I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE . . .
I agree with Barry Oliver ("The Allegiance That I Owe," Feb. 26, 2004) that our allegiance to Christ must be reflected in allegiance to His church. It is the duty of every member to support decisions that have been taken through a legitimate representative process, unless such decisions conflict with God's word (Acts 5:29).

However, the problem of dissent against the exercise of legitimate church authority is small compared with the problem of dissent by many administrators, pastors, teachers, and employees against the doctrines and standards of the world church. If the criteria laid down in Oliver's article are applied consistently to church employees and entities, widespread disloyalty to the doctrines and standards of the world church is apparent. Unity and harmony will not be restored to our church by ignoring this problem or castigating those who feel duty bound to identify it.

Barry Harker, Ph.D.
Flaxton, Queensland


While I have received paychecks from Adventist church organizations for nearly 25 years, I have yet to work one day for the church, and I hope I never shall. The distinction? I work for God; I am employed by the church. (This makes me a better worker for the church as well, I believe.)

Recognizing this distinction keeps me from confusing two disparate entities. When the church lets me down (as it surely will), I do not change my opinion of my Boss. Too many workers for the church have ended up tragically terminating their friendship with God.

Whoever our employer, we are called, as Christians, to work for God (see Col. 3:23).

Chris Blake
Lincoln, Nebraska

BROADCAST SMUT
In the news commentary by Jennifer Jill Schwirzer ("Grime Doesn't Pay," Mar. 4, 2004), she makes a valid point. As those who love Christ, what should we do in this kind of situation? If we support the networks we support this kind of vulgarity. If we support other Christian groups we find ourselves supporting legislation.

We should stand apart by being living examples of our Lord and Savior Jesus. By not watching these types of television programs, we do not support what the networks are doing. By living chaste and pure lives, others will know our stand by our actions. We become holy living examples of Christ in this world. If we do any less we misrepresent our Lord and Savior. By supporting a temperance movement we will be making our stand and bring into clarity that it is a personal decision that people have to make individually, and thus it can become a collective decision.

Let's look at our lives and sign the temperance pledge, not only about not drinking and smoking but against sexual immorality.

Randy Moeller
Director ASI China

CARSON AND CREATION
Thank you for the timely article reflecting a conversation with Ben Carson regarding evolution ("Evolution? No." Feb. 26, 2004). I am currently enrolled in a state college biology course, and today's topic was evolution. I like Carson's comment about not having enough faith to believe in evolution.

On the way out of class, I overhead a fellow student say, "Evolution fixes God's mistakes." How sad.

Brenna Kerr
Drayton, North Dakota


Ben Carson says, "Even in our own solar system--we orbit 93 million miles from the sun. If it were 92 million miles, we'd be incinerated; 94 million miles, and we'd be a frozen iceball."

Actually, the distance between sun and earth varies between 91 million and 94.5 million miles. See, for example: http://www.windows.ucar.edu/tour/link=/earth/statistics.html.

Tim Crosby


Ben Carson is talented and dedicated. In his interview with Jonathan Gallagher he presents an excellent version of the design argument for creation, as pleasant and intelligent as is his smiling face in the photograph.

In the next to last paragraph he uncharacteristically attacks anyone who might differ with him: "If you accept evolutionary theory, you dismiss ethics, you don't have to abide a set of moral codes . . . . You can be like Lucifer." He implies that an evolutionist father would not save his son from drowning.

This is unfair and untrue. Many evolutionists are loving, moral people; and many creationists are not. Which group would burn the other group at the stake if given the opportunity?

David Patterson
Ooltewah, Tennessee

STILL CARING
I was thrilled to see my story in print ("In Love With My Boss," Feb. 26, 2004), but I just had to update you (it was written in 1997).

I'm still caregiving and still "In Love with My Boss." Since writing that story, I've been a traveling companion for many of my clients. I've been blessed to fly first class, stay in four-star resorts, and traveled to Colorado, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Florida, Idaho, and California. I am loved by my clients, and I provide them with the help and companionship they need. I've received countless gifts as well as being included in one client's will. God has continued to bring me every client, so I know the perks I receive are gifts directly from Him.

Six months ago my husband was fired for refusing to work on Sabbath, so we had to cancel our weekly subscription to the Adventist Review (temporarily). Someone at church told me about the article, so I was able to download it from the Adventist Review website, but I would like to order copies of the magazine to give to friends and family (I am the only Adventist in my family). Please tell me how to order individual copies.

Rosemary Hammond
Glendale, Arizona

To order individual or bulk copies of past issues of the Adventist Review, call subscriber services at 301-393-3257. To order toll-free, call 1-800-456-3991.

MORE ABOUT UZZAH
I have been following the debate on the death of Uzzah with some interest ("He Only Tried to Help," Feb. 12, 2004). One respondent objected to the idea of God being described as a killer. "He isn't a 'mess up and I'll strike you down' kind of God," she said.

I don't know how other readers view the God of the Old Testament, but I find that the Old Testament and the Exodus stories are replete with violence and incidents of "cruelty." A simple search on the Internet unearths numerous sites that document many of the incidents of violence perpetrated by the Israelites against other nations--with God's help. In many instances instructions are given to wipe out everything, including little children and animals. How can this be explained or justified? Indeed, this has led many non-Christians to scoff at the idea that God is love and peace.

Whatever the corrective intention underlying Uzzah's incident, and others like it where disobedience was punished with death, it seems to me that these incidents only served to instill terror into the hearts of people who then serve God out of fear. Is it really possible to disguise the many acts of violence perpetrated in the Old Testament as anything other than revenge and murder? When one compares the war-like and avenging God of the Old Testament with the meek and cheek-turning Jesus of the New Testament, it seems as if they are two completely different characters. How can we explain this difference or change in approach? Does the New Testament represent a break from the violent past?

Name Withheld


I enjoyed Angel Rodríguez' column. I had just been reading the story of Uzzah and how he died. I had also been studying about prayer.

My favorite definition of prayer comes from Ellen White. She wrote: "Prayer is the opening of the heart to God as to a friend" (Steps to Christ, p. 93). Using that definition, it is hard to relate to Mr. Rodríguez' statement: "Perhaps we need to recover the sense of God's holiness and stop treating Him as our buddy."

Mrs. White also stated: "Prayer does not bring God down to us, but brings us up to Him" (Ibid.). With those words I feels as if I'm being drawn up to God's throne to join the best Friend one could ever have. And a best friend is a "buddy."

Ferd Moreno
Tigard, Oregon

LINKING THE PAST AND THE PRESENT
I was happy to find the subject of alcohol prohibition covered by Rachel Whitaker in the Adventist Review ("Drying Up the Stream," Jan. 22, 2004). Seventh-day Adventists have a rich history of involvement with the temperance movement, a history that did not end with the repeal of the eighteenth amendment in 1933.

I was sorry to read the closing paragraph in which Whitaker asserted that "The Woman's Christian Temperance Union, the Anti-Saloon League, and the Prohibition Party are little more than historical footnotes today." The Woman's Christian Temperance Union is a worldwide organization that still educates for temperance, namely the abstinence of all that is harmful and moderation in that which is good. In southern California the WCTU operates a summer camp, exhibits in many venues, including the Los Angeles County Fair, and conducts contests in schools, from kindergarten through college. And from comments, written and oral, we know that we are making a positive difference in lives.

The Anti-Saloon League, through its successor organization, American Council on Alcohol Problems, continues to work on legislative issues concerning alcohol, other drugs, and gambling. The California Council on Alcohol Problems will soon hold its board meeting at Pine Springs Ranch, the conference center for the Southeastern California Conference.

And finally, the Prohibition Party, although no longer able to sway a presidential election as it did in one nineteenth century contest, still operates and is the oldest third party in the United States.

From the viewpoint of this Seventh-day Adventist, who works with all three of the above organizations, it would be a tremendous asset to Seventh-day Adventists and society at large were our church to again assert a more powerful voice for temperance.

Paul B. Scott
President, Board of Trustees,
Women's Christian Temperance Union of Southern California