Early Adventists and early Mormons shared several points in common. Both groups were treated with contempt by others, even considered outcasts from "real" Christianity. On their part, Adventists and Mormons were saddened by the treatment received at others' hands, and sought for the guidance of God. Seventh-day Adventists, blessed by the strong prophetic guidance of Mrs. Ellen G. White, clave ever more staunchly to the Bible. Latter-day Saints also under the guidance of one they considered a prophet, turned to the revelations he claimed were from heaven. The Book of Mormon and then other "Scriptures" became the centering authorities for that group.

Thus, out of similar beginnings were chosen two very different paths. Over the years the gap has widened. Mormons still want to help Adventists switch to their church, and Adventists still want to help Mormons find the truths we believe we have. Interestingly, neither group has done well in converting the other. Some former LDS have become SDA, and a very few former SDA have become LDS. In your everyday contact with friends and relatives, you'll interact with them too. So today I want to present some points of interest; some items that will help us in our efforts to share with our friends and neighbors.

I want to propose to you today that the differences between the two groups run very, very deep. So deep in fact, that we can safely say that there are two altogether different "ways of knowing" held by the Mormon and by the Adventist. Few questions illustrate this difference better than the question of revelation and faith. Let me explain.

By revelation now I am not speaking of the Bible's book of Revelation. I am talking about the process whereby God reveals Himself or His teachings to man.

Latter-day Saints promote a system of revelation characterized by both an internal and subjective and also separate and distant elements. On the personal level, what is truth is detemined by subjective feelings or burnings in the bosom. On another level, revelation is determined by the top leaders of the church, its prophets and revelators, especially its president. The very hierarchical LDS denominational structure makes the sayings of the current president the authoritative last word--the very last word in fact, superior to all others. The effect of this is to relocate authority away from the Protestant bastions of the Bible and conscience and replace those with church leaders and feelings. Faith for the Adventist means a trust in God's power to deliver according to the promises He has revealed. Faith for the Mormon means to place one's trust in an inward feeling about a purported revelation, whether from the church leadership or from one's own feelings. The consequences of these differing viewpoints are monumental.

While these opposite outlooks need to be understood, still haven has provided ways to bridge the abyss. Rather than using gimmicks and false means of building bridges between us and others, let us discover the commonalities shared by all humans and build bridges there. Let us now procede to look into how "revelation" differs when it comes to Adventists and Mormons.

The Adventist Understanding of Revelation

As Seventh-day Adventists we understand that God communications to man--reveals Himself to us--by various means. Luke says that he wrote the facts out "in order" (Luke 1:3). Hebrews says that God spoke in times past "in diverse manners" by the prophets and in the last days speaks to us also by His Son (Hebrews 1:1-2). Paul learned some things in the Arabian desert by revelation (Galatians 1:12, 17), and Jeremiah said that God put His words into his mouth (Jeremiah 1:9). Ellen White, in the introduction to the Great Controversy, writes:

Before the entrance of sin, Adam enjoyed open communion with his Maker; but since man separated himself from God by transgression, the human race has been cut off from this high privilege. By the plan of redemption, however, a way has been opened whereby the inhabitants of the earth may still have connection with heaven. God has communicated with men by His Spirit, and divine light has been imparted to the world by revelations to His chosen servants. "Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." 2 Peter 1:21.

During the first twenty-five hundred years of human history, there was no written revelation. Those who had been taught of God, communicated their knowledge to others, and it was handed down from father to son, through successive generations. The preparation of the written word began in the time of Moses. Inspired revelations were then embodied in an inspired book. This work continued during the long period of sixteen hundred years--from Moses, the historian of creation and the law, to John, the recorder of the most sublime truths of the gospel.

The Bible points to God as its author; yet it was written by human hands; and in the varied style of its different books it presents the characteristics of the several writers. The truths revealed are all "given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16); yet they are expressed in the words of men. The Infinite One by His Holy Spirit has shed light into the minds and hearts of His servants. He has given dreams and visions, symbols and figures; and those to whom the truth was thus revealed have themselves embodied the thought in human language. Great Controversy, Introduction, p. v.

Open communion was our birthright, but the fall changed all that. Afterwards heaven still needed to communicate with man--more than before--but had then to use carefully chosen methods to reveal to man what he needed to know without exposing him to destruction. So by means of visions and dreams, written revelation, angelic visitation, the speaking of the prophets, God communicated. The ultimate revelation was His sending His Son Jesus.

Many Christian people have satisfied themselves with the idea that since Jesus was the ultimate revelation, God no longer sends prophets or guides His church by any extra-biblical means. However, to the avid Bible student such propositions come short of being sound. Again, as Ellen White wrote,

In harmony with the word of God, His Spirit was to continue its work throughout the period of the gospel dispensation. During the ages while the Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testament were being given, the Holy Spirit did not cease to communicate light to individual minds, apart from the revelations to be embodied in the Sacred Canon. The Bible itself relates how, through the Holy Spirit, men received warning, reproof, counsel, and instruction, in matters in no way relating to the giving of the Scriptures. And mention is made of prophets in different ages, of whose utterances nothing is recorded. In like manner, after the close of the canon of the Scripture, the Holy Spirit was still to continue its work, to enlighten, warn, and comfort the children of God.

Jesus promised His disciples, "The Comforter which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." "When He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth: . . . and He will show you things to come." John 14:26; 16:13. Scripture plainly teaches that these promises, so far from being limited to apostolic days, extend to the church of Christ in all ages. The Saviour assures His followers, "I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." Matthew 28:20. And Paul declares that the gifts and manifestations of the Spirit were set in the church "for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ: till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ." Ephesians 4:12, 13. (Great Controversy, Introduction, pp. viii-ix).

It is obvious that the church still has need of prophets, still has need of revelation. She has been granted such in spades. Seventh-day Adventists know that the total written revelational output from Mrs. White by far exceeds all the writings of Joseph Smith and those who have followed him as "revelators" in the LDS church. This is not our point. Rather, it is this: Seventh-day Adventists fully embrace the idea of contemporary revelation. Like the Latter-day Saints, we understand the special need of God's church in the last days to have the guidance of revelation and prophets. This recognition marks a vast departure from that Christianity content to be guided by merely the doctrines and commandments of men. Such teaching is destitute not because it has only the Bible; rather because it has forsaken the teaching of Scripture.

Consider Ellen White's understanding of why she was urged to write: "The testimonies of the Spirit of God are given to direct men to His Word, which has been neglected" (Selected Messages, bk. 1, p. 46). In spite of our belief in the modern presence of the gift of prophecy among us, in spite of the several writings we publish, the tenor of those very writings has ever been to increase our confidence in the Bible and to point us back to it and its unquestioned final authority. To us revelation has been presented as a harmonious whole, protected and given by one and the same Holy Spirit.

Positions on Contemporary Revelation

This helps explain why the LDS claim to contemporary revelation has never bothered Seventh-day Adventists; we believe in it too. We, however, make it a point to test all potential manifestations of prophecy by the Bible, which is as it should be. The LDS claim to revelation, although different from ours, is a major plank in their position. It has had noticable effect upon those whom they would convert to their church. We might boil down the positions on contemporary revelation to roughly three. The first two are:

1. There is no written revelation after the apostles of the first century.
2. There is indeed revelation since that time, actively present in a variety of modes. "No man can receive the Holy Ghost without receiving revelations. The Holy Ghost is a revelator" (JS-Teachings, p. 328). All this "revelation" is of roughly equal weight.

Because the validity of contemporary revelation is easily proven to be a Bible reality, Mormons have made effective use of that fact. They have (when given opportunity) demonstrated it's validity, and interested others in their church. (For a careful and detailed discussion of the issue of adding to God's Word, see Who's Adding to the Word of God?).

Still, there is another position on revelation, which we might call the Adventist position: different forms of revelation have different functions. Christians are directed especially to written revelation, a manifestation of revelation that is uniquely external to us and functions under special divine safeguards. We see Scriptural evidence of a special guardianship of the written Word that specially suits it for its role of final spiritual authority. (For some of these evidences, consider the synopsis at the end of this document [not completed].)

Adventists and Mormons here diverge sharply. Adventists turn to the Bible, Latter-day Saints from it. Adventists see the necessity of an external and objective source of authority; Mormons do not and in fact, much prefer "revelational" authority as they understand it.

Consider that the Mormon holds written revelation in general inferior to the "direct" variety. James E. Talmage's Articles of Faith chapter on "Revelation," for example includes the following lines:

As the written word--the record of revelation previously given--grew with time, it became a law unto the people, but in no period was this deemed sufficient. While the revelations of the past are indispensable as guides to the people . . . they may not be universally and directly applicable to the circumstances of succeeding times. . . . It is at once unreasonable and directly contrary to our conception of the unchangeable justice of God, to believe that He will bless the Church in one dispensation with a present living revelation of His will and in another leave the Church, to which He gives His name, to live as best it may according to the laws of a bygone age. (James E. Talmage, Articles of Faith, p. 273-274).

While (as we have seen) Adventists have no problem with there being contemporary revelation, we cannot help but respond with sorrow to see the Bible containing the living Word of God characterized as merely the record of revelations previously given, the laws of a bygone age, in large measure inapplicable to our times. Time and place must be taken into account, but the Word is alive.

Elsewhere, we find Mormons saying that "The authority of Scripture is not in the written word, but in personal testimony, from personal experience" (http://www.whyprophets.com/prophets/simple/know.htm). Such lines are impossible to reconcile with the testimony of the Bible itself. Personal testimony has its place, but that is ever sublimated to the Word of God itself. John 4:1-42 tells the story of the woman at the well, who discovering Jesus to be the Messiah, went and told those in the village where she lived that she had found the Christ. The whole story closes with these villagers saying "Now we believe, not because of thy [the woman's] sayings: for we have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Savior of the world." Upon what was their testimony based? Another testimony [hers]? No. On a burning feeling inside? No. On Jesus' appearance? No. But upon having heard His word.

A Mormon may say, "But Jesus wasn't reading from the Bible. He was speaking words that may or may not be recorded in the Bible." We have already agreed that the Bible does not contain all the revelation there is. Jesus spoke the Word of God, of this we may be sure. Christians have a "more sure word of prophecy" in the written Scriptures--more sure than the testimony from personal experiences such as the transfiguration (See 2 Peter 1:16-21). Peter there says that the word is more sure than the eyewitness testimony from the mount of transfiguration. This is not about feeling or asserting; it is about something more sure.

By definition, revelation means something breaking in from beyond, coming from God to humanity. If the source of what is "revealed" is not divine, then the revelation is not divinely authoritative and in fact is not revelation. Man cannot uncover what God has covered. Nor can man reveal what God has not given to be revealed.

Over and over again God commanded His prophets to write revelation down into books (see for example Exodus 17:14; Isaiah 30:8; Jeremiah 30:2; 36:2; Revelation 1:11, 19). When we link this with the wonderful fact of His preservation of His Word, we know that we can place our trust in it. Paul writes that the events of history recorded in the Bible are examples, "and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come" (1 Corinthians 10:11). In Romans 15:4 he says of written (and we might add 'preserved') revelation that it was given "for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope." John says he was inspired to write his gospel in order that the reader might "believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God"--not that he wrote so that the reader might pray for a confirmatory feeling.

Revelation Confounded with Faith

Mormonism confounds revelation with faith. Remember when Jesus challenged the disciples and asked them, "Who do you say that I am?" Peter responded by affirming, "You are the Christ, the Son of the Living God" (Matthew 16:16). LDS author James E. Talmage writes of Peter's response: "This was no avowal of mere belief, no expression of a result at which he had arrived by mental process, no solution of a problem laboriously worked out, no verdict based on the weighing of evidence; he spoke in the sure knowledge that knows no question and from which doubt and reservations are as far removed as is the sky from the ground. . . . Through direct revelation from God Peter knew that Jesus was the Christ; and upon revelation, as a rock of secure foundation, the Church of Christ was to be built" (James E. Talmage, Jesus the Christ, pp. 335-336).

How is it that Talmage arrives at the conclusion that Peter's response bypassed all his mental processes and came to him by "direct revelation"? It is true that the Father had revealed it to him--not flesh and blood; yet there is no hint that this was a bypassing of Peter's human faculties. "Never can humanity, of itself, attain to a knowledge of the divine" (Ellen G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 412). Yet never can an impression bypass the mental faculties. Revelation implies both impartation and reception. God must give, for Peter could never force Him to reveal. But Peter must receive and process mentally, or else that which was revealed would be meaningless.

The church is not built upon a bolt from the blue, but a reconnection between man and God where meaning and trust combine. We have faith in God not because we've been zapped with 40,000 volts, but because He takes the initiative and makes a deadened heart receptive, sensible, able to appreciate and respond to His initiative. "The goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance" (Romans 2:4). Faith is much more than an assertion of certainty. Talmage says Peter's response "was no avowal of mere belief." But it was in fact simply belief, simply faith. And faith has a human aspect.

The only faith that will benefit us is that which embraces Him as a personal Savior; which appropriates His merits to ourselves. Many hold faith as an opinion. Saving faith is a transaction by which those who receive Christ join themselves in covenant relation to God. Genuine faith is life. A living faith means an increase of vigor, a confiding trust, by which the soul becomes a conquering power" (Ellen G. White, Desire of Ages, p. 347).

Real faith involves an embracing, appropriating transaction in which we "join" ourselves to God in a different relation than before. The ongoing experience of faith brings increasing strength and conquering power in the battle with sin.

How different, and how practical this seems when compared to the mindless "zap" of direct revelation Peter supposedly experienced with no weighing of evidence nor active mental processes. God enables us to exercise faith, but doesn't just flatten us with an overwhelming and undeniable experience. He doesn't corner us and force us to believe. Faith thus would be removed and replaced with coercion.

Blurring How Faith Works

Adventists and Mormons have a fundamental difference in the concept of faith. Adventists recognize that they have nothing in themselves of which to boast, nor any power within themselves by which to pull down revelations. But according to LDS author Bruce McConkie, "Our Lord's true Church is established and founded upon revelation. Its identity as the true Church continues as long as revelation is received to direct its affairs, for the gates of hell can never prevail against that power of faith and righteousness which pulls down revelations from heaven" (Bruce R. McConkie, Mormon Doctrine, p. 581, emphasis mine).

Our faith does not pull down revelations from heaven. Heaven empowers our faith and by faith we cooperatively link with heaven. We have no righteousness of our own by which we can pull anything down from heaven. God owes us nothing; when we do good it is only by His intervention and our reception of His strength. How strange it seems that in Mormon theology it is suggested that we have or develop some righteousness by which we may "pull down" revelations.

Why the Differing Views on Feeling/Faith?

Seventh-day Adventists discover in the Bible that at the fall the created realm's message to man was distorted. Nature now wore two faces, testified of two different combatants. Flowers remained but now thorns were added. Sweet smells remained, but now foul odors were also added. The animal creation, originally peaceful and harmonious was now divided between prey and predator. And we realize that humankind's original capacity to understand and interpret heavenly Father's message through our senses was severely restricted. The human heart, originally pure, was now turned desperately wicked, incapable of trust, unlikely to return a sound result to us. All our faculties were impacted. If originally we were prepared to rightly interpret the nuanced messages of the flowers and the rocks and the trees, in a fallen state that capacity effectively was neutralized.

We understand that written revelation was granted to us because of our great need, not as an accessory or an option. Broken on the inside, we needed something from outside of ourselves.

Adventists understand that "Faith is the medium through which truth or error finds a lodging place in the mind. It is by the same act of mind that truth or error is received, but it makes a decided difference whether we believe the Word of God or the sayings of men" (Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, p. 346). Our understanding of what faith is is critical, for it is the means of receiving both lies and truth. All are liable to temptation; all are liable to error. The fallen person cannot trust his heart. His emotions and mind are liable to pull him toward what he desires and not necessarily toward what God desires for him.

Faith as understood by the Seventh-day Adventist is based upon God's promises, upon trust in His strength and compassion toward us. It looks outward, outside of ourselves. It grasps His power for obedience. Faith in the context of Mormonism is different, looking inward, into oneself,' seeking for a subjective feeling upon which to trust. The believer's feelings become his own urim and thummim.

All, whether Adventist or Mormon must watch; all are subject to the untrustworthiness of our feelings. Our desires impact what we feel. If you really want to purchase that thing, and you pray about whether to buy it or not, what guarantee have you that God will intervene to give you the clear answer you think you want? The first key is the changed heart. When our desires have gone from fallen and carnal rather to echo God's own desire, then may we better trust in the answers to prayer; not because they come any louder or with any greater accuracy, but because we may then expect that the pathway between God and ourselves is less obstructed and that we shall hear His voice more clearly. Even then it stands as a subjective matter; even then misinformed feelings may blur the impression in our mind.

Senses and Idea-Bearing Revelation Sources

We need to keep distinct the different modes by which revelation comes to us. There is a reason why heaven sees fit to provide revelation in the form of words. Words (symbolic language) record meaning with much greater clarity than do the other senses. The olfactory sense (smell) is handy for smelling a flower, noting the pungency of its fragrance, but smell has never been an ideal medium by which to communicate complex ideas. We do not doubt that the pleasant fragrance of a flower speaks to us of God's loving creation, of His attention to beauty and detail. So yes, God can communicate to man through his senses, including the sense of smell. And if He has communicated, has He not revealed? Thus, revelation, as the Mormon insists, does come through a variety of venues. Agreeing that this is the case, still we must remind him that not all forms of revelation are equally efficient to communicate ideas.

Because one has an experience one spring day in the garden, appreciating the beauty of the flower that God has made, doesnÕt mean one can necessarily say a great deal about the atonement of Jesus Christ because of having experienced the pleasant fragrance. Complex ideas are communicated much more effectively through written revelation.

A feeling that God has revealed His will to us on a subjective point (whether I should paint this house green or brown, or marry Betty or Sally) need be considered with caution. When God has spoken with great plainness in His Scripture--for example in that the seventh day is His Sabbath and that we should observe it--and we refuse to, then where are we?

It is not that God refuses to give us right impressions about subjective points; but a subjective point is just that--subjective. The Bible is clear that we are required to keep heavenly Father's commandments, but it is not clear what color we should paint our house or who we should marry. Yet because of a mistaken notion of how faith functions people will make a mistake in marriage while failing to obey God by observing the Sabbath. They'll accept what they think is an impression sent to them by God on a subjective point, and then turn around and ignore a most definite command on a plainly revealed objective point. This is the result of the Mormon "way of knowing."

The Mormon standpoint finds it difficult to have confidence in the Bible but easy to have confidence in one's own feelings. Great confidence is held toward its own church leadership.

Mormonism Founded on a Different Way of Knowing

Young Joseph Smith struggled to determine which church of his day was the true one. To him it was an insoluble Gordian knot. An Adventist would have asked him, "Friend, why not weigh the matter by Scripture?" But Smith would have replied as he did in his history: "The teachers of religion of the different sects understood the same passages of Scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible." (Joseph Smith--History 1:12). The LDS church began in the fact that not most confidence but all confidence in settling the matter of the true church by means of the Bible had been for him "destroyed."

Strangely, Smith found his solution by putting his own interpretation on the verse which says "If any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not; and it shall be given him" (James 1:5). How did this text impress him? Here are his words: "Never did any passage of scripture come with more power to the heart of man than this did at this time to mine. It seemed to enter with great force into every feeling of my heart" (Joseph Smith-History 1:12).

Smith was enthralled; he had found a shortcut! Instead of arduous study of the Bible, an altogether different solution here presented itself: "I retired to the woods to make the attempt [to determine which church was the right one]. It was on the morning of a beautiful, clear day, early in the spring of eighteen hundred and twenty. It was the first time in my life that I had made such an attempt . . ." (JS-H 1:14).

As you may know, he writes that he was seized by demonic powers which nearly prevailed in ending his life, but was then freed by divine intervention. Two beings appeared to him and told him that none of the churches were right and that he must not join any of them. Why? The response was that "They teach for doctrines the commandments of men, having a form of godliness, but they deny the power thereof" (JS-H 1:19).

How ironic that in seeking to leave behind the doctrines and commandments of men the Latter-day Saints appear to have embraced the same. Their unfortunate reliance upon inwardly-centered authority predisposes them to leave aside the Bible and embrace that which is not Scripture, for we know that many of the teachings of Mormonism are irreconcilable with the Holy Scriptures.

Why Even Have Written Revelation?

The LDS position (all revelation is of essentially equal weight) leaves us with no reason for there even to be written revelation, as well as removing objective tests of revelation. An internal impression with no handle on it removes all authority from a divinely preserved document and relocates it inside the person. Faith--or should we say revelation--is thus hyperpersonalized

If all revelation is roughly equal with all other revelation, no reason remains for there to be written revelation. Why bother with the Bible or the Book of Mormon or the Book of Abraham when someone can instead simply speak forth revelation? If that which is spoken is "Scripture," then what is that which is written?

The LDS "Scriptures" make the words of church leaders Scripture. "They [the priesthood] shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost. And whatsoever they shall speak when moved upon by the Holy Ghost shall be scripture, shall be the will of the Lord, shall be the mind of the Lord, shall be the word of the Lord, shall be the voice of the Lord, and the power of God unto salvation" (Doctrine and Covenants 68:3-4).

As a pastor I am a church leader. Doubtless it would be convenient were my utterances "Scripture." How handy this would be, especially at church board meetings. But there is a much better way. We don't live in a time when we can afford to be loose about what is Scripture and what is not; about what is inspired and what is not, what is authoritative and what is not. Our lives are being shaped by what we believe even at this moment, and we need to let God be God and hear His speaking.

God is presenting to the minds of men divinely appointed precious gems of truth, appropriate for our time. God has rescued these truths from the companionship of error, and has placed them in their proper frame-work. When these truths are given their rightful position in God's great plan, when they are presented intelligently and earnestly, and with reverential awe, by the Lord's servants, many will conscientiously believe because of the weight of evidence, without waiting for every supposed difficulty which may suggest itself to their minds, to be removed. (Ellen G. White, Evangelism, p. 122, emphasis supplied).

Determining Truth

Weight of evidence--inspired weight of evidence--is what is needed today. Not a feeling or a "revelation" that can't be tested; not a throwing-up of our hands and saying that it is useless to try to determine the truth by reference to the Bible. But remember, the Mormon and the Adventist have two entirely different 'ways of knowing.' His 'revelation' is nothing more than a strong feeling or opinion or hope to you, and your strong Bible answers are all rendered null if the right 'revelation' comes. So how shall we bridge the gap?

We understand something of the LDS way of thinking. We see its apparent power but also its hidden weakness. Here are the words of one former Mormon:

Anyway, I was a eventually a missionary too, but I decided after about four months out that I didn't believe in it. My reasons had a lot to do with the epistemology behind the concept of testimony, and it took me a long time to take care of all the intellectual loose ends. Basically, my problem was that I kept having "spiritual experiences" toward obviously non-Mormon ideas. The irony is that most of the non-Mormon stuff I read had been assigned in BYU classes. Eventually, I figured out that spiritual experiences were a completely inaccurate way of determining truth, and so I left my mission (By the way, I was supposed to go to Portugal, but was waiting for my visa in Sacramento when I decided I didn't believe in it). (http://www.exmormon.org/whylft18.htm accessed on 10 April 2001).

In contrast the Bible provides an acid test for all claimed revelations. "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, there is no light in them" is emblazoned in the mind of every Seventh-day Adventist. The Bible is the test. As our prophet put it: "By their [the Holy Scriptures; i.e. the Bible] testimony every statement and every miracle must be tested" (Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, p. 593). Nor will any Adventist agree to put even Mrs. White's writings above the Bible. Scripture must interpret Scripture. And what is there to fear here? After all, the Mormon and the Adventist are really seeking after the same thing: to know God's will and experience His power in the life. How many LDS are crying out for the power of the living God in their lives, thirsting and desiring to obey heavenly Father's commandments but unable, lacking the power. If the impressions of Mormonism haven't worked, if they've never given God's Word in the Bible the serious attention it deserves, then who will wait any longer? There's no better time than now to discover the power of the Seventh-day Adventist epistemology, the "way of knowing" we find outlined in the Bible. Why wait?

Adventists are sitting on some heavy-duty treasure. It's not your car or your house or your Sabbath School lesson; it's not even your Ellen White books or even your Bible (although they contain treasures unsurpassed). The treasure I am speaking of is what every Mormon wants but doesn't have, and what we have but take so readily for granted: our way of knowing--our trust in God and His Word, His Bible made for man.

If indeed, the Mormon lacks a truly inspired source of revelation, he is actually quite adrift, and left to trusting in men who are trying to be good but who have no special insight into God. Since the entire denominational structure, having in essence forsaken the Bible, is reared upon the validity of the claim of its leaders to spiritual authority, LDS "revelation" bears a very heavy load. It replaces the Bible's authoritative function.

What does the Book of Mormon provide for the Mormon? (a) An illusion of canonic authority. It suggests to the interested person new to Mormonism the classic idea of Scripture, of letting written revelation guide to truth. (b) It represents a concrete evidence that something happened with Joseph Smith Jun. and his claim to restore the church. Either something supernatural happened or it did not. Adventists have 1844. Mormons have the Book of Mormon. Our interest in 1844 arises from our epistemology and our hermeneutic. Their interest in the book of Mormon arises from their claims of spiritual validity and authority. That is, what we believe about the Bible makes us interested in 1844, but what they believe about the Bible makes them interested in the Book of Mormon.

It (the Book of Mormon) may receive a lot of missionary attention, but in comparison to the Doctrine and Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price (considered by Mormons to be "Scripture"), the Book of Mormon is merely a paperweight. Its real importance rests in its heroes and stories, but most of all in its challenge to the reader to embrace the Mormon epistemology (pray and ask whether the book is true). It is an embarrassing fact that the core theology of Mormonism (pre-existence of souls, eternal progression, etc.) is located almost exclusively in the Doctrine & Covenants and the Pearl of Great Price, two of the four LDS "standard" Scriptures (the other two are the Bible and the Book of Mormon)--"Scriptures" that were composed after the Book of Mormon was dug-up from the ground! (The PGP contains the "Book of Abraham" and the "Book of Moses"--supposedly ancient works that came to light by other fortunate means), while the Book of Mormon itself is relatively free of these teachings that are understood to be by LDS as gigantically important elements of the "restored gospel."

In contrast, what of our understanding of the Bible and of the writings of Ellen G. White? Where does that take us? First, the Bible provides us a source of canonic authority--a rule by which to test all other claimed revelations, even those of Ellen White. Second, the Bible and the Ellen White writings help us locate ourselves in the prophetic time frame. We see where we stand in the culminating flow of history. They show us our identity--who we are. Finally, the nature of the Bible and of the Ellen G. White writings is such as to reinforce with great strength the authority of the Bible and our confidence in it.

It has been said by the Latter-day Saint: "All the problems of epistemology are solved when we realize that God can talk to us" (http://www.whyprophets.com/prophets/simple/know.htm). But it is much more true that all the problems of epistemology are solved when we learn to grant to the written revelation of God's Word, the Bible, its bottom-line place and test all things by it. God help us to do that and truly solve the epistemological problem. After all, it is evident that this was the purpose of heavenly Father. He saw the thick darkening boundary erected between humankind and Himself at the fall and gave written revelation to pierce that darkness, to open heaven to us. Why will we rob ourselves of His solution?

Building a Different Bridge

We bridge, not with artificial bribing behaviors, but through slices of reality shared in common.

During the last decade, some church workers were taught "listening skills" and techniques that, while well-meaning, are based on faulty conceptions. Part of the philosophy was to "bridge" to the person one interacts with by means of various "rapport building" techniques. Most of these were artificial. For example, if they held their hands in a certain way or sat in a certain way, you might echo or mimic their actions to facilitate communicating with them. One surmised by careful listening whether they were visual, auditory, or kinisthetically oriented, and so on.

While we do not disagree with the importance of careful listening, we wonder how effective building an artificial rapport could be. People are able rather easily to sense when we are not being ourselves. When they suspect that we are presenting ourselves to them in a way that is more chameleon than reality--that is, when they suspect that fundamentally we are lying to them--rapport is eliminated rather than enhanced.

However, the Bible does suggest to us fundamental spiritual points of contact between all human beings. We share several things in common, no matter the generation we are from, or where we've grown up.

All humanity has, in common, built-in spiritual aspirations. We are all made in God's image. true, the image is darkened, marred, slammed, burnt, and dimmed--but still it is there. Still we retain some vestige of (and I say this carefully) godlikeness. Still we have the freedom to choose obedience or no, righteousness or sin, unselfish love or self love, truth or error, what is good or what is evil.

In common we share the human situation. We are born, grow up, live, mature, and perhaps finally die; all these things are part of our experience. All these topics are built-in bridges, for life contains numerous moments when we stand along with this person or that person at a waymark in their life. Death and sickness intrude on every family. Another commonality in the human situation is joy. A newborn child, a graduation from high school, an important achievement in ours or our spouses' life. Together all people share the human experience. Nothing artificial in this.

Thirdly, we share in common the experience of perception. All we perceive the environment in which we live-out the possibilities and potentialities of our lives. All of us have a sense of our place within the broader world and in God's plan.

These three areas we share in common with everyone in the world. We needn't try to be sly and outguess someone, or let on that we are someone we are not. We needn't sacrifice a sliver of integrity to "bridge" or "build rapport" with others. We all need salvation. We all are designed to worship. Let us bridge into the world of others by means of these reality-paths and see how God will bless. If we will be "standard" Christian people, just basic and "real" people, and let God and angels speak through us to others, what will God do?

At the End of the Day . . .

So. At the end of the day where are we? What have we gained from having thought through these differences? Let us summarize these points:

1. It is to be hoped that we now understand yet more pointedly than before how important the Bible is--a solid and reliable revelation, unchanging, unpassing, still alive and ready to transmit life to us. In contrast LDS "revelation" is altogether more vague, more subject to emotions and sensations which so readily lead astray.
2. That we understand how "revelation" is confounded with faith. God's church was founded upon the Rock of Christ and faith, not the rock of revelation. Faith lays hold of the connection God offers and receives His power to obey. It is not primarily revelation and is certainly much more than an assertion of certainty about some supposed fact.
3. That we need to be more aggressive in sharing how the Bible helps us live for God. We need to be more active in reinforcing other's confidence in the Bible, whether we are helping restore what was lost or perhaps for but the first time give evidence that it is a power that no seeker of God dare treat as dusty revelations not suited for our day.
4. That we can bridge from our commonalities in spite of our differences in understanding revelation, and watch to see what our God will do.

We have our secret weapons. Let's use them. First, to live our own lives, but then to share with others what great things God has done for us in showing us the pathway that has changed us and given salvation in Christ. May we be vocal in our testimony. Many surround us who so need to hear.