Pardon v. Parole
by Preston Foster
Near the end of most American presidencies, comes a spate of pardons. The president, for reasons rational and not, grants pardons to several people. Most have been convicted of crimes; some are charged with a crime or are likely to be (see “Ford pardons Nixon, Richard M.”). Some of those who have been convicted have already paid the penalty for their crimes. Others are in the process of serving their time. Others may be out of jail, pending appeal. No matter. Once the pardon is granted, they are free, legally forgiven of their crime.
Everyday, convicts across the country are placed on parole, as a normal function of state and local judicial systems. These parolees are still “in the system,” but free to move within a designated jurisdiction, as long as they stay out of trouble and periodically report to their parole officer. They are not entirely free, but compared to jail, parole is a major upgrade.
The difference between pardon and parole occurred to me as I pressed to understand the working notion of grace among my Adventist friends. Many Adventists are aware of the most obvious benefit of grace (salvation), but they do not feel free or trust their freedom. They are very careful to qualify their freedom as not permitting sin (Romans 6:1-2, 15). Acting as their own attorneys, they define their freedom, not by what it is intended to produce, (the fruit of the Spirit) but by what is forbidden (the law).
Many of these Adventist friends think like parolees. Both the parolee and the pardoned are grateful for their new status (assuming they were guilty, of course). However, the parolee is less confident about his or her status, somewhat hyper-vigilant about what is allowed (John 9:16, John 5:10), and respectful, yet somewhat resentful of their parole officer (Luke 15:29-30). They operate under the assumption that one wrong move and they might, again, be held accountable for their former crimes. Their goals are to fulfill the expectations of the parole officer for as long as they remain in the system, and to avoid re-incarceration.
This should not be what drives our life in Christ.
It seems to me that the “good news” is that Christ paid the price for our sins at the Cross. If we claim Christ as our Savior and “confess our sins, He will cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9) — and we are saved (Colossians 1:22). Christ’s death on the cross provides us with pardon (grace). Like those whom the president pardons (only more so), we should be so grateful for what has been forgiven that we have no desire to repeat the crime. Our gratitude, not the threat of the law, is the motivation to live free of past entanglements (John 1:17, John 8:32).
So, what is the source of this parolee mindset among believers?
From my observations (and personal experience), the lack of confidence in our salvation is due the fact that we have not truly accepted grace. Because we believe that 1) we are still in the system (under the law), and 2) our freedom is dependent on our works (Titus 3:5, Ephesians 2:8-9, Galatians 5:4, Galatians 3:16, Romans 3:28), we view Christ more as our parole officer rather than He who pardoned us — our Savior. We work to maintain our freedom from a consciousness of penalty. We are not confident about our status and think that any, non-deliberate or careless infraction may land us back in jail (Hebrews 12:20). The consciousness of our guilt, combined a lack of faith (belief that the pardon is merely parole), leads to legalistic behavior (1 Timothy 1:7-9, Galatians 4:29), rather than freedom and full citizenship (Galatians 4:31).
Spiritual parolees often fear that those who have accepted pardon also believe they have, somehow, acquired diplomatic immunity — freedom to sin without consequence (a.k.a. “cheap grace’). Although immunity was not stipulated in the pardon nor requested by the pardoned, somehow this claim works its way into virtually every conversation about grace. The parolee clings to the law, protecting it, believing it is the determinant of his freedom (Galatians 4:21).
The gospel is a writ of pardon (Isaiah 40:2, Romans 4:7-8). Christ, on the cross, paid the price for sin, making our pardon possible. If we accept the grace-given pardon, we are free to walk in the Spirit, not under the law (2 Corinthians 3:17, Galatians 5:18). Those acting as their own attorneys have misinterpreted the intentions of the Court (John 3:17).
How true! A church full of parole officers is a most uncomfortable place to be, and that is what many churches are. The Perfectionist thread running through Adventism reinforces that mentality which is expressed frequently here and other SDA blogs. If one must attain a "sinless" state before one can be assured of salvation, then the parole officer is always right behind us checking our every behavior. This is the "peace that passses all understanding"?
For Adventists, this is perhaps where the SDA concept of “probation” is most problematic. Probation is not applicable for those who have been pardoned; whereas it is certainly applicable for those on parole. That is why an understanding of the Investigative Judgment wherein, for those who have Jesus as their Advocate, this Judgment is effectively already decided—making the concept of Christian “probation” of no practical effect—is most persuasive.
If this is true, then the Investigative Judgment is only applicable for those who have not enlisted the advocacy services of Jesus Christ; thus, the same for probation (as the two go hand in hand).
The obvious question of importance then, at least for me, is “is this true?”
Two questions:
1] Does Grace cover and forgive sin or does it condone sin?
2] Is the overstated 'once saved always saved' a valid Biblical teaching?
Remember that is is the LAW and the LAW only that is the basis for our conviction as sinners. It points out SIN and we are convicted as sinners – guilty as hell and remain this way until we accept God's offer of Redemption and Forgiveness. Gal 2:20 sums up this new 'saved' experience quite well. The brother of the prodigal, to me, represents those 3rd, 4th, 5th generation Christians also who have not embraced the salvation offered by the Father even though they are right in the Father's house. Progresssives form part of this group too. Most converted Christians come 'home' by way of the Cross as there is no other way. These AREN'T on parole: THEY ARE FREE…Hallelujah!
T
Trevor,
I can see no interpretation of grace that condones sin. My question is, how did grace ever get confused with doing so?
Likely, it is another deception by the Father of Lies to get believers to 1) be unsettled about their salvation, 2) believe that THEY can work their way to salvation, 3) minimize and distrust the miracle of grace, and 4) hold so tightly to the law that they never learn to walk in the Spirit.
I have always believed that the "once saved always saved" conversation was a diversion from the point. It is an "us vs. them" theological debate that diverts toward the "cheap grace" discussion. I have never, personally, met anyone who claimed they are free to sin without consequence. The notion that confidence in God's grace somehow translates into "diplomatic immunity" or permission to sin without consequence answers a question that grace doesn't ask. I believe that when one truly accepts Christ as their Lord and Savior and the grace that He provides, they ARE always saved. Not because they are free to sin, but because if they have accepted Christ as their Lord, they no longer have a desire for the things of the world, as Christ is working in them (Galatians 2:20). They are on the road of sanctification, and are granted His grace as they have put on the righteousness of Christ (Romans 13:14, Galatians 3:27, Colossians 3:10).
Indeed, Galatians 2:20 sums it up!
Thanks.
RE: "Likely, it is another deception by the Father of Lies to get believers to 1) be unsettled about their salvation, 2) believe that THEY can work their way to salvation, 3) minimize and distrust the miracle of grace, and 4) hold so tightly to the law that they never learn to walk in the Spirit."
Yeah, I like these 3 points Brother Preston.
—–
RE: "I believe that when one truly accepts Christ as their Lord and Savior and the grace that He provides, they ARE always saved."
I like this statement too. Question is: "Is the 'ARE always saved' not also at risk of been used by some as part of the diplomatic immunity you so aptly mention?" I definately know this doesn't mean we presumptiously sin as you have pointed out.
T
Brother Trevor,
Thanks very much.
I try not to worry so much about how some might "use" the wording (re: "always saved") to cleverly "win" debating points with me (or others). The debate is not with me, it is with Christ (Ephesians 6:12). If Christ is both our Lord and Savior, we will be saved, and remain so, and the power of the Spirit will enhance our influence with others. If they are trying to twist His words to justify their willingness to sin, there is no blood covering for them. If you let them speak long enough, they will identify themselves to all.
"By their fruit, ye shall know them" Matthew 7:15-20.
I rather like the confidence that is available in salvation in Christ as Lord and Savior that allows one to say, "I AM saved," rather than, "I'm TRYING to be saved." For me, TRYING to be saved can be as dangerous a trap as presuming to be saved regardless of my attitude toward sin. It can imply that I believe that I have salvific powers of my own or that I am not sure that, if I if I come to Christ as my Lord and Savior, he MAY save me. Certainly, Paul was confident of his salvation — and of ours: " I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith. Henceforth is laid up for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge shall give me at that day: and not only to me only, but to all them that also love his appearing" 2 Timothy 4:7-8.
The Cross has power that I can claim. I rather like knowing that if I accept Him as my Lord and Savior, He WILL save me.
As the singer says, " . . . the world didn't give it to me, and the world can't take it away!"
For me, the ah ha moment was realising that "legal pardon" was just one of many metaphores used to explain salvation. The teachings of Jesus use "the lost coin", "the lost sheep", "the podical son", and other parables. Paul also uses the metaphore of adoption. It seems to me that using the one metaphore of legal pardon with out the balance of the metaphores and parables leads to a distorted understanding. It was realising that there was more that legal pardon to salvation. The metaphore of adoption is good because it doesn't end. Pardon ends at the cross, then what do you do? Adoption begins at the cross, then you walk with God. You grow you make mistake, you learn from them all while being part of the family. For me being God's son is far more important than having a good lawyer to get me pardoned.
Kevin,
Pardon gives us the freedom to serve God out of a heart filled with gratitude, for such a love, that would make such a sacrifice, for such a one as me (us). Luke 1:68-75; John 8:32.36 The fear of death has been abolished. 2 Timothy 1:10 In exchange for condemnation we receive the gift of eternal life. John 5:24; 1 John 5:10-13 Even more so, God will never hold our sins against us. Romans 8:31-34; 2 Corinthians 5:19; 1 Corintihians 13:7 The only thing that can / will be held against us is the sin of unbelief, not accepting the pardon, rejecting Christ as the only means of salvation, which happens to be the unpardonable sin… There's no sacrifice for that. John 3:18,36; 1 John 5:12 So as you have received Christ, so walk ye in Him. Colossians 2:6
Praise God for being found while lost, being adopted while estranged, but just as much for pardoning a sinner / trangressor such as me (us).
Kevin,
My fondest wish is that we all accept adoption into His family as children of the promise (Galatians 4:30-31).
The Bible's metaphors are most certainly superior to mine. I only wish to offer another point of view that may resonate with those who approach salvation from a legal point of view.
But you are right, the father did not accept the minimal deal offered by his returning prodigal son. He accepted him, again, as an heir.
Stephen,
It seems to me that judgment (whatever its sequence) can only have adverse consequences for those whose sins are not covered by the blood of Christ. If our sins are forgiven (Hebrews 8:12, Romans 4:7-8), what is there to judge? For me, there is a plethora of scriptural reinforcement for believing, "Yes, this IS true."
Probation, in the Adventist prophetic terms, MAY, then apply to those who have not made their peace with God, thru Jesus, at sometime prior to His Second Coming. It seems to me that that is to whom Revelation 22:11 applies.
How many Adventist sermons have you heard on Gal. 2:21?
"I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly."
Could it be because Adventism has always focused on the law and its demands that must be obeyed?
Elaine,
I am not afraid to say that I believe some Adventists are literally afraid of grace — and afraid to preach it.
Because grace contrasts the law (John 1:17, Galatians 5:4), in terms of covenants, some Adventists, sadly, think that grace discounts the Sabbath (and that, somehow, grace invites sin). The Sabbath preceded the law (originating at the close of creation, (Genesis 2: 2-3) and remains Christ's designated day of rest in the New Testament (Hebrews 4: 4, 6, 7, 9, 10). As some Adventist have anchored their observance of the Sabbath in the law only (Exodus 20: 8-11), they cling to the law, primarily for the sake of protecting the Sabbath.
Grace preaching is largely avoided, as many preachers fear that doing so will compromise their law-focused bona fides, creating political problems with the modern-day Pharisees. It is a well founded fear (they crucified Christ for doing so). Still, God hates a coward (Matthew 25:25-26, 30; Revelation 21:8).
I believe this dynamic (fearing to preach grace) hinders the latter rain and mutes the gospel.
Good piece Preston. The analogy sent the message home. I was just discussing similar issues this morning with my wife and later read your article during lunch.
Here are a few of my perceptions: I gained status (citizenship of heaven) as a son by recieving and believing in Jesus (Jn 1:12). This was not accomplished by good works. Likewise, my status (as a son) cannot be altered because of bad works. His grace is the avenue for Him to accomplish His dreams (bring orphans into His Kingdom) and also the power for us to live like sons and daughters of God (hello prince! hello princess!)
Thanks be to God, we are no longer sinners, but rather saints (Col 1:2), a royal priesthood, called to proclaim the praises of Him who called us out of darkness into His marvelous light (1 Pet 2:9). This gospel is truly good news. Hard to believe, and maybe that is part of the problem. Maybe, we need to start believing in our own conversion and the reality of who we are in Christ rather than focusing on the "old man".
The "old man"'needs a parole officer. The "new man" (2 Cor 5:17) is lead by the Spirit and to paraphrase the apostle Paul: There is no more punishment for those who are in Christ Jesus (Rom 8:1). We are unpunishable because He took our punishment!
Thanks very much, Matt.
I think the Holy Spirit is whispering this message to many, so that the good news will ring in the ears of His children. I resonate with your perceptions. I believe our salvation is in the present tense.
Praise God!
Your point (re: "hard to believe . . .") is so very true. It is hard to believe because it is not based on our works (but on His), contrary to the teaching that many of us adopted. Works appeal to our natural, sinful narcissism. Grace points only to Him.
Adventism has always had an uncomfortable releationship between law and grace. If the emphasis is on grace, then the law is secondary, and this will not do–solely because of the position taken on Sabbath, despite there was no law regarding sabbath until Sinai.
Paul is the finest exponent on grace and its relationship to law. Only by neglecting Paul are Adventists able to emphasize the ultimate importance to salvation of sabbath. If observing sabbath is the ticket to salvation and avoidance of the mark of the beast, where is grace? Grace and law are antithetical: either there is grace for the sinner or there is law, and in Adventism it is law that has been preached.
As you state, Preston, how seldom does one hear an Adventist sermon on grace? Is there not a reason? If sabbath observance is absolutely necessary for salvation, of what need is grace? It is works. Paul never emphasized either the law or sabbath; in fact there was no longer any concern for the former annual feasts, new moons or sabbath days. Is this why some of his letters are not topics for sermons–too controversial?
You hit some true and painful spots here Elaine. I guess the great challenge for Adventistism is deciding whether we are under law or under grace. According to Paul, you cannot be under both (Gal. 5:4). It leads to confusion and spiritual schizophrenia. Jesus was walking, talking, living, breathing Grace. Where ever He went, the atmosphere changed. People were able to walk into freedom because of His graceful words and graceful works. I hope that one day, we capture this Jesus for who He really is and the place He invites all into – Graceland (Mt 11:28).
Well (Elaine), there you go again. The Sabbath is perhaps a problem with you because you, or those who have gone before you (in your previous life as an Adventist) have misrepresented the Sabbath as relates to salvation.
Since we know that the Sabbath was sanctified before Sinai, and that an explicit command to remember something that had not yet existed, or been established, or identified (or even defined for that matter) is nonsensical on its face, and that salvation is the gift of the grace God and not a derivative of Sabbath observance, and that the primary reason for doctrinal attempts to disregard the Decalogue is the Sabbath, and that Paul regularly preached to Gentiles in the synagogue on the Sabbath, and that Jesus fully anticipated the Sabbath to be relevant for His followers after His death and resurrection, much of your assessments of the Sabbath is ripe for at least some "reevaluation."
On the other hand, it is certainly true that grace needs to be preached more because it invariably points out our absolute and complete reliance on the love and sacrificial death of Jesus for salvation.
Elaine,
You don't hear sermons about grace because there are so few in the church who have really experienced it and even fewer who live in it each day. I hope you will try it. Each day, ask God to help you live in His grace. It is truly a wonderful and liberating experience.
Preston,
This is one of the best pieces of writing I've read anywhere which captures the Adventist struggle with understanding Grace. This is a brilliant piece! I appreciate your clarity and conciseness. The metaphor is solid.
I hope that Atoday is able to pass this piece along far and wide.
Blessings,
Kevin
Kevin,
God be praised and magnified. Grace IS the gospel. It is the power of this simple, yet powerful message that resonates in our souls.
Thanks very much.
And after you have suffered a little while, the God of all grace, who has called you to his eternal glory in Christ, will himself restore, confirm, strengthen, and establish you. (1 Peter 5:10 ESV)
This is indeed a fine column. We spend far too little time reveling in the grace of of God's love – basking in His forgiveness. By His grace, I have never experienced the need of pardon or parole from earthly powers. But it seems to me, as a former prosecutor, that the problem you point to, Preston, may not be so much a product of feeling unpardoned as it is the result of having to face, after pardon, the question: "How now shall I live?"
Elaine Nelson's freedom seems to leave her preoccupied with hostility towards the perceived agents of her incarceration who indoctrinated her with a false conscience. Others return to former negative associates, lifestyle choices, and habits of mind which again put them under the condemnation of the law. Thus, the problem is often not the inability to accept the reality of pardon, so much as it is resentment and anger towards the "system" that gave rise to the need for pardon, which creates unpardoned mindsets.
So how do you differentiate between those who struggle with what seems to be a Biblically legitimate question for a community of faith – "How now shall we live as the redeeemed?" – and those who are haunted with the weight of past sins by which they still measure their worth in God's eyes?
Nathan,
How to differentiate between those struggle…"How now shall we live as the redeemed?" with those who are haunted with the weight of past sins by which they still measure their worth in God's eyes?
First of all, we are very poor in our understanding of the multifacited function of God's grace. Grace as God's unmerited favor, which purchases our pardon, gives us the freedom from the condemnation of the law violated, is understood as a concept, but seems to be misunderstood in its scope / range in terms of our sins as a personal experience. I believe this affects both groups in your question.
Those that want to know "how shall I now live", need to understand the second phase of the grace of God… its power. As a former prosecutor you well know the terms of probatation / parole; you will obey all laws, along with the stipulated specifics. Does the legal system provide all of the necessary resources to ensure the success of the one who is released? Is the parolee confident that the system will do everything it can to asssit him / her in their endeavors to no longer be a law breaker, muchless to return to prison? Or for the most part, are they left to themselves to work it out? How many of us understand that all heaven and its resources are available to ensure the success of living the redeemed life without fear and trepidation? Heaven understands our true weakness, but do we? Christ told Paul that His grace was sufficient, because His strength was made perfect in Paul's weakness. One of the questions the redeemed have to answer is, how weak am I? If our weakness is total, God grace / strength is total in terms of our needs.
The "haunted" are stuck with the notion that God views them based on their performance in terms of His law. God's grace is not realized, much less understood when it comes to its pardon / power. For whatever the reason, the idea that God would be willing to punish, condemn, execute His own Son for our transgressions misses its mark? Christ as the sin bearer is an unknown entity. They are under the delusion that God has left them to themselves to do what He expects them to do, that's it, that's all. They sit in their prison cell wishing to be free, while not realizing that if they just push on the gate, the door will open. Christ's death has unlocked the prison house doors for all who would be free from the effects of sin, and provides to power to keep them free.
The question for both groups is, do you believe? Jesus said all things are possible to him that believes.
As a child, I listened over and over again to a Tex Ritter song – "Two Little Magic Words". "There are two little magic words that will open the door with ease. One little words is thanks, and the other little word is please." I listened for the lilting music, but I remember the words. The phrase about doing what's right seems applicable here: "A lot of folks furget to remember t'be polite; they don't ree-a-lize how good they would feel if they did what's right." Folks in the Church who believe in right and wrong and want to create and preserve a community that is faithful to God's call as they perceive it aren't necessarily equivalent to parolees or parole officers.
My experience suggests that those who complain the most bitterly about an unforgiving, unpardoning church aren't interested in knowing what's right, much less doing it. They demand tolerance and permission, using euphemisms like pardon and forgiveness as Kryptonite against faith community boundaries and standards. They don't talk about repentance because they don't believe in sin. They reject the loving yoke of trust and obedience that comes with pardon and forgiveness. Christ's forgiveness is limitless, and His salvation most certainly does not depend on our efforts. But I believe that those He pardons will continue to angrily experience the guilt of the unpardoned as long as they look to Egypt for their meaning and sustenance.
We must be careful not to confuse the poor in spirit with the proud in spirit.
Nathan,
So true!
Some years ago another church member and I were visiting a couple who were enduring many problems in their relationship, including an unwillingness to forgive. As our conversation continued I asked if there was something in her experience that was making her angry against God. There was. When she was a child her best friend's home had burned and she had been both disfigured and disabled by her injuries. "Why would a loving God do that to her?" she shouted at us throug her tears. "How many times has God forgiven you?" I asked. Many times. She listed several. "Can you forgive God?" I asked. (It wasn't that I was implying that God needed forgiven. It was a step toward ultimate forgiveness that opened her mind to discovering the true, loving nature of God.) That question stopped her cold for a long time. "Yes," she finally whispered. Several days later her husband called to tell me how things were improving in their home and how happy she had become. Until then he had been just a marginal Christian. Now he wanted to know more about the power that had changed her so visibly.
If Adventism accepts fully the concept of grace, why is there still, long after Adventism was founded, not a clear understanding of its relationship to law? Reading all the comments, and other SDA blogs, there seems to be little assurance of salvation until perfection is reached. Is this a false assumption?
Elaine,
That is not a false assumption, but an accurate observation of how many have not learned how to embrace God's love and transforming power.
Yesterday morning on the way to work I was listening to a radio talk show where a messianic Jewish rabbi was being interviewed. Though it is a comedy program, the hosts are unashamed to declare their belief in God. They are devout Sunday keepers, so the question arose about the relationship between the redeemed and the law. I thought the Rabbi's answer was great. On the drive to the studio he observed the law because of his respect for authority and in consideration of others. He was living in the freedom that comes from knowing the law was no threat to him. But had exceeded the limit and gotten a traffic ticket he would have come under the penalty of the law and faced the condemnation that disbedience brings. There is a huge difference between the two. God wants us to grow and learn to live in the freedom and blessings that He offers when we live in harmony with Him.
My SS teacher used this metaphor about a year ago, and it has stayed with me.
It is a false assumption. Our assurance is based on God so loving us that He gave us His Son. God will not condemn us for being sinners. Romans 8:32.22 Why? When God gave us His Son, He gave us eternal life. John 5:24; 1 John 5:10-13. And God did this for everybody. John 4:42; 1 Timothy 2:4; 4:10; 1 John 2:1.2 Those that will be lost at the end of the day are those who do have Christ as a personal Savior / representative past / present / future.
Historically, Adventists have been caught up in defending the relevance of God's law against those who have taught that grace trumps God's law. So in essence what we have are two opposing positions at odds with each other: those that teach law at the expense of grace, and those that teach grace at the expense of law. Adventists have fallen for the most part into the first group. But to be honest, there is truth and error on both sides. And the only way to reconcile the opposition is to rightly understand the relationship between law and grace.
For those who believe that perfection is achieveable thru the grace of Christ can / will only experience it as a result of not only a proper understanding of the relationship of law and grace, but apply / follow that understanding to it's designed end, to witness the grace of Christ, never for the assurance of salvation.
For whatever reason, it is surely most misunderstand by millions of Adventists. It must have been the way some taught it.
Elaine/others: This is certainly true. However, I don't think many Christians in general understand that Christ lived and died for ALL persons, Christian or not. It is only with rejection of Christ (agape love as described in the Good Samaritan story and Matt. 25), that one can be lost. (Of course, it is not a once lost, always lost concept. One can come back should they choose).
The doctrines must be filltered through agape love. A Sunday-keeping Christian who has Christ as his righteousness and rests in that, is more of a true Sabbathkeeper than those literal Sabbathkeepers who don't understand agape love.
This is why infants and children are saved, because Christ's sacrifice is for all until they come to the age of rejecting love. There are many Adventists who believe this inclusive concept of salvation, but it was rejected by a few men at the GC years ago and is not part of our "three angels message" and righteousness by faith as it should be. This is a story I would like to see Adventist Today tackle!
Nathan,
Thanks for your kind words.
A few thoughts:
– I have found that some who claim freedom in Christ and from the law take a "works-based" approach to their freedom. It sometimes manifests itself in a kind of ironic "reverse judgmentalism," which they, in judgment, call-out others for being judgmental (in a traditional Adventist sense). Some former Adventists mirror and reflect what they hate most about the judgmental, law-based culture in living out their new interpretation of "freedom" — in judgment (note: one never hates what they don't care about). The common denominator is works — depending on our own power (either under law or grace) to achieve righteousness and judging others by what we do (or don't do).
– The key to understanding and operating under grace is to accept the leading of the Holy Spirit (see "What Holy Ghost?"https://atoday.org/article.php?id=797). This is, I believe, the most under-utilized resource in the universe — and the only way to operate in Christ, without the law as you master. It is the answer to your question, "How now shall we live as the redeeemed?" Because the answers are seemingly intangible, we often, in our frustration with a Spirit we are not intimate with (and in our habitual self-dependence), lose patience and act on our own (Psalm 27:14, Psalm 37:9) — never hearing the leading of the Spirit. To Laffal's point, we move on our own because we do not believe. Our self-dependence has attenuated the voice of the Spirit. Still, He bids us (Joel 2:28).
– The problem, in my view, is not so much looking at board members as the strict parole officers (as much as some might relish that role), it is seeing Christ in that role. When our relationship with Christ is misaligned, we have little hope of manifesting the fruits of the Spirit. Debates about sin, forgiveness, transformation, and restoration (within the faith community) are to be reconciled by aggressive exhibitions of love, joy, peace, and long-suffering. The fact that we too rarely witness this tells us something about the under-utilization of the Spirit in all of our lives.
Terrific insight! I could not agree more. I like your observation regarding intimacy with the Holy Spirit. I treasure so many of the wonderful things my Adventist heritage has given me. But Holy Spirit intimacy is not one of them. I learned growing up that the purpose of Christ's presence in my life through the Holy Spirit is to give me the strength to follow the principles and precepts of righteousness (law), as understood by the "holy fathers". It has taken me some time to individuate within the Church. My Church worked hard to acquaint me with the principles and precepts to which the Holy Spirit had guided it, rather than teaching me to become intimate with the Spirit who seems to fall silent when confined within doctrinal boxes. It is not a reason to condemn the Church, but a reason to rediscover and rekindle the flame.
As you suggest, knock-down, drag-out fights to defend or destroy the theological and subcultural identifying marks of Adventism probably demonstrate an Adventist Stockholm Syndrome (Hey, that's a good title for a blog!). Sadly, the mindset of sin has bullied us into thinking that captivity is cool.
This is a likely reason why, spiritually and culturally, our relationship with the Holy Spirit lacks intimacy:
"This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" Galatians 3:2 KJV
Nathan,
Intimacy with the Holy Spirit is the relationship God wants to enjoy with us! If you want a really eye-opening Bible study, take your concordance and look for references to the Holy Spirit. He is the first revelation of God in Genesis and the last in Revelation. He is the most commonly-referenced member of the Trinity through the entire Bible. He does amazing things. He is the one Jesus told us to wait for and to seek after so we could be empowered to minister His love to a sin-filled world and be His witnesses from one end of the earth to the other.
Getting to know the Holy Spirit required that I step outside the doctrinal "boxes" that I had grown up being taught were the way to know God and do his work. Today many of the doctrinal topics about which people like to argue are non-issues to me because God has focused me on a ministry where those topics simply do not matter and I have more important things to do with my time.
Becoming intimate with the Holy Spirit is simple: ask God to reveal himself to you. That is one prayer He is eager to answer. Keep your eyes wide open because that revelation is likely to come in a way your past has taught you to not expect. Then hang on and enjoy the ride.
It was Philip Yancey who wrote that he had to go outside the church to find faith. Sometimes the church is obstructive to personal spirituality and receiving the Holy Spirit.
Quite true, Elaine. But when the church is referred to as Christ's bride, is it merely the idealized church of your imagination that never has existed, and never will exist? When God calls people, He generally seems to call them into communities of faith where His Spirit moves with synergistic power. If the church I have found is an obstacle to the Holy Spirit and spiritual formation, I better search diligently to find a place where I can experience and be guided by the Spirit.
Have you not found such a church? If so, why not say, "Sometimes the church greatly enriches personal spirituality and helps us to receive the Holy Spirit."? If you have not, keep searching and ease up on those who believe they can and do find, in a 21st Century Adventist fellowship, such a church.
Yancey, like many Adventists, was born into his religion and practiced it all his life untile he became disenchanted as he could not find a faith within that system.
Ease up on those who believe? It seems that there are many who are in that condition if one is to accept such blogs as representative. I have found fellowhip in the SDA church I attend occasionally; I also have found the same welcoming atmosphere in the Universalist church.
The desire of most people is for acceptance, and for those few who are desperately searching for just the right doctrines in a church is a very poor reason to join any church because there is no such church that has all the "right" doctrines; those that make that claim may not be a warm, welcoming church. It all depends on what one wants in a church.
Elaine,
So what are you looking for? Acceptance by you fellowman, or by God?
Ideally we can have both. But John said it very clearly, "if you walk in the light as He (Jesus) is in the light, you will have fellowship with one another." 1 John 1:7 And in addition, John adds that the blood of Christ will cleanse you from all of your sin. In addition, Paul calls this fellowship a mystery. It's not an item that is overstocked in most churches. Ephesians 3:8-12 To experience, you must walk in it. Then you'll find it.
It can be tough finding genuine fellowship in any church, but I've found it to be true, genuine fellowship is truly sween when you find it.
Peace
People need both acceptance and fellowship with other humans. We know that when deprived of those, especially in the early years, it distorts someone for life.
If being and Adventist is the only way to be accepted by God (surely, you are not inferring that?), that was not introduced either in the NT nor in Christianity for hundreds of years. If love for one another is the greatest commandment, anyone or any church that does not demonstrate this is not ordained by God.
Elaine,
Your experience illustrates the dilemma of finding the fellowship of God's family among imperfect humans where traditions and views about particular doctrines create distinctions that lead to division. I know that struggle well. Fortunately I was not alone and a large enough group of us were experiencing the same problems that we decided it was time to establish a new congregation. Some at the old church kept expecting us to come back for several years before realizing that we weren't looking back. Some of them got curious enough to visit and find out why. A few decided they liked our fellowship and joined us.
That is what initiated the church I attend: the larger and older church was too focused on behavioral standards and strict interpretation of both the Bible and EGW, no room for differing interpretation.
In the 20 years it has been in existence it has attracted its members from the core group of about 20 that it began until a membership of more than 250, all with no public evangelism but either word-of-mouth, or casual walk-ins who found it to be the first SDA church they had attended and if residents of the area, they moved their membership. A number (I was such a one), on the first visit, decided this was their "home church." Such a church is a very welcoming church and all ideas are shared and given respect. IOW, it is not the typical SDA church. BTW, the other larger SDA churches in the area are experiencing less growth, even loss of members. Go figure.