntax of the Greek phrase episemos en tois apostolois. When the construction is discussed, the focus is on the prepositional phrase en tois apostolois and the meaning of en (EV) , not on the collocation of episemos with prepositional phrases."

Lexical Evidence

Episimos can mean well known, prominent,outstanding,famous,notable, eminent, illustrious, distinguished, or a bad sense--notorious. Episemos can be used either in an implied comparative sense "prominent, outstanding, among" or in an elative sense "famous, well known to/by". Therefore, lexically, both meanings are possible. We will have to turn to syntax, extra-biblical sources and context to determine which meaning should be used (Wallace).

Syntactical Evidence

Dr. Wallace asserts that “if Rom. 16:7 meant to say that Andronicus and Junia were outstanding among the apostles, Paul would have used the genitive--ton apostolon" (Wallace). However, these forms were not used, which indicates that they were not members of the Apostles. Some of Dr. Wallace’s explanations and discussion are technical and beyond the scope of this article. If interested, please see his article online.

Non-biblical Evidence

When doing a search in the exhaustive Thesaurus Linguae Graecae, which includes non-Biblical Greek literature, scholars have found that episimos with the EV plus the dative and genitive modifier is common (Wallace). “Repeatedly in biblical Greek, patristic Greek, papyri, inscriptions, classical and Hellenistic texts- the genitive personal modifier was consistently used for an inclusive idea, while the (EV plus) dative personal adjunct was almost never so used. To say that episemoi en tois apostolois can only mean “noteworthy among the apostles” is simply not true. It is more accurate to say . . . [and] almost certainly means ‘well known TO the apostles.’ Thus Junia and Andronicus are recognized by Paul as well known to the apostles, not as an outstanding member of the apostolic band. To sum up the evidence of biblical and patristic Greek: every instance of EV plus personal nouns supported the exclusive view" (Wallace).

III. “The Apostles” (Ton Apostolon)

When the Twelve Apostles and Paul are mentioned in the N.T., the context contains certain words or phrases which identify them with certainty. The following indicators confirm their identity: 1 ) The number “twelve,” 2 ) The specific names of the “twelve” (“Peter,” “John,” “Paul,” etc.), 3 ) Jesus in person- while He walked on earth, 4 ) The Definite Article preceding the word “Apostles” (“THE Apostles“- Gr.-tous, tois, ton apostolos), and 5 ) The context (Acts 1:2- “He had chosen”; Acts 4:33- “witness to the resurrection”; 2 Pet. 3:2- “apostles of the Lord”, etc.). When one or any of these contextual markers are present, Scripture is signaling that the passage is only referring to this special role of the Twelve Apostles or Paul. Romans 16:7 contains the phrase “ton apostolon”- “the Apostles”. This is confirming evidence that Junia was NOT a member of “the apostles” (as stated in Rom. 16:7), otherwise the contextual marker(s) would be absent.

IV. Gift of the Spirit

In the “Fourth Phase” of Apostolos (See “What is an Apostle?”), the office or unique role (as it related to the Great Commission fulfilled in the First Century- see Col. 1:23) was replaced by the spiritual gift (1 Cor. 12:28; Eph. 4:11-13). After the initial establishment of the churches (including the church in Rome- - to whom “Romans” was written), the Holy Spirit gifted people to be missionaries from their home church “outpost." Since all spiritual gifts are gender inclusive, Paul’s commendation of Junia as a female member of the apostolos is a non-issue. Paul was not including her as a part of the unique, one-time role that the twelve, Paul and his companions were called to. The fact that she was gifted as an apostolos does not add anything to the current debate of leadership in the church, since with apostles, prophets, etc. gender is inclusive and therefore irrelevant.

V. Conclusion

The majority of information regarding Junia is that she was a female. Scholarly consensus that Junia was a member of the apostleship could be based upon Lightfoot’s misunderstanding of the evidence. The syntactical, extra-biblical evidence points to Junia as being recognized by the apostles, not a part of them. Interestingly, as we saw in the last article, Contextually, when the definite article is used with the noun apostolos, (ton apostolon) it signifies the unique, twelve-member office, and Paul’s ministry only. Finally, when the Apostle Paul wrote his epistle to the Romans, the gift of apostolos had already commenced. The whole discussion of whether Junia was a male or female, a part of the apostles or not is a mute point! Since gifts are gender inclusive, and a non-ordained office, it is irrelevant in the conversations of leadership positions and roles in the church.

Related articles

• What is an apostle?
• ELDER = PASTOR = BISHOP? (Part II)
• PASTOR = BISHOP = ELDER? (Part I)
• One wife husband

An open letter to Ted Wilson, Lisa Beardsley-Hardy, Larry Blackmer, and the La Sierra constituents

In a couple of days, fewer than 100 people will determine whether the Seventh-day Adventist Church in North America will hold onto any of its tertiary educational institutions. The constituents of La Sierra University have been called to a special session this Thursday, February 21, where they will be asked to approve radical changes to La Sierra's bylaws that will loosen the University's connection to the Church. Under pressure from WASC, the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, a sub-committee of La Sierra's Board of Trustees has drafted proposed bylaw changes that dilute church representation on the Board of Trustees, weaken the position of the Board chair, and transfer most of the Board's governing power to the president of the University.

The proposed bylaw changes ensure that lay Trustees will always outnumber church official Trustees; in fact, the provision regarding Board quorums is amended so that there is no quorum unless lay Trustees outnumber church officials. The new bylaws would make the office of board chair an elected office, elected by the other board members, and would prevent the Pacific Union president from ever serving as chairman, or vice chair, of the Board of Trustees, assuming that he continues to serve as chairman of the PUC Board of Trustees. The proposed bylaws also strengthen the position of vice-chair and make that officially a lay position.

These changes are in response to WASC's expressed desire for greater board autonomy, by which WASC means greater independence from the official Seventh-day Adventist Church. But all of our union-affiliated colleges' governing boards are set up exactly like La Sierra's: the union president is ex-officio chairman of the board, and all affiliated conference presidents are board members. No other secular accrediting organization has ever taken issue with this arrangement. But you can expect that, if La Sierra knuckles under to WASC's demands and approves these bylaw changes, all the other regional accrediting bodies will try to enforce similar demands of our other colleges. If sound educational policy demands an autonomous board in Southern California, then sound educational policy demands it in Northern California, Washington, Nebraska, Texas, Tennessee, Michigan, and Maryland, as well. Eventually, and sooner than you think, all of our Adventist tertiary educational institutions will be Adventist in “heritage” only; they will no longer be governed by officers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

How did we get to this dangerous place?

We got here because some of “us” do not want our educational institutions to be governed by the Adventist Church, and are willing to go to great lengths to see that they aren't. This faction has long seen accreditation as a way to secularize Adventist tertiary education. They would love for the SDA Church to be forced to choose between a truly Adventist education, on the one hand, and secular accreditation with its prestige and government money, on the other. They constantly argue, on such blogs as Spectrum, that Adventist education cannot be truly Adventist and still maintain secular accreditation. Indeed, they argue that Adventist education cannot be real education, much less accredited education, unless it abandons the Adventist educational philosophy. For example, T. Joe Willey recently wrote at Spectrum:

Beyond governance issues and outside interference, how will Adventists come to terms with not just biology, but all of higher education? This will be problematic if the church’s traditionalists continue to maintain that Scriptural authority has absolute priority over history, science, psychology, social science, philosophy as well as theology — that it is infallible and cannot be circumvented and is above challenge by methodological naturalism or scientific data or evidence. If this policy is going to be used to cast off outside approvals or accreditation commissions . . . the church could then face closing down its academic colleges and universities [or] transforming them into unaccredited Bible colleges. Willey, “The Accreditation of La Sierra University: Tampering with Financial Consequences,” Spectrum, January 28, 2013.

So far, there is no real conflict between accreditation and upholding the Adventist philosophy of education, just a strong desire for such a conflict on the part of secularists within our midst. Secular accrediting associations understand that church schools exist to further the mission of the sponsoring denomination, which will sometimes include a different view of origins, among other things. Creationists in the Adventist Church and elsewhere want Darwinism taught and understood in our schools—indeed, we want our students to understand it better than students in state universities—but we want it taught and understood as a false theory of origins. The truth about our origins is set forth in the Word of God and in the inspired testimonies of Ellen White.

But although there is no genuine conflict between Adventist education and secular accreditation, certain ones so desperately want such a conflict to exist that they are willing to foment it. They are willing to make it actually happen. Which brings us back to the immediate situation at La Sierra.

Apparently, former La Sierra Trustee Lenny Darnell wrote to the WASC commission with responsibility for accrediting La Sierra and urged them to demand that the board structure be changed. Darnell managed to record himself saying, “And if there's any way that Lenny can figure out, there's gonna be a memo to the WASC commission that says that you need to demand that we dismantle this ex-officio structure, or these problems will never go away. And this needs to be . . . whatever language you want to use, you need to say that we're coming back in two years and it has to be different.”

Even if we didn't have a recording of Lenny Darnell planning to solicit WASC to demand the exact change to the structure of the Board of Trustees that WASC ultimately demanded, and that the constituents will be asked to vote on Thursday, it could easily be deduced that Randal Wisbey, or some intermediary working on his behalf, had contacted WASC and solicited bylaw changes, based upon the following facts:

1. Denominational ownership has never before been seen as an impediment to secular accreditation.
2. All of the union-affiliated Adventists colleges have governing boards set up exactly like La Sierra's: the union president is ex-officio chairman of the board and all affiliated conference presidents are board members. WASC is essentially decreeing that any sectarian school that is actually governed by the sect--as opposed to just loosely affiliated with a denomination--cannot receive secular accreditation. This is an astonishing position, and may well be a novel argument. As far as I am aware, no other secular accrediting organization has ever taken issue with our standard governing board structure.
3. WASC would never say, “La Sierra, you're too tightly bound to your sponsoring denomination; make changes to your bylaws to loosen the connection” without knowing in advance that the suggestion would be agreeable. If the president, Board of Trustees, and the Pacific Union were all united on the present board structure, such a demand to re-structure the board would be expected to draw a lawsuit. Yet WASC made that demand of La Sierra because it had been assured that the administration wanted these board changes, and hence WASC would not be buying a lawsuit by demanding them.
4. WASC would expect to lose such a lawsuit. When I've mooted this issue online, liberals argue that WASC has a free hand to bully colleges because accreditation is voluntary and a college can simply choose not to be accredited. This is a poor argument. Accreditation is effectively no longer voluntary; federal grant and loan aid depend upon accreditation, as does transferability of credits and use of a degree as a prerequisite for admission to graduate schools. Because accreditation is crucial to a college, it cannot arbitrarily be removed; an accrediting association cannot make unreasonable demands. If La Sierra sued, WASC would back down, but they never would have made this demand had La Sierra insiders not solicited it.
5. Randal Wisbey resents efforts to interfere with La Sierra's inculcation of Darwinism. He allowed Louis Bishop to be disciplined three times for pointing out that La Sierra was undermining Seventh-day Adventist beliefs on origins, he demonizes those who, like the founders of Educate Truth, call attention to La Sierra's wrong teaching on origins, he has frustrated all efforts, internal and external, to address La Sierra's origins problem, he fired Lee Greer over Greer's rapprochement with Larry Blackmer on the origins issue, and he had three Trustees thrown off the Board for their efforts to address the problem. Wisbey wants these bylaw changes in order to put an end, once and for all, to any efforts by the Board of Trustees to address the origins issue. The proposed bylaw changes will put faculty, curriculum, and normal university operations far beyond the purview of the Board of Trustees.
6. If the bylaw changes were really driven by WASC, they would address only WASC's stated concerns: the structure of the board and the close connection to the official Seventh-day Adventist Church. But the overwhelming majority of the bylaw changes take governing power away from the Board of Trustees and give it to the president. This is contrary to WASC's stated policy on governing boards. WASC intends for governing boards to have strong oversight and strong committees in such areas as finance and academic affairs, but these bylaw changes strip the Board of most of its power to in these areas. In fact, the bylaw changes strike out the committee names (Executive, Membership, Academic Affairs, Personnel, Student Life, Trusteeship, and Finance) because these Board committees will no longer be necessary—the Board will lose its governing authority in these areas. That most of the bylaw changes are contrary to WASC policies demonstrates that WASC was never the driving force behind the bylaw changes. This is a power grab. Randal Wisbey is seizing power from the Board of Trustees and from the Church.

Where do we go from here?

First, we go to California and defeat these bylaw changes. They will require a two-thirds majority to pass, and things are not so far gone that two thirds of the La Sierra constituency will vote for something that has the potential to divest the entire church in North America of its tertiary educational apparatus.

And make no mistake, we are playing for all the marbles. Some fourteen months ago, I was blogging with someone who seemed extremely knowledgeable about La Sierra, but who was using a pseudonym. He wrote:

Interestingly enough, the LSU bylaws are being rewritten under WASC's guidance as we speak. Presuming the "permanent" (ex-officio) board member positions including the automatic Chairmanship by the PUC President are eliminated or weakened would you expect the PUC to stand idly by and see their "ownership" of LSU diluted by a bothersome third party whom they see as the cause of their problems in the first place? Perhaps they will go to the courts to protect their investment and control.

I responded:

On the question of how much WASC can interfere with curriculum and board structure, my answer is, not much. The strategy of using secular accreditation to effectively wrench La Sierra free of church control is too cute, and it won't work if the church is willing to sue WASC on First Amendment Freedom of Religion grounds. But, as I've said several times, if La Sierra even comes close to setting a bad precedent with WASC, we should close it down and sell the property.

He responded:

As for how much WASC can interfere with board structure - isn't that what is happening[?] Quite a bit, it seems, if rumors are correct. WASC even visited the LSU campus a couple of months ago to lay out exactly the changes they are demanding. . . . In the end, I don't think the church will have the option of shutting down only LSU. I think it's going to be an all-in game. Accept accreditation and accept severe limits on church structural and functional control of the church's tertiary institutions in the U.S. or close them ALL down.

I have since come to believe that the person I was blogging with was Lenny Darnell, the same former La Sierra Trustee who said he would write WASC demanding that the ex-officio board structure be done away with. Lenny is wrong about La Sierra, and Adventist education, and Seventh-day Adventism, but he's right about one thing: This is an all-in game, one hand for all the chips on the table. We defeat these bylaw changes or we risk losing all of our colleges.

The shame of it all

If we step over the line of God’s Law, He (in His mercy) allows three consequences into our lives: guilt, shame, and fear. They each have a purpose; first I'll write about shame. I am fascinated by the casual comment that closes chapter two of Genesis. “The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame.” With this comment, Moses drops a pin marker in pre-fall paradise and then moves into the story of sin in chapter three. Here we see disgrace for the first time (v. 7), and they weren’t glorying in it either (Philippians 3:19).

When the flush of forbidden excitement faded into monochrome reality, Adam & Eve first saw themselves in the cold light of conviction. They were not just naked; they were now the raw edge of genetic vulnerability. And they were... ashamed. It was a flashing “check heart” light on the dashboard of their tender conscience.

Six thousand years later (give or take a week), we seem to have entered a different time in history. Shame is no longer an approved tool in society's toolbox. And it’s actually a shame. Shame can keep people from making many dumb decisions.

The self-esteem movement of the 1960’s has given birth to a world without concern for behavior or excellence. I really like a quote I heard recently: “They keep inventing new ways to celebrate mediocrity.” For instance, an international math test found that although American students ranked low in skills, they were at the top of the world when it came to believing that they were good at math. As David McCullough said last year in his Wellesley Massachusetts High School commencement speech, “Today’s B was yesterday’s C.”

In Western culture, the self-esteem movement has essentially become the anti-shaming movement, and now wants us to feel good about everything. But it isn’t good to feel good about bad things, is it? We tend to call that psychopathic behaviour.

Here’s another example of anti-shame. Last year, a Children’s Hospital in Georgia started a campaign to reduce childhood obesity. They released several nice videos and put up numerous billboards with real-life overweight children talking about the real-life problems that obesity causes.The videos (watch them on YouTube) are presented with neither judgment nor excessive dramatization. But, now there is a campaign to have the Children’s Hospital take down these billboards! The belief is that these billboards bring shame to children who are obese. I don’t agree that these apropos billboards are making kids ashamed, but if they are it could become a good thing (40% of children in Georgia are overweight). Excess fat endangering our life should make us ashamed. It should be noted that excess fat covering their bodies also makes them ill, and it’s much easier to die of diabetes or heart disease than of shame.

Anyone sensible can see that the Georgia Children's Health Alliance wasn’t bringing shame to children; they simply acknowledged the fact that children were already feeling ashamed and that one of the many side effects of obesity is that our (get ready for it) self-esteem takes a dive. And we can’t have that.

Anti-shame has (as intended) produced a steady stream of shamelessness. Bad grades? No shame. Bad behavior? Don’t be ashamed. Immorality? No shame. No restraints, and no humility.

Thus today we have people bursting out of closets all over the place. In place of the ever popular No Fear™ Tee-shirts, we have their seamy cousin–No Shame. And I think that’s a shame.

It may come as a shock to you, but there was once a time when personal failures, deviant desires, and perverse taste were accompanied by shame and embarrassment, or at least by silence. Today these deviations are a ticket to have your own reality show, and/or maybe a book deal.

What then is the purpose of shame? If there’s one thing I’ve learned it is that shame can play a wonderful role in a civilized society. Shame helps keeps us from behaving badly (or should). To be immune to the disapproval of loved ones would hack a great piece out of what it is to love. The absence of shame is often seen around criminal and immoral activity. The opposite of shame is not goodness; the opposite of shame is shamelessness and the connotation there is not pretty. Bring back shame. It should be a national sport. A good dose of healthy shame could fix a great many ills.

What about the Bible? The Bible has much to say about shame. It defines a healthy kind and a bad kind. One bad kind occurs when others intentionally embarrass us. That’s not fun, is it? In this category I will also put false shame, when the Enemy tries to discourage & damage our relationship with God. False shame is a pipeline for negative thoughts. Perhaps we’ll talk about that kind in another article.

We receive the right kind of shame when we transgress God’s Law, as did Adam & Eve. This shame is meant to bring us to repentance. Shame, therefore, is appropriate. But it need not be permanent, for as Paul tells us in Romans, where there is hope we are not ashamed, and through Christ we are provided hope (Romans 5:5). You and I need Jesus to take our burdens and our shame away. He is willing, if we are.

Therefore I see the current anti-shame culture that surrounds us as a mortal enemy of repentance. Anti-shame is not interested in surrendering our burdens to Jesus; it just denies that sin and guilt exist at all. It has a precedent in the Bible, and the results can be devastating.

“The LORD is righteous in her midst, He will do no unrighteousness. Every morning He brings His justice to light; He never fails, but the unjust knows no shame” (Zephaniah 3:5). This verse reveals the contrast between God’s goodness (which leads us to repentance) and a conscience seared. It’s a type of anti-shame, and here’s an even better verse: “Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things” (Philippians 3:19). Now we have a people who are continuing to do wrong and receiving worldly accolades for their shameful ways. In this kind of world, carnality is king. If this looks familiar to you, that is because it is describing our current world condition. Have mercy on us, O Lord.

I close this article with two scriptural causes for the contemporary quagmire of anti-shame.

1. Spiritual drunkenness. Just as alcohol causes people to lose shame, the wine of Babylon is removing the inhibitions of Earth’s inhabitants (Jeremiah 51:7; Rev. 14:8).
2. Fighting reality. Calling good good and evil evil cultivates the right kind of shame. Calling evil good and good evil is the combustion engine of anti-shame (Isaiah 5:20) and pride is its deep-cycle battery.

Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore they shall fall among them that fall: at the time that I visit them they shall be cast down, saith the LORD. Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. — Jeremiah 6:15-16

Having faith in God while waiting

“Wait on the LORD: be of good courage, and he shall strengthen thine heart: wait, I say, on the LORD.” – Psalm 27:14 Wait on the Lord. Waiting is one of life's most difficult challenges. Impatience is a common thread in the history of humanity, and in today's fast-paced society addicted to instant gratification, waiting even just a little bit has become agonizing. We often grow tired of waiting and either give up whatever it was we were waiting for or try various other methods to achieve the result we wanted.

This mindset can leak into our spiritual life, and impatience in spiritual matters can pose a threat to our faith and trust in the Lord. The longer we wait, the greater the opportunity for our courage and conviction to waver. The human heart, after all, is a frail thing.

There are some among us who are waiting on the Lord to work in our life. It could be guidance with which college to attend, what degree to pursue, what career to enter, or what man or woman to marry. It could be help with broken relationships, health problems, financial issues. During the wait, we may struggle with a wide range of high and low feelings, such as confidence in the Lord and discouragement when He seems to be quiet. We know from the Scriptures that the Lord hears us when we pray to Him. In Isaiah 65:24, the Lord promises: "...before they [His people] call, I will answer; and while they are yet speaking, I will hear." We know this, of course we know, but there are times when our weak humanity overwhelms us and we feel lost, alone.

Waiting is hard, even for the Christian.

So what do we do? Do we give up? Give in? God forbid!

Waiting is never easy, but there is always a reason. Even though we cannot see it while we are in the present, the Lord knows exactly what we need and when. If we look back over those times in our lives where we thought the Lord was not answering our prayers, when the waiting seemed to be unbearable, we are able to see the Lord's hand guiding us through. That alone should give us courage to push onward and endure any future waits.

However, if you struggling right now, perhaps you will find comfort in knowing that you are not alone. Whatever it is you are going through, others have experienced it and, through the strength of the Lord, overcame the agonizing wait (Philippians 4:13). Some testimonies have been recorded in the Scriptures. In 1 Corinthians 10:11, we are told: "Now all these things happened unto them for examples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come."

For those waiting for a life-changing event, remember that exiled Israel had to wait 70 years for the fulfillment of the Lord's promise through the project Jeremiah to bring them out of exile. (Jeremiah 29:10-13)

For those waiting for the right marriage partner, Isaac was forty-years-old when he married Rebekah according to Genesis 25:20.

For those waiting for a child or struggling with infertility, Sarah, Hannah, the mother, of Samson, and Elisabeth all endured the agony of infertility before the Lord blessed them with a child. And according to 2 Samuel 6:23, Michal, the first wife of David, never had children.

Whatever it is that you are waiting on the Lord for – no matter how long it seems that silence is your only answer, no matter how dark your current situation may seem – hold fast to the promise of Romans 8:28.

Real quickly I want to diverge onto a tangent, and this is very important. There are three things that we, humans, tend to do that make waiting worse: worry, coveting, and running ahead of God.

Let's look at the first: worry. Worry has a way of getting inside our minds and taking root very deeply. Some individuals, for whatever reason, are more pre-disposed to anxiety than others, and anxiety often has more than just psychological effects. Some people experience physical pain associated with high anxiety. Worry, anxiety, is not healthy physically, emotionally, or spiritually. It causes us to chronically view life from a negative perspective, overlooking all the blessings by focusing in on only the bad things. If left unchecked, this anxiety can damage our relationship with the Lord as well as our relationships with others. The apostle Paul wrote to the believers in Philippi with these encouraging words: “Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God” (Philippians 4:6).

The second, covetousness, is similar. Covetousness often begins with a harmless, passing thought, perhaps along the lines of: "I wish I had a good job like that." or "Why not me?" It settles into our hearts and minds and pumps out poison into our lives. Without realizing it, we grow dissatisfied with what the Lord has done for us and greedily long for the blessings the Lord has bestowed on others. James 1:14-15 gives us insight into how this transformation occurs in the heart and mind. “But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.” Like worry, this discontent will weaken our faith and trust in the Lord.

The third way we tend to worsen our situation is by running ahead of the Lord. After waiting a certain amount of time, our impatience leads us to doubt the Lord or come to the faulty conclude that the Lord must be waiting for us to act first. It is just like that saying, which is often erroneously attributed to the Bible but actually originating from ancient Greece, “God helps those who help themselves.” We use human logic and reasoning to talk ourselves into doing something that is not guided by the Holy Spirit. The end result often only complicates the situation. For example, after waiting for years and years with no apparent answer from the Lord, Abraham and Sarah tried to bring about the Lord’s promise of a child themselves: Abraham took Sarah’s handmaiden Hagar as a second wife. The history of God’s people was complicated by the misunderstandings and hatred that sprung up between the descendants of the son of promise, Isaac, and the son of man’s way, Ishmael. Proverbs 3:5 tells us clearly “Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding” and Proverbs 14:12 warns: “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

So how do we strengthen our faith and deepen our trust in the Lord while we are waiting?

I believe the key to this is coming to understand that even though we may be waiting for the Lord in whatever situation of our life (family, career, health, whatever it may be), we cannot be idle. The apostles, in the upper room, were waiting on the Lord but while they waited, they were not idle. They put away their differences, selfish desires, earnestly drawing together and pouring our their hearts to the Lord in prayer. And the result? The Holy Spirit fell upon those waiting and many were reached for the cause of Christ.

Even though we may be waiting on the Lord, we need to have faith that He has a plan for our lives. We need to keep our faith in the Lord on fire NOW through studying God’s Word, praying, fellowshipping with believers, witnessing to those within our sphere of influence, and living every single day for the glory of the Lord.

Remember, it is the little moments that happen every day that often make the biggest difference. We often wait for the Lord to give us a grand mission—a call to ministry, an opening as a missionary to a far-off place, whatever the dream may be—and while He may do that, He also expects us to live every day in faith. That includes sharing the Gospel in any capacity that we are able to in the "short term". We have an individual personal responsibility to witness for Christ NOW, not tomorrow or in ten years.

Think of it this way: the Lord has placed you in this exact time and place for a reason, even if you cannot see it. In Acts of the Apostles on page 109, Ellen White spoke of "a large class [of people] who need to be taught by such missionaries as Philip—men who will hear the voice of God and go where He sends them. There are many who are reading the Scriptures who cannot understand their true import. All over the world men and women are looking wistfully to heaven. Prayers and tears and inquiries go up from souls longing for light, for grace, for the Holy Spirit. Many are on the verge of the kingdom, waiting only to be gathered in."

The first priority in our life should always be sharing the message of Christ with those in our sphere of influence: our family, friends, co-workers, neighbors, and community. Let nothing else, not even what we may be waiting for, get in the way of this prime directive. In the end, having a career, marriage, children, etc. will mean absolutely nothing if we did not use what the Lord blessed us with to win souls to Christ. And what a glorious message we have to share! No other branch of Christendom has been given the privilege, and responsibility, of sharing the first, second, and third angels' messages.

In Evangelism, page 119, we read: "In a special sense Seventh-day Adventists have been set in the world as watchmen and light-bearers. To them has been entrusted the last warning for a perishing world. On them is shining wonderful light from the Word of God. They have been given a work of the most solemn import,—the proclamation of the first, second, and third angels’ messages. There is no other work of so great importance. They are to allow nothing else to absorb their attention."

And in Christian Service on page 145, we are told: "Let every Seventh-day Adventist ask himself, “What can I do to proclaim the third angel’s message?” Christ came to this world to give this message to His servant to give to the churches. It is to be proclaimed to every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. How are we to give it?"

Even though we may be waiting on the Lord to move in our own lives—whether it is help with finances or health issues, concerns for wayward children, which person we should marry, or what job to take, we cannot forsake our duty to share the good news of Jesus with those around us today, right now.

A different kind of dinosaur

Back in 2006, my company completed a spray-foam insulation project for Indianapolis Allison, a large GM plant in the heart of the city. The weather was good, and the project was eventually completed. I have to be honest. I have not seen so many lazy people in one city block as I did at that plant. And I blame the labor union mindset for that diminished work ethic. As we move into the year 2013, I sense that the time is right to ask ourselves, “Do Adventist Christians have any business joining labor unions?”

The first head of the American Federation of Labor Samuel Gompers, summed it up nicely in 1886 when asked what organized labor really wanted, he replied, “More.” There is more, and we are going to unmask it in this article.

Trade unions rose to prominence at a time when industrialized countries were growing at a staggering rate. In those days employee safety was often secondary to profits and job security was mostly non-existent. That was the 1840’s. Organized unions were a necessary provisional corrective to the exploitations of early industrial-revolution business. Then, as the industrialized nations matured, working conditions along with ingenuity, production safety, and efficiency all improved. By the 1920’s the industrial climate typified by Henry Ford and Herbert Hoover reached an apogee, buttressed by endemic optimism, efficient government and a profound confidence in the future. May I remind you that today’s situation has made labor unions a wholly unnecessary dinosaur standing in the shadow of a great federal regulatory beast? Unless workers are held at gunpoint, it is not possible to "exploit" them for any length of time today.

Here’s irony. Today’s progressives find fault with the church for clinging to “outdated” morals and beliefs (as if Biblical belief could ever be outdated). In liberal circles it is vogue to mock the church as clinging to a faded image etched onto a Victorian daguerreotype.

This is why it is interesting to watch so-called "Progressives" tout 19th century solutions for 21st century problems. Liberals in the church who support labor unions (and there are a growing number of them) are themselves museum curators cultivating the relics of antiquity. Labor unions are modern dinosaurs that should by now be extinct. They were needed at the turn of the 20th century to protect workers from dangerous working conditions, but they survive today as a political tool to influence elections and exert economic power. However, another (and far more sinister) goal is "increased forced unionization.” They want everybody to be like them!

It is not surprising unionized companies like GM, Chrysler, and Bethlehem Steel went bankrupt, and that heavily unionized states like California, New York, and Illinois are in deep financial trouble. By their very nature, unions must seek to drive their employers into bankruptcy. If they don't, then they aren't doing their job. Too harsh you say? Not at all.

The purpose of a union is to extract from its employer more than the market wage. If it doesn't do this, then there is no reason for workers to support it or to pay dues to it. And because companies must sell their output at market prices and pay market returns for the capital that they employ, they cannot afford to pay more than "market" for any major input. Accordingly, any unionized company for which labor is a significant part of its cost structure will eventually be destroyed. Thus, I can sum up the labor union mindset as trying to take more out of the system than they can put back into it.

As mentioned earlier, unless workers are held at gunpoint, it is not possible to "exploit" them for any length of time. That is why labor unions have become a modern dinosaur. In my opinion, they ought to go away. They once served a purpose but that time has long since passed. They have turned into very powerful, self-serving organizations that are hurting America and our ability to compete with the rest of the world. Yet I don’t think they are going away. Here’s why, "The trades unions will be one of the agencies that will bring upon this earth a time of trouble such as has not been since the world began" (LDE 116).

Whoa. With these startling words, the Spirit of Prophecy pulls back the curtain of the future. This is what’s coming. I told you there was more.

Could it really be that these “harmless” trade unions, many of which began in the 1840’s could become a ferocious monster in the time of the end? Absolutely. A fitting emblem of the “lamb that speaks like a dragon” is these organizations that began with decent intentions, and end with the fiery outbreath of persecution.

“But can’t we join one anyway and ignore these old outdated warnings?” You can, yes. At great peril.

“I need to provide for my family, and God wants us to be happy right?” No. The Lord wants us to be faithful. As we are faithful to His ways, joy comes into our lives. “If you know these things, happy are you if you do them” (John 13:17).

Those who claim to be the children of God are in no case to bind up with the labor unions that are formed or that shall be formed. This the Lord forbids. Cannot those who study the prophecies see and understand what is before us? The transgressors of the law of God have taken sides with their Leader, the General of rebellion. He understands how to devise his Satanic schemes and through whom to work for the carrying out of them. He is striving to lead every soul to take sides with him, and under the influence of his temptations, thousands are binding themselves up in bundles, ready to be consumed by the fires of the last day. 4MR 78

Samuel Gomper said it. Interviewed in 1886, his answer to the question “What do you labor unions want?” was “More!” Ok. Now let’s look back at the results of another interview in the Heavenly Country above. In the God-to-Isaiah transmission of truth all the unholy desires of Lucifer–-as he mutated into Satan–-are easily summed up in this one word “More!” (Isaiah 14:12-17). He wanted to take more out of the system then he was able to put back. This wrong spirit introduces friction into the universe and ultimately leads to violence (John 8:44). That explains why labor unions tend towards violence so easily.

The work of the people of God is to prepare for the events of the future, which will soon come upon them with blinding force. In the world gigantic monopolies will be formed. Men will bind themselves together in unions that will wrap them in the folds of the enemy. A few men will combine to grasp all the means to be obtained in certain lines of business. Trades unions will be formed, and those who refuse to join these unions will be marked men. 2SM 142

So what do you think? Is it ok for Adventist believers to join labor/trade unions?

“Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship has righteousness with unrighteousness? and what ‘union’ has light with darkness?” (2 Corinthians 6:14).

We’ve been warned.

Science affirms Daniel's diet lowers cancer risk

I knock gently on my patient’s door and hesitantly walk in. After the initial exchange of greetings I carefully state, “Ms. Doe, I have some bad news. The pathology report indicates cancer….” News such as this is every physician’s and patient’s nightmare. To this day, disclosing the “C” (cancer) word both as a physician and as a human being fills me with fear. But is this fear completely founded?

Many of us view the “C” word as a result of hereditary genes, as though we were handed a set of genes by our parents and there is nothing we can do about it. But is that really the case? While it is true that heredity plays a large role in disease, the good news is that new advances in scientific research indicate that we don’t have to be quite so scared hereditary genes as we used to think. Furthermore, this same research indicates that we can not only prevent the big “C” but, in many cases, even treat it with simple dietary changes and moderate exercise. Excitingly, science was not the first to discover these revolutionary principles. God as our Great Physician and Creator advised us of these same principles long ago, both in the Bible and in the Spirit of Prophecy. In our television show Practical Living and in our health lectures, we focus on all eight of God’s perfect health plan. However in the following article, we will primarily focus on nutrition.

The scientific community has for some time noted the benefits of a vegetarian diet in cancer prevention. In fact, in 2012 the largest meta-analysis of multiple different studies indicated over an 18 percent decrease in cancer among vegetarians as opposed to non-vegetarians.(3) With all the positive benefits on cancer prevention noted from a vegetarian diet, many have wondered what role in cancer prevention and treatment a completely plant based or vegan diet plays. This was the basis of the recent National Cancer Institute funded study performed and published by Loma Linda University. In the Adventist Health Study 2 (AHS-2), the researchers studied over 60,000 people. Controlling for confounders such as smoking, alcohol use and a family medical history of cancer, the researchers discovered that while vegetarian diets do confer a protective role against cancer, veganism confers the greatest decrease in cancer at a 34 percent decrease in cancer from a vegetarian diet alone. This improved cancer protection was noted in both genders but very specifically in prostate cancer and female related cancer including breast, ovarian and cervical cancers.(7)

In response to the AHS-2, many are asking, “Why such a significant decrease in cancer among vegans versus vegetarians?” The answer to this question is the basis of the research performed by Pritikin researchers, a group of concerned scientists and physicians dedicated to discovering the relationship of disease and diet. Their first attempt to answer this question involved taking petri dishes with prostate cancer cells, the “number one” cancer in men, and exposing them to the blood of vegans versus those on a standard American diet. The petri dishes were followed over the course of a year, noting cancer cell growth and programmed cell death or apoptosis. Much to the excitement of the researchers, the prostate cancer cells were significantly affected by both, by a decrease in growth and increased programmed cell death. In fact, the leading researcher Dr. Ornish and his group discovered that a vegan diet decreased cancer growth by nearly 8 times over the standard American Diet.(5) Although these results were phenomenonal, the Pritikin researchers wanted to determine if this same effect could be substantiated over an even shorter time interval and with the most common cancer in women, breast cancer. As such, they took three different breast cancer cell lines including estrogen and progesterone receptor resistant ductal carcinoma, one of the more difficult to treat breast cancers, and exposed them to the blood of non-vegan women. Then, these same participants were then asked and agreed to undergo a two week vegan diet. After only 12 days, the petri dishes were assessed and amazingly there were significant decreases in cancer cell growth and exponential increases in apoptosis (programmed cell death). Imagine that! In just 12 days, one’s blood can be completely altered on a healthy, plant based diet so much so that the body is able to fight off cancer. The exciting news is that this same 10-day interval effect can be seen in numerous other diseases as well.

Pritikin researchers sought to determine what element in the vegan women’s blood was combating the cancer cells. In 2011, the researchers published their results that demonstrated clearly that the hormone involved is Insulin like Growth Factor-1 (IGF-1). For some time, IGF-1 has been known to promote cancer cell growth and decrease programmed cell death, both clearly substantiated in the article published by Soliman et.al.(2) Combining their research with that of Ngo’s article (4), the Pritikin researchers were able to show that a vegan diet lowered IGF-1 levels even as low as half their Average American omnivore diet level.(4,6) In addition, the researchers discovered that eating a vegan diet not only lowers your current risk of cancer but it also combats years of meat-eating by lowering IGF-1 binding globulin which lowers “old” accumulated IGF-1. This is accomplished by assisting the liver in “binding” up cancer causing IGF-1 and eliminating it through the gastrointestinal tract. Through these two mechanisms, the researchers determined that your body is able to drastically fight cancer in as little as 12 days.

The really good news about combating cancer with a plant based diet is that there are no side effects. In addition, according to numerous studies, the results of a plant-based or vegan diet are far reaching and don’t just decrease your risk of cancer, but help you prevent, treat and defeat diabetes, hypertension, obesity and other health problems. In future articles, we will be examining each of these diseases individually and noting the benefits of a plant based healthy diet among other lifestyle changes. In contrast, research is very clear that meat eating decreases longevity by worsening many of these diseases. Although an improvement to a meat diet, a lacto-oval diet is also not ideal and does not carry the best health results as noted with a vegan or completely plant based diet. According to a recent report by the CDC Nurses’ Health Study, eating the equivalent of one egg per day shortened a females life as much as smoking five cigarettes per day for 15 years.(1) This statistic concerning a lacto-oval diet suggests there is a good, better, and best diet. And, if you are looking for the lowest risk of cancer, heart disease, diabetes, obesity, hypertension and many, many other diseases, the best is the original healthy plant based diet given in Eden (Genesis 1:29).

The vast and quickly realized benefits of a plant-based vegan diet remind me of the dietary blessings of this same diet as noted in Daniel Chapter 1. Here, Daniel was given 10 days of a plant based diet. At the end of his “10 day Daniel diet trial,” he was rewarded with appearing healthier than all his other omnivore colleagues (Daniel 1:11,15). These results were found exponential, when, at the end of three years of eating a plant based diet, he and his friends were found to be 10 times smarter, and l would postulate based on the above research, 10 times healthier and with perhaps 10 times less risk of cancer, than all of his counterparts (Daniel 1:19,20).

The above exciting research shows that in as little as 12 days--and I would dare to state 10 days--a plant based diet is 8 to 10 times more effective in decreasing our risk of cancer when compared with the average American diet. This knowledge has motivated me to ask my patients to give me 10 days of a plant based vegan diet. Stressing the positive results of improved cholesterol, weight loss and glucose control, and now, more exciting than ever, a decrease in cancer, I will fuel my patients incentive to "try the Daniel diet." Perhaps if you haven’t yet tried the Daniel 10 Day Diet, you too will test it out and I guarantee you won’t be dissatisfied.

REFERENCES:

1). Baer, HJ., et.al. American Journal of Epidemiology. 11 Feb 1;173(3):319-29. Epub 2010 Dec 6. Risk Factors for Mortality in the Nurses' Health Study: a Competing Risks Analysis.

2). Barnard, RJ., et.al. Journal of Nutrition and Cancer. 2006;55(1):28-34. Effects of a Low-Fat, High-Fiber Diet and Exercise Program on Breast Cancer Risk Factors in vivo and Tumor Cell Growth and Apoptosis in vitro.

3). Huang T., et.al. Annuals of Nutrition and Metabolism. 2012; 60;233-240. Cardiovascular Disease Mortality and Cancer Incidence in Vegetarians; A Metanalysis and Systemic Review. 4). Ngo, Th., et.al., Journal of Cancer Causes and Control. 2002 Dec;13(10):929-35. Effect of Diet and Exercise on Serum Insulin, IGF-I, and IGFBP-1 Levels and Growth of LNCaP Cells in vitro (United States.

5). Ornish, D, et.al., Journal of Urology. 2005 Sep;174(3):1065-9; discussion 1069-70. Intensive Lifestyle Changes May Affect the Progression of Prostate Cancer.

6). Soliman, S., et.al. Journal of Evidence Based Complement and Alternative Medicine. 2011; Epub 2011 Mar 15. Analyzing Serum-Stimulated Prostate Cancer Cell Lines After Low-Fat, High-Fiber Diet and Exercise Intervention.

7). Tantamango-Bartley, Y., et.al. Journal of Cancer Epidemiological Biomarkers and Preventation. 2012, Nov 20, Vegetarian Diets and the Incidence of Cancer in a Low-Risk Population.

La Sierra University's Edward C. Allred Center honors notorious abortionist

Edward C. Allred made a fortune owning a chain of abortion clinics, personally aborting hundreds of thousands of fetuses, and currently owns gambling venues in California and New Mexico. In 2010, La Sierra University founded the “Edward C. Allred Center for Financial Literacy and Entrepreneurship" in his honor. It hardly seems possible that La Sierra University, which still purports to be a Seventh-day Adventist school, would name anything after a man who has left such a trail of wreckage in his wake, a man who made his fortune eliminating two generations of humanity, and now spends his days devising ways to separate gamblers from their money. And yet they did. But apparently they are not proud to be associated with his life work, as shown by the misleading information on their website:

Dr. Allred has always been an entrepreneur, whether in his innovative and financially successful medical practice or in his lifelong commitment to the sport and business of quarter horse racing in the United States and Southern California in particular. To both he has brought not only sound and creative business practices but also a deep interest in his colleagues and employees and a genuine care for their well being.

To characterize a business with annual revenues of $70 million from 23 outlets in two states as a “medical practice” goes beyond spin and crosses over into dissimulation.

In 1969, Dr. Edward C. Allred, a graduate of La Sierra University and Loma Linda University, founded the “Avalon-Slauson Medical Group,” which was later renamed “Family Planning Associates.” Although this was before the Supreme Court effectively legalized abortion nationwide in Roe v. Wade (1973), California had already legalized abortion in several situations, and hence many women traveled to California to have abortions. “We had planeloads of people coming in,” recalled Allred to a Los Angeles Times reporter in 2002, “We'd meet them at the airport with a bus.”

In 1980, Allred claimed to have personally aborted a quarter of a million fetuses in the preceding 12 years. It may seem difficult to believe that one man could perform so many abortions, but Allred tried to spend no more than five minutes with each pregnant woman. “We've been pioneers in so many ways,” he once told a reporter. “We streamlined, we made efficiencies, we employed the suction technique better than anyone, and we eliminated needless patient-physician contact. We usually see the patient for the first time on the operating table and then not again.” Spending only five minutes per patient would have allowed Allred to perform as many as 100 abortions in a 10-12 hour working day, and 200 working days per year (50 four-day work weeks) would, over 12 years, add up to 240,000 aborted fetuses. So Allred's estimate of the number of abortions he performed during that time is credible.

You might wonder how a person who has aborted a very large city worth of human lives salves his conscience. The pioneers of abortion, such as Margaret Sanger, were quite explicit in favoring it as a means of weeding out undesirables and the unfit, and there was general agreement that the black race was undesirable. Dr. Allred has, at least on one occasion, voiced similar thoughts.

Population control is too important to be stopped by some right-wing pro-life types. . . . The Aid to Families with Dependent Children program is the worst boondoggle ever created. When a sullen black woman of 17 or 18 can decide to have a baby and get welfare and food stamps and become a burden to all of us, it's time to stop. In parts of South Los Angeles, having babies for welfare is the only industry the people have. Edward C. Allred, M.D. quoted in Anthony Perry, "Doctor's Abortion Business is Lucrative," San Diego Union, October 12, 1980, pages A-3 and A-14.

Family Planning Associates expanded to the point where Allred owned 21 abortion clinics in California and two in Chicago. According to a 2001 article in Forbes Magazine, Allred's business generated $70 million in annual gross revenues and $5 million in annual profits. Just as McDonald's founder Ray Kroc pioneered efficiencies and economies of scale in the hamburger business, Edward C. Allred pioneered efficiencies in the abortion clinic business, causing some to call Allred “the Ray Kroc of abortions.”

But things did not always go smoothly; there have been post-abortion deaths, and Allred has been sued many times. One abortion technique Allred used in the early days was saline amniocentesis--injecting saline in place of the normal amniotic fluid--which slowly poisons the baby while burning its skin. This method was usually used in late-term abortions, and the baby typically took an hour to 90 minutes to die. In 1977, Gianna Jessen's 17-year-old mother went to Dr. Allred's Avalon Clinic in Inglewood, California, seeking to abort a pregnancy of 29 weeks (seven months). Dr. Allred used the salt poisoning method, underestimating the amount of saline necessary to kill the fetus, which began struggling to escape the deadly womb. Gianna Jessen was born alive, and Dr. Allred is listed on her birth certificate as the doctor who delivered her. Gianna suffers from cerebral palsy, which she calls the gift of cerebral palsy, and today has become a prominent spokeswoman in the pro-life movement.

Dr. Allred sold Family Planning Associates in 2005, and has retired from the abortion business. He devotes his time to a hobby and passion he acquired while still in medical school: horse racing. Dr. Allred now owns Los Alamitos Race Track in Cypress, California, and Ruidoso Downs, in New Mexico. Horse racing is a very dangerous “sport,” and the exploitation of jockeys is one of the most under reported aspects of that “sport” (really just an excuse for gambling).

Jockeys are independent contractors who earn on average about $38,000 per year; for a basic “mount fee” of as little as $60.00 per race, they risk death and paralysis. In a typical year, at least one or two jockeys are killed or suffer catastrophic spinal cord injuries, and yet the tracks do not carry adequate insurance. A paralyzed jockey will typically burn through a million dollars in medical bills in the first 2 years after the accident. This isn't a theoretical concern; on September 2, 2011, Jacky Martin suffered a broken neck in a fall at Ruidoso Downs, is now a quadriplegic, and needs mechanical help to breathe. Ruidoso downs reportedly carries only $500,000 in accident insurance, and, as in almost every case of this type, that is grossly inadequate to provide for Jacky Martin's ongoing medical needs.

These men and women risk death an catastrophic injury almost solely to provide an occasion for gambling. At Los Alamitos, the daily “handle,” or total dollar amount of bets taken in, was reported to be $1.3 million. Allred decided to simulcast Los Alamitos races to other venues, thus enabling gamblers to bet and lose money on races that they did not attend. Ruidoso Downs had been losing money, but Allred and his partners made the track profitable by adding 300 slot machines, some of which are proudly shown on the track's website. Attendance at horse racing venues has sharply declined in recent years, and industry insiders say the “sport” cannot survive without casino-style gaming at the tracks. But is saving the tracks in the public's interest? According to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission (NGISC), more than one in three racetrack patrons is a pathological or problem gambler, so the tracks cause financial problems for the patrons, as well as causing jockeys to risk death and quadriplegia.

Back to La Sierra University. The Board of Directors is stocked with Adventist Church leaders. Pacific Union president Ricardo Graham is Chairman of the Board of Trustees, and all the affiliated conference presidents within the Pacific Union are also board members. These are all decent men, so it is difficult to understand how they could have allowed La Sierra to become associated with such a person as Edward C. Allred. This sad incident, along with previous stories—such as the issuing of tax-free bonds that came with a secularizing bond covenant, and the ongoing failure to prevent Darwinism being inculcated as truth—call into question whether the Board of Trustees is exercising any meaningful oversight at all.

If the church leadership in the region cannot reform La Sierra, world church leadership must take action. If La Sierra cannot be reformed, it must be clearly and publicly separated from the official church.