As a 30-something I am happy to say I love the recent progression of Adventist Review. I find myself engaged by a much higher percentage of the article, and I love the more thematic style addressing current issues. It seems to me that more articles are being authored by Review staff and Adventist organizational leaders than in the past, which may reflect more “expert” and/or “experienced” viewpoints. It may make for higher quality writing in some cases, but at some point I wonder if this tactic will narrow the voice of the Review too much. Adventism is so broad and wide that it seems it would be important to have a balanced cross section of authors.
I hope the Review will continue to recruit varied voices to its author pool so that the voice of the magazine can be as diverse as our Adventist Church.
New Market, Virginia
When my Review arrives, I look for love letters from my two favorite contributors: Dixil Rodríguez and Stephen Chavez. Dixil reminds me that we are all God’s children, and Steve quietly assures me that I don’t have to be afraid.
Thoughts on the July Issue
In regard to Andy Nash’s article “The Revelation of Jesus Christ: A Chronology,” and his statement that “those who accepted Christ are not judged by their works,” I would simply point to Ecclesiastes 12:13, 14: “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil” (KJV).
Then there was the piece “I Was Wondering,” in which the query was about going out to eat in a restaurant on Sabbath. I’m sorry, but this appears to be a lack of planning on the part of the host. We are counseled to have the Sabbath in mind all week and to plan ahead. I would not condemn someone who, in an emergency situation, found it necessary to purchase food on Sabbath, just as David and his men ate the showbread in an emergency situation. But we should try to avoid these kinds of situations, not facilitate them. I think we can do better than this.
The editorial “Armchair Religion” is right on target (June 2016). I agree: broadcasts and live-streaming meet a real need for those physically unable to attend or who lack safe transportation to church. Maybe another term for “armchair religion” is “lazy.” Reasons for attending church haven’t changed, as noted by the four printed. An important blessing of the Sabbath is the fellowship of believers coming together to worship.
Food for Thought
The Review continues to provide such good spiritual “food for thought” for its readers. Splendid!
However, it is helpful for the journal to reiterate an out-of-context and conflated paraphrase from The Great Controversy (pp. 598, 599): “We need to study Scripture and accept what it says as it reads.” Applying this solitary principle to such narratives as Lazarus and the rich man can result in serious confusion.
As part of prayerful dependence on the Holy Spirit in understanding Scripture, the Adult Teachers Sabbath School Bible Study Guide wisely counsels us to read within a discerning framework by exploring and considering “facts about the people; the setting; cultural, historical, and/or geographicl details; the plot of what’s happening; and conflicts or tension of the texts” (p. 4).
Bonnells Bay, Australia
We welcome your letters, noting, as always, that inclusion of a letter in this section does not imply that the ideas expressed are endorsed by either the editors of the Adventist Review or the General Conference. Short, specific, timely letters have the best chance at being published (please include your complete address and phone number—even with e-mail messages). Letters will be edited for space and clarity only. Send correspondence to Letters to the Editor, Adventist Review, 12501 Old Columbia Pike, Silver Spring, MD 20904-6600; Internet: firstname.lastname@example.org.