It has been a while since I posted material on my blog. I
think I will have to start again as I am finding some very bad articles being
published on the Spectrum and Adventist Today Websites.
Recently on Adventist Today Christopher Thompson posted an
article entitled On Being
Adventist and Not Being a Jerk.
Here are a couple of quotes:
___________
" Cultural Adventists are jerks.
I’m not sure where I first heard the term Cultural
Adventist, but I think it encapsulates the persona of the kinds of people who
fit the bill here. Adventists are those who are awaiting the coming of the
Christ. A Cultural Adventist on the other hand, has been encultured in the
behaviors and lifestyle of Adventism, yet they lack the Spirit of Christ.
So here’s a qualifier. Christians aren’t jerks. But you do
know that you can be a Cultural Adventist and not be a Christian..."
If they are fasting, you will know. If there’s an
unacceptable TV program or movie, they’ll be sure to let you know that they
haven’t seen it. They never fail to tell people what they never eat. They are
professionals at letting you know all of the noble things they do and how
careful they are to abstain from all things that are harmful. They are closely
akin to the ancient Ascetics who believed pleasure to be evil. Cultural
Adventists are pale-faced drones and they’re proud to tell you why God prefers
pallor.
…We all know that our body is the temple of the living God
and that living a healthy lifestyle is a sign of good stewardship. However, we
can do without the incessant Sabbath dinner plate patrolling, with continual
reminders of the evils of cheese and sugar…
__________
First, is he using the term Cultural Adventists in a way
that others have used it in the last 20 or so years? What kind of definition
would include the statement that the defined lack the Spirit of Christ? Would
that be an OK point to include in the definition of Progressive Adventist or
Traditional Adventist? Why would anyone tolerate such a judgmental statement
against a group of people as they lack the Spirit of Christ?
Next Christians aren't jerks, Paul confronted Peter to his
face about his hypocrisy in the Bible, Hypocrisy seems a bit more dramatic then
plate patrols are a potluck, so I would say by Thompson’s description Peter is
a Jerk! Martin Luther started the whole Reformation and was a raging
anti-Semite in our terminology. And he was also pretty rude and crude to some
other sides and peoples during the reformation. But he was a mighty Christian.
So it is pretty clear that Christians can be jerks!
Then he says you can be a Cultural Adventist and not be a
Christian. But he has already said that Cultural Adventists lack the Spirit of
Christ! So by his own definition they would not be Christian. As Christians
define being a Christian by having the Spirit of Christ which allows one to
acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah.
in 2005 Clifford Goldstein in an article in the
Review gave a pretty good definition of Cultural Adventist. "Recently
I've become friendly with (and fond of) a "cultural Adventist,"
someone who, by his own admission, is an Adventist solely because he was raised
and educated in the church but who, by his own admission, takes "exception
to many of the church's theological beliefs and religious practices." In
other words, he's a Seventh-day Adventist, not because of the church's
teachings but despite them."
I have had conversations with Cliff on the internet and I
would sometimes classify him as a jerk...So should I say that Traditional
Adventists are jerks? Would not that be a logical fallacy of a generalization?
So I would not do that, yet here this writer begins with a logical fallacy and
compounds the errors line by line and judging by the comments and Shares on
Facebook
people like it
For the sake of argument let us assume Cultural Adventist did not have a defined meaning. It is pretty clear he is referring to
traditional Adventists. Those remarks about Cheese and sugar, unacceptable TV
shows, telling people what they never eat, If you have fun on Sabbath you’re
worldly, they love to reason together by using trite E.G. White quotes, and
they “roll out whenever someone mentions drums”
In fact the article is trying to say that Traditional
Adventists are Jerks, but he does not want to actually use the term so he has purloined
the term Cultural Adventists as a subterfuge for what he really means.
His formula of writing is apparently to state something as a
fact and then later on make a hazy statement about how you can't do what he just did and that makes it okay. More properly
he should have said: "To be fair, Adventism is a complex and multifaceted
system of belief and it’s unsafe to paint any one person or any group of people
with such broad strokes, [Insert as I have done.]
Though I still would have ripped his article apart because once you know you
are painting with too broad strokes you should redo your article, and the editors should have noted those problems as well.
It is important to recognize when someone contradicts
themselves? "So here’s a qualifier. Christians aren’t jerks" Then he
says: "Now time for a transparent moment. I’m a bit of a jerk
myself." What, Christians aren't jerks, he just told me that! Well I guess
there is a difference there, he is just a bit of a jerk just a smidgen of a
jerk...not like those Cultural Adventists which are full-fledged jerks who don’t
get the modifier that he uses for himself.
So why do so many people on Facebook like and share this
article? Two reasons, the first is a reaction to Traditional Adventists who are pretty firm in their beliefs. The second reason is my personal opinion that we train people with sermons to not really
listen to what the person says. You are only supposed to listen to what you
already agree with (news and social media and magazines now days seem to also
do this). So when asked how was the sermon people say oh it was so good because
they only heard what they wanted to hear. Anyone who is critical of false
statements or poor logic is viewed as divisive or sour or dwelling on the wrong
things...as if the listener is responsible for the errors of the speaker or
writer
As it turns out this non critical view appears to be accepted today not
just in sermons but in articles and the news media. I would rather
think critically, it seems a better way to search for truth and relevancy. So I
am returning to my critiques of some of the writings in Adventist Media. Though
I will likely stay away from doctrinal things and concentrate on logic and
fairness and consistency. I think that if Christianity cannot accommodate
doctrinal differences it is doomed and that is true for Adventism as well. But
we never grow and develop without the use of reason, logic and good arguments,
and we really need to get back to that even if it has been beaten out of so
many people of late.
No comments:
Post a Comment