Abstract
As Seventh-day Adventism mirrors the global trends in world Christianity, the contextualization of its message has taken various forms, even as this formerly North American movement continues its global spread apace. It is therefore appropriate to ask in what ways Adventists have contextualized their message. Using a historico-contexual perspective, I analyze mainly academic works of Adventist theologians and missiologists that discuss ways Adventism has been adapted to a very broad audience.
Seventh-day Adventism (henceforth Adventism or SDA) as a movement mirrors the recent global trends in world Christianity, including exponential growth, the shift from North to South, and contextualization and theological renewal. Indeed, the growth rate of the SDA from its founding in 1863 to the present is one of the highest of all churches. 1 Recent statistics show that the SDA Church has become a worldwide movement, 2 with a record of planting a new church every 3.5 hours; every day, 3,452 members join the church. In 2016 the overall membership totaled over 20 million. 3
On a closer look, the church shows more than just a half-century of rapid growth. What was formerly known as a North American apocalyptic-cum-eschatological movement now draws most of its membership from outside the United States; indeed, most members are currently located in the Global South. 4 Thus, while SDA can be considered a global movement, it is at the same time experiencing a massive “shift in its center” from North to South, as well as a reverse mission underway from its former mission fields. 5 This shift has been evident for some decades now. For instance, a prominent Adventist theologian in the early 1990s predicted: “It is only a question of time before a Third World figure with a non-White face sits behind that [president’s] desk” at the SDA world church headquarters. 6
Most important for this research is the way Adventists seek to convey their message in various contexts. As Adventism was becoming an increasingly global movement, an acute awareness arose of the need to contextualize its teachings to the varying contexts it was encountering as it grew. With the increasing emphasis on the varieties of theology in the different contexts of world Christianity, I argue that, from close observation, Adventism as a global Christian missiological movement is indeed inculturating, contextualizing, or indigenizing its theology.
In the future we perhaps may speak of Adventist theologies. For the purposes of this article, however, we consider the (singular) theology of the movement and ask, In what ways are Adventists doing contextualization? What models have been used in adapting Adventism into different contexts? To pursue this task, I first highlight briefly the historical background of Adventism, along with this church’s theological profile. We then consider contextualization as a theological theme and look at some examples of contextualization in Adventism.
SDA history, background, and theological profile
Seventh-day Adventism arose out of the many revivals known as the Second Great Awakening, which swept over North America in the early nineteenth century. Such revival movements as Millerite apocalyptism, Methodist revivalism, and restorationism (involving the Christian Church/Disciples of Christ) were the major religious factors 7 that not only led to the origin of Adventism but also shaped Adventism and its theology as a whole. 8 In particular, Millerism, an apocalyptic message of the imminent return of Jesus Christ propounded by William Miller, was central to the immediate origin of Adventism. Miller’s focus and study of the prophetic books of Daniel and Revelation led him and other Millerites to announce October 22, 1844, as the exact date of Jesus’s return. When it did not happen, the Millerites experienced what they called the Great Disappointment.
In the wake of the disappointment and in the face of ridicule, a small portion of those who determined to retain “the blessed hope” came together to reexamine their beliefs. 9 This examination led to a number of reformulations and modifications, as well as the clarification of new conviction. In the decades following, Adventists stressed a Christ-centered theology, with the Bible as the basis of their faith. This emphasis explains why they consider their primary mission to be the proclamation of the Gospel of the whole Bible to the ends of the earth (Matt. 28:19–20), taking the messages of the three angels of Revelation 14:6–12 to all people groups. They also accept biblical prophecy and see themselves as spiritual heirs of ancient Israel, the apostolic church, and the sixteenth-century Reformation. 10 This heritage, they believe, extends the broader confines of biblical prophecy to include the prophetic ministry of Ellen G. White, a cofounder. 11
Moreover, Adventists observe the seventh-day Sabbath and emphasize a holistic theology that stresses principles of a wholesome lifestyle in preparation for the imminent return of Jesus. 12 Adventists also believe that they are called to prepare the world for Christ’s return, and thus they engage in various kinds of mission to this end. The ways and means they seek to do this work will be elaborated in the next sections.
Contextualization: A theological and missiological theme
Accommodation, inculturation, and indigenization are some of the terms used to describe the process of making the Gospel culturally relevant. For this research, contextualization, a broader term, is preferred. It is the attempt to communicate the message of the person, works, Word, and will of God in a way that is faithful to God’s revelation, especially as it is put forth in the teachings of Holy Scripture, and that is meaningful to respondents in their respective cultural and existential contexts. 13
The need for contextualization cannot be overemphasized. This need—to make the Gospel relevant in every culture —is stated most clearly in 1 Corinthians 9:19–23, 25, the
This covenant comes fully to life with the incarnation of Jesus in the New Testament. In the incarnation, not only was God “at home in specific segments of social reality,” but also his greatest self-revelation “took place within all of the particularities of a specific time and culture.” 15 Paul follows this example in his attempt to adapt his actions to different cultural and religious settings (1 Cor. 9:19–23). According to Paul, it is for the sake of the Gospel with the sole aim of winning souls to Christ.
In mission, however, how to contextualize the Gospel in specific cultural contexts remains perplexing. This perplexity arises from the need to balance faithfulness to the one Gospel with its meaningful expression in particular cultures, no two of which are exactly the same. No wonder Dean Flemming concludes from 1 Corinthians 9:19–23 that, since God values all cultures, “our articulation of the gospel must be culture-specific but not culture bound.” 16 In a bid to hold to both sides of this tension, missiologists have approached contextualization from differing theological or methodological angles, based on various guiding assumptions, orientations, and attitudes toward culture.
For example, in his seminal work
Contextualization in Adventism
Adventists were late in the process of contextual theological reflections. “By the time Adventists really started reaching non-western cultures a tried and true disregard for encountered cultures was apparently well entrenched.” 20 Not until recently were issues of theology vis-à-vis culture taken seriously. Possibly, this realization occurred as Adventism confronted diversified elements in different contexts during cross-cultural encounters and as it understood the vast extent of its culturally diverse membership. Consequently, in 2010 the church prepared a crucial document describing contextualization as “the intentional and discriminating attempt to communicate the gospel message in a culturally meaningful way.” 21
The document strongly affirms upholding the fundamental beliefs of Adventism. At the same time, local expressions of Adventism are encouraged. 22 This two-sided emphasis indicates a concern in missiological thinking that Adventism become truly a church for all nations, tribes, tongues, and peoples. 23 Furthermore, this new awareness of the necessity of contextualization has led to the conclusion that some official documents, such as “Twenty-Eight Fundamental Beliefs,” “Church Manual,” and “Baptismal Vows,” should be recast in a form that is more easily understood by other Christians, cultures, and non-Christians. 24
It can be noted that, in the attempt to contextualize, emphasis on some doctrinal points at different times in the growth and spread of Adventism influenced the approaches or models used. Owen McIntyre highlights this influence when he notices that Adventist theology favors a redemption-centered approach over a creation-centered approach. 25 It is therefore not surprising to him that Bevans’s translation model was favored by two Adventist scholars. 26 What he might have failed to note, however, was the church’s theology that uniquely focuses on the redemption of humankind through the proclamation of the imminent return of Christ. Those who favored the translation model were appealing to this doctrine.
The creation-centered approach later influenced Adventist contextual theological thinking, which can be seen in the use of holistic models for mission theologizing. But aside from redemption and creation, other theologically centered themes such as Christology and pneumatology were also embraced. Indeed, when thoroughly scrutinized, Adventist contextual models focus on theological/doctrinal points such as (1) the communication of Adventist message—the Word of God as the Gospel, (2) life as a whole creation, including theological anthropology, (3) the incarnation of Christ, (4) salvation history and God’s love, and (5) the work of the Holy Spirit. Interestingly, these focus points appear as the starting points in Adventist systematic theology.
Adventist contextualization: Approaches, models
The rest of this article presents some contextual approaches that are grouped or classified by themes in systematic theology. Thus,
The translation of the Adventist message and the Word of God
A foremost model used by Adventists is the composite model of translation and/or adaptation. While Bevans considers translation and adaptation models separately, 27 Adventist missionaries unconsciously used and advocated this composite model to translate and adapt their fundamental beliefs in specific contexts. 28 This approach was widely used first in Europe and other Western societies and then in Africa and other countries outside North America.
Some examples will suffice. According to Daniel Heinz 29 and Erich W. Baumgartner, 30 Ludwig Richard Conradi (1856–1939), a German-born Adventist minister, translated and inculturated Adventism into the European context throughout his ministerial career. When Conradi came to Europe, he studied the situation and noticed that there were deep-rooted prejudices against the Adventist message in Europe. Since the translation of Adventism was one of his primary goals, 31 he thought of inculturating Adventism by demonstrating the compatibility of Adventist faith with various Protestant traditions in Europe. Conradi did so by using a religious and cultural framework that had roots in the Pietistic Reformation. Baumgartner agrees: “Conradi adapted the Pietist model of meetings and developed a contextualized message. . . . For him, the Adventist message was rooted in a historic Adventism in Europe that preceded American Adventism.” He demonstrated the compatibility by emphasizing the European pioneers of the biblical messages of righteousness by faith and biblical prophecy. 32 Again, Heinz asserts, “Conradi attempted repeatedly to demonstrate the place of Adventist apocalypticism in the history of theology. . . . He liked to show that long before the emergence of the Millerite movement, students of scripture in Europe had preached the idea of an imminent Second Advent and that this concept had achieved great prominence with the Reformers.” 33
Conradi’s translation and inculturation model resulted in such great success that, within a few decades (ca. 1890–1910) of its implementation, the growth rate of the Adventist Church in Europe exceeded that of the church in the United States. Unfortunately, Conradi’s practice of contextualizing the Gospel in various cultures was not largely adopted during his lifetime. Only in the last decades of the twentieth century did the SDA more broadly begin to take local contexts seriously.
From the late twentieth century onward, the translation model became a tool for mission and academic reflection. One of the first to reflect on this model was Borge Schantz, 34 who focused on the adaptation of Adventism to the German context through the influence of Conradi. Schantz was influenced by Charles Kraft’s dynamic equivalence model of translation.
Barry Oliver called for the adaptation of the SDA fundamental beliefs to specific cultures, which is another example of an Adventist academic employing the translation model. 35 According to McIntyre, “Oliver’s method of acknowledging the context fits very closely with what Bevans identifies as the Translation Model.” 36 Yet, it seems Oliver’s model is a synthesis of the translation-adaptation and incarnation models, since his method involves both the message and the messenger. On the one hand, the model encourages the need to find the best way to communicate each fundamental belief relative to each specific context. On the other hand, the messenger needs to identify with the people and their culture; that is, the missionary/cross-cultural worker must adopt an incarnational approach. 37 According to Baumgartner, to communicate Adventism with this model, “a translation, even a dynamically equivalent one, dare not change the cultural setting of the original events. In most attempts to communicate the word, however, the essentials of God need to be ‘transculturated’ into the receptors’ cultural setting.” 38
Holism and anthropology in Adventism
The SDA understanding of biblical anthropology, in particular its doctrine of the immortality of the soul, has influenced its approach to contextualization. Adventists view life as a complex whole, with every aspect of life in need of the power of the Gospel. Any part of this life that is not touched by the Gospel endangers the individual as a whole. This approach has enabled Adventists to move beyond the Greek dualistic separation of the physical and the spiritual. 39
This approach, however, goes further than the individual. For Adventists, the Gospel in its full essence finds acceptance in strong communal cultures. Thus, according to Oliver and McIntyre, despite the tendency to understand the Gospel individualistically, this anthropological approach encourages the transformation of the whole person. This change includes the individual’s community relationships and therefore functions as a transformational agent for the community, as well as the individual. 40 The success of this approach is seen in the Adventist mission work in the South Pacific and the work of the Adventist Development and Relief Agency.
Non-Western Adventists have studied this approach. For instance, Rowland Nwosu’s dissertation on contextualizing Adventism among the Igbo of Nigeria, West Africa, is worthy of mention. Nwosu looked for philosophical similarities between the Igbo traditional worldview and Adventism. Since both worldviews embrace holism, he reasoned that an Adventist ethnic theology that would minister to the Igbo as a whole was needed. He created a model that took elements of the Igbo worldview seriously and that could be developed through publications, health and educational institutions, and also in church life and ethics. His model serves as an example for beginning a distinct contextual reflection among Igbo Adventists in Nigeria.
It is clear, however, that Nwosu could not balance the tension between the individual and community, for his emphasis favors the individual. Such tension seems to be inevitable when employing his approach. Nevertheless, Nwosu’s analysis proves insightful in the discussion of contextualization in Adventism. His work also borrowed elements from Kraft’s dynamic equivalence and receptor-oriented approach, as well as Bevans’s contextual models, hence its synthetic but holistic nature.
The holistic nature of Adventism and structural holistic models
Adventist structural holistic models are based on ecclesiological reflections. McIntyre observes that the focus on ecclesiology in Adventism has been of two kinds. The first, the herald model, was undoubtedly the main model in early Adventist theologizing. The second emphasizes Adventism’s global organizational structure, proudly declaring itself a “world church.” 41 It led to an institutional vision in which the church was defined “primarily in terms of its visible structures, especially the rights and powers of its officers.” 42 This model, according to Gorden Doss, may have suited early Adventism, but it was “largely unreceptive to contextualization of theology and to some degree threatened by it.” 43
Interestingly, Adventists emphasized a third model in ecclesiology—structural holism—which was open to holistic contextualization. This model is further evidence of the church’s emphasis on holism and ecclesiology. Thus, contrary to McIntyre’s view, Adventists broadened their view of ecclesiology to incorporate holistic structures suitable to other contexts (e.g., underground churches in China). This practice serves as the real evidence for their claiming to be a world church. 44 In this model, theological concepts are used as a framework for developing messages for the specialized needs of a given context.
Unsurprisingly, those who advocate for this model often do so to voice their disapproval of the church’s long-standing structure and traditions, 45 which at times have been uninterested in promoting Adventism’s apocalyptic calling. In addition, the acceptance of transitional organizational structures for the sake of mission demonstrates Adventism’s commitment to being a world church. The formation of publishing, administration, education, and medical institutions is also a distinguishing feature of Adventist mission. These components form what Knight calls “Adventism’s missiological quadrilateral.” 46
The incarnated Christ and transcendent Spirit in contextual approaches
Other biblical points in theology that have influenced the way Adventists do contextualization focus on the incarnational ministry of Christ and the transcendence of the Holy Spirit. The focus on Christ leads scholars to look for principles from the life and ministry of Christ for insight into methodological approaches in mission. For instance, Lukas Tambaya Daniel suggests a five-point evangelism principle that mirrors Christ’s incarnational approach. 47 Especially for Muslims, this approach builds a bridge from the Quran to the Bible and then to Adventist beliefs. Furthermore, Daniel weaves the holistic nature of Adventism together with the awareness of the working of the Holy Spirit among Muslims. This approach is effective not only among Muslims but also among other non-Christians.
Similarly, the awareness of the working of the Holy Spirit beyond the institutional boundaries of Christianity has prompted some serious reflection in contextualization. This view corroborates the statement of the Seventh-day Adventist Church on relations with adherents of other world religions.
48
Although this statement does not address the salvation of non-Christians per se, it is clear that Adventists affirm the working of God’s Spirit and existence of “certain values and truths” among “other faiths” (world religions).
49
This understanding has been taken further in the model articulated in
When the issue of syncretism was raised as a problem in this model, Peter Roennfeldt addressed the issue with the
Having looked at the ways Adventists do theology by focusing on the incarnational ministry of Christ and the transcendence of the Holy Spirit, some points stand out. The models that focus on Christ and/or the Spirit were mostly used to reach members of other religions. In most cases both the incarnate Christ and the transcendent Spirit were used to construct a contextual model with an eschatological emphasis. This emphasis is redefined, however, in a challenging manner when the institutional church is forced to acknowledge the working of the Spirit
Missio Dei
A similar framework for mission among non-Christians can be seen in the use of narrative models. One that is quite fascinating is a narrative model centered on the Old Testament concept of “God’s salvific purpose for all people,” or
Tompkins’s reflection is a product of his encounters as a missionary among Hindus. By demonstrating parallels between Hinduism and the “nations” in the Old Testament, Tompkins creates a foundation for identifying Hindus as the “nations.” He argues that the similarity of worship of idols suffices for this case. Tompkins identifies examples of God’s mission to the nations in the Old Testament involving cross-religious encounters and adopts them for today’s Hindus. Using relevant portions of the narratives of Naomi and Ruth, Elijah and the widow of Zarephath, and Elisha and Naaman, he develops an approach that can serve as a model for missions to Hindus. The working theologies constructed from these narratives stress a need for building relationships, flexibility towards recent converts, and an emphasis on God’s omnipotence.
Synthetic models: Adventist contextual constructions
The synthetic model seems to be the most popular among the models used by Adventists. 55 This model consists of a synthesis of two or more contextual models developed by other Christian scholars and advocated by Adventists as well. For example, to construct an Adventist theology of wealth and poverty, Doss combines David T. Williams’s typology of Christian approaches to poverty and Terrance Tiessen’s ten models of Christian theology to construct a holistic Malawian Adventist theology of wealth and poverty. 56
Likewise, Jon L. Dybdahl combines the translation model with a trialogue involving an ongoing conversation between the Word of God, the missionary, and the missionized. According to him, this trialogue enables contextualization in three major areas: theology, ethics, and church life. 57 It is evident that Dybdahl’s trialogic model was a reaction to William Dyrness’s dialogical model, as well as to the models of Bevans and Schreiter. In Dybdahl’s view, the more common approach of a two-way dialogue leaves the missionary, the Bible, or the missionized out of the conversation. In a later development of this model, Dybdahl discusses what it takes to be effective as a missionary in another context, outlining how a missiological consciousness can be developed. 58 This reflection may have been the result of his involvement in the creation and writing of a Hmong statement of belief, as a former pioneer missionary in Thailand. The simple statement of belief in a question-and-answer format shows Dybdahl’s ingenuity in discussing issues in contextualizing Adventist beliefs outside of North America.
The synthetic model shows how much Adventism borrows from other Christians, while maintaining its authentic apocalyptic calling in service to the world. Nonetheless, this insight demonstrates that Adventist scholars are seriously engaged in doing contextual theology. Their reflections form a mosaic of several syntheses of local Adventist theological constructions. In sum, these theologies contribute to the ongoing local-global discourses in the field of world Christianity and help initiate a global theological discourse within the world Adventist movement.
Conclusion
This article has given only an overview of the models used by Adventists in missiological contextualization. Initially, early Adventists were reluctant to engage in contextualization because the scope of Adventist mission was myopic, not embracing the whole world. A shift occurred, however, when the focus of Adventists switched to translating and adapting their message cross-culturally to “the ends of the world.” The contextual models presented above demonstrate the extent to which Adventists became open to cross-cultural theologizing. Focus on certain theological and doctrinal points served as the method for doing contextualization. The result of this focus amounted to the production of local Adventist theologies based on some borrowed models.
This article shows how Adventist scholars were consistent in preserving their own eschatological and apocalyptic framework, despite their use of various contextualizing models. Adventist scholars developed their contextual thinking by constructing models that owed no allegiance to the views of non-Adventists. Thus, in the course of doing global mission theology, Adventism’s unique identity was maintained. Moreover, non-Western Adventist scholars are presently constructing their own models for their own contexts. This phenomenon suggests that Adventism is already going through the global-local exchange of theological reflection envisaged in world Christianity.
Footnotes
Funding
This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Notes
Author biography