Liberal Adventists are undermining the truth. They question the historicity of our traditional understanding of Ellen White’s prophetic ministry. They point out scientific and theological problems in our traditional understanding of earth history. The trouble with these liberals is that they are unwilling to submit to authority, to humbly accept the teaching of competent ecclesiastical authorities. They do not trust the conclusions of our spiritual ancestors. They don’t bow to the truth.” 

In this issue of Adventist Today, we do the typical “liberal” thing: We pointedly question several traditional “verities” of Adventism. These verities have been broadly affirmed in our church for over a hundred years and are seen by many as integral to Adventist identity and mission. But we also publish a classically “conservative” piece arguing for objective, nonpersonal truth and warning against the subjectivity of “the Left.” Why? 

First, we often publish articles “to the right” of our editorial group. We value the contributions conservatives make to the life and thought of the church. Second, even though we are far more hesitant to claim that we “have the truth” than are our conservative critics, our very reason for existence is our commitment to the truth. This devotion to truth is part of our Adventist heritage. According to Ellen White, nothing is true simply because it has always been believed or because the church says so or because she says so. We would add, nothing is true simply because the Bible says so. A statement is true if it corresponds with reality, and false if it doesn’t. 

The Adventist veneration of law is linked with this understanding of truth. We believe that even God is in some sense bound by law. He is trustworthy because he is consistent, rational and predictable, not capricious and arbitrary. (I am not denying God’s capacity to make personal choices, but those choices are within boundaries suggested by love, justice, rationality, fidelity.) We believe that nature, like its creator, is also consistent. We reject materialistic explanations for the origin of life because they appear to us to require a saltation or miracle that is utterly incompatible with everything we observe in the universe. 

Just as we reject naturalistic explanations that involve the invocation of godless miracles, so we reject spiritual explanations that ignore or contradict concrete evidence in the natural realm. In short, when we challenge traditional understandings of reality, we do so in pursuit of truth, not because we are relativists or postmoderns. 

I personally value much of postmodern thought. The postmodern emphasis on relationships finds a very strong echo in the Bible, where the Jews receive extraordinary favors and punishment because of their special relationship with God and where salvation is declared to come from knowing Jesus Christ. The postmodern recognition that all dogmatic religious statements are conditioned by time and place is a healthy corrective to the arrogance of Adventist traditionalism. We don’t have everything just right. 

We don’t have all the truth. But as a journal of progressive Adventism, AT is committed to the pursuit and publication of truth. Of course, we don’t always get it right. But we believe we provide a valuable service to the Seventh-day Adventist community by our exploration of credible challenges to “what we have always known” and our attention to the voices of those who have been driven by their studies to see reality in ways that sometimes contradict our historic certainties. 

These novel perspectives are not always right. Tradition is not always wrong. But tradition is strengthened and purified when it is respectfully tested and questioned. We think that is part of our job. We believe it is required of those who love the truth.