This book deals with the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of Seventh-day Adventists and was published by the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Germany in conjunction with the German Adventist publishing house. The author is a professor of systematic theology at Friedensau Adventist University. After a foreword and the author’s introduction, the main body of the book discusses the 28 Fundamental Beliefs in 28 chapters. This is followed by an epilogue and two appendices, the first appendix reprinting the 28 Fundamental Beliefs and the second furnishing additional study materials.

The book is very well done, richly illustrated, written in an easily accessible style with suggestions for further reading and a dedicated website to find further information, ask questions, and make comments. Obviously, the book is not just addressing an Adventist audience but is geared towards non-Adventists in order to introduce them to the Adventist church.

By and large, Pöhler has done a good job in summarizing Adventist beliefs. In most cases, he has presented the Adventist perspective well and needs to be commended for that. However, the book contains a number of serious shortcomings.

1. Criticism of Adventism.

In some cases, Adventists and/or their positions are criticized directly or indirectly and different views among Adventists are portrayed. For instance, the author mentions that Adventists are still “in the process of adjusting their original, shortsighted, and narrow view of the ‘little flock’ of persecuted and scattered Sabbath keepers to the larger ‘Revelation of Jesus Christ’” (89), namely that the remnant is not a small group but a huge multitude. He discusses the “shut door” issue suggesting that Adventists have not yet completely moved out of this “dead end road” (154) overlooking Merlin Burt’s dissertation that has effectively dealt with this question.¹ Discussing the gift of prophecy, he mentions Adventists who supposedly have made Ellen White infallible and have equated her with the Bible, while others consider her the little light which has no binding character (120). He claims that Adventists have sometimes forgotten that the Sabbath is not a means of salvation (132). Even if there may be some truth in these statements, is it wise to present this in a book that attempts to make an impact on non-Adventists and help believers in a German-speaking church which is deeply polarized?

Pöhler also criticizes the fact that Adventists call themselves the “remnant church” and maintains that “the body of Christ” cannot be considered an organized church (89), seemingly equating God’s church throughout the ages with the end-time remnant. He holds that we have no right to decide whether others are part of the church of the remnant and suggests that Adventists may “consider themselves to be part” of the remnant only if they exhibit the characteristics of the saints in Revelation 14:12 (90). His chart on the remnant in the New Testament (207) focuses on the Greek term loipos “the rest/remnant” but leaves out other important aspects because, in Scripture, the remnant is not only described by this term. He also seems to imply that the 144,000 represent all believers of all time (p. 219). While many of his statements on the church may contain a kernel of truth, the overall line of thought misrepresents the Adventist position. Fundamental Belief number thirteen clearly distinguishes between God’s church through the ages and the remnant: “The universal church is composed of all who truly believe in Christ, but in the last days, a time of widespread apostasy, a remnant has been called out to keep the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus.”² The remnant is a visible group of believers who call God’s people out of end-time Babylon.

2. Details liable to be misunderstood or to provoke questions.

Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. It may seem that the author does not consider baptism as a prerequisite for participation in the Lord’s Supper (108) which, in his view, has little or nothing to do with remembering a past event (109).

Spiritual Gifts. Pöhler proposes that, because the Holy Spirit is compared to wind, it may get “stormy” when he fills an individual (43). This suggestion, together with his assertions that (a) no “guests” were present when the Holy Spirit was poured out at Pentecost, (b) the church was just praising God (113), (c) spiritual gifts can also be used to edify oneself (112),³ (d) mention of a “charismatic church” (118) and (e) repeated references to praise may suggest to some readers that the author is pursuing a charismatic agenda. When dealing with the gift of prophecy one could get the impression that the author considers Luther a prophet of some kind (118). For him prophets are speakers for God who have a message for their own time (117). Criteria for the genuine gift of prophecy are not given; instead Ellen White is described as being “in prophetic trance” (119), a word which, due to its connotations, we would normally avoid when speaking about the biblical gift of prophecy.

Christian Living. While Pöhler correctly rejects asceticism his stress on “fun in life” (137) sounds strange. There also seems to be an extreme emphasis on individualism when he states that “nobody interferes with me . . .” (139). Supposedly, mature believers are those who think, speak, and act autonomously and responsibly (145). But where is the community of believers? Although Scripture mentions the individual aspect, it also stresses the corporate aspect. Believers listen to each other and are shaped, corrected, and encouraged by the church. They do not live and act in isolation from the church, although they are individually responsible for their decisions.

3. Issues and topics not mentioned or not sufficiently developed.

Books must be evaluated not only by what they mention but also by what they leave out. When discussing the Adventist lifestyle, Pöhler does not mention abstinence, the distinction between clean and unclean foods or jewelry. However, in the second appendix he gives a personal testimony about his own attitude toward nicotine, alcohol, drugs, and unclean meat. This is quite helpful and yet far from being a portrayal of the position of the church. Tithing is mentioned only in passing without even a full sentence being devoted to it (139).

The treatment of the sanctuary doctrine appears to be fuzzy. 1844 is dealt with in such a way that we are left wondering where the author stands and seems to be unrelated to the Day of Atonement. One wonders if, for the author, the Day of Atonement was fulfilled completely at the cross (155). The year-day principle is not spelled out. We hear little about the heavenly sanctuary; and, instead of speaking about the cleansing and vindication of the heavenly sanctuary, the author talks vaguely about the restoration of whatever is holy to God (156-57).

On page 205, three views of the atonement are mentioned: the dramatic model (ransom), the objective model (substitution), and the subjective model (moral influence). An evaluation is not provided, although the author does mention substitution in other places (65, 67, 71, 208).

4. Own views and agendas.

In some cases the author presents his own views instead of the position of the church. For instance, adultery is redefined as abandoning a love relationship with one’s spouse. This would include extramarital affairs, abuse, emotional deprivation of love, and neglect. Whatever destroys a marriage is adultery (149). Consequently, there are many causes for divorce. Pöhler includes under adultery much more than what the church has established and how the Bible defines this term. Scripture limits adultery and fornication to sexual misbehavior. While the Church Manual stresses that a marriage “should be entered into only between partners who share a common faith,”⁴ the author provides guidelines for mixed marriages: (1)

Are the partners aware of the specific challenges of a mixed marriage and willing to master them? (2) Are both partners willing to respect their different religious convictions? (3) Do both partners wish to ask for God’s blessing upon their marriage (151)?

Frequent references to various positions in Adventism and the development of Adventist doctrine as well as his urging not to stay where we presently are (155)—though not completely mistaken—reveal the author’s agenda expressed in his dissertation that “there can be no timeless and permanent doctrinal meaning, nor any immutable conceptual truth” and doctrine must constantly be reinterpreted.⁵ A statement similar to this is found on p. 182 where he talks about the effect of Scripture and tradition (most likely Adventist tradition!) on the church. Again, on p. 185, he refers to two opposing groups within Adventism: those who understand the 28 Fundamental Beliefs as a “credo” and those who consider them imperfect and dependent on time and who are open to correcting and changing them. As representatives of the second position he mentions especially the postmodern cultures of Europe, Australia, and North America and quotes A. Loisy: “Our fathers had difficulties confessing their beliefs; we have difficulties believing their confessions.”

The epilogue shows that Pöhler is particularly interested in locating the “center” of Adventist faith (182-87) which, for him, is Christ. However, this confession leads him to argue that not all Adventist beliefs are equal in importance and indispensable and that one must distinguish between central and marginal teachings (184), a distinction the church has never made. For him the Fundamental Beliefs contain three central Adventist concerns: the Second Coming, the Sabbath, and the church of Christ (186-87). Therefore the Adventist church must be different from and yet close to other Christian denominations (183). An overemphasis on neglected truths must be avoided (184).

5. Selective use of the writings of Ellen G. White.

The author occasionally quotes Ellen White, but one gets the impression that his use of her writings is selective. For instance, he quotes her to show that truth is progressive (12-13), but he does not balance this statement with others she makes about “the sure pillars of our faith” from which “not one pin is to be removed.”⁶ He uses her statements on the so-called thought inspiration of Scripture and the imperfection of everything human (18), but does not show from her other statements what she means by thought inspiration nor refer to those where she ascribes the final authority to Scripture.⁷

All in all, the book is a mixed bag. A number of other issues exist that space does not allow us to address here. While Pöhler portrays some Adventist teachings well, he relativizes others. The book is written in such a way that readers may not see the full implications of his proposed exposition of Adventist beliefs, and yet feel uneasy. Here and there, his agenda for major change, pluralism, individualism, and relativism shines through (182). Viewed from this perspective, the book belongs to the fringe of Adventism. The book would have greatly benefited from an evaluation by the Biblical Research Committee of the Euro-Africa Division but, unfortunately, this has not happened. Because of the book’s significant shortcomings we would discourage its translation into other languages.