The book had been on my reading list for some time, but other reading—related to a current writing project—took priority. Last week, as I was considering what books to pack for our short holiday in Denmark, I decided that the 733-page biography of J.N. Andrews by Gilbert Valentine would be one of them. I am keenly interested in the history of our denomination and of the American context in which the Advent movement was born. And I admire Valentine as a gifted historian. I found his book on W.W. Prescott very much worth reading, but I enjoyed, in particular, The Prophet and the Presidents and his recently re-published account of the complicated arrangements regarding the literary heritage of Ellen G. White. Valentine is a meticulous researcher who tells a story as it, with the good things and the bad things that he encounters.

As I write this week’s blog I have almost finished the Andrews biography, and my high expectations have certainly been met. It is fascinating reading, and, although I think I am reasonably well-read in Adventist history, every chapter contains information that was totally new to me. The book provides a meticulous description of Andrews’s life—of the kind of person he was, his background, his family relationships, and his career as a preacher, author, scholar and missionary. But its value is hugely increased by a wealth of background information about the beginnings of Adventism and the way in which the key personalities in the church—in particular James and Ellen White, Joseph Bates and Uriah Smith—related to each other.

It remains a fascinating and inspiring story how in a few decades a small disjointed, discouraged group of people grew into an organized denominational entity, with a few hundred congregations spread over the Northeast of the United States and beyond. It is a story that has strengthened the conviction of millions of people around the world that their church is not just any religious organization, but that it constitutes a movement called by God for a special mission at the end of times. Valentine tell this story of faith, commitment, personal sacrifice, and of the steady growth of the church against all odds. But he also tells another story that must also be heard. The “pioneers” were no saints, who always operated in total harmony, and the doctrinal development was not as smooth as has often been suggested. Fanaticism and extremism often raised their ugly heads. Controversies about organizational and other practical matters could turn quite nasty. Interpersonal relationships between the leaders of the fledgling movement were frequently marred by jealousy, misunderstandings and suspicions. The question whether or not the visions of Ellen White were of divine origin remained a hot issue for many Adventist believers in the early decades.

Why is it important that the positive as well as the negative elements of our church’s history are carefully chronicled? The answer to that question is that a balanced view of our history will help us deal with the challenges we face today. A sizable group of Adventists believes that the past of our church must guide us in our dealing with the present. Our present-day doctrinal views and our policy decisions must reflect those of the pioneers. This is what the defenders of “historic” Adventism tell us. They maintain that the only safe way to stay on course is to remain true to what the founders of our movement have modeled for us! This way of thinking is based on a highly romanticized view of the past, as if the church of the first half century of its existence was a period of unmitigated brotherly and sisterly love, when all were united in their search for truth and allowed themselves to be led by the Spirit in all their practical decisions. The reality is that Adventism’s past is a mixed bag of lots of inspiring things, but also of many elements that showed all too clearly the human weaknesses of the leaders and their followers.

The past can inspire us but it also provides us with warnings and case studies of what went wrong. Moreover, the context in which early Adventism developed differs so greatly from our twenty-first century world that the beliefs and actions of our early leaders cannot furnish us with clear-cut answers for all present challenges.”Historic Adventism,” with its one-sided view of the past, cannot be our compass for the present and for the future. Those who believe that it can, should carefully read Valentine’s biography of J.N. Andrews. All others will, however, also benefit greatly from this captivating book.

Numbers chapter 35 informs us about an interesting feature of life in ancient Israel. God instructed Moses, we are told, to arrange for six “cities of refuge,” three on each side of the Jordan River. A killer was in great danger of becoming the victim of revenge. But in these six cities people, who had inadvertently killed someone, could find asylum and be safe until their case would come to trial.

The “city of refuge” institution has inspired other asylum-models. Many countries have a tradition that a house of worship may serve as a “city of refuge,” where law enforcement officers will not enter or, at least, act in a very restrained manner. That is why in recent times undocumented immigrants have sometimes sought and received asylum in a church building. When the refugee crisis was at its height, some Dutch churches organized permanent church services, so that refugees who had found asylum in the church would be relatively safe. The police would hesitate to arrest anyone during a church service!

It occurred to me, as I was thinking about possible consequences of the Corona-crisis for the church—and for the Adventist Church in particular—that we currently are seeing a kind of ‘city of refugee” model developing. I am referring to the growing number of digital sabbath schools, where the program is quite different from that of “traditional” sabbath schools and which are mainly “visited” by church members who consider themselves “progressive.” I am now regularly receiving information of where I might find these “progressive” sabbath schools—in the United States but also in other parts of the western world. I have been invited to attend several of them and have actively participated by giving a number of presentations in three of them, with more being planned for the coming months. In none of these sabbath schools I have seen a traditional lesson quarterly. The leaders of these digital groups, which may have in excess of a hundred participants, decide on the topics that will be discussed and then find people who are willing and able to introduce such a topic by giving an introduction. Before the pandemic erupted many of the participants were members of non-traditional sabbath school classes that have long been a feature of several of our larger churches, especially near major SDA institutions. But in this Corona time these alternative classes see also others joining, who feel at home in an environment where real live issues, and topics that are often avoided, are discussed. Most presenters are of a more liberal ink. In an open atmosphere traditional viewpoints may be queried and existential questions can be probed along unorthodox paths. Since there have lately been few, if any, physical church services, these sabbath schools usually last much longer than the “normal” one hour period. In one of these sabbath schools which I recently participated in, one of the “members”, when asked about a return to “normal” church services, said: “Actually, this has become my church.”

Could it be that, as the Corona-crisis is subsiding, there may be a significant number of people who want these digital sabbath schools to remain, and want to be church members in this digital environment. Could it be that there are quite a few persons who have come to experience these digital sabbath schools as ‘cities of refuge.” They have often not felt “safe” in the traditional churches where they hold membership, and where they experienced that their questions were not welcome. They have often concluded that the things that are discussed in the traditional sabbath schools in their local church, and what they heard in many of the sermons, has very little, if anything, to do with their everyday life. The Corona-crisis has made it possible to escape from a narrow kind of Adventism, and they have found a safe haven in one of these “progressive” sabbath schools. Could it be that this is a phenomenon that will spread? And should, perhaps, even the church administrators be happy that there are places where members, who might otherwise sever all links with Adventism, can be together with like-minded people and have their church? (For well over a decade in the Netherlands two “cities of refuge” have been in operation, where Adventists gather, who are often at the “margin” of the church, and now consider this their church. They operate with full support of the Dutch church leaders.)

Is this a good development? It certainly is not the ideal situation. The fundamental idea of being church is that we can all meet together and worship together, regardless of where we come from and who we are. The church must in its very nature be totally inclusive. It should be a place where people can find spiritual nurture and grow in different ways and at their own speed. It must be a place of love, and true love includes patience, respect and tolerance when ideas and customs differ.

That is the ideal. But, unfortunately, our time is characterized by a polarization as we have never seen before. This is what we see in society, and perhaps never as bad as in these pre-election days in US politics. The differences between adherents of different parties are so sharp and cause so much hatred and violence that constructive discussion has become virtually impossible. We must fear that something similar is happening in too many places in the Adventist Church. There is an ever-deepening divide between various segments of the church. One the one hand we see a determination to stay with the past. Popular (and populist) speakers inundate the church with their conspiracy rhetoric and their sensational dvd’s. Many feel that this is the good “old-time religion” we should protect. But, on the other hand, we see those who want to find new ways for living and expressing their Adventist faith, and who want to connect their Adventist heritage with the world of the 21st century in which they live. The tragic reality is that communication has broken down between those two “parties” in the church. With the result that in many places the “progressives” (for want of a better word) have been leaving the church in droves. It may be a very good thing in our present circumstances that there are and, for the time being, remain some digital or physical cities of refuge, where those people, who feel that the traditional local church, where they used to attend, does not provide then with enough breathing space, can find spiritual safety, until the polarization subsides, and we can become the kind of inclusive church as Christ intended.

It is early Friday morning in the Netherlands. A few hours ago President Donald Trump was officially elected as a candidate for the Republican party in the presidential elections that will take place on November 3 in the United States. He will, together with Mike Pence, as candidate for the vice-presidency, take on the Democratic Joe Biden, with Kamala Harris as Biden’s “running mate”. It will be extremely exciting andI will follow the battle closely in the coming weeks, and am already looking forward to the first debate between Trump and Biden on September 29th.

One element that plays an important role in this election is age. Again and again, the Republicans insist that Biden is far too old to be president. He is now 77 and he will be 78 (if he wins) when he begins his term as president of the US. Of course, the Republicans have a point. But then honesty demands that they recognize that their Donald also left his youth far behind. He was born on 14 June 1946 and is now 74 years old. If he wins, he will reach the age of 78 years by the end of his second term!

In the United States people look at age in a different way than people do in the Netherlands. We have an official retirement age (currently 66 years and 4 months) and find it normal when people simply retire, or are told to leave their jobs. In the United States the moment people want to stop working is mostly left to their own choice. As a result, many people continue to work well into their seventies, or even considerably longer. (Unfortunately, in “rich America” many people cannot afford to retire earlier).

I can’t deny that I would have liked to continue working for a while, when I had to retire at age 65, and was (I think) mentally and physically able to do so. I would therefore applaud a bit more flexibilityin dealing with the moment when people stop working than we do in the Netherlands. That does not alter the fact that you have to ask yourself whether people at age 78 still should aspire to an incredibly hard job. One would say that among 328 million Americans there must be some suitable younger leaders. By the way, we also have to keep an eye on that aspect when we choose new leaders for the worldwide Adventist Church in 2021. The current president, Ted N.C. Wilson will be 71 when the upcoming church elections take place, and hopefully the question will come up (among a series of other considerations, I hope) whether it is wise to re-elect someone over 70 as the most important leader of the church.

There was a different age issue in the Dutch media last week. Now that the Corona crisis continues and it is feared that a second wave of infections will occur, some are suggesting that the elderly might go into some kind of prolonged light quarantine. After all, they are among the most vulnerable in society, so the argument goes. Young people should be especially careful not to infect grandparents and other older people. If the elderly are willing to withdraw from social life, young people will be able to move and operate more freely. Surely the elderly should be willing to do that for the younger generation.

I can get angry about the fact that the elderly are constantly described as “vulnerable” people. The fact that there was so much mortality in nursing homes was mainly due to how the Corona danger was dealt with in the beginning of the pandemic. Moreover, there are very many elderly people who are vital and much less vulnerable than countless others in other age groups. However, the biggest objection is that we have to do everything we can to prevent a division in society between old and young. A healthy society consists of people of all different ages who can freely interact. Also in the governments and in the boards of organizations (and of the church) there must be a balance between people of different ages.

Whether it is wise to put someone of 78 on the highest post is a reasonable question. But in some cases it might be better to have someone of 78 than of 74.

I enjoy writing books. But nowadays authors must also play a role in the marketing of their books. Regularly people ask me what books of mine are currently available and where they can be bought.
Below is a list of recent English and Dutch books that are in print, with information where they can be ordered (in italics}.

ENGLISH

I have a future: Christ’s Resurrection and Mine
Stanborough Press, 2019
In USA: Adventist Book Center / amazon
In Europe: https://lifesourcebookshop.co.uk

Daily Devotional: Face-to-Face with 365 People from Bible Times
Autumn House Publications Europe, 2018
In USA: Adventist Book Center
In Europe: https://lifesourcebookshop.co.uk

In All Humility: Saying “No” to Last Generation Theology
Oak and Acorn, 2018
Amazon.com / Amazon.uk / amazon.nl

Facing doubt: A Book for Adventist Believers ‘on the Margins’
Flanko Press, UK, 2016
Amazon.com / Amazon.uk / amazon.nl

It’s Time to Stop Rehearsing What We Believe and start Looking at What Difference It Makes
(reprint)
Pacific Press Publishing Association. 2014
In USA: Adventist Book Center / amazon.com
In Europe: https://lifesourcebookshop.co.uk

The Body of Christ: A Biblical Understanding of the Church
Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2009
In USA: Adventist Book Center / amazon
In Europe: https://lifesourcebookshop.co.uk /. amazon

Key Words of the Christian Faith
Review and Herald Publishing Association, 2008
In USA: Adventist Book Center / amazon
In Europe: https://lifesourcebookshop.co.uk / amazon / bol.com

DUTCH

Ik Heb een Toekomst: Over Dood, Opstanding en Eeuwig Leven
Kerk van de Zevende-dags Adventisten, 2019
Service Center van de Adventkerk: https://www.servicecentrum-adventist.nl

Christelijk denken en doen: Hoe Geloof je Leven Richting Geeft
Uitgeverij Boekscout en Uitgeverij Boekencentrum, 2019
Bol.com
Boekscout: https://www.boekscout.nl/shop2/
May also be ordered in regular bookshops.

Gaan of Blijven: Een Boek voor Adventisten aan de Zijlijn, 2016
Flanko Press, UK, 2016
Amazon.com / Amazon.uk / amazon.nl
Bol.com

Bijbels Dagboek: 366 Ontmoetingen met God en met Mensen zoals wij
Kerk van de Zevende-dags Adventisten, 2015
Service Center van de Adventkerk: https://www.servicecentrum-adventist.nl

Bijbels Dagboek: Een Kwestie van Kiezen
Kerk van de Zevende-dags Adventisten, 2012
Service Center van de Adventkerk: https://www.servicecentrum-adventist.nl

Geloofswoorden
Kerk van de Zevende-dags Adventisten, 2009
Service Center van de Adventkerk: https://www.servicecentrum-adventist.nl

Het Avontuur van je Leven: Op Zoek naar God en Jezelf
Kerk van de Zevende-dags Adventisten, 2006
Service Center van de Adventkerk: https://www.servicecentrum-adventist.nl

Yesterday I happened to see a Dr. Phil show on one of the Dutch commercial channels. This is not a channel I often watch. And Dr. Phil’s show isn’t at the top of my list of “favorites.” A few years ago my wife and I got a tour of the Paramount studios in Los Angeles and we saw, among other things, the studio where Dr. Phil’s program is recorded. It is a very popular program of which there have been about 2700 episodes since 2002. Dr. Phil McGraw (as his full name is) became famous from the moment he regularly appeared on the Opra Winfrey show. Since then he got his own program, in which relational and lifestyle problems are central. I continue to be amazed that people are willing to have their most intimate problems analyzed by Dr. Phil in front of the cameras, with an adiene of tens of millions of people.

Yesterday I saw an episode in which a (American) woman of (I guess) 60-plus was the main person. She had, I understood, become a widow and had subsequently tried to find a friend via a dating site. In this way she had come into contact with three different men. She enjoyed the contacts she had gotten with these men. She was addressed with all kinds of affectionate names, and she enjoyed the constant assurances that she was an extraordinarily sweet and special woman. But none of these men lived in the U.S., and while these online “relationships” had now flourished for a few years, she had not met any of these men in person. What these men had in common was that they (according to what they said) went from one hardship to the next, and needed urgent help to get out of their acute financial problems. Their “sweetheart” in the U.S. was sensitive to such pleas and wired them in the last three years a total of no less than $266,000.

The sad story showed that this was not a rich lady. On the contrary. She had taken out an extra mortgage on her house, sold valuables, took out loans, etcetera. Now, during Dr. Phil’s program, she finally realized she’d been swindled in a sophisticated way. During the conversation, it also became clear what had made her so susceptible to the scams of her three friends. It can be summed up in one word: LONELINESS

(We have seen all too often also in the world of religion that people with modest financial means fall victim to swindlers who cleverly exploit others (often older women). Televangelists, but also leaders of other so called “independent ministries,” are often masters in relieving their victims’ of their last bit of savings).

But, back to the lady in Dr. Phil’s program. Unfortunately, loneliness is a great problem that leads many (especially, but not exclusively) elderly people to desperation. Most of them don’t appear in talk shows. Of some we suspect that they are lonely, but many try to keep it hidden that they are lonely. During the past few months it has been extra hard for many people to see and talk to others. Now that social life is starting up again, it is obvious that our priority is to visit (or receive visits from) family and friends. But, unfortunately, there are too many people who can’t expect a family visit and don’t have any kind of social network. They are people who are lonely. Couldn’t we decide that we also regularly visit someone who doesn’t belong to our immediate family or our circle of friends, but of whom we know (or suspect) that he/she is lonely and would enjoy a little personal attention? Surely that shouldn’t be too difficult. . .?!