Many of our readers have likely noted the emergence in the United States of a new political movement calling itself No Labels [1]. Their alleged purpose is to focus on bipartisanship and middle-ground solutions to the various issues dividing the country, hoping thereby to transcend the harsh polarization that for the past several decades has characterized the American political process.
We try as much as possible to avoid strictly political issues on this website, as our sole agenda is faithfulness to the written counsel of God as set forth in Scripture and the writings of the Spirit of Prophecy (Isa. 8:20; Acts 17:11). But as we all know, the challenge of labels and the divisiveness they often bring is not merely an issue in popular culture or politics. In Christian circles, including Seventh-day Adventism, the different monikers used to categorize varying spiritual and theological viewpoints are perceived by some as confining, inflexible, and annoying.
The Play of Ideas
But whether we like it or not, the play of ideas in any line is going to require verbal markers, what we often call labels. (Even the name “No Labels” is in fact a label!) Whether one considers the ideas being labeled as negotiable or not is a separate issue. One way or the other, ideas and the modes of thought they represent require written or spoken identification. The simpler such identification becomes within social, cultural, or political dialogue, the more inevitable is the use of what most people call labels.
Regardless of how disturbing, even threatening the taking of sides and the division of people into philosophical or moral camps may be, it’s hard to anticipate a different set of consequences so long as differing thought patterns, proposals, and practices claim their respective adherents within human communities. Alienation and hostility are not necessary in such circumstances, but fallen humanity being what it is, such outcomes are too often the result of such differences.
Some of us are old enough to remember the days when the late William F. Buckley Jr, viewed by many as the founder of modern political conservatism in America [2], would have public debates on television with the late John Kenneth Galbraith, a Harvard professor and U.S. diplomat well known for his advocacy of liberal politics [3]. Those discussions were often so gentlemanly and gracious that one could imagine them taking place over dinner. When Galbraith died in 2006, Buckley eulogized him as a “friend and adversary” [4]. American political discourse today doesn’t often hear such kind words offered regarding those with whom one differs so decidedly.
The Great Controversy
Unlike secular politics, the realm of the spiritual is defined by the contours of what the inspired text calls the great controversy between Christ and Satan. Where God reveals His will through His written Word, the struggle of ideas becomes not a contest between greater and lesser wisdom, but rather, between a hell to shun and a heaven to win. Jesus depicted this choice in His Sermon on the Mount, when He spoke of the two ways leading respectively to eternal life and eternal death:
Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat:
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it (Matt. 7:13-14).
Ellen White comments on the path to eternal death as follows:
In the road to death the whole race may go, with all their worldliness, all their selfishness, all their pride, dishonesty, and moral debasement. There is room for every man’s opinions and doctrines, space to follow his inclinations, to do whatever his self-love may dictate [##5|Ellen G. White, Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing, p. 138.##].
Grace and kindness, of course, remain necessary even—in fact, especially—when we differ with one another regarding eternal realities. The apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesians of the imperative of “speaking the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15). Ellen White echoes the apostle’s words in such statements as the following:
In the work of reform to be carried forward today, there is need of men who, like Ezra and Nehemiah, will not palliate or excuse sin, nor shrink from vindicating the honor of God. Those upon whom rests the burden of this work will not hold their peace when wrong is done, neither will they cover evil with a cloak of false charity. They will remember that God is no respecter of persons, and that severity to a few may prove mercy to many. They will remember also that in the one who rebukes evil the spirit of Christ should ever be revealed [##6|——Prophets and Kings, p. 675.##].
The Limited Utility of Labels
Even the most accurate labels, of course, fall short of adequacy, whether in the spiritual or the secular realm. The late U.S. Senator Eugene McCarthy, in his 1964 book A Liberal Answer to the Conservative Challenge, acknowledged this inadequacy, while at the same time conceding that “there is not enough time to change the flags” [##7|Eugene J. McCarthy, A Liberal Answer to the Conservative Challenge (New York: MacFadden Books, 1964), p. 11.##]—meaning in this context the conservative and liberal labels used in politics. Turning to the spiritual realm, even the label Seventh-day Adventist, divinely chosen and non-negotiable [##8|White, Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 144.##], only identifies two of our distinctive teachings—the Sabbath and the second coming of Christ.
Where problems arise is when labels are employed that serve more to inflame and annoy one’s opponents than to accurately identify where someone stands on a given issue. One such label in contemporary Adventism is “fundamentalism,” a moniker that has lately become more an epithet than a respectful identifier of the theology to which it is often applied. Like Gene McCarthy said regarding the liberal and conservative labels in politics, these same labels in the theological arena—very different, to be sure, as to the belief systems and practices they represent—often fall short in their description of the thought systems and behaviors they are meant to describe. Nevertheless, it is fair to say many more contemporary Adventists whose thinking gravitates in the direction of either what is commonly thought of as liberal or conservative theology, are at least resigned (even if reluctantly) to the application of these labels.
But the fundamentalist label is different. Very few theologically conservative Adventists who now find themselves being styled “fundamentalists” would claim this label, and for the following reasons. First, even the most pronounced of theological conservatives in contemporary Adventism would not qualify as fundamentalists in the lexicon of modern conservative Protestants, for the simple reason that the former—in contrast to many self-identified Christian fundamentalists—follow the lead of Ellen White in rejecting the verbal inspiration of the inspired writings [##9|——Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 19.##].
Secondly, any Seventh-day Adventist engaged in active evangelism—and those thus engaged are nearly all what most would describe as conservative in their theology and lifestyle—can attest to the fact that their most ubiquitous (and vigorous) opponents in the larger Christian world have tended to be self-identified fundamentalists. When I was growing up as a fifth-generation Adventist, in a home where interaction with non-Adventists through Bible studies and evangelism was commonplace, my first encounter with the fundamentalist label was not at all positive. These were the Christians, after all, most conspicuously defensive of such doctrines as Sunday-sacredness, the natural immortality of the soul, the eternal torment of the wicked, once-saved-always-saved, the secret rapture, and similar unscriptural heresies. I would venture to say that for most Adventists on the cutting edge of soul winning, self-identified fundamentalists have been their principal adversaries.
Thirdly, to many thoughtful Seventh-day Adventist minds, the fundamentalist label bespeaks ignorance, race prejudice, snake-handlers in the American South, and similar traits to which the average devout Adventist is understandably resistant. The popular application of this label by non-conservative Adventists to their theologically conservative brothers and sisters is thus notably unwelcome and needlessly divisive.
Conclusion
In the final analysis, despite their inadequacy, labels are unavoidable. But when in the spiritual realm we find ourselves using them, it behooves us to employ grace, understanding, and a listening ear. If at all possible, labels which offend should be avoided. What is most imperative for the Christian to understand is that while compromise and the quest for a middle ground may be prudent in the play of secular ideas—politics in particular—such a quest is most unwise when faithfulness to the inspired Word is at stake. The divine standard of judgment is absolute:
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. . . . So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty (James 2:10,12).
REFERENCES
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Labels
2. “William F. Buckley,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_F._Buckley_Jr.
3. “John Kenneth Galbraith,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kenneth_Galbraith
4. Buckley, “In memory of Ken Galbraith, friend and adversary,” Chron, May 4, 2006 https://www.chron.com/opinion/outlook/article/buckley-in-memory-of-ken-galbraith-friend-and-1492041.php
5. Ellen G. White, Thoughts from the Mount of Blessing, p. 138.
6. ----Prophets and Kings, p. 675.
7. Eugene J. McCarthy, A Liberal Answer to the Conservative Challenge (New York: MacFadden Books, 1964), p. 11.
8. White, Testimonies, vol. 6, p. 144.
9. ----Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 19.
Pastor Kevin Paulson holds a Bachelor’s degree in theology from Pacific Union College, a Master of Arts in systematic theology from Loma Linda University, and a Master of Divinity from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University. He served the Greater New York Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for ten years as a Bible instructor, evangelist, and local pastor. He writes regularly for Liberty magazine and does script writing for various evangelistic ministries within the denomination. He continues to hold evangelistic and revival meetings throughout the North American Division and beyond, and is a sought-after seminar speaker relative to current issues in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. He presently resides in Berrien Springs, Michigan