One of the finest skills taught in the school of pulpit teachers is the proper handling of quotable materials. A vast river of sermons has poured from Adventist pulpits for over a century, and many of the tributaries feeding this mighty stream of thought have found their source in the numerous springs of noninspired writings. Quite frequently the student in the pew is briskly called to attention as the speaker, with unqualified certainty, reads a statement from the works of a noted scientist, historian, or literator, insisting that this or that position is undeniably reliable. This man says so; therefore it is so.
In these last days of doctrinal abandonment and will-of-the-wisp-do-it-yourself religions, we welcome the words of "the man with a message," who strikes with telling blows of conviction, whose sermons are to the people what the mold is to molten steel, who knows the way, is in the way, and confidently proclaims, "This is the way," and the people follow. This is most surely the caliber of ministry that is needed now.
Our Lord spoke "as one having authority," that is to say, His teachings were irresistible because they were sound, rational, punctuated with a God-authenticated persuasiveness. He knew the way.
The purpose here is not to discuss, primarily, what constitutes authority in matters of truth and dogma, but to warn against the all-toocommon practice of quoting from the works of philosophers, scientists, historians, and other noninspired sources and conveying the impression that these in themselves are the alpha and the omega of authority. To be sure, this is not done intentionally—which in effect only increases the evil of the practice. Supporting evidences are not decried, but rather encouraged to add color to the design of truth. But they are color only, and not the design. This must be constantly impressed upon a faithless generation that has seriously questioned the reliability of our supreme authority—the Bible. Little wonder that Ellen G. White counseled:
"Cold, philosophical speculations and scientific research in which God is not acknowledged are a positive injury."—Counsels to Parents, Teachers, and Students, pp. 423, 424.
Let it ever be proclaimed from the housetops that those who are in earnest in the quest of the elixir of everlasting life will not stop short of that which has an authentic ring
Do We Need Proof?
To illustrate the frustration that unwittingly obscures truth, the book of Jonah serves as an example. The greater portion of Bible critics class the story of Jonah with Oriental fiction. To what ends we sometimes go to endeavor to "prove" the reliability of this controversial book! I am aware of at least six stories with various ramifications of whale-devours-manman-survives, circulating among clerics. As to the veracity of them no one is certain. But be that as it may, is the reliability of the book of Jonah contingent upon a modern alleged episode vaguely comparable to that which is found within the structure of the book in question?
Because a whale in recent times after a period of three to twenty-four hours (depending upon the story used) of serious discomfiture regurgitates an unfortunate live victim, are we to conclude or even intimate that Jonah's three days and three nights of miserable incarceration in the bottom of the sea have now been authenticated by scientific procedures? On the contrary, we would exclaim as Jonah did in his prayer of thanksgiving, "Deliverance belongs to the Lord!" (RSV). In our honest attempt to clothe truth let us not be so inclined to obscure the naked majesty of an authoritative "Thus saith the Lord" by some questionable parallel evidence of modern times.
From some points of observation the case of swine's flesh might well be labeled "man's data versus God's command." As bad as man can picture the reputation of the pig, the command of God to desist in its use as a food ought to be the most convincing argument. The numerous statistics and heterogeneous reports which are quoted to "prove" that swine are unclean may suggest to some that we have information that God has not been pleased to release. They are unclean because an eloquent Authority has declared them to be so. All other arguments are shadows in comparison, some being quite erroneous. When God speaks men are drawn away from themselves. They look up beyond the stars into the vastness of eternity and see Him who is invisible. And seeing Him, they do not question, "How will this affect me?" but rather, "What is God's will for me?" We must never let an anatomical view of a hog obscure the vision of a God whose love relentlessly insists that every trace of sin be removed.
Are Quotations up to Date?
In the use of quotations we do well to check not only for accuracy of copy but for reliability and up-to-dateness. This is particularly applicable to the sciences. It is not too surprising to note the bulk of misinformation foisted upon the public through the press. Much of ordinary reading matter consists of warmed-over facts sprinkled with a generous portion of editorial bias, deletions, exaggerations, half-truths, or truths smothered in a context completely unrelated to the original. This element should not creep into the sermons of expositors of truth.
A responsible scholar will not be content with every wind or rumor tossed about by the press. He will know whereof he speaks. Sensational claims will be viewed with suspicion until positively verified by adequate sources.
As to the matter of up-to-dateness, much can be said. Many of yesterday's facts are fiction today, and experience tells us that much of what is considered untenable today will become a reality tomorrow, should time last. It is indeed a pleasant chore to keep in stride with the times, eyewitnessing new discoveries and significant changes. Some of the notes in our sermonic storehouse could very well stand some surgical attention before a repeat performance. Archaic statistics and unsound arguments must go, and fresh, vigorous, pertinent facts be substituted. The principles of revision as adopted by book publishers could well be utilized by him who "publisheth peace."
True, a measure of disappointment may register when we are compelled to modify our views regarding the Jew and Palestine, Armageddon, the finding of Noah's ark; to delete legendary natural history illustrations which tell of eagles carrying off babies or music coming from Orion; and to silence certain historical inaccuracies that we have long considered truth.
Caution should be regarded in transplanting a quotation lest it die for lack of proper nourishment in its new environment. Many notable divines who so vigorously proclaim the second advent of Christ are ever so far from our concepts of this glorious hope. Some who speak of the Sabbath and its perpetuity are all the while meaning Sunday. It would seem quite unnecessary to quote Robert Ingersoll even though he ardently espoused the nonimmortality of the soul.
To stay within the bounds of the intent and purpose of the author is being fair and honest. Had a certain former adherent to our holy faith possessed Christian integrity in the matter of quoting from the works of Ellen G. White, his forty reasons why people should not be Seventh-day Adventists would be nonexistent. Unfortunately he has practiced that part of the code of the literary underworld which says, "You can take a man's words and make most anything out of them you want to."
Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are reliable, reported accurately, consistent with the author's intentions, up to date, and do not obscure divine authority—these quote with conviction!
