Baylor University Reflects on the Waco Tragedy after 20 Years
by Makala Coleman
“Learning only comes from reflection,” said William Bellinger, chair of the religion department at Baylor University. “The Book of Ecclesiastes says there are all kinds of days that come from our Creator, days of prosperity and days of adversity. We have to reflect on them all.”
Last week (April 18), Baylor University hosted a conference on the theme, “Reflection on an American Tragedy: The Branch Davidians 20 Years Later.” It focused on a better understanding of what took place at the Mount Carmel compound near Waco in 1993, emphasizing historical and cultural perspectives. Baylor is a Baptist institution and one of the major centers for research about contemporary religion in America.
In the incident 20 years ago a group called the Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventists, led by David Koresh, resisted Federal and Texas state law enforcement officers with gunfire. The standoff lasted from February 28 to April 19. Koresh believed that he was the mouthpiece of God, not that he was Jesus reincarnated, but that God spoke through him.
It began with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) attempting to raid the Branch Davidian compound. ATF agents believed that weapons were being stored in the complex. Ten people were killed in an exchange of gunfire. Four of them were ATF agents, the rest were Branch Davidians. After 51 days with the Branch Davidians barricaded in their compound, the siege ended tragically when a tear gas attempt to force people out of the buildings turned into an engulfing fire that killed another 76 men, women and children.
For some people, this historical event is remembered as if it took place yesterday; and in some situations, remembered with a bias. This conference was convened to help people look at the tragedy with an open mind. It’s intention was to help people understand what happened and why. Understanding these things can help prevent this type of event from recurring in the future.
Religion scholars, FBI agents, historians and others spoke. Two survivors from the tragedy also attended and answered questions. “No matter who you are, you can share insight,” said Phillip Arnold, founder of the religion crisis task force. “If we imagine our own participation in an event, we can have a point of contact. You must have objectivity and see from a different worldview than your own.”
With so many different people, it’s no surprise that not all were on the same page. Some had conflicting views, but all were honest with what they knew to have taken place that day. Many of the speakers were directly involved with the incident.
The conference began by pointing out that the Branch Davidians, the Federal agents and everyone involved with the tragedy were human. They were not necessarily evil, just fallible as every person is. “The folks at Mount Carmel were our neighbors,” said J. Gordon Melton, professor of American religious history at Baylor University and editor of the standard reference on religious denominations. “They were good people, everyday people. They were no stranger than I am. People at Mt. Carmel were trying to find out what the Bible means and see how it fits in the big picture. It’s the same thing that we do at church today.”
The Branch Davidians faced a dilemma in their faith. “They loved life, but they believed then that for theological reasons they must obey God and do what he wanted them to do,” said Arnold. “And what they believed was the voice of God (Koresh) was telling them to stay.”
Speakers included Melton; Arnold; Matthew Wittmer, documentarian; Catherine Wessinger, professor of religious studies at Loyola University in New Orleans; Gary Noesner, retired chief of the Federal Bureau of Investigation crisis negotiation unit; Stuart A. Wright, professor of sociology at Lamar University; and Philip Jenkins, professor of history at Baylor.
The Branch Davidians formed in the 1930s out of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. They shared the Adventists' interest in Bible prophecy and a respect for the gift of prophecy exercised by Ellen G. White. During the 1993 events in Waco, Adventist Church leaders tried to separate the denomination from the Branch Davidians in the public mind. They did not want the Adventist Church to be associated with what was called a dangerous cult. Law enforcement guarded some Adventist church services to protect congregations from harassment by the media and others.
The question has been raised, should the Adventist Church have done more to be involved in helping people get out of that compound? Although the denomination had a legitimate reason to not want to be mistaken for the Branch Davidians in the public mind, could Adventists, with an understanding of prophecy, have helped negotiators better understand the thinking of the Branch Davidians and possibly saved more lives?
The conference at Baylor mentioned the Adventist Church only once or twice, in passing. There was one reference to Ellen G. White. The denomination was never compared to or lumped together with the Branch Davidians.
Throughout the different presentations there was one common theme: It is important to treat all people fairly. In the news in 1993 the Branch Davidians were often called a “cult.” In a way, that label softened the tragedy of their deaths for the onlooking public. On the other hand, Federal agents were accused of restricting freedom of religion. Under the heat of conflict and even in contentious debate, it can be difficult to remember the Christian principle that no matter what belief a person holds, or what a person does, each person must be treated with respect and kindness.
Makala Coleman is a reporter for Adventist Today and a journalism student at Southwestern Adventist University.
My compliments to Makala Coleman for a well-written piece that demonstrates the First Principle of journalism: tell the reader what happened without telling them what to think about it.
The obsession with searching the Bible for last day events or learning about God is futile. The Bible is a book, written by humans, it never claims to be inspired, God never wrote a single word and He is not in a book written by man.
Look at yourself; look at your neighbor, if we believe we are made in God's image, then what is the right and loving act toward all others; is it not how God would act? Better yet, if we simply followed the age-old Golden Rule of relating to others, that would both honor the God we claim to believe in and make a better world.
Attempting to decode and explain the impossible contradictory and cruel stories that man attributed to God is not for children, nor has it improved one single individual's life to analyze, set dates, and
write doctrinal codes. What a waste of time and no one can show that one single person's life has been improved by believing in 1844 or the articles of furniture in the Jewish temple. This is the result of such as David Koresh in focusing on scattered texts in the Bible to build a religious system.
Elaine,
Apparently it has been a while since you last opened your Bible and read passages like 2 Timothy 3:16 that says "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness." Yes, that is scripture declaring that it is inspired (god-breathed).
God loves you, Elaine. When will you stop throwing stones at Him long enough to let Him whisper that in your ear and touch your heart with His tenderness?
Elaine you say "The obsession with searching the Bible for last day events or learning about God is futile". I thought the bible was to reveal who God is. The last book "Revelation" is about revealing Jesus. It reveals who Jesus is and it also says blessed is the man who reads it.
Since you know so much Elaine, can you please tell how I can find out more about God.
You will only find what other humans BELIEVED and THOUGHT about God. If you believe their knowledge is far superior to yours about God, read to see what they believed. Some is quite atrocious.
Since the Adventist Church so successfully separated itself from the Branch Davidians, there also is no need to work through the trauma. We simply leave it to others. Mourning about those young, enthusiastic Adventists who followed Koresh's tune to Waco like the children in the Pied Piper of Hamelin … is out of the question as well, I guess. … Learning from the Waco experience? Well, how?
Wow Elaine if you believe that about the Bible why are you on this site?
Elaine is welcommed on this site by many of us because her comments are typically very insightful about the nature of Adventist Christianity. Although I personally do not agree with her 100% of the time time (usually about 98% of the time), that really is not the point. For example, her most recent comment that "The obsession with searching the Bible for last day events . . . is futile" I very much agree with. Now the part about "learning about God" I would need to consider further.
The sad thing about that event was not only how deluded Koresh's followers were, but how the FBI and ATF bungled it. The very first article I read in Newsweek magazine stated that it was known that Koresh habitually went into town every day. They could have easily nabbed him during his daily town run instead of attempting a bold confrontation with weapons and trying to outgun the whole herd, putting more lives at risk. Also it was known that the group believed that in end times the government was going to come after them and they would have to defend themselves. So of course by marching in on the compound the government agents played their parts perfectly in the delusionary script so the outcome of resistance was predictable. It seems someone could have had a little more imagination and come up with a better plan.
I gave up posting on this site for many months. Agreeing with Elaine's views, as I did, seemed hopeless. Reactions like: "…why are you on this site?" indicates alternative viewpoints remain unappreciated by some. Elaine is 100% correct. If more people could accept that the Book of Mormon, the Bible & the Quran may not have fallen from Heaven as exquisitely leather bound volumes, world history (past & present) would be almost bloodless.
Well written article Makala
Vernon,
Your reassurance is graciously accepted. However, I stick it out as I hope to at least raise a few question for the too secure in previous positions. When one never changes a position, it's the same as being 6' under. One can only grow by changing.
Elaine,
I am curious as to what changes in position you have made in the last year or even since being on this site. I am serious. I would be interested in hearing from others in this regard as well (if it isn't getting too far off the subject).
Reading the many different expressions by those who comment here, nearly all Adventists, I have realized what I was unaware of: Adventists do not all think alike! They represent almost as many beliefs as do Roman Catholic members. That convinces me that the church is not a hegemony, much as the leaders hope for, but all accepting the major Christian doctrines which are affirmed by all other denominations. It is the SDA positions that are unlike all those other churches that are the crux of the disagreements and discussions.
Shouldn't that cause reflection that perhaps the major doctrines where we can all agree on should be cause for happiness, and those which will never reach agreement may not really be that important for one's salvation?
Again, Elaine speaks vloumes. Expanding one's knowledge beyond so-called holy books is essential for any intellectual progress. Muslim Madrasas teach only Quran, 72 virgins, and Jihad. Graduates are, therefore, brainwashed robots. We owe it to ourselves to avoid that kind of truncated mindset.
Study how the Bible was invented by Rome, and violently forced upon the people. Study about Elohim, multiple suprenatural beings (gods), who decided on newer lifeforms. Study about 'Sons of God' who predated the first humans, and raped every human female they could catch. Study the giants of Genesis, 'mighty men of old' called Nephilim, and described on 30,000+ clay tablets. These topics are hinted at in the Bible, none are explained fully, and ministers avoid discussing them. Our place in universal history becomes clearer with this kind of additional understanding.
Preachers should spend their time in the pulpit advocating postions that all Christians should observe and practice: Freedom, liberty and justice for all. This may sound trite, but is in actuality not practiced too often even within the church. Preaching the unique SDA doctrines have no affect on our attitudes toward others, but often causes dissension. How to spread Christianity through community service, even educating the members about the distortions propagated about other religions.
The Quran should be presented as very similar to the Bible in its promoting peace and love, not the jihadist radical position which is often felt to be its only message. The Bible is similarly full of wars, God-ordered. and the Islamic message has no monopoly on killings. Instruct the members in an overview of history, which for many has only been viewed through the Red Books. Inform them that it was the Christian church which Adventists have so villified that gave us the Bible we have today; that those Christians preserved the texts and the beliefs throughout the ages; a faith that we would not have today were it not for their courage.
There is a great need for this, I feel, in viewing and listening to many Adventists throughout the years. FWIW.
Why, Elaine? Why liberty, justice, peace. love? Did Nietzsche have it wrong? Why not eugenics? What revelation do you rely upon to conclude that society should protect the "least of these?" What revelation tells you that following the Golden Rule will strengthen the human species? Or for that matter, what authority gives you the right to decide whether preservation of the human species is even in the interests of evolutionary biology?
"There is a great need for this…"
'Nuff said!
" Inform them that it was the Christian church which Adventists have so villified that gave us the Bible we have today; that those Christians preserved the texts and the beliefs throughout the ages; a faith that we would not have today were it not for their courage."
Elaine, You wrote above that you learned that Adventists were not all alike in their views. That sounds great to hear and an important insight. Then you write the above accusing Adventist of villifing other Christians. I think that was more true in the 50s and 60s, but it certainly is not now, so it sounds like you are still dealing in generalizations. The least you could do is say SOME Adventists! (instead of villifying us all).
All through the ages there have been Christlike saints and many/most were Roman Catholics, even some popes. They started mercy hospitals and welfare work. However, this is the same church organization that promoted the Crusades, carried out inquisitions, and murdered heritics, and replaced some biblical practices with pagan ones. As a system it was bankrupt and kept the Bible from the people. So we can't let the system off the hook. Much of Christianity's bad reputation today comes from them and even some reformers. (My ancestor was drowned by Wesleyans in Switzerland over his belief in baptism by immersion.)
I and a lot of others on here could not belong to a conservative Christian church because of their theology–what you might call our "different" doctrine. I could never believe in a forever-burning hell or that God changed His day of rest and replaced it with a pagan symbol, and that we have no connection with the Jewish people as Christians (Christ was a Jew.) These doctrines all have a deep symbolic meaning that points to Christ, and if taught aright would make us better people (You must know some!). Instead doctrine was sometimes taught (especially by "missionaries" to primitive peoples) as another superstition. If those in other cultures had been taught to respect women as part of the message of love and justice, we would not have this problem with third-world countries and women pastors.
I really don't know how we can change this now other than church leaders taking some unpopular stands to do what is right in every part of the church. This would mean losing members, but numbers should not be the issue.
Ella,
Adventists may not be vilifying the Catholic church today, but that is part of the history and in some of EGW's writings in calling that church the "harlot of Babylon." At the church where I was a member 25 years ago, one of the conference Religious Liberty Secretary's was condemning the Catholics in a sermon. I immediately wrote him a letter quoting EGW in one place where she said no longer should we be saying rude things against the Catholics (a paraphrase). It is has not been eliminated completely from the SDA church but is not nearly as bad as it once was.
To say such things as I have are called "ecunism" which is a bad word in some SDA circles.
Remember the old joke about a new arrival being shown around Heaven? His angelic guide explained dazzling wonders as they strolled around the celestial kingdom, but ignored a inaccessible, walled compound in plain sight. Finally, the angel said, "Well, you've seen it all…any questions?" The man said, "Just one…what's in that walled-off area in the center. The angel replied, "Oh, that's where we keep the Adventists…they think they're the only ones up here!" The name of any other religious persuasion fits nicely in the punch line. It applies to all.
Dear Makala, I agree with others comments that your reporting was objective and pointed out one significant omission in this one day symposium, the role of the SDA church leadership leading up to and following the crisis. Of course the church spent tremendous effort to distance themselves from the whole debacle but still has difficulty explaining why almost all of the adults murdered in that siege and subsequent fire were baptized SDA's.
Another dimension that is wholesale sidestepped in the whole controversy is that branch davidians are not the true successors of the original Shepherd's Rod message, a distinction that the popular media, the worldly scholars, or the SDA leadership categorically fail to make known. Thus below is a link to a carefully researched paper which does address the theological and historical distinction between true Davidian Seventh-day Adventists and the branch counterfeit started by Ben Roden in 1955. Relevant citations and a brief historical summary are included.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9940587/A-True-Davidian-vs-A-Branch-Davidian