READING THE BIBLE
William G. Johnsson made a strong appeal for faithful, continuous study of the Bible--all of it ("My Father's Gift," Jan. 2004). He emphasized studying the whole Bible, not just parts of it: "The whole Bible is a treasure . . . every Christian would want to discover all its treasure." He urged us not just to read in the Bible, but to read the Bible through--over and over again.

But he honestly recognized a hurdle, and its name is Leviticus (plus parts of Numbers and Chronicles, I might add). Johnsson asked, "How do I get past Leviticus?" Then he advised, "Keep reading--you will be out of that book in only a week."

Is that the reason for reading Leviticus? Is reading this book an obstacle course to overcome with grit and determination? He implied that the limp, exhausted reader will say as he puts the book down, "Whew, I made it through Leviticus. I don't know what it's all about, but it only took a week and I guess the exercise is good for the character. Now I don't have to plow through it again for another year!"

Near the end of his appeal Johnsson said, "Ask God to help you to be open to His Word for you (yes, Leviticus is His word!)."

Your emphasis on reading and knowing the whole Bible is, of course, in harmony with the best Adventist tradition. We Adventists have felt far ahead of other Christians who read only parts of the Bible, and thus have an incomplete grasp of truth. So pervasive was this concept in Adventist education that when I was 10 I accepted my church school teacher's challenge to read the Bible through. I started with Genesis and managed to read to the middle of Leviticus before throwing in the towel.

In fifth grade, the teacher once asked us each to recite a Bible verse. Students recited John 3:16, Psalm 23:1, and other favorites. When it came my turn I was feeling obtuse. I stood and said, "'Amariah, Malluch, Hattush.' Nehemiah 12:2." The teacher glared at me and made pointed comments about "students who make smarty remarks." Would we not agree with her that not all Bible texts are created equal?

Now, some years later, I have read the Bible through 13 times, including three versions in English, plus Spanish and French. But I still don't really know the answer to the question, Why read Leviticus? Are we to set our faces like a flint, stick out our lower jaw, and plow through it each year; then rejoice that the angels have recorded our good deed in the heavenly books?

Johnsson's article stops short of giving satisfactory reasons. Wouldn't we be better off meditating on the words of John or Paul?

When Stephen Chavez wrote that "Christ's character, as revealed in all 66 books of the Bible . . . will surely help us reflect Christ's love to the people," please explain how Leviticus (and parts of Numbers and Chronicles) help us to do that. I cannot see how plowing doggedly through Leviticus each year is going to help our characters or those to whom we witness.

Richard H. Utt
Loma Linda, California


My wife and I appreciate and enjoy the Adventist Review. The recent article by William G Johnsson, "My Father's Gift," was excellent. But I suggest an alternate wording for one sentence. The sentence, "Try your Adventist Book Center or a Christian bookstore," I would change to, "Try your Adventist Book Center or another Christian bookstore." Our Adventist Book Centers are Christian bookstores. The first reading could be interpreted to mean that the terms are exclusive.

Thank you for all the great articles and your consistent good work in producing the Adventist Review.

Paul Glenn
Potomac Adventist Book Center
Silver Spring, Maryland

STILL QUESTIONING?
I was happy to read that the book, Questions On Doctrine, is being published again. This news brought back old memories as I read the background information about the book by Mark Kellner.

I endured many attacks from my local church members when I attempted to support this book, as I am sure many others did as well. During our lesson study of the book of John this past Sabbath, suddenly it seemed, from the back of the room (they always sit in the back) a voice and tone that I had not heard for almost 10 years began, "You'd better know what side of the truth you are on. If you don't know where you stand on the nature of Christ you will be lost."

I thought our church had moved past this issue. But it seems that we haven't.

Name withheld

DRYING UP THE STREAM
I read Rachel Whitaker's article "Drying Up the Stream" (Jan. 22, 2004), about the church and prohibition, with interest. A couple things should be included that would clarify our history and our influence today over similar issues of civil/moral reform.

First, Ellen White's comments were consistent for advocacy against liquor, and it seems God never did step in to stop her calls for voting and speaking out against alcohol.

Second, we ask why the eventual failure of the eighteenth amendment? The amendment itself was incomplete. As Ms. Whitaker pointed out, the amendment only prohibited the manufacture and sale of alcohol; it didn't outlaw its consumption. Thus, a huge underground black market was created that eventually led to criminal organizations profiting greatly from the illegal manufacture and sale of alcohol. These powerful businesses, with murder and extortion, turned public sentiment against prohibition and led to the amendment's eventual overthrow.

We should not let the past failure of prohibition silence the good the Church can do in other areas of social ills. Often this makes us uncomfortable allies with certain elements.

For example, when the temperance movement joined with those in favor of Sunday legislation reform, our church joined with those who opposed the closing of saloons on Sunday. They perceived such laws were targeted toward eventual wholesale Sunday legislation. At the same time the church promoted the temperance cause. The principle was clear in doing such: prohibition affected human relationships (something government is meant to control and enforce), and Sunday laws affected humanity's relationship to God (something government is not permitted to force).

Pastor Kevin James
Director of Legislative Affairs
Nevada/Utah Conference
Ogden, Utah


After reading "Drying Up the Stream" (January 22, 2004), I would point out other factors contributing to the demise of Prohibition:

1. Significant numbers of people distributed, bought, and sold alcoholic beverages illegally during that time.

2. Organized crime contributed greatly to both "bootlegging" activities and violent crimes (such as gang-related murders).

3. The influence of mostly rural Protestants waned increasingly in the face of growing opposition to Prohibition itself.

Considering the troubles associated with Prohibition (however unintentional), the importance of both prevention and education must be appreciated.

Bennie Visher, III
Amherst, New York


I suppose it's not typical for authors to write letters to the editor about their own articles, but I feel it's important to make this amendment. In my article about Adventists and prohibition, I suggested that one might legitimately conclude that Adventists' intense involvement in the prohibition cause was unwise.

Recently I have come to believe that since Ellen White, under heavenly guidance, repeatedly urged Adventists to just such levels of involvement, we ought rather to conclude that there were good reasons why active participation in the prohibition movement was the right course for Adventists at that time.

The question of how or whether we should be involved in the morally charged political issues of the present day remains one that deserves our serious consideration.

Rachel Whitaker
Hagerstown, Maryland

THE OLDER THE BETTER
I read in recent Adventist Reviews two articles about aging ("Still Laughing at 110" (Jan. 2004), and "How to Live 99 Healthy, Happy Years," (Jan. 22, 2004)). A Christ-centered life gives purpose, and following Ellen White's guidelines for diet bring great blessing. But exercise is probably the most neglected part of older people's lives.

I didn't learn to swim in deep water until I was more than 35. I began by swimming short distances in deep water and setting new goals. Finally I could swim a half mile. In 2000 I swam a mile three times. In 2001 I swam a mile 10 times. Last summer, at age 66, I passed the 10 mile goal and the beach supervisor suggested I aim for 26 miles, which I thought was impossible. He said that would equal the English Channel. I kept swimming a mile each day and when I reached 20 miles, decided to go for the 26. I finished the season with 28 miles.

I use a modified crawl stroke and side stroke and no longer need to float on my back to rest; my swimming is much stronger now than it was 3 years ago. I swim slowly but have cut the time it takes me to swim a mile from two hours to one and a half hours some days.

I did not hike any distance until I was in my thirties. In 2002, when we were in Alaska, my husband, age 71 and I, age 64, climbed to the Harding ice field, an eight-mile round trip. We often walk trails for five or six miles. For him this is done with knee and back problems. We have learned that one can do a great deal by setting a reasonable pace.

Our present goal is to continue hiking as many trails in the national parks as we can. I hope to swim 34 miles this summer, which will be half my age. Encourage older members to be active.

Arlyne Bauer


Thank you for publishing the feature on Lydia Newton, "Still Laughing at 110". Not only was it an interesting story, it also reinforced the closeness of the great Adventist family.

My father, Robert L. Cannard, 91, of Paso Robles, California, is a life-long reader of the Review. He recognized the name Lydia Scheppler of Kankakee, Illinois, as a friend about whom his mother spoke often as he was growing up in Kansas. His mother was also from Kankakee, with parents from the Alsace-Lorraine region of France. Should it really be so amazing that people who live by biblical principles, do it so well and so long?

Dave R. Cannard
Battle Ground, Washington