Ted Wilson and his concerns

[Gail]

John Lomacang just shared a video on Facebook of Ted Wilson and his sermon on his concern about what's not right with the church.

I couldn't find code to embed the video so if someone finds this video to share feel free to do so.

The gist of it are these four points:

1) A loss of Seventh-day Adventist identity among some pastors and church members

2) The growing tide of worldliness in many of our churches

3) The danger of disunity

4) A spiritual complacency and apathy which leads to a lack of involvement in the mission of the church

What thinkest thou? Do you agree?

[Woody]

Don't think "unity" will ever happen. And striving for it will only cause strife.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

I don't find any video, but it appears that the source is an Adventist World article from last March.

source

My first thought, though, when reading the four "points" was "how is this different from 20, 40, 60 years ago?" When I read some of the Adventist articles from the early 1900's (and even from the 19th century, and perhaps, even in scriptures), it seems that there's always been a need to watch out for these issues..

In fact, is there really anything new that is spoken from the pulpit? I'm not sure there is -- it's a matter of saying the same thing, but in different ways and styles to fit the perceived audience..

[Tom Wetmore]

And speaking of speaking to an audience in different ways at different times throughout history wih the same message....

I think that perhaps that is part of the problem, but there is also a growing disconnect with the audience in the message of the church. And there are different audiences within the church, and more significantly those outside the church, which would suggest that different approaches should be used to reach those different audiences. But we are at the point that it is not just simply a different method or style of communication or media used, the message itself is not even deemed of any importance or relevance to increasingly large segments of the intended audience.

A fair analogy is communicating in a very contemporary media and style to a drivers ed class in high school, the process of hitching up your horse to your buggy and how to control your horse as you travel down the road. The students would at best likely laugh, roll their eyes and think it a strange joke. But more likely they would tune you out, and conclude you had nothing of value for them. And when you did try to communicate safe driving skills for the modern era, you would have lost the audience completely.

As a church, we are losing our audience in much the same way. Horse and buggy message to an internet generation considering future space travel...

[JoeMo]

Quote:

As a church, we are losing our audience in much the same way. Horse and buggy message to an internet generation considering future space travel...

Amen, Tom. IMO we should start by focusing on bringing people to Christ rather than bringing them to Adventism. After all, it is Jesus who saves us; not our denomination. I apologize to anyone who finds that offensive.

Just getting them to church will significantly increase the chance of them "discovering" Adventism, if it's the right denomination for them. It works like that at our church.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

it *does* seem like the issue of the message's "relevance" is the biggest problem..

when I think about it, really, it's hard to put a finger on what, exactly, is the primary message the Adventist church is trying to spread...

what is the SDA church known for in the mainstream public?

1) vegetarianism

2) health and medical services

3) worshiping on Saturdays

4) no jewelry, no dancing, no movies, no..., no..., no... (I realize that's changed within the church, but it's still the public's perception)

5) anti-Catholic church

are these really the things that will draw people to the Adventist church? Are these the things that will *keep* people in the church?

I don't think so....

[Kevin H]

Unity has been the concern of the Babylonian churches who had their creeds and did not have room for the Millerites in their creeds and unity. The hurt and disposed Millerites decided to form a church where they would agree on a few landmarks, but as long as they are not fanatical, be free to follow the Bible according to the dictates of their conscience without fear of being put out like they were in their old churches.

The issue of 1888 was fear that Righteousness by Faith would destroy unity. Mrs. White felt that this was nonsense, that we have only a small core of ideas that we are unified on. We have unity in diversity. During the highs of the church we have been accepting of this diversity. During our lows have been when we have people who are focused on unifying us and trying to push us into unity.

[Gail]

The issue of 1888 was fear that Righteousness by Faith would destroy unity. Mrs. White felt that this was nonsense, that we have only a small core of ideas that we are unified on. We have unity in diversity. During the highs of the church we have been accepting of this diversity. During our lows have been when we have people who are focused on unifying us and trying to push us into unity.

Exactly! When I was a homeschooler and not many people were into that we were happy to find a family to share projects and fun days with. We also belonged to a diverse group for socialisation and to get together for field trips, swimming, cooking or art classes, etc. it did not matter then that some of us were Adventist, Mormon, New Age or what-have-you. We bonded on the common ground and everyone seemed okay with the diversity. We all benefitted from the reason we were there, which was to provide for the needs of the group.

It was a lesson I never forgot, how people aimed at a common goal can put differences aside and focus on the goal and get her done.

When Ted first became president he was rallying the troops to become evangelistically-minded to bring the Gospel to the masses I wondered if indeed real action could be legislated or decreed from the top. Can passion be decreed?

[Kevin H]

Another issue he brings up is:

2) The growing tide of worldliness in many of our churches

That on the surface sounds good and I would hardily agree. However, I would question how worldliness is defined. I've just noticed that there are three issues that tend to come up from time to time when people bring up worldliness that makes me uncomfortable.

First: If we go into the Ellen White Estate and look up folders on different issues. On topic after topic you would find this same pattern. There are the principles that we uphold and things that early Adventists did not do as an example of upholding these principles. However during the 1920s through the 1940s, with the major changes the church made in the 1923 General Conference, we find questions coming into the Review. these questions would basically follow the pattern of "Since Adventist don't do this, why do we do that, isn't that very similar to this?" and soon Adventists no longer did that as well as this. As we stopped doing that then another letter would show up "Now that we no longer do that, what about this other thing over here that we do. Isn't this other thing close to that?" and you see our list of dos and don't just growing like the circles after throwing a rock in the water; until by the 1940's Mrs. White and our pioneers looks worldly as they would have been doing that and this other thing and only avoided this. Many in our church have gone back to the earlier views. However there are people who feel that unless you have the list of dos and don'ts that developed from the 1920s to 40s that you are worldly. They want to push not only our foundation but the traditions that we have added over those years.

Second, I've noticed that too many people define worldliness as something like "You don't like the music I like and God only likes my music." breaking the second commandment as we make God into our own mental graven image and force our likes and dislikes into this image and want to force this god on to everyone else. This is NOT to say that there are not problems with much music or similar topics. We need to be critical of music but we need to balance the criticisms with the fact that God is a lot bigger than we are and that we are not the experts on what God likes and dislikes.

Third, 1 John tells us not to love the world nor the things in the world... But we tend not to read the next verse where it tells us what it is about the world that we are not to love. And it is NOT the world out there, but attitudes inside our selves: The lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, the boastful pride of life. It is an attitude inside of us that filters how we interpret the world around us. Mrs. White says that there is a disposition in every man to esteem himself about his breathern, to serve self, to seek the highest place. The poet/philosopher Eli Siegel said "There is in every person a disposition to think they are for themselves by making less of the outside world." Mrs. White also says "When we love the world as he [Jesus] has loved it then for us his mission is accomplished; we are fitted for heaven for we have heaven in our hearts."

Too often we use the label of "Worldliness" as our reasons for making less of the outside world. I have seen conservative Adventists have a fit over Mrs. White's quote about loving the world as Jesus has loved it (especially if you don't bring up that she said it, and even when you do frequently they don't catch that it is from her.)

As long as Elder Wilson's definition of worldliness does not include these 3 concerns and maybe other concerns that I have not yet seen, then I would agree with him. However there are too many in the church who use one or move of the above 3 as their definition of worldliness. There are some very power hungry people who use these 3 attitudes in pushing their power and to grow in position and admiration over those who follow them. This concerns me.

[Woody]

The more 'worldly' people who are in our churches the better. Praise God.

[thx4mercy]

The more 'worldly' people who are in our churches the better. Praise God.

Of course! But that's different than worldliness being in our churches.

But then I don't know you or what kind of sense of humor you have, so maybe you were just being a smart aleck!??

[Woody]

Are you saying that worldly people will not have worldliness?

Or are you saying you just don't want worldly people who have worldliness to be in the church?

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

. . . so maybe you were just being a smart aleck!??

Hardly.

Perhaps you will want to get to know people a bit better before you come out with statements like what I have posted. Such do not come across in a positive manner as related to you.

People with differing opinions are welcomed here. Personal attacks generally are not often received positively.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

OTOH, it's sometimes difficult to interpret obtuse one-liners ...

[thx4mercy]

Are you saying that worldly people will not have worldliness?

Or are you saying you just don't want worldly people who have worldliness to be in the church?

If worldly people start to attend our church, we expect that they will look and dress like the world and be doing worldly things.

But when I hear a concern about worldliness being in our church, then I think it's referring to long-time baptized Adventists who know that we are to be separate from the world, but yet prefer the fashions and amusements of the world.

[thx4mercy]

Quote:

. . . so maybe you were just being a smart aleck!??

Hardly.

Perhaps you will want to get to know people a bit better before you come out with statements like what I have posted. Such do not come across in a positive manner as related to you.

People with differing opinions are welcomed here. Personal attacks generally are not often received positively.

I HONESTLY was not meaning to be critical of Woody. I sincerely believed that it was possible that he was trying to be funny. Maybe if you see my last reply to him, it would help to explain why I thought that was possible.

[Gail]

Thanks for your very first post, Burt! I like your signature

What do you think God's people are needing just about now? What would help?

[Mario-One]

It would be better if we could see the Ted Wilson video, and not be asked to comment on someone's gist of it. So I am interested in the video when you find it.

The Rules of conduct warns members they can be banned if they "swing a verbal baseball bat at others or at the church." This discussion about what I think of Ted Wilson's concerns could be viewed as a swing at the church. But when you invite people to express their concerns, you should not punish them for expressing legitimate concerns.

So I will start by saying that I love the church, I have been a member for 25 years, and with all the valid concerns that Ted Wilson and other have, the church is the main interest to God and therefore it is the main interest for me.

One concern I have that is not in the four points mentioned is the loss of members, so my concern is the lack or concern about this matter.

David Trim reported to the Oct. 2013 Annual Counsel that from 2000 to 2012 over 13 million people joined the church, in the same report he said that during the same period 5.9 million people left the church. He gave no stats on how many are in the church but not attending. 5.9 million lost members should 'shout out' there is a problem here. The church needs to talk to these members to find out why they left and what they can do to get them back. Then there are members who have been kicked out of the church unfairly, and want to return but their appeal is blocked. The church manual says, "While it is the right of the church to administer discipline,this does not set aside the rights of members to seek fairness" - when a question or appeal is made to church leaders they say it is not my job, I can't answer you.

Which brings us to the number one concern, in my opinion, which is church leaders who do not follow the church manual or church working policies and are not held accountable for their errors or their neglect of duty.

[Mario-One]

I would like to add that not everyone has the same experiences in the church, but my experience has been well documented on other Forums

I introduce a quote from the inspired writings

Is Christ divided? Is a trifling difference of opinion of sufficient consequence to part asunder very friends,

so that they cannot unite in doing a good work? Are individual opinions to be regarded as being so infallible

as not to admit of any change? This is certainly spiritual weakness. Let each worker humble his heart before God.

As no one's opinion is always without a flaw, do not act as if you could not talk the matter over together and

concede to one another. {13MR 38.2}

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

Mario, you're not going to start in on how church officials haven't responded to your numerous emails regarding your membership and how they ought to be disciplined for not responding to you, are you?

[Gail]

That, indeed, is another topic for another thread.

[Gail]

The four points of concern I gave I copied from the video. They were shown PowerPoint style so that wasn't hard. He kept to the topic, commenting on the four points mentioned.

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

[Gail]

I wish I could see this... It doesn't come through on the iPad :(

[Tobiwan]

What a unique concept this word unity is. It was the focus of the worship at the recent New York Conference 4 year session (I remember when they were annual, then biannual, and tri-annual, now quad-annual). It was even a wish, hope, maybe a dream of Jesus near the end of His ministry. He prayed, Father if only they could be one like We are. It has been the desired need of more then one recent senior pastor I have talked to about the diversity, disunity, if you will, in our fellowship. There was a recent discussion we had concerning Gods role in the end of those who say "no thank you" to Gods offer to fix what needs to be fixed. Also in May 15 Review a four page spread casting dispersion, questioning the conclusions I'm thinking are being held by an increasingly larger number of people .

Pastor's conclusion is, that on top of all that the wicked will loose out on, God will also need to measure out Punishment upon them. I suggested the unfathomable loss will be enough and pointed out that Sin pays a wage and that a very gracious God, who remembers our sins no more, gives gifts. Gifts greater then we can even think or ask.

Pastor expressed a desire for unity. My desire as well, and when I suggested he reconsider his position and share this in his sermons around the district, he expressed he did not want to put his pension at risk.

If I could only repair my time machine, and return 2K years those who are the most vocal for unity today. Return them with a wire and lapel camera and see which side they would support.

Who would they choose, the educated leaders of the church and their pensions, or a traveling town to town Preacher that talked about God like no other.

When the Good News is finally figured out for this generation, and it is presented to the whole world, Satan will try, to the point of death to stop it and Christ will put together a rescue operation to save His friends.

I pray it will be soon