Progressive Adventism

Progressive Adventists are members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church who consider themselves to be theologically progressive relative to the denomination's mainstream. They typically question one or more of the church's more peculiar, or "distinctive" beliefs such as the investigative judgment, the remnant, a future global Sunday-law or an overuse of Ellen G. White's writings.

A significant number of scholars would be considered "progressive".^[1] Despite some diversity of theological opinion, the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists considers itself to be remarkably unified given its worldwide geographical extent.

Although the terms liberal Adventist or left-wing Adventist are also used, these may be considered derogatory, and "progressive" is the preferred self-designation.^[2] This is appropriate because most progressive Adventists still identify more with "conservative" Christianity than with "liberal" Christianity. Progressive Adventists may be contrasted with "historic Adventists", who lie at the other end of the Adventist theological spectrum, and more mainstream Adventists who lie somewhere in between. While progressive Adventists may not be mainstream in the context of the theology of the world church, they are mainstream in the sense that many are employed as university lecturers in church operated institutions. By contrast, historic Adventists generally operate outside of the official church structure.

A similar, possibly equivalent group have been referred to as cultural Adventists by Ervin Taylor in an interview with Clifford Goldstein^[3]. These individuals feel an attachment towards the Adventist church for cultural reasons rather than strict theological conformity. However the broader term "Cultural Christian" refers to a Christian who is not active in their faith, and this is not the intended meaning in this case.

Other terms such as ecumenical Adventist and evangelical Adventist have been used, with possibly related meaning.^[2]

Many progressive Adventists might hold similar beliefs or feel an affinity with the Evangelical left.

There is no formal organization or specified set of beliefs held by progressive Adventists. (Perhaps, in this sense, they could be compared to the Emerging Church.) Ervin Taylor wrote:

"It would be regrettable if any would propose that progressive Adventism should be associated with some specific set of propositional statements that purport to redefine, using contemporary vocabulary, some specific tradition of Christian or Adventist religiosity. Rather, I hope that progressive Adventism will be primarily associated with vision of a free and open servant church and the 'priesthood of all believers.'"^[2]

That being said, the common factor shared by all progressive Adventists is some degree of discomfort with certain of the church's official or traditional doctrinal positions. An article called Progressive and Traditional Adventists Examined^[4] identifies four typical areas of progressive belief:

• Investigative judgment. A different view of the investigative judgment, or a denial of its biblical basis.
• Remnant. An inclusion of other Christians in the term remnant.
• Ellen White. A less rigid view of the prophetic ministry of Ellen White, or perhaps even denying the validity of her prophetic gift. (Many more mainstream scholars share a progressive view of Ellen White's inspiration, but would not be classified as progressive Adventists overall.)
• Sabbath. An emphasis on the benefits of the Sabbath, but a denial that it is the "seal of God" or that Sunday keeping will ever become the mark of the beast.

Young earth creationism. Other traditional teachings may also be challenged, such as young earth creationism. The 1994 Adventist Today article Science Faculty Vary in Views on Creationism documents a survey of North American Division science educators. 60% responded, of which 83½% held doctoral degrees. Just 43% of the respondents affirmed the statement "God created live organisms during 6 days less than 10,000 years ago." Other progressive Adventists believe in young earth creationism.

Bible. The same survey showed close agreement on the nature of the Bible, with 92.6% affirming the moderate statement "Bible is God's word with human thought forms and perspectives." Only a minority affirmed the competing statements, "Bible is the actual word of God, to be taken literally word for word" or "Bible is ancient book of myths, history, and moral precepts." Progressive Adventists may be open to a small use of the historical-critical method of Bible scholarship, as well as the historical-grammatical method employed by many Adventists.^[5]

Speaking in tongues. The majority of Adventists believe that speaking in tongues refers to speaking in unknown earthly languages, not to a personal prayer language or similar as practiced by many charismatic and Pentecostal Christians.^[6] Hence an Adventist with an appreciation for charismatic experiences could be considered progressive in one sense, particularly because traditional Adventist views are suspicious of the Pentecostal and charismatic movements.

Numerous progressive thinking individuals and movements are discernible throughout the history of the Adventist church. These may or may not be classified as "progressive" according to the rough criteria above, yet they were progressive for their times. While progressive Adventism is not a formalized nor institutionalized movement, many feel an affinity with and perhaps see themselves as a continuation from these individuals and movements from the past.

Progressive Adventists generally are appreciative of church cofounder Ellen White. She was influential in pointing the church towards Christ, most notably at the 1888 Minneapolis General Conference Session. Her writings formed a key part of the conversion experience of many progressive Adventists. Her concept of "present truth" is endorsed by progressives, as are many other aspects such as her willingness to restructure the church governance, her openness to trying new things, and many of her spiritual and personal counsels to others. Progressive Adventists believe they are a legitimate part of Adventist heritage, particularly when concepts such as present truth are emphasized,^[2] and opposing concepts minimized. They also emphasize more strongly than other Adventists that White was human and fallible; feeling free to substantially differ with her on certain points of her theology.

General Conference president A. G. Daniells showed many Christ-like and progressive tendencies regarding the view of her inspiration and other matters. Willie White also had a moderate understanding of her inspiration, as did W. W. Prescott. Progressives tend to be disappointed that important and revealing discussions such as during the 1919 Bible Conference weren't made available to church members. Along with perhaps the majority of Adventists, they see the influence of fundamentalism on the church during the early 1900s in a negative light.

In the minds of progressives, a very positive development occurred in the 1960s when a large number of Adventists completed PhDs at secular universities. This occurred because of a new requirement that feeder colleges to medical institutions needed to be accredited, which meant that a large number of professors at the union colleges were required to take PhDs in secular universities. This allowed a widening of ideas and a greater degree of open-mindedness, and a greater appreciation of other Christians, eventually leading to the creation of the Association of Adventist Forums and the founding of the progressive Spectrum magazine in 1969, which have been influential in the church.

Progressives typically are supportive of Desmond Ford and his ministry, and regret that his ministerial credentials were removed after the controversial meeting at Glacier View in 1980.

Progressives view favorably the church's increasing understanding regarding the inspiration of Ellen White since the 1970s. Some believe the approach taken by the church administration towards the discoveries made by Walter T. Rea, Ronald Numbers and others was unfair and overly protective of Ellen White.

The progressive magazine Adventist Today was first published in 1993.

The following Adventist periodicals are progressive:

• Spectrum, the journal of the Association of Adventist Forums. At its founding,

"Spectrum’s objectives were to print differing viewpoints about church-related issues not always discussed openly and to encourage communication among those willing to explore such issues. The founders hoped that by working toward these goals they would strengthen the Church."[1]

• Adventist Today. According to its website, it

"advances the best in Adventist culture, thought, and ministry and serves the needs of the 21st Century Adventist church by offering inspiration, analysis, reviews, commentary, and narratives rooted in and relevant to the contemporary Adventist community."[2]

See the the last section "XI. Alternate Publications" of the article The Future of Adventism: Where's The Church Headed? by Alden Thompson for a useful comparison of Adventist periodicals across the spectrum.

Progressive Adventists believe in candid reporting of news and information about the church. This view is also shared by many mainstream Adventists such as former editors of the Australian Record James Coffin^[7] and Bruce Manners.^{[citation needed]} Coffin was also on the staff of the Adventist Review.

In the United States, certain Adventist colleges and universities have a reputation for being more progressive than many other such places of learning. These include, for example, Walla Walla College, Pacific Union College, Loma Linda University and La Sierra University.

At times there has been intense discussion between educators and church administrators. Former General Conference president Robert S. Folkenberg's "Total Commitment to God" initiative was voted by the Annual Council in Costa Rica in 1996. In 1998 a church action to establish a Board of Ministerial and Theological Education to oversee the church's theological seminaries "has evoked significant criticism in some areas, including North America, and awaits implementation."[3] There was concern over the document International Coordination and Supervision of Seventh-day Adventist Ministerial and Theological Education.GC (General Conference) Sets Standards for Ministerial and Theologic Education See a response Toward Spiritual Assessment in Seventh-day Adventist Colleges and Universities by Duane C. McBride, which appeared in the April/May 1998 issue of Adventist Education.

See also 2003 Conference on Religious and Theological Education, Adventist Today article. See the 1997 artices Tensions Peak in Adventist Higher Education and Religion Professors Face Conference Presidents.

Caution. Progressive Adventists do not fit in a "box". They have no formal organization and no official list of beliefs. Hence it should not be assumed that those listed here hold to all the beliefs listed above. Rather, the belief considered to qualify them as progressive is mentioned for each scholar.

This list is incomplete; you can help by adding missing items.

• Raymond Cottrell, was an associate editor of the Adventist Review and the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary amongst other major positions. A founding member of Adventist Today, he also served in an editorial role.
• Steve Daily, author of Adventism for a New Generation, in which he boldly argues for changes in Adventism for it to remain relevant; denying many traditional doctrines such as the remnant.
• Richard Rice, whose book Believing, Behaving, Belonging: Finding New Love for the Church was published by the progressive Association of Adventist Forums. He is a leading contributor to open theism, a term he created, which is highly controversial in both Adventism and Christianity in general.
• A. Graham Maxwell, Ph.D., emeritus professor of New Testament, Faculty of Religion, Loma Linda University, supports the moral influence theory of the atonement^[8][9][10] which is considered liberal by many Adventists. Many other Adventists believe that the Bible uses different metaphors to describe the atonement, all of which have a place and contribute to the overall picture.^{[dubious – discuss]}
• Ervin Taylor, emeritus professor of anthropology at the University of California and currently (as of 2007) executive editor of Adventist Today. He rejects what he sees as past fundamentalist influences on Adventism, such as Ellen White having doctrinal authority, and young earth creationism with a recent global flood. "The view that the Seventh-day Adventist institutional church is “the” remnant church of Biblical prophecy is a classic cultic, fundamentalist position."^[11] He could be described as a theistic evolutionist. See interview of Taylor.
• Julius Nam, assistant professor in the Loma Linda University Faculty of Religion, is the "primary writer" of progressiveadventism.com.^[12] He calls for an extended definition of "progressive" which could also include conservative and even historic Adventists who are progressive thinkers relative to their standpoint.
• Desmond Ford is no longer a member of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. However he still retains many Adventist beliefs, such as the Sabbath and the validity of Ellen White's prophetic gift, but rejects the 1844 investigative judgment, the day-year principle, the remnant doctrine and others. Hence he shares many beliefs with typical progressive Adventists. He also writes regularly for progressive Adventist journals, and has spoken in some Adventist churches.

There are also many others not yet listed above, including a significant proportion of Adventist theologians. Samuel Koranteng-Pipim's book Receiving the Word,^[1] particularly the section "Liberals are not bad people" on pages 198-200, displays a strong concern about progressive Adventist scholars. According to Alden Thompson, "The footnotes label some 66 Adventist scholars, authors, administrators as being on the wrong side of the divide."^[13]

It is quite natural for mainstream and conservative Adventist scholars to disagree with minor elements of traditional Adventist understanding. However other beliefs are considered by many to be much more fundamental to Adventist understanding, and challenging these would be considered "progressive".

In conclusion, there is a wide variety of scholarly opinion and the various labels do not have clear boundaries.

Many contributors to Spectrum and Adventist Today would consider themselves progressive, although articles are contributed by authors across the theological spectrum.

The relationship more progressive Adventists have had with church administrators tends to depend on the nature of the administration at the time. General Conference Presidents, editors of the Adventist Review, book editors at Pacific Press and Review and Herald etc. have been of varying theological persuasions at different times.

Raymond Cottrell describes a situation in the 1960s and 70s when Robert H. Pierson was General Conference President:

"Robert H. Pierson was a gracious person, a dedicated Adventist, a gentleman in every way, but also a person with clear objectives and resolute determination to achieve them."^[14]

He describes Pierson, Gordon M. Hyde and Gerhard Hasel as the "three architects" behind "the decade of obscurantism (1969-1979)". According to Cottrell this "triumvirate" attempted to gain control of Adventist biblical studies in this decade. During his time as dean of the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary at Andrews University, Hasel made Drs. Sakai Kubo, Ivan Blazen, Fritz Guy, and Larry Geraty feel very unwelcome. Scholars at other institutions were also moved on or pressured.

Other experiences are positive. When Fred Veltman was called to closely investigate literary parallels in Ellen White's writings following the plagiarism charges of the 1970s and 80s, he was highly concerned about his ongoing employment in the church, due to the controversial nature of Ellen White studies. He was also concerned that the results of his study might be swept under the rug and not publicized to the church, as he believed had happened to many other studies. He writes that he was constantly reassured by then General Conference president Neil C. Wilson that both his employment was secure and that his work would not be in vain.^[15] Sure enough, his study is now available online from Adventist Archives.

Progressive Adventists display an inclusive attitude towards other Christians and other people. Other Christians have often had positive experiences interacting with more progressive Adventists. Tony Campolo has had positive experiences speaking on numerous Adventist university campuses.^[16] Clark Pinnock gave very favourable reviews of Alden Thompson's Inspiration, despite the significant attention given to Ellen White in the content, and Richard Rice's theology textbook Reign of God.^[17] Pinnock was also impressed by Richard Rice's book The Openness of God, and later was the editor for another work of the same name, contributed by authors Rice, John Sanders and others.

• Spectrum, the foremost progressive journal
• Adventist Today, another progressive journal
• Progressive Christianity
• Seventh-day Adventist theology
• Historic Adventist, a contrasting group

• Adventist Today articles from Jan/Feb 1994 edition:
  • Evangelical Adventism: Clinging to the Old Rugged Cross by Michelle Rader, David Vandenburgh and Larry Christoffel
  • Progressive Adventism: Dragging the Church Forward by Madelynn Jones-Haldemann
• Progressive Adventism: A Nonfundamentalist Vision by Ervin Taylor in Adventist Today Sep/Oct 2001
• Adventist for Tomorrow forum, "a VERY independent discussion forum"
• Alden Thompson Online, Alden Thompson's personal homepage which contains many of his articles
• ProgressiveAdventism.com. Primary writer is Julius Nam, assistant professor of religion at Loma Linda University Faculty of Religion