If you don’t know mathematics then you won’t know how incredibly useful it is in the world, because you won’t recognize a situation in which it would be useful, because you don’t know the mathematics necessary to make that judgment. Similarly for history. Convincing people who do not know the subject of its utility is a hard sell, even if it is supremely “useful”.

Maybe you could provide an english translation for those of us who do not know serbian?

I so wanted to read these posts but was unmotivated by the visual challenge and irritation.

Howerver, I have found a soltuion.

I copy the text of the entire post and paste it to Word or any wordprocessor will do, and WOW!

I can now read progressiveadventism.com again engjoyably in glorious black type on a white background.

God does answer prayers but not the way one expected.

Why was the dark background chosen? Some particular reason?

Later on, in 8th grade and in high school, I understood more clearly the relevance of Christ and Christ’s death for me. And in some ways, I thought it was more important than the Adventist stuff.

Right now, although presentation is an issue, I’m not sure I dichotomy is quite so fundamentally relevant. In Early Writings, Mrs. White says that in her girlhood, she felt she would do anything if she could just have the smiles of Jesus. I think we can study the history of the pioneers Christocentrically in much the same way that we study the Jewish history in the Hebrew Bible in terms of Jesus Christ and possibly even more so since Christ is such an important part of their way of seeing things.

Besides, 1844 did not mark anything that could be seen, observed, or shown to be of significance.

No different than Joseph Smith’s golden tablets.

How many SDA academy graduates, or even college students know of the twists and turns in eventually accepting the NT canon and the Nicene creed? Or that until Constantine, Christians were called atheists?

Usually, the Adventist thinks of their beliefs born immediately of Judaism–because the Jewish law is proclaimed by SDAs. We should focus on our mutual beliefs with other Christians rather than contrasting them as “we have the truth” and they are wrong.

I want to attribute that answer to poor test-taking skills or nervousness. But other teachers inform me that some students think the Maccabeans was something John the Baptist ate, or kosher jelly beans. Yikes!

When I was a PUC student, Dr. Warren Ashworth and Greg King did assign Ellen G. White’s book, “Desire of Ages,” so why don’t I? Well, many students don’t even read the Bible, much less tackle any of the Red Books.

It’s not just a matter of “Adventist literacy” or “biblical literacy” - it’s often a matter of basic literacy - historical, cultural, and even spelling.

I teach “Introduction to Christian Ethics,” but once in a while a student greets me with “Hey, I took Christian Ethnics from you!” Christian ETHNICS?

On essays, I see the phrase, “this day in age.” What’s that? Oh, “this day and age” (I think).

Every quarter I give a brief lecture on the importance of spelling: that “relational” is a different word than “rational.” You would think “spellcheck” would help, but really, it doesn’t seem to make a difference for some folk.

I am tempted to be relieved if students can recognize “1844″ as a year (much less the significance), rather than as the name of a new rock group or hip-hop artist (e.g., Curtis Jackson calls himself “50″). I’m tempted, but I’m not ready to acheive such deficiency - not yet.

Yet I do wonder what happened in Adventist academy and church before they got to college. This week a freshman student suggested we watch “Prince of Egypt” (the animated Disney movie about Moses) for extra-credit or for class. Really? In “Life and Teachings of JESUS”? Soon, I suspect, we’ll be giving assembly credit for watching Veggie Tales’s version of Jonah or Queen Esther.

Yet, I suppose the task (and burden) of teachers everywhere is always the same: to TEACH! And yes, it is always rewarding when you realize students have indeed learned and grown in various ways. And it would be grossly unfair and inaccurate and lazy to assume ALL Adventist students are so illiterate about Adventist heritage. Some are quite well-versed. Whether they care or not, . . . that’s another issue.

In “Life and Teachings of Jesus” today, we went over John 9. Whose is to blame for the blindness - the man or his parents? Jesus’ response is that it doesn’t really matter or help to assign proper blame, only that God would be glorified as the work of grace and healing was carried out (”Work the works of God”).

So regardless of why exactly we are where we are, we have a privileged task. We are always just one generation from disintegration.

So while it might be a nice idea to require an Adventist Heritage course at the undergraduate level, just consider that there are MANY courses already required that often don’t seem to produce the desired effect of a generally well-rounded education.

I’d like to require SPELLING (or require students to submit their assignments via text message, because apparently studies show that young people are [surprisingly] more careful on their text messages than they are on college essays. Sigh.

I’ve recently been asking my Adventist friends (those that like discussing such matters) if “we” Adventists have more in common with Catholics (who believe in Jesus, but do not observe the Sabbath) or observant Jews (who keep the Sabbath, but do not believe in Jesus.) Who’s got more “truth”?

This usually results in a nice conversation that gets to the heart of the issue about Adventist identity.

We can discuss this and more in January…lol.

I’ll try to make it to your presentation that day and yes, some definite hanging out afterwards.

(You have a place to crash already while you are here?)

I’d say 1844 is more important because my own birthdate is existentially more important than the birthdate of my father.

I know it’s fashionabe to say we’re Christian first and then Adventist, but I’d say otherwise. We’re Adventist first, and then Christian….

Yeah, I’m a Nam-inalist.

(Hey…can we hang out in the evening of Jan. 12 after my presentations that day?)

Two dates:

325 A.D. - formulation of the Nicene Creed (ecumenical affirmation of the full humanity and divinity of Jesus Christ made by most major Christian traditions–East and West)

1844 A.D. (or there abouts) - formulation of the Sanctuary, Sabbath, State of the Dead, and Spirit of Prophecy doctrines (with new emphasis on the doctrine of the Second Coming)…Oh, and NEWSTART.

If one had to choose between the two, which is more important for an graduate of an Adventist college/university to have studied and be familiar with?

I would argue that the first date is much more important, because it is a central belief held by most Christians through history. (Even if one does not subscribe to it, he/she should know why they do not, and what the issues are.)

I agree with you that the study of history has to begin somewhere. The question is where do “we” (Adventists) begin? Is it with the preaching of William Miller? The Reformation?

The attitude I encountered when taking Church History I & II at an Adventist university was a general attitude of derision. The course, although it was not offered in the religion department, was required of all religion majors. The attitude of the professor as well as the majority of the students was that the the vast majority of Christian history is one of falling away from “truth”, i.e. darkness. The “truth” becomes revealed in 1844. (Perhaps this was just my take on it, as I was required to read through “The Great Controversy” in another class and this greatly shaped my general historical perspective at that point in my life.)

I worry that a required “Adventist Heritage” course, over a general “Christian History” course would only reinforce this mentality.

I guess I’m saying that if I had to choose between the two, I’d opt for a general Christian history course with Adventist perspectives woven in, not vice versa.

I’m in full agreement with the Ellen White quote that has been quoted about God’s leading in the past, if it broadly defines “us” as the Christian church in general and “past” to mean way before 1844.

Jack W. Provonsha [and others]: We have nothing to fear from the past except as we forget how God is leading us into the future.