Adventist Heritage - Vol. 03, No. 1

In this issue: 2 | Editor\u27s Stump 3 | The Seventh-day Adventist American Dream 11 | The American Centennial: An Adventist Perspective 17 | Uriah Smith: Wood Engraver 22 | Publisher of the Gospel: C. H. Jones and the Pacific Press 33 | The Military Chaplaincy and Seventh-day Adventists: The Evolution of an Attitudehttps://scholarsrepository.llu.edu/advent-heritage/1004/thumbnail.jp

The life and work of Uriah Smith

In the development and growth of the denomlnation of Seventh-day Adventists, the names of six or eight individuals appear as exerting unusual influence. Qne of these was Uriah Smith, and because of his position as editor, writer, and preacher for half a century, it seemed of value to examine his relationship to this religious body, and more particularly, to their periodical, The Advent Review and Sabbath Herald, which he edited for forty-seven years, Statement of the problem Included in this study is a consideration of the influences in his early years which led Smith to accept the teachings of Seventh-day Adventists. A brief survey was made of his home life in Battle Creek, Michigan, after he became editor of the paper, One chapter was devoted to his editorship, which was followed by a discussion of his gift as a writer. Since he was not indifferent to political issues, it seemed worthwhile to examine his views on this subject, During Smith\u27s lifetime the Seventh-day Adventist denomination was largely under the leadership of Mrs. Ellen G. White. A chapter was written on Smith\u27s relationship to her world, This was followed by a survey of his attitude toward some controversial tenets of the Adventist movement. An estimation of his character and of his contribution to the denomination he served is found in the closing chapter of this thesis

Adventist Heritage - Vol. 08, No. 2

In this issue: 2 | Editor\u27s Stump 3 | Seventh-day Adventist Nurses: A Century of Service, 1883-1983 12 | Train Up a Child . . . -- Seventh-day Adventist Home Commission Publications: 1922-1932 23 | Heirloom: Uncle Arthur -- Master Story Teller 33 | The Pathfinders Club in North America: 1911-1966 48 | The Bitter Taste of Prosperity -- Sectarian Jeremiads and Adventist Medical Work in the 1920\u27s 60 | Bookmarks: Uriah Smith: Pioneer Editor, by Eugene F. Durandhttps://scholarsrepository.llu.edu/advent-heritage/1015/thumbnail.jp

Adventist Heritage - Vol. 05, No. 1

In this issue: 2 | Editor\u27s Stump Articles-- 3 | Ethical Politics: Adventism and the Case of William Gage-- 16 | Walter E. Read and the British Union Conference-- 25 | Lieutenant Governor George A. Williams: An Adventist in Politics-- 39 | The Bible Research Fellowship: A Pioneering Seventh-day Adventist Organization in Retrospect Heirloom-- 53 | Uriah Smith\u27s Small Epic: The Warning Voice of Time and Prophecy Bookmarks-- 62 | Adventism and Politics 64 | Marginal Noteshttps://scholarsrepository.llu.edu/advent-heritage/1008/thumbnail.jp

The Nineteenth Century Engagement Between Geological and Adventist Thought and its Bearing on the Twentieth Century Flood Geology Movement

The Seventh-day Adventist Church has from the early years of its existence reacted to the perceived challenge of geological thought to their nascent theology. In particular, the Sabbath of the fourth Commandment in Genesis 2 and the catastrophic global Flood described in Genesis 7 and 8 were targeted. The nineteenth century Adventist response has been one of shifting focus, changing strategies, and increasing intensity. Ellen White, the church’s co-founder and prophetess, was one of the first to sound a warning on theological implications of geology. Her perception of geology contained many pre-nineteenth century concepts disconnected from contemporary geological thinking. Long-time editor Uriah Smith used external documents, notably Presbyterian writings to guide the Adventist congregation with ways of responding to geological thought as it impacted on their faith. The first authentic Adventist evaluation of geology and its perceived link with evolution by Alonzo Jones took place in the mid-1880s. With his spirited response, Jones criticised geological stratigraphic concepts in order to neutralise the threat of burgeoning theistic evolutionary thought. His searching in the geological literature involved the use of contextomy. George McCready Price next ventured to nullify the established stratigraphic principles of geology in order to justify a single, global flood-based hypothesis to explain all fossiliferous sedimentary formations. To achieve this, he presented from established scientists selected citations out of their intended context. A special case is presented on Price’s questionable use of the reports of American field geologists McConnell and Willis on thrust faults in the Rocky Mountains. Price modified diagrams and failed to convey unmistakable evidence of a dynamic cause of complex stratigraphy to present his case for the global existence of reverse sequences of rock strata. He argued that since the geologists’ evidence for a fossil sequence of life in the rock stratigraphy is so greatly flawed, there must have been a single catastrophic event that better explained this. Adventist engagement with geological thought during this period saw a noticeable increase in the disregard of intellectual integrity. This study argues that intellectual dishonesty is not a valid way to support a preconceived interpretation of the scriptural narrative. History provides several examples where skewed accounts of events due to questionable intellectual sincerity have eventually been corrected. This research provides access points for interested persons to further investigate the historical aspects of the nineteenth century geology and Adventist thought engagement

The Nineteenth Century Engagement Between Geological and Adventist Thought and its Bearing on the Twentieth Century Flood Geology Movement

The Seventh-day Adventist Church has from the early years of its existence reacted to the perceived challenge of geological thought to their nascent theology. In particular, the Sabbath of the fourth Commandment in Genesis 2 and the catastrophic global Flood described in Genesis 7 and 8 were targeted. The nineteenth century Adventist response has been one of shifting focus, changing strategies, and increasing intensity. Ellen White, the church’s co-founder and prophetess, was one of the first to sound a warning on theological implications of geology. Her perception of geology contained many pre-nineteenth century concepts disconnected from contemporary geological thinking. Long-time editor Uriah Smith used external documents, notably Presbyterian writings to guide the Adventist congregation with ways of responding to geological thought as it impacted on their faith. The first authentic Adventist evaluation of geology and its perceived link with evolution by Alonzo Jones took place in the mid-1880s. With his spirited response, Jones criticised geological stratigraphic concepts in order to neutralise the threat of burgeoning theistic evolutionary thought. His searching in the geological literature involved the use of contextomy. George McCready Price next ventured to nullify the established stratigraphic principles of geology in order to justify a single, global flood-based hypothesis to explain all fossiliferous sedimentary formations. To achieve this, he presented from established scientists selected citations out of their intended context. A special case is presented on Price’s questionable use of the reports of American field geologists McConnell and Willis on thrust faults in the Rocky Mountains. Price modified diagrams and failed to convey unmistakable evidence of a dynamic cause of complex stratigraphy to present his case for the global existence of reverse sequences of rock strata. He argued that since the geologists’ evidence for a fossil sequence of life in the rock stratigraphy is so greatly flawed, there must have been a single catastrophic event that better explained this. Adventist engagement with geological thought during this period saw a noticeable increase in the disregard of intellectual integrity. This study argues that intellectual dishonesty is not a valid way to support a preconceived interpretation of the scriptural narrative. History provides several examples where skewed accounts of events due to questionable intellectual sincerity have eventually been corrected. This research provides access points for interested persons to further investigate the historical aspects of the nineteenth century geology and Adventist thought engagement

Centralized for Protection: George I. Butler and His Philosophy of One-Person Leadership

Statement of the Problem On November 17, 1873, the General Conference adopted George I. Butler’s leadership philosophy, which officially centralized ecclesiastical authority within one person. This statement on leadership and authority was deemed highly important and several resolutions, as well as a covenantal pledge, were voted and signed in promise that this new policy would be strictly followed. What led the Adventist Church to adopt such a policy and bind itself to it in this manner? What were the philosophical and theological tenets that the policy espoused? Since this position on leadership is no longer accepted in the Adventist Church today, what led the denomination to change its mind and how did the Leadership Controversy that erupted as a result of Butler’s philosophy impact the history of the church? The purpose of this thesis is to answer these questions in a threefold manner: (1) to set Butler’s “leadership doctrine” within its Adventist historical context and briefly chronicle the events that prompted him to write Leadership, (2) to analyze, evaluate and critique Butler’s philosophy of leadership, and (3) to chronicle the responses to Butler’s essay and note the impact the Leadership Controversy had on the Seventh-day Adventist Church in subsequent years. Methodology This study was conducted on the basis of primary source research. The documents referenced include church publications and periodicals as well as correspondence, diaries, church record books, and other germane documents. More recent studies by scholars are also cited on occasion as secondary sources, either for support or critique. Conclusion Between the 1840s and 1863, James White, in effect, led the Sabbatarian Adventist movement as one man. Evidently, this informal type of governance was appropriate for this small group of Sabbath-keepers during this time. When the denomination officially organized in 1863, however, the locus of authority officially broadened from one informal leader to the formally elected three-person General Conference Executive Committee. It was difficult for Adventists to make this transition and questions regarding leadership began to arise. This became particularly pronounced during the years following James White’s first stroke (1866-1877) as a controversy between leaders began to threaten denominational unity. In response, George I. Butler led Adventists to accept his philosophy of leadership and centralize power within one person for the sake of protection. This caused the Adventist Church to officially revert to its first (though unofficial) conceptualization of church governance that was practiced between the 1840s and 1863. Though this reversion came with great enthusiasm in 1873, it eventually sparked the Leadership Controversy of the 1870s as certain Adventists began to challenge Butler’s philosophy. This controversy concluded in 1877 when the Adventist Church officially reaffirmed the oligarchical understanding of leadership that it adopted in 1863. In this way, the Leadership Controversy was resolved by broadening the locus of authority from one person to a small group of persons. Within the next decade, however, Ellen G. White realized that the church had grown too large to be governed so closely by the small General Conference Executive Committee. Though she supported an oligarchical form of leadership and authority in 1875, she began calling for change after the General Conference session in 1888. Eventually, in 1901, the Adventist Church recognized the need to broaden the locus of authority once again. In order to affirm this final shift between practiced models of leadership, Ellen White gave her final response to the Leadership Controversy of the 1870s in 1909, stating explicitly that ecclesiastical authority should not be centralized in one person or a small group of persons

The History of the Adventist Interpretation of the Daily in the Book of Daniel from 1831 to 2008

During the more than 160 years since Adventism\u27s inception, the interpretation of the tamid or daily in the book of Daniel underwent several changes with respect to the argumentation, as well as the way differing views are handled. This study analyzes various Millerite and Adventist interpretations of the tamid in Dan 8 between 1831 and 2008 focusing especially on the approach to the biblical text, the argumentation, and the atmosphere during the time of conflict (1900 - 1930), as well as on Ellen White\u27s counsels during the period, puzzling statement, and possible explanations. This documentary study was based primarily on published primary sources produced by Millerites and Seventh-day Adventists from 1831 to 2008. Both primary and secondary sources were used to provide background, historical context, and perspective for the present study. While Seventh-day Adventists first adhered to the Millerite interpretation of the daily as Roman paganism, beginning around the turn of the nineteenth century they identified it as Christ\u27s heavenly ministration. The proponents of the Millerite interpretation eventually relied more on traditino and their understanding of the statement on the daily written by Ellen White in 1850. The proponents of the new interpretation drew their reasons rather from exegetical studies. This change did not happen without controversy, and both groups were responsible for the intensity of the conflict. Ellen White\u27s statment referred to the prophetic dates and the supplying of the word sacrifice in the text of Dan 8 rather than to a specific identification of the dailty