When a church or school makes a standard of behavior, we will always be divided simply because we have different tastes, preferences, and upbringing. If people want to watch "The Passion of The Christ," let them, trusting that their relationship with Jesus will grow stronger as a result. When, however, others just wanted to read about it in The Desire of Ages, let them do that; for one will find much inspiration there as well.

Our standard is Christ. And even so, each of us may have a different idea about Him and His teachings on certain issues, because our thoughts are slanted by our own upbringing and biases.

Our churches and schools should be more loving and forgiving, more understanding and accepting of our differences as well as our commonalities. We can pursue the things we are called to do and not mind too much the behavior of others not consistent with our own.

Mike Sarsoza

This piece brought back many childhood memories regarding this topic. We were raised to believe that our guardian angels left us at the door of the theater, so we must never attend. And believe me, we never did. We saw movies in academy and college, approved by the faculty of course, and certain scenes, usually of a romantic nature, were discreetly covered by the hand of the projectionist. By then TV was in a majority of homes and anyone could watch anything they chose. I often questioned the validity of our church's stand. Should the Church Manual encourage the removal of TVs from our homes? In many cases that was the choice of members.

I was so saddened by Prem's choice. Yes, there is an inconsistency. But is TV any better? There's just as much gory violence, frightening satanic spiritualism, and sexual behavior available on any given night to be seen around the world in the comfort of our homes. DVDs are easily accessible and we can feast on whatever content we choose.

So maybe the issue should be what we see, more than where we see it. The theater is simply a place where people meet to see a movie. Our homes are also places where we can meet to see movies, rented, bought, or on TV. Is it not the content of what we see that is the issue and not where we see it? By beholding we are changed, bit by bit, show by show.

Thank you for these thought provoking articles. The Church Manual is a guide, but many issues have to be personally decided upon. Our relationship with God, and knowing how He would have us walk, will enable us to make right choices.

Lois Mohr

I appreciate the article by John Fowler. He has touched on a very real problem in our church. It is not just the movie, "The Passion of Christ," it is also all theater attendance, dramatic presentations, reading of fiction, television, and worldly entertainment. These seem like simple harmless activities. What's wrong with them, if anything?

I searched the Ellen G. White CD-ROM and found many references to what these things do to our Christian experience. I picked a few references: Review and Herald, Feb 20, 1866, par 21; and Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1, p. 124.

I also found frequent use of the words "exciting," "fascinating," "bewildering," "glorifies crime and vice," and "familiarity with sin." We all have observed that these activities constantly make subtle and overt attacks on Christianity, home, and the church.

Mrs. White also stated that these fascinating activities unfit the mind to appreciate the study of the Bible, to enjoy tranquil pleasures, and even to find interest in daily work.

Are these things true? Is this happening in the church? I wish that I could say "No," but I'm afraid that we have become almost illiterate when it comes to the Bible.

But it doesn't have to be this way. Just one illustration: We were in London when George Vandeman held an evangelistic series in Trafalgar Square. There was great interest. But even more significant, there was a revival in Bible study in all the Adventist churches in London. Let us find, I pray, the Pearl of great price, and value it above all things.

Hubert F. Sturges


EVERYTHING WORKS?
It's hard to fault Don Schneider's enthusiasm in the interview, "Policies and Priorities" (Jan. 2005). Helping others to know Jesus is a wonderful priority. Yet I wonder if the open-ended methodology that Pastor Schneider advocates is going to deliver the best results. He states: "Everything we can lay our hands on is good to use. Everything works if we work it."

While I believe we should innovate relentlessly, the evangelistic principles the Lord has given our church rule out many approaches that are currently fashionable in Christendom. We have been given a body of instruction on evangelism that will produce the best results most efficiently. This is not the time to experiment with methods with which God does not approve. If we have the right priorities and matching policies, the results in 2005 can be astounding. We have the message that the world needs to hear and evangelistic opportunities greater than any I can remember in my lifetime. It would be wonderful to see the North American Division make a significant impact on our societies in 2005.

Barry Harker
Flaxton, Queensland, Australia


BOTH AND
It was with great relief that I read the news commentary, "Was Darwin Wrong?", by Timothy G. Standish (Dec. 16, 2004). My prayer is that professional scientists will become increasingly responsive to the prolific writings of evolutionary science, not so much to be argumentative, but to increase public awareness that evolution is really not a foregone conclusion, and that there is a scientific alternative to evolution that can be studied scientifically.

Speaking as a lay person, religiously and scientifically, the question of how life originated on this planet is taken painfully for granted by most of the Christian community. OK, the vast majority of Christians agree that ultimately God did create our world. But is it a non-issue because we all agree? (I've had people say as much to me.) Christians are brought into the debate on the volatile issue of what version of the origins story gets taught in schools, and this is an important issue to be sure.

But there is another reason why this debate is relevant and vital, and it transcends the simplicity of who is right and who is wrong or the complexity of our political machine: There are many who are undecided but want to know the truth regarding the existence of God, and see the answer in deciding how life began. (I've talked to some.)

Contemporary science has apparently cornered the world into a radically oversimplified and binary stance: faith or science. As a consumer of both science and religion I would argue that my spiritual faith is predicated in large part on facts. Just because I accept something written in the Bible by faith does not mean it is not also fact, nor do I read an article in a scientific journal without first exercising some faith that there are some facts.

I'm learning to challenge my science by my faith and embrace the science that my faith naturally includes. In being prepared to share my faith I'm also becoming prepared to share my science.

Ralph Sanchez
Thompsonville, Illinois


IT'S ALL HIS
I have determined that I will never pay tithe again. You might think that a pretty bold statement for a pastor to make. "How can a pastor not pay tithe? Doesn't he know that what God's Word says regarding the tithe (10 percent of what God has blessed us with) applies to everyone, including ministers?"

Yes, I understand that, but that's not why I won't pay tithe anymore. The reason I will not pay tithe anymore is because I cannot pay for something that doesn't belong to me. God's Word says the first 10 percent of everything we receive is His. That's why the Scriptures refer to those who do not return God's tithe to Him as thieves and robbers.

We have some wonderful friends who watch our dog for us when we go away. When they give back our dog, are they paying us with the dog? No, they're returning what is ours. It's the same with God's tithe. He allows us to hold 100 percent of everything He gives us the ability to receive, but He tells us that the first 10 percent is His. He just lets it pass through our hands as a test of our honesty and loyalty to Him.

Is my neighbor showing thankfulness when he returns my chainsaw I lent him? Of course not. He's doing the right thing. But he shows his gratefulness when he gives my family a bouquet of flowers after he returns my chainsaw. We only really start showing our gratitude to God for all He has done for us when we give above God's 10 percent from the 90 percent He says is ours.

Although I will not be paying 10 percent, I certainly will be returning God's 10 percent, and showing my love and thankfulness by giving to His ministries on earth an offering above His 10 percent in proportion to my thankfulness for the rich love and bounties He has given me. I cannot thank Him enough for the promise of heaven, for forgiveness of sin, for release of guilt, for giving us power and victory over temptations and habits, for filling our hearts with love, mercy, patience, compassion, joy, and so much more.

I have found, as have many others, that we cannot out-give God. The more we have given to Him, the more He has supplied our every need.

I pray that each of us will demonstrate to God and the universe our faithfulness to Him by returning to God His 10 percent, and that we will show our love and thankfulness to Him by generously giving to Him an offering in proportion to our love and thankfulness for what He has done for us. We show our love to our family not only with words of praise and spending time together, but also by giving gifts, providing food, home, etc. The same applies to showing our love to God. Life is all about entering into a love covenant with God.

Pastor Jeff Zaremsky
Florida Conference


PRAISE FROM AN UNBELIEVER
I am not a Christian. My wife is, however, of the Adventist persuasion; so I have access to the Adventist Review, Sabbath school study guides, and other literature, which I often read. Though not a Christian, I have read the Bible cover to cover and still access it from time to time via traditional and electronic formats. (I also read Buddhist scriptures and have dabbled in the Koran and the Book of Mormon. My purpose is awareness and understanding.)

I wish to compliment you on the fine publication that is the Adventist Review. In this I refer specifically to two articles in the December 15, 2004, issue: "Of Beatitudes and Commandments," by Nathan Brown, and "Where are the Young People," by Shirley Gast Lynn. Had I discovered thinkers and Christians such as these in my childhood, I certainly would have been more favorably disposed toward the Christian model.

I have no issue with the Ten Commandments being posted anywhere. Broadly construed they represent pretty good advice for anybody. I only wish that more Christians had them posted in their hearts as guides for thought and behavior rather than quarreling over whether or not they should be displayed in public places as emblems of political fealty. Christ's message, to me, was a positive one, and the beatitudes represent His thought much more closely than the negative strictures of the commandments. His commandment and the Sermon on the Mount are guides for all who would aspire to a spiritual life, whether avowedly Christian or otherwise. I have seldom seen so succinct a contrast between pharisaical and spiritual Christianity as Mr. Brown presents.

And Ms. Lynn's counsel should be listened to if what Adventists want is a living, dynamic tradition, versus a static, self-justified faith. She points out a problem that many, perhaps most, Christian denominations are facing: the disaffection of those who find the church to not speak to their lives and times. All living things adapt to circumstances or die. Some of those that fail to adapt become fossils.

I apologize for the presumptiveness of a non-Christian to speak to believers of Christian values. I mainly wish to express my respect for much of what I read in Adventist literature and see in Adventist action.

Bryan McNutt
Glendale, Oregon