Removing the Candlestick

When God is Forced to Set Aside His Favored Instrument(s)

“Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent.”

Revelation 2:5

The removing of the candlestick is a metaphor for the act of God in rejecting those who, entrusted with the task of diffusing the light of truth, have failed to do so. But more significantly, and sadly, it denotes the withdrawal of Jesus Himself from the individual(s), who cannot henceforth be used by Him.

It is noteworthy that the sanctuary had no windows, and the curtains were opaque. The only physical light inside the sanctuary came from the candlestick – an apt portrayal of Jesus as the only true source of light in a dark and evil world. The removal or snuffing out of the candlestick would thus result in total darkness inside the sanctuary.

Inspiration declares, “Without the light of the candlestick [Jesus in her midst], the church cannot advance, and is in a very perilous position.” Manuscript 81, 1900, 43, 44. It is therefore of utmost importance to ascertain the circumstances under which the Lord Jesus is likely to withdraw Himself from His people in order that we might not make the same terrible mistake that would result in such a withdrawal.

Fortunately, we are not left to speculate on this point, because the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy make it perfectly clear for us. Let us begin by understanding a few very significant points from the inspired pen of Mrs. Ellen White: “The sin of ancient Israel was in disregarding the expressed will of God and following their own way according to the leadings of unsanctified hearts. Modern Israel are fast following in their footsteps, and the displeasure of the Lord is as surely resting upon them.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 94.

“The trials of the children of Israel, and their attitude just before the first coming of Christ, have been presented before me again and again to illustrate the position of the people of God in their experience before the second coming of Christ.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 406.

These quotes establish two powerful facts:

  1. Modern Israel – the Seventh-day Adventist Church (SDA) – is treading the same path as ancient Israel, and
  2. The “displeasure of God is as surely resting upon” her as upon ancient Israel. Notice that God’s displeasure is not something to be expected in the future, but is on us at this very moment.

“Unsanctified hearts” in ancient Israel were responsible for their ultimate rejection and crucifixion of Jesus. It must mean, therefore, that “unsanctified hearts” have just “as surely” steered us into a path of rebellion. And we are on track to reject the Lord Jesus again.

God predicted this eventuality following the death of Mrs. White:

“I am charged to tell our people that do not realize, that the devil has device after device, and he carries them out in ways that they do not expect. Satan’s agencies will invent ways to make sinners out of saints. ‘I tell you now, that when I am laid to rest, great changes will take place. I do not know when I shall be taken; and I desire to warn all against the devices of the devil. … I do not know especially what changes will take place; but they should watch every conceivable sin that Satan will try to immortalize.’ ” 1 Manuscript, 1, 1915.

Is there any objective evidence that the “great changes” Mrs. White feared have indeed come to pass since 1915 when she went to her rest? Regrettably, there is much to be said on this point. But first, it must be recognized that as fallible human beings, we cannot judge such cherished, yet hidden, evils as envy, jealousy, pride, to mention a few – all of which are incompatible with the candlestick of God. But it is incumbent on us to apply the infallible test of Matthew 7:20 and “know them by their fruits.” The external words and acts are an irrefutable gauge to the inner state of the heart. So, it is in this category of evidence that we will confine ourselves to, as we consider the direction the corporate church is headed.

  1. The Spirit of Prophecy

“My brethren, I feel great sorrow of heart. I shall not appear before you again in our general gatherings unless I am impressed by the Spirit of God that I should. The last General Conference that I attended gave you all the evidence that you will ever have in any meeting that shall be convened. If that meeting did not convince you that God is working by His Spirit through His humble servant, it is because the candlestick has been removed out of its place. … God is knocking at the door of the heart; but as yet the door has not opened to let Him enter and take full possession of the soul-temple.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 18, 196.

The rejection of the Spirit of Prophecy, both overtly and covertly, is probably the greatest sin of the SDA church. Many examples can be cited where official publications of the church deny, denigrate or dismiss the writings of Mrs. White. This is none other than the rejection of God Himself who gave her to the remnant church to steer her through the fatal deceptions of the last days. On every hand, in every area of mission and ministry, is evidence piled upon evidence of rank apostasy and deliberate disobedience. If there were just one sin for which God would be justified in removing the candlestick from the SDA church, it would have to be the casting aside of the Spirit of Prophecy in practice, if not in actuality. But there is more.

  1. Health Reform

“Those who are truly on the Lord’s side will be self-denying and self-sacrificing. They will eat and drink to the glory of God, refusing to corrupt soul and body by intemperance. Then the condition of the church will testify that her light has not been removed. But if church members do not act the part God has assigned them, the movement of health reform will go on without them, and it will be seen that God has removed their candlestick out of its place. Those who refuse to receive and practice the light will be left in the background.” A Call to Medical Evangelism and Health Education, 45, 46.

It is common knowledge that many of our ministers who stand behind the pulpit Sabbath after Sabbath, are not health reformers—they are not vegetarians, much less vegan. This deplorable state of affairs is rarely, if ever, addressed by men in responsible positions. The thinking, perhaps, is that because ingesting clean meats is not a test of fellowship to a new-born Adventist, that it is of no consequence for leaders to keep to the same low standard of diet as well. But the Spirit of Prophecy is unequivocal in stating that all God’s people should quit eating flesh foods as we approach the end of time. Especially should ministers and leaders be exponents of health reform in strict veganism.

  1. True Education

“The education given in our schools should be of that character which will strengthen the spiritual intelligence and give an increased knowledge of God and of Jesus Christ. This kind of education will qualify men to become missionaries …

“Unless our schools rise to a much higher plane of action, their candlestick will be removed out of its place.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 8, 250.

It is a matter of much sad and solemn regret that the vast majority of our institutions of learning are of a worldly character, preparing students, for the most part, for high paying jobs in the world. Schools like Madison College, Tennessee, in the days of Ellen White are extremely few and far between, if present at all. The blueprint in this area has been all but denied and disregarded in total.

  1. Medical Missionary Work

“Great light has been shining in regard to medical missionary work. Had our people accepted this light when first presented, what a change would now be seen in the ranks of Sabbathkeepers. If we do not heed this light, our candlestick will certainly be removed out of its place. The Lord has been withdrawing His presence from some who have had great light but who have failed to walk in accordance with this light.” Ibid., vol. 2, 181.

Who can deny that the medical work officially conducted by the Seventh-day Adventist Church is a far cry from the medical missionary work endorsed by the Spirit of Prophecy?

  1. Litigation of Believers

“When troubles arise in the church we should not go for help to lawyers not of our faith. God does not desire us to open church difficulties before those who do not fear Him. …

“These men cast aside the counsel God has given, and do the very things He has bidden them not to do. They show that they have chosen the world as their judge, and in heaven their names are registered as one with unbelievers. Christ is crucified afresh, and put to open shame. Let these men know that God does not hear their prayers. They insult His holy name, and He will leave them to the buffetings of Satan until they shall see their folly and seek the Lord by confession of their sin.” Selected Messages, Book 3, 299.

The seriousness of the brazen disobedience in this matter cannot be overstated. Even though it is not explicitly stated that the candlestick will be removed for the sin of suing a brother in court, it is obvious that if God will not hear the prayers of the guilty party, it means that the candlestick has been explicitly removed – Jesus has left the apostates to their wicked devices. The guilt of the SDA church in this matter is well documented in the public records.

More exhibits can be provided to demonstrate the total refutation of light by our leaders. The foregoing are the most egregious examples that come to mind. Clearly, if God does not call the church to account now, He will have to apologize to the ancient church for the holocaust of A.D. 70, which He was forced to bring upon their stubborn heads.

The question that begs to be answered now is, How far does modern Israel go in repeating the history of ancient Israel? Will she reverse course, step back from the brink of the precipice, and turn whole heartedly back to God again? Most unfortunately, prophecy reveals that she will careen off the cliff into rejecting Jesus too—this time in the Person of the Holy Spirit. Note the decimation of the church that has rejected the Holy Spirit manifesting in the latter rain:

“There is to be in the [Seventh-day Adventist] churches a wonderful manifestation of the power of God, but it will not move upon those who have not humbled themselves before the Lord, and opened the door of the heart by confession and repentance. In the manifestation of that power which lightens the earth with the glory of God, they will see only something which in their blindness they think dangerous, something which will arouse their fears, and they will brace themselves to resist it. Because the Lord does not work according to their expectations and ideal, they will oppose the work. ‘Why,’ they say, ‘should we not know the Spirit of God, when we have been in the work so many years?’ ” Maranatha, 219.

“In the last vision given me, I was shown the startling fact that but a small portion of those who now profess the truth will be sanctified by it and be saved. Many will get above the simplicity of the work. They will conform to the world, cherish idols, and become spiritually dead. The humble, self-sacrificing followers of Jesus will pass on to perfection, leaving behind the indifferent and lovers of the world.” Testimonies, vol. 1, 608, 609.

In view of this sobering fact, how does God expect His faithful people to relate to the emergency? Are we to glue ourselves to the church pew, comforting ourselves with the hope that God will fix matters at the headquarters in His own time and way? Or are we to take a more proactive stance?

What about the quote, so often cited, that the Church will go through to glory? Let us look at it closely:

“Satan will work his miracles to deceive; he will set up his power as supreme. The church may appear as about to fall, but it does not fall. It remains, while the sinners in Zion will be sifted out—the chaff separated from the precious wheat. This is a terrible ordeal, but nevertheless it must take place. None but those who have been overcoming by the blood of the Lamb and the word of their testimony will be found with the loyal and true, without spot or stain of sin, without guile in their mouths. … The remnant that purify their souls by obeying the truth gather strength from the trying process, exhibiting the beauty of holiness amid the surrounding apostasy.” Maranatha, 203.

Here are the points established by this quote:

  1. The Sunday laws of Satan plunge the SDA Church into an existential crisis.
  2. The storm of persecution causes “the chaff” (“sinners in Zion”) to be blown away.
  3. The crisis is so severe – so much chaff is blown away – that the church appears to be in a state of imminent collapse.
  4. Nevertheless, because “the precious wheat” “remains,” the church survives.
  5. The “wheat” are designated as “the remnant,”  a miniscule fraction of the original church.
  6. They are “without spot or stain of sin, without guile in their mouths.”
  7. This description confirms them to be none other than the 144,000 sealed saints of Revelation 7.
  8. God recognizes them as His “church.”
  9. Therefore, the great majority – the chaff – their profession notwithstanding, were never really a part of God’s church at all! They were plants and agents of Satan!
  10. The tiny, post-crisis remnant “church,” shorn of all earthly trappings of greatness, bears almost no resemblance to the imposing precrisis entity. Yet, this is the “church” that “does not fall,” giving the lie to the notion that the present-day gargantuan SDA organization will go through unscathed.

Clearly, from the evidence presented here, the “chaff” are in control of the SDA Church. Far outnumbering “the wheat,” they wield immense power, keeping to themselves the name and assets of the church. Thus, it is entirely within reason that in the time of the great crisis, the compromising majority, still sitting in the pews and going through the motions of religion, are thought to be the “wheat,” while the troublesome “remnant,” despised and driven away, will seem to be the “chaff” which is blown away. The external appearance of the church, therefore, will be very misleading.

This inspired scenario proves that we are right now at that point corresponding to the time in ancient Israel when God was leading a movement apart from the control of the Sanhedrin. Deeply ensconced in incorrigible apostasy, the ancient Church was about to step off the cliff in crucifying Jesus. And God was proactively preparing a small band of faithful, independent souls to meet the emergency. And so it was that the Jewish church appeared to “fall” in A.D. 70, but it “remained” in the form of the 120 Jewish disciples in the upper room (and their converts) under the direction and control of the Holy Spirit. Today Jesus is preparing 144,000 saints for a similar crisis in the Adventist Church. Answerable directly to God alone, independent of the apostate organization, they are the faithful “fishermen and peasants,” vilified and unqualified in the eyes of men, who carry the torch of truth (the candlestick) through to the end. It is because of them that the “church” does not fall.

May we “strive with all the power that God has given us to be among the hundred and forty-four thousand.” Maranatha, 241.

Amen!

Dr. Pandit is a retired cardiologist living in Arkansas with his wife Dorothy. He is proud to call himself a historic Seventh-day Adventist. He, with his wife, is involved in backing two self-supporting ministries in India 1) Medical Missionary Training and Lifestyle Center in South India and 2) A printing ministry in Western India. They are also founding members of a “home church” located in Hot Springs, AR. He can be contacted via his email address: sudor777@gmail.com, or phone: 870-356-4768.

No Time to Celebrate

No time to celebrateby Marshall J. Grosboll

The Seventh-day Adventist church is God’s true and remnant movement of Bible prophecy. As such, it is the special target of the enemy of truth and righteousness. God thus calls for His watchman to maintain a constant vigil over His purchased property. When danger is perceived within the church it is the duty of every true and faithful Seventh-day Adventist to put personal interests and ecclesiastical positions behind him, and give the warning message necessary to protect the church, however unpopular that warning may be.

“As they [God’s people] assimilate their character to the divine Pattern, men will not guard their own personal dignity. With jealous, sleepless, loving, devoted interest, they will guard the sacred interest of the church from the evil which threatens to dim and cloud the glory that God intends shall shine forth through her.” — Testimonies to Ministers, page 406.

As members of His church, God holds us each responsible for its health and well- being. “If God abhors one sin above another, of which His people are guilty, it is doing nothing in case of an emergency. Indifference and neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst type of hostility against God.” —Testimonies, vol. 3, page 281.

Many consider that our church is today facing the worst danger and crisis it has ever faced with the arrival of the celebration movement. The celebration movement is a new attempt, within the church, to receive the Holy Spirit. The meteoric rise of this new passion within the church is too phenomenal to be taken lightly. It is indeed either the manifestation of the true Holy Spirit or the false, counterfeit manifestation of the Spirit. If it is the true outpouring of the Holy Spirit, it would be disastrous to reject it. But if it is the counterfeit working of satanic agencies, it would be equally disastrous to receive it, or even to remain neutral about it. In this situation, as between Christ and Barabas, there is no neutral ground. The celebration movement is not pail good and part bad, it is one or the other. There is no accord between Christ and Belial, or between Christ’s spirit and Satan’s. To remain neutral is as bad, or even worse, than to decide the wrong way!

“Christ’s followers have no right to stand on the ground of neutrality. There is more hope of an open enemy than of one who is neutral.” — Review and Herald, Feb. 25, 1902.

The Timing of the Movement

In considering this movement, let us analyze two aspects: The timing of the movement and the philosophy behind it.

The Bible says, “There is a . . . time for every purpose under heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck what is planted; a time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up; a time to weep, and a time to laugh” (Eccl. 3: 14, texts from the NKJV).

To do a good thing at a wrong time can be the worst of evils. To prune a tree at the wrong time can kill it. To prune it at the right time can save it. To be happy when someone dies, or to be sad when someone is healed, is the wrong timing. To worship God is a duty, but to worship Him on Sunday instead of Sabbath is rebellion. “It is the very essence of all right faith to do the right thing at the right time.” —Testimonies, vol. 6, page 24. In fact, doing a good thing at the wrong time is often worse than open evil — it is more deceptive. Worshipping on Sunday instead of Sabbath deceives many people who would not be deceived by Atheism.

One of the greatest concerns about the celebration movement is the timing. As we shall see, the Lord says that for us to celebrate at the wrong time, when we should be mourning for our own sins and for the sins of Israel, becomes an unpardonable sin!

In the Old Testament Day of Atonement, that prefigured our day just before the second coming of Jesus, those who celebrated instead of afflicting their souls were “cut off’ from Israel (Leviticus 23: 29). To us, living during the antitypical Day of Atonement, the Lord says: “Draw near to God and He will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners; and purify your hearts, you double- minded. Lament and mourn and weep! Let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to gloom. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and He will lift you up” (James 4: 8- 10).

It is no time to celebrate when a church is in apostasy. Those who make celebration the focal point of worship during this time of crisis will not receive the seal of God. In speaking of the time just before the close of probation, the Bible says: “Now the glory of the God of Israel had gone up from the cherub [which were on the ark], where it had been [since 1844], to the threshold of the temple. And He called to the man with the linen, who had the writer’s inkhorn at his side; and the Lord said to him, ‘Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and put a mark on the foreheads of the men who sigh and cry over all the abominations that are done within it. ‘ To the others He said in my hearing, ‘Go after him through the city and kill; do not let your eye spare, nor have any pity’ “ (Ezekiel 9: 3- 5).

“The time will soon come when the prophecy of Ezekiel 9 will be fulfilled; that prophecy should be carefully studied, for it will be fulfilled to the very letter.”— Ellen G. White 1888 Materials, p. 1303.

After quoting the above verses from Ezekiel 9, Ellen White comments:

“These sighing, crying ones had been holding forth the words of life; they had reproved, counseled, and entreated. Some who had been dishonoring God repented and humbled their hearts before Him. But the glory of the Lord had departed from Israel; although many still continued the forms of religion, His power and presence were lacking.

“In the time when His wrath shall go forth in judgments, these humble, devoted followers of Christ will be distinguished from the rest of the world by their soul anguish, which is expressed in lamentation and weeping, reproofs and warnings. While others try to throw a cloak over the existing evil, and excuse the great wickedness everywhere prevalent, those who have a zeal for God’s honor and a love for souls will not hold their peace to obtain favor of any. Their righteous souls are vexed day by day with the unholy works and conversation of the unrighteous. They are powerless to stop the rushing torrent of iniquity, and hence they are filled with grief and alarm. They mourn before God to see religion despised in the very homes of those who have had great light. They lament and afflict their souls because pride, avarice, selfishness, and deception of almost every kind are in the church. The Spirit of God, which prompts to reproof, is trampled underfoot, while the servants of Satan triumph. God is dishonored, the truth made of none effect.

“The class who do not feel grieved over their own spiritual declension, nor mourn over the sins of others, will be left without the seal of God.” Testimonies, vol. 5, pages 210, 211. What God is calling for today is the Straight Testimony, such as John the Baptist gave. “In this fearful time, just before Christ is to come the second time, God’s faithful preachers will have to bear a still more pointed testimony than was borne by John the Baptist. A responsible, important work is before them; and those who speak smooth things, God will not acknowledge as His shepherds. A fearful woe is upon them.” — Testimonies, vol. 1, page 322.

This calls for serious contemplation and heartfelt repentance, rather than jubilation and gaiety.

Isaiah Saw the Celebration Movement

In a striking prophecy of our day, when God is calling for heartfelt and tearful repentance because of the prevailing apostasy within the church, Isaiah predicted that some would be celebrating instead of repenting, and that this rebellion would constitute an unpardonable sin. Isaiah 21 and 22 are Old Testament parallels of Revelation. In repeating the second angel’s message, it says: “Babylon is fallen, is fallen” (Isaiah 21: 9). This must be referring to spiritual Babylon, in a primary sense, for it refers to the second fall of Babylon. The Babylon of Nebuchadnezzar’s time fell but once, whereas the second fall refers to the fall of spiritual Babylon in Revelation.

While Isaiah 21 deals with spiritual Babylon, chapter 22 deals with spiritual Israel. It is “The burden against the Valley of Vision” (verse 1). A “valley” in prophecy often refers to people, whereas a mountain refers to worship, religion, God or gods. The Hebrew uses a word meaning a “wide valley” when referring to the wicked, but a word meaning a “narrow valley” when referring to the righteous. (See, for example Isaiah 2: 2; Joel 3: 14; Psalm 121: 1; Isaiah 22: 1.) Possibly this symbolism comes from Sinai, where God spoke from the “mountain” to the people who were in the “valley” below. Here God has a message to the Valley of Vision, or the people of prophecy. In Revelation the people of prophecy, who keep the commandments, refers to God’s remnant church (Revelation 12: 17; 19: 10). This identification of the object of chapter 22 is further confirmed in verse 4, where the church is called the “daughter” of “my people.” In Isaiah’s day, God called Israel “My people” (Isaiah 51: 16), whereas spiritual Israel is here identified as the “daughter” of My people.

Isaiah 22 describes the condition of God’s people in the last days. It describes them as a “tumultuous city, a joyous city.” Yet their members are slain, though they “are not slain with the sword, nor dead in battle” (verse 2).

Today, as this prophecy predicted, our members are slain. Our young people are leaving the church in mass. Attendance figures in North America are generally on the decline. Most churches have less than half their membership even occasionally attending services. Even counting babies and visitors, most churches do well to have half as many in church as are on the books. Our people are slain, though not in martyrdom or from warfare with the enemy, but from apostasy. God’s power has seemingly been removed from the church and we are trying to replace that power with good public relations, exciting music, celebration worship, and colorful programs. Thus, while God’s people are “slain,” though not “in battle,” they are “a tumultuous city, a joyous city.” In order to secure themselves in the midst of these conditions, the leaders bind themselves together in a confederacy to support one another (verse 3). God and His people lament this condition within the church. He says: “I will weep bitterly; do not labor to comfort me because of the plundering of the daughter of my people. For it is a day of trouble and treading down and perplexity by the Lord God of hosts in the Valley of Vision” (verses 4, 5). God can no longer protect His people because of their spiritual condition. “He removed the protection of Judah. You looked in that day to the armor of the House of the Forest; you also saw the damage to the city of David, that it was great” (verses 8, 9).

God’s people do everything to cover up their losses and to turn them around — except for one thing. They look to the institutions of man’s accomplishments, they number the homes of Jerusalem, they sacrifice some institutions to preserve others, they consolidate, they expertly plan for the future — but they do not seek the wisdom of the One who established the church in the beginning through the Spirit of Prophecy. (See verses 8- 11.)

“In that day the Lord God of hosts called for weeping and for mourning, for baldness and for girding with sackcloth” (verse 12). “But instead,” what does He find in the church? He finds “joy and gladness, slaying oxen and killing sheep, eating meat and drinking wine” (verse 13).

And what is the result of this apostasy of celebrating when the Lord calls for deep repentance? “Then it was revealed in my hearing by the Lord of hosts, ‘Surely for this iniquity there will be no atonement for you, even to your death, ‘ says the Lord God of hosts” (verse 14)! As in Ezekiel 9 and Leviticus 23, this rebellion constitutes a sin that cannot be pardoned. Probation is soon to close, and those who are celebrating when the Lord is calling for sorrow for sin will find themselves without a mediator. “Satan invents unnumbered schemes to occupy our minds” — his goal is to keep us joyfully celebrating within the church, until probation’s door is forever closed and we are unprepared (Great Controversy, page 488). That day is fast approaching.

New Theology for a New Movement

The celebration movement has its roots in the New Theology teachings that Desmond Ford and others brought into the church starting in the 1950s. The New Theology taught that, since Jesus had a different human nature than we do, we cannot be like He was. We can never hope to overcome sin and live a life like Jesus lived. “He is our substitute,” it was said, “not our example.”

The gospel, according to the New Theology, was the good news of justification. Sanctification was not a part of the gospel. Jesus forgives our sins without anything being done on our part except to accept Him as our Saviour. We will continue to sin until Jesus comes, but we will still be saved because of Jesus’ righteousness. He accepts us just as we are. This was called “good news.”

I remember a prominent Sabbath morning speaker at a conference campmeeting I was helping with a few years ago. He spoke about the joy of Sabbath- keeping. Sabbath is supposed to be a day of joy, but this joy is supposed to come from having victory over sin, not because God permits us to continue in sin. But this speaker proclaimed that the Sabbath is to be a day of joy because God accepts us in sin, just the way we are. He affirmed that we are to rejoice and be happy whether we have character defects or not — not because God can help us to overcome these defects, but because God happily accepts us while we continue to sin.

The speaker gave examples from the Bible to prove his point. He said that Moses threw down the Ten Commandments from the mountain in a fit of anger, yet the Lord accepted Him, without a word of reproof, and brought him back up into the mountain to talk with him face to face, even though Moses was continuing to manifest anger. The speaker went on to say that if the Lord accepted Moses — even with his uncontrolled temper, He will accept you if you have a temper problem too. That is why the Sabbath is to be a joyful day! Thus, he taught, we are to make Sabbath a day of rejoicing without worrying about our sins.

Either the speaker had not read the Spirit of Prophecy account of this story or he did not believe what it says, for there we are assured that when “he threw down the tables of stone and broke them. . . Moses did not sin . . . . He was wroth for God, jealous for His glory.” — Early Writings, page 163. But the speaker used this story to falsely assure his hearers that sin is inconsequential — God doesn’t care!

The speaker used other illustrations. He said that Paul boastfully claimed to have kept the law. Since those who believe in the New Theology do not believe that anyone can keep the law, this statement of Paul’s is not believed. He claimed that Paul was just manifesting boastful self-righteousness, but God accepted him too. Thus, God even accepts the self- righteous and boastful, according to this speaker. Again the thought was conveyed — forget about your shortcomings, simply rejoice in the goodness of the Lord.

I was shocked and distressed over this perverted theology that taught people to rejoice in their sins, but was even more surprised to hear the comments of delight in the message by those attending.

This is superficial Christianity. “If they were really one with Christ, if His Spirit were dwelling in them, they would see the sinfulness of sin. Not only would they confess; but they would forsake that which God abhors.” — Youth Instructor, March 5, 1903. “He who is truly penitent does not forget his past sins, and grow careless about them as soon as he has obtained forgiveness. On the contrary, the clearer the evidence he has of divine favor, the more he sees to regret in his past life of sin. He loathes, abhors, and condemns himself, and is more and more astonished that he should have continued in rebellion so long. He renews his repentance toward God, while he grasps more decidedly the hand of Jesus Christ, and finds that repentance is a daily, continued exercise, lasting until mortality is swallowed up of life. He who thus repents, appreciates the righteousness of Christ as above silver and gold, above every earthly tie and affection.” — Signs of the Times, Nov. 26, 1894

“He who is truly repentant, he who is regenerated, hates sin. All manner of selfishness is distressing to him. Indifference to God on the part of those around him grieves him. He is not led to exalt self in the performance of his duty, but abhors self. ‘I abhor myself is the language of the godly of all ages, who have had a clear view of the purity and holiness of Christ.” — Signs of the Times, Aug. 13, 1894.

“When the church are united, they will have strength and power; but when part of them are united to the world, and many are given to covetousness, which God abhors, He can do but little for them. Unbelief and sin shut them away from God.” —Testimonies, vol. 2, page 149.

It is the spirit of Satan that leads to indifference to sin. And it is this indifference and blindness to sin, which has been steadily growing in the church since the New Theology was introduced, that has laid the foundation for the celebration movement. No one who truly understands the significance of sin and the Laodicean apostasy within the church today is going to join a celebration movement — rather they are going to become a part of the movement calling for contrition and repentance for sin.

The Movement Finds a Home

The New Theology laid the foundation for the acceptance of the celebration movement within the church, but what was the catalyst that caused it to materialize?

For years there has been a growing interest in statistical growth, or “numbers,” within the organization. There was the “1000 days of Reaping” program followed by “Harvest 90.” These programs encouraged the baptizing of large numbers of people throughout the world. Literally millions joined the church, often without adequate preparation.

In Inter and South America and the third world countries, dramatic growth was witnessed. In contrast to the explosive Adventist growth in these countries, the church in North America has grown at a snail’s pace. Once the mainstay of the Adventist denomination, North America is becoming more and more insignificant compared to the other divisions. It no longer dominates the world field during the General Conference session.

In my state of Kansas, there were 100 churches around the turn of the century. Today Kansas has nearly a million more inhabitants, but the Adventist church has grown downward from 100 churches to 56! In church after church of thriving communities, I have asked how their church today compares to what it was thirty years ago — in nearly every instance there are fewer in attendance today. Somehow the power of the gospel has, for the most part, left the Adventist movement in the Western Countries. Though there are local exceptions, church schools, academies, pathfinders, evangelism, prayer meetings and in-gathering are all floundering compared to the advances made in prior years. Seemingly every program that has promised revival has failed.

In short, the condition of the church in North America, as well as in Europe and Australia, has become an embarrassment.

For years, in an attempt to turn things around, we have been inviting speakers from evangelical, non- Adventist churches and seminaries to speak to our ministers and share with them how we can grow like other churches. We have copied their programs, such as their New Testament Witnessing concepts, thinking that what works for them will work for us too, but it hasn’t. The “Caring Church” concept was one such program that was primarily a disappointment. The “Lab 1” and “Lab 2” programs for conflict management have not produced the results hoped for either. Nor has Management By Objectives brought about the miracles hoped for in administration. As was predicted in Isaiah 22, we have looked in every direction for every solution to our problems, but we have not looked to the Maker of the church — to the One who fashioned it long ago (Isaiah 22: 11). Isaiah says, in verse 13, that the next solution sought would be one of celebration!

With each failure, the desire for a program that works has grown more intense. We have developed a great desire for the Holy Spirit to come and give us “numbers” in the developed countries as we have heard about in the other countries. And since we have already reached outside of our church for the expertise of the Sunday- keeping churches, we have now looked to those Sunday- keeping churches that supposedly have the manifestations of the Holy Spirit — that is, the Pentecostal churches — to make up for what we have not found in the evangelical churches.

Several of our ministers have gone to the Pentecostal churches to learn the secret of their power. In years past there was no confusion as to the source of their power — we always believed that it was a counterfeit manifestation of the Holy Spirit. We tested all manifestations of the Holy Spirit with such verses as Isaiah 8: 20. We believed that the Pentecostal power was spiritualistic, and that it would help to unite apostate Protestantism and Catholicism together, and that under this three- fold power America would “follow in the steps of Rome in trampling on the rights of conscience.” — Great Controversy, page 588.

Generally, in our past history, we would not consider renting a Pentecostal church for our own services, or renting out our facilities for a Pentecostal service. We loved the Pentecostal people dearly, but believed that the movement was a form of spiritualism. We could not worship in the same room where spiritualism reigned.

The result of this new endeavor to revitalize our church through the introduction of Pentecostalism is the celebration movement. It is of no small significance that the two most heralded celebration churches, the flag- ship churches of Portland, Oregon and Colton, California, are both conducted in Pentecostal churches.

How surprised I was to hear a sermon from a minister in one of our largest conferences, in a revival meeting that had been promoted with a full back- page color advertisement in the Union paper, say that his best friend was a Pentecostal minister. He shared how the Holy Spirit is being manifested in churches today, and is now even coming into some Adventist churches as well. But he said that most Adventists are so afraid of the Holy Spirit that if it should come, they would flee from the room. The conference president and other conference leaders heartily endorsed his speech. His purpose was to start a new celebration church in their conference.

Many of the Adventist celebration books and materials are simply re- writes from straight Pentecostal books and materials. And the whole order of service in these churches is Pentecostal in style. In preparation for this article, I visited one church. I had heard the reports from others, and am not the one to visit questionable places just to see for myself. But I thought maybe the reports had been exaggerated. I was pleasantly surprised in the foyer at the conservative attire of the greeters — no jewelry or frivolous dress (though I soon found that other leaders in the church were not similarly attired). But inside I was in for a shock. A musical drama was in process, with the lights off and spot lights on the “actors.” Following was music by the band and lead singers from up front. The music had the definite beat of rock music. When the pastor called people to come up for prayer, hundreds went forward. There was the laying on of hands by elders while the pastor and his wife prayed, and many others waving there hands back and forth in a Pentecostal manner. Throughout the service there was clapping, joking, laughter, and a happy feeling. At the conclusion the band and lead singers let loose with the loudest music of the day, with a beat that was becoming harder all the time. The lead singers clapped their hands and swayed back and forth.

Those attending appeared to be an interesting amalgamation — everything was acceptable. Many think that this is wonderful. I, too, enjoy seeing people who represent a melange of philosophy and dress in a church if the people are non- Adventists looking for truth, but that was not the case in this church. While God accepts each one where they are initially when they first find the Lord, He expects practical, spiritual growth to ensue from that point on. The road to heaven is not the broad road that includes every brand of Christian practice and life- style, it is the narrow road that Jesus walked.

I wondered what Jesus would have said if He had attended. I am sure He would have called the service sacrilegious. I will not go back, for I do not believe the Lord could protect me from the evil influences that there prevailed. Is that too old- fashioned; too far fetched? Haven’t we always told our members not to attend spiritualistic meetings and pentecostal services because the Lord could not protect us in such places?

Celebration Spreads

Ellen White says that “the final movements will be rapid ones” — Testimonies, vol. 9, page 11. We have seen the rapidity with which Eastern Europe has turned from Communism to the Pope. But nowhere have final events moved faster than they have in the celebration movement. Who even heard of a celebration church two years ago? But today it is world- wide. Pastors from all over America have been trained in the celebration concepts. Pastors from Australia and New Zealand, on the way to the General Conference, have stopped off and been trained in the celebration concepts. Celebration churches are springing up everywhere, as though empowered by some special force.

Twice before Satan has tried to bring this kind of spiritualistic experience into the church — after the disappointment of 1844 and again after the turn of the century. In both cases it was supposedly the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and was associated with music, drums, and the swaying of the people. Ellen White predicted that this phenomena would again come into the church.

“The things you have described as taking place in Indiana, the Lord has shown me would take place just before the close of probation. Every uncouth thing will be demonstrated. There will be shouting, with drums, music, and dancing. The senses of rational beings will become so confused that they cannot be trusted to make right decisions. And this is called the moving of the Holy Spirit.” — Selected Messages, vol. 2, page 36.

The Lord here said that this would take place “just before the close of probation”! Isaiah 22 says there would be no atonement made for those who join in, for probation will close. Surely, we are seeing the final events of history being enacted! This is no time to be a sleeping Christian, but as Paul said, “knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep” (Romans 13: 11).

“But,” someone may say, “Our church is becoming a celebration church and we don’t see all the extremes mentioned above manifested in our church. Our church is just incorporating the good parts of the celebration movement.” But let us consider the source. Eve found it impossible to separate the good from the bad when she partook of the tree of knowledge of good and evil.

Let us consider one other thing: The two flagship celebration churches were started as celebration churches. It is impossible to change an existing, traditional church into a full- fledged celebration church immediately. There must be a conditioning process. Many times I have heard conference presidents counsel us ministers not to go too fast with the people. As in every other area of life, change comes one step at a time.

A person doesn’t become an alcoholic overnight. At first it appears that alcohol is quite a pleasant entertainment. The one who drinks doesn’t consider that he will ever go to the “excesses” of the alcoholic. But one must look at the alcoholic to see where alcohol consumption ultimately leads. And so, if one wants to see the end result of the celebration movement, he must see the character of the churches that have been started as celebration churches, without the baggage of traditional Adventists in the congregation to slow the process up. The pastor of the Colton, California celebration church found that he could not introduce all of his ideas in the Azure Hills Seventh- day Adventist church, because too many of the member objected to his ideas, as they should have done. Therefore, pastors who introduce the celebration concept into established churches must progress slowly, step by step — but the end result, though it will take a little longer to achieve will be the same as the full- fledged celebration churches. Thus, even the first vestiges of celebration must be vigorously opposed in every congregation. Once a church becomes a celebration church, it is the duty of every true and faithful Seventh- day Adventist to leave that apostate congregation.

Time to Speak Up

Today it is time for every true and faithful Seventh- day Adventist to raise his voice against this apostate movement within the church. This will bring persecution.

“It needs something besides theory to reach hearts now. It needs the stirring testimony to alarm and arouse; that will stir the enemy’s subjects, and then honest souls will be led to decide for truth. There has been and still is with some a disposition to have everything move on very smoothly. They see no necessity of [a] straight testimony.

“Sins exist in the church that God hates, but they are scarcely touched for fear of making enemies. Opposition has risen in the church to the plain testimony. Some will not bear it. They wish smooth things spoken unto them. If the wrongs of individuals are touched, they complain of severity, and sympathize with those in the wrong. As Ahab inquired of Elijah, ‘Art thou he that troubleth Israel? ‘ they are ready to look with suspicion and doubt upon those who bear the plain testimony, and like Ahab overlook the wrong which made it necessary for reproof and rebuke. . . . Just as long as God has a church, he will have those who will cry aloud and spare not. . . whether men will hear or forbear. I saw that individuals would rise up against the plain testimonies.” — Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, pages 283, 284.

Already persecution has arisen against those who speak out against the celebration movement. At least one has been disfellowshipped for this, and undoubtedly other disfellowshippings will follow.

When persecution arose in Battle Creek against the straight testimony, Ellen White wrote to the leaders of the church and recalled how she and others had been persecuted in their previous denominational churches and for this reason had to leave, and to call others out of these churches too. Then, in referring to our own church, she said: “We hoped that there would not be the necessity for another coming out.” — Ellen G. White 1888 Materials, page 357. But Ellen White found that she did have to call people out of the Battle Creek church, and to tell students not to attend school there. We, too, must recognize that we must not attend a place where God’s Spirit has left. The Seventh- day Adventist movement is going through, but, as in Ellen White’s day, there is proving to be a need for a calling out from certain congregations and institutions within the church.

In commenting on Adventists who had not accepted all the truth, the messenger to the remnant said: “I was shown the necessity of those who believe that we are having the last message of mercy, being separate from those who are daily imbibing new errors. I saw that neither young nor old should attend their meetings; for it is wrong to thus encourage them while they teach error that is a deadly poison to the soul and teach for doctrines the commandments of men. The influence of such gatherings is not good. If God has delivered us from such darkness and error, we should stand fast in the liberty wherewith He has set us free and rejoice in the truth. God is displeased with us when we go to listen to error, without being obliged to go; for unless He sends us to those meetings where error is forced home to the people by the power of the will, He will not keep us. The angels cease their watchful care over us, and we are left to the buffetings of the enemy, to be darkened and weakened by him and the power of his evil angels; and the light around us becomes contaminated with the darkness.

“I saw that we have no time to throw away in listening to fables. Our minds should not be thus diverted, but should be occupied with the present truth, and seeking wisdom that we may obtain a more thorough knowledge of our position, that with meekness we may be able to give a reason of our hope from the Scriptures. While false doctrines and dangerous errors are pressed upon the mind, it cannot be dwelling upon the truth which is to fit and prepare the house of Israel to stand in the day of the Lord.” — Early Writings, pages 124, 125.

Conclusion

Ellen White was shown the final struggle of God’s remnant people: “I saw some, with strong faith and agonizing cries, pleading with God. Their countenances were pale and marked with deep anxiety, expressive of their internal struggle. Firmness and great earnestness was expressed in their countenances; large drops of perspiration fell from their foreheads.

“Evil angels crowded around, pressing darkness upon them to shut out Jesus from their view. As the praying ones continued their earnest cries, at times a ray of light from Jesus came to them, to encourage their hearts and light up their countenances. Some, I saw, did not participate in this work of agonizing and pleading. They seemed indifferent and careless. They were not resisting the darkness around them, and it shut them in like a thick cloud. The angels of God left these and went to the aid of the earnest, praying ones. I saw angels of God hasten to the assistance of all who were struggling with all their power to resist the evil angels and trying to help themselves by calling upon God with perseverance.” — Early Writings, pages 269, 270.

Some day soon, before Jesus comes, each Christian must go through a Gethsemane experience. Those who have developed a shallow experience based upon emotionalism will not go through this time. But those who have learned to stand for truth and principle now, will be helped to stand true then.

There is coming a true outpouring of the Holy Spirit. But it will not be accompanied by worldly music, clapping of hands, lightness and triviality, and fanaticism — it will rather lead to deep contrition of soul. But before the genuine outpouring of the Holy Spirit will come a counterfeit movement, just as before the second coming of Christ will come a counterfeit second coming. I would rather choose to wait for the genuine Holy Spirit, and the genuine second coming.

Someday there will be a genuine celebration church. There will be the most beautiful, holy music in this church. There will be rejoicing and jubilee. There will be no sin within this church, and no tempter to destroy, for it will be the celebration of the redeemed of all the ages celebrating around the throne. Just as I can wait for the true Holy Spirit, and the true second coming, so I can wait for the true celebration church.

“And it will be said in that day: ‘Behold, this is our God; we have waited for Him, and He will save us. This is the Lord; we have waited for Him; we will be glad and rejoice in His salvation” (Isaiah 25: 9).

Order copies of this booklet in our bookstore.

The Tithe Problem, Part II

by Ralph Larson

The editors of the Adventist Review have taken notice of the questions about tithe that are troubling an increasing number of our church members and have published in their edition of September 7, 1991, a supplement in the form of an inserted tract dealing with the subject.

This development is most welcome. It is hoped that the Review editors will continue this enlightened policy, and that they will apply it to the other areas of concern that are as troubling to our members as the tithe question, if not more troubling.

We suggest that every church member who has a sincere desire to know and to do God’s will, will do well to save this special insert and compare it with the article on tithe in the September issue of Our Firm Foundation, as well as with this article.

We are confident that only good can come from such a comparison. let every church member examine the evidence and draw his or her own conclusions. Here the matter must ultimately rest, as was recognized by Ellen White in a thought- provoking statement on page 616 of The Desire of Ages:

“The Jewish rulers recognized the obligation of tithing, and this was right; but they did not leave the people to carry out their own convictions of duty.”

It is to be hoped that all concerned parties will remember that church members cannot be forced to pay tithe. They must act out their own convictions in the matter, and these convictions will grow out of their satisfaction with the scriptural and the Spirit of Prophecy evidences placed before them. Scoldings and threatenings will not suffice, and church discipline on this point is specifically forbidden in the church Manual. See page 240 in the 1971 edition and page 165 in the 1986 edition

We, therefore, welcome the decision of the Review editors to bring the subject out into the open, so that church members may be provided with the opportunity to weigh evidence, evaluate arguments, and develop their own convictions of duty.

Basic Principles Before considering the specifics of the situation, let us identify some landmarks and fixed boundaries, basic principles that must apply to any and all of the details. The most important and relevant truth that must be kept in mind throughout all of our study is:

“It should be remembered that the promises and threatenings of God are alike conditional.” – Selected Messages, book 1,67

The experience of the Israelites, who were once the chosen people of God but were eventually rejected as a people by God, testifies eloquently to the truth of this statement. The opinion that prevailed among the Jews of Christ’s time was that regardless of how far they departed from the express will of God, they nevertheless retained their position as the chosen people of God, with all of the rights and privileges pertaining thereto. This conviction was in spite of such clear warnings as had been given in Leviticus 26, Deuteronomy 28, Jeremiah 18, and elsewhere.

Here is the crux of the matter. The questions that we must consider are these: Could it be possible that the error of the Jews might have, to some degree, crept into our thinking? Are we beginning to believe that we are unconditionally the true church of God? Are we presuming that the rights and privileges of a true and faithful church are ours unconditionally? That the promises of God are without condition?

Are we supposing that the rights and privileges of a true and faithful ministry can be claimed by our ministry unconditionally? That they have a right to collect tithe regardless of what they teach and do?

Doubtless we would find these questions easier to answer if they were expressed in terms of totality— total rejection of all of the will of God by all of the ministers of our church. We would quickly agree that such is not the case. But does that resolve our problem? Was there not always a faithful remnant in Israel? And do we know of any church today that rejects all of God’s truth? Yet, God rejected Israel, and we know God is calling His people out of the popular churches of our time.

Is it not apparent that there is a line beyond which infidelity may not pass with impunity? A line beyond which neither a church nor a ministry can claim for itself the rights and privileges that God has guaranteed to a faithful church and to a faithful ministry? We must remember the promises and the threatenings of God are alike conditional.

We come now to the question, How should we see our church and its ministry today? The Review tract writer suggests that there is a significant difference between saying there is apostasy in a church and saying a church, speaking of the entire body of believers, is in apostasy. This point is well taken. I know of only one independent ministry leader who has a conviction that the church is in apostasy. The rest would say, like the Review tract writer, that there is apostasy in the church, although they would not minimize it as he does.

I have received a letter from a Union Conference president which opens with this sentence: “I despair with you over the fact that so many of our church members are finding it necessary to turn to independent ministries in order to hear basic Adventist teaching.” And I would recommend for thoughtful study the Annual Council 1973/ 1974 Appeals for reform as published in Our Firm Foundation in December 1991.

The precise point in increasing apostasy at which it would be appropriate to stop saying there is apostasy in the church and start saying the church is in apostasy is a difficult problem. It is doubtful that human wisdom is sufficient for the question. Probably it would be best to let that point be defined by the Divine Mind that never errs in judgment.

But the questions that are coming to me from all across the country are from church members who are facing an immediate, practical problem. They are being forced to recognize that some of the doctrines being presented in their particular churches are very different from the doctrines they were taught when they joined the church or when they attended Adventist schools. Many recognize the strange doctrines as the very errors they left behind when they withdrew from other churches in order to become Seventh- day Adventists.

These members do not wish to return to those errors, nor have them taught to their children. Many have made fruitless appeals to church pastors and administrators. These are the kind of people who are turning in despair to ministries which are teaching the unchanged Seventh- day Adventist faith. These are the kind of people who are asking the urgent question, “Does God require me to pay tithe to support the teaching of false doctrines? Would it be wrong to pay tithe to a ministry that teaches the faith that I believe?”

I sympathize with them, although I do not presently share their problem. The church where I hold membership is served by a pastor who preaches the historic Seventh- day Adventist message, and so I am comfortable paying tithe and offerings to this church. If this pastor were transferred and a Calvinistic Adventist pastor put into his place, I do not know what I would do. I hope that I never have to face the problem. But others are facing the problem.

These questions are what caused me to do the research that was reported in Our Firm Foundation, September 1991. I set forth my conclusion in this statement:

“In neither Ellen White’s writings nor her practice was there anything to support the view that all tithe, regardless of circumstances, must be paid through regular channels.”

The writer of the Review tract article challenges this conclusion and sets forth a series of arguments in support of the view that all tithe must be paid through the regular church channels, apparently regardless of circumstances. He sees it as the correct understanding of Ellen White’s writings on the subject.

For purposes of analysis, we will group his arguments as follows:

  1. Argument from the Scriptures
  2. Arguments from the Spirit of Prophecy
  3. Arguments regarding Document File 213
  4. Arguments based on supernatural powers
  5. Arguments ad hominem, against the man
  6. Theological questions

Argument From the Scriptures

We use “argument” in the singular form because there is only one scriptural argument presented:

“The Old Testament gives clear instruction for the return and use of the tithe. The New Testament does not elaborate further, except to endorse the necessity of tithe paying.” Page 2

Let us compare this statement with 1 Corinthians 9, in which the apostle Paul responds to questions about his credentials and his right to the financial support of the people. The general principles set forth in the first twelve verses are brought to a specific conclusion in verses 13 and 14:

“Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? And they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel.”

Verse 13 is an obvious reference to the tithing system, by which the Levites were supported. Verse 14 specifically applies the same principle to another group. And who are they? “They which preach the gospel.”

Their credentials are the gospel which they preach. And was Paul a pluralist? Was he saying that preachers of any gospel and all gospels are to be supported by the tithe? We will find the answer in Galatians 1: 8- 9:

“But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.”

Does “let him be accursed” equate with “Let him be supported by the tithe?” And notice that Paul includes even himself in the warning, saying “Though we preach any other gospel unto you….” Is he not putting the test of truth above all other tests? Is he not telling them that the true gospel is the highest of all credentials? So much so that they should refuse to listen to even Paul himself if he came back to them preaching a different gospel, a new theology? How, then, can it be argued that if a minister is a member of a certain church and carries credentials from that church, he is entitled to be supported by the tithes of God’s people regardless of what gospel he preaches?

Arguments From the Spirit of Prophecy

Unfortunately, much of the material in this area is wasted, because it does not deal with the question before us. The longest series of Spirit of Prophecy quotations presented are warnings against withholding tithe, a practice which no one is defending. All of the parties involved in the present discussion believe that tithe paying is a sacred duty. None would approve of withholding it.

Similarly, much attention is given to the Spirit of Prophecy counsels regarding the proper use of the tithe to support the ministers of the gospel, a matter concerning which there is no significant disagreement. All of the parties involved are committed to following these inspired counsels, although in his list of the proper uses of the tithe, the writer might have included this instruction: “But while some go forth to preach, He calls upon others to answer to His claims upon them for tithes and offerings with which to support the ministry, and to spread the printed truth all over the land” Testimonies, vol. 4, 472; emphasis supplied in all quotations

Emphasis in the Review tract is placed upon a caution against any person “gathering up tithes,” which I would understand to mean solicitation. I do not know of any independent ministry that solicits tithe. Tithe comes to the independent ministries voluntarily from church members who are weary of false teachings being presented in their particular churches. Most of these church members have been faithful tithe payers for many years. Their devotion and fidelity to this Bible truth is not different from their devotion and fidelity to the other truths of our faith which they cannot bear to see changed. Where truth is taught, tithe is paid. That is the bottom line.

A strong attempt is made to apply Ellen White’s warnings against withholding tithe to the payment of tithe through other than the regular church channels. Two lines of reasoning are set forth in support of this proposition.

First, it is argued that for Ellen White the expression “the Lord’s treasury” meant only church and conference treasuries. This statement is in spite of the fact that when she herself sent tithe directly to needy ministers, and not through church or conference treasuries, she wrote, “The money is not withheld from the Lord’s treasury.” (The Watson letter, quoted in Review tract, page 13.) How, then, can it be maintained that for her “the lord’s treasury” meant only church and conference treasuries?

The Review tract writer apparently anticipated this question and offered what is, to my mind’ a very unsatisfactory explanation. After having admonished us that for Ellen White “the lord’s treasury” meant always and only the church and conference treasuries, he then tells us that when Ellen White’s tithe was sent directly to needy ministers, bypassing church and conference treasuries, it was not withheld from the lord’s treasury because they were Seventhday Adventist ministers.

Readers may decide for themselves whether this attempt to walk on both sides of the street at once is persuasive. Would not this interpretation open the door for all of us to bypass church and conference treasuries and send our tithe directly to needy ministers of our choice?

The second line of reasoning advanced in support of the claim that for Ellen White “the Lord’s treasury” meant only church and conference treasuries is that for Ellen White the word “means” does not generally include tithe but is applied only to offerings. Since only this argument was new to me, I checked it out carefully, and quickly discovered that the claim does not bear up well under investigation.

I went to that marvelous invention, the “CD Rom,” as produced by the White Estate, and asked it to report whether in Ellen White’s writings the words tithe, tithes, tithing, and tenth, were ever used in connection with the word means. It promptly supplied 168 references in which these words were used in such a manner as to make it impossible to separate them from the word means, which obviously included them. In some passages tithes and offerings together are referred to as means, and in other passages tithe alone is referred to as means. For the sake of brevity, we will provide here a sampling of those statements that do not include offerings: “Every soul who is honored in being a steward of God is to carefully guard the tithe money. This is sacred means.” Manuscript Releases. vol. 1, 185

“There are a large number of names on our church books; and if all would be prompt in paying an honest tithe to the lord, which is His portion, the treasury would not lack for means.” Counsels on Stewardship, 95

“Of the means which is entrusted to man, God claims a certain portion- a tithe.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 149 “God has given special direction as to the use of the tithe. He does not design that His work shall be crippled for want of means.” Gospel Workers, 224

“Should means flow into the treasury exactly according to God’s plan- a tenth of all the increase, there would be abundance to carry forward His work.” Evangelism, 252

“And in view of this the Lord commands us, ‘Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house; ‘ that is, a surplus of means in the treasury.” Review and Herald, vol. 2, 18

“If all of our people paid a faithful tithe, there would be more means in the treasury.” Ibid., vol. 4, 507

“With an increase of numbers would have come an increase of tithe, providing means to carry the message to other places.” Pamphlet No. 67,9

“If all, both rich and poor, would bring their tithes into the storehouse, there would be a sufficient supply of means.” Testimonies, vol. 4, 475

Since Ellen White went into print 168 times with statements clearly identifying tithes as means, (sometimes using duplicate words), it is difficult to understand how the Review tract writer could have reached an opposite conclusion. And since his representation that for Ellen White the expression “the lord’s treasury” means only church and conference treasuries is not supported by either of the two evidences he offers, it collapses of its own weight. It deprives of all validity the attempt to apply Ellen White’s warnings against “withholding tithe” to those who do not withhold tithe but, rather, send it to ministers that they feel are faithful to our message. And it gives particular force to her statement:

“All the means is not to be handled by one agency or organization.” Spalding- Magan Collection, 421

Arguments Regarding Document File 213

As was stated in my article in Our Firm Foundation, September 1991, this file contains a record of the plans that were made by Willie White, Ellen White’s son and secretary; General Conference President A. 0. Daniells; Elder W. W. Prescott; and others to deal with criticisms of Ellen White that had been published by a Dr. Stewart in the year 1907. Stewart had charged Ellen White with inconsistency in that she recommended paying tithe through organizational channels, yet did not always follow her own counsel. Their proposal for dealing with the challenge was set forth in these words:

“As to the proper use of the tithe: the outline of a statement upon this subject which was agreed upon was briefly this: to give extracts from Sister White’s writings as to the tithe and its use; to show that her testimony and her own usual practice was in favor of paying the tithe into the regularly designated treasury, to be used under the counsel of the committees appointed for such purposes; to show further from her writings that when those who have charge of the expenditure of the tithe so far fail in the discharge of their duty that the regularly organized channels for the distribution of the tithe become hindrances to its proper use, then in order to carry out the divine plan that the tithe should be expended in the wisest manner for the furtherance of the work, individuals have the right to pay their tithes direct to needy fields; but that this involves a considerable degree of personal responsibility, which must be assumed by those who decide to follow this plan. It was thought that this matter could be handled in a way to show that the departure from the regular plans was authorized only when the regular plans failed to be carried out by those in positions of responsibility.”

The Review tract writer tries to offset this evidence by the following methods: First, doubt is cast upon the authorship and dating of the document. I see no reason for such doubts. The file contains four letters from Dr. Stewart on the subject, all addressed to Willie White. There is also a letter of response from Willie White to Dr. Stewart. The notes, or “memoranda,” contain ten references to Willie White as the one who should answer certain questions. The most significant of the ten for the purposes of our inquiry is

“Tithe— to whom it should be paid: “Refer this to W. C. White. Very important.” In the light of this evidence it appears that to question Willie White’s involvement in the proceedings is hardly reasonable. And to question the date is not more reasonable. The four letters if of Dr. Stewart to Willie White are dated October 22, 1906; May 8, 1907; June 10, 1907; and June 24, 1907. Willie White’s letter to Dr. Stewart is dated June 9, 1907. The book by Dr. Stewart was published in mid- October, 1907, and a copy was sent to Willie White on October 27, 1907. The “memoranda” which includes the statement about tithe makes specific reference to this book. These facts seem to adequately establish the date for all practical purposes.

Second, the Review tract writer proposes that these men did not properly understand Ellen White’s thinking regarding the tithe, and supports this proposal with a most unhelpful comparison. He refers to a vision of heavenly planets given to Ellen White in 1846 in the presence of James White and Joseph Bates, who assumed that she was seeing Jupiter, Saturn, and Uranus. Then, we are told:

“Closeness to a prophet does not guarantee correctness.” We are asked to accept this as evidence that Ellen White’s son Willie, who had been her personal secretary and companion for twenty- six years, did not understand her thinking regarding the tithe, a matter concerning which she had gone into print well over a thousand times. The Review tract writer, viewing the situation from a distance of more than 80 years, seems to feel he has a better understanding of her thinking than Willie White did.

This reasoning strains the credulity to the breaking point.

Another attempt to discredit Document File 213 will be commented on in section 4. Before leaving this section we must mention a puzzling question and answer found on page 5 of the tract:

  1. “I’ve heard it said that other women who joined Mrs. White in her ‘tithe project’ for the Southern ministers didn’t send their tithe through Mrs. White but sent it directly to needy ministers, and that she must have approved of such actions. Is this so?”
  2. “No.” (Followed by a lengthy explanation.) I do not understand how the writer proposes to harmonize this statement with the following lines in the Watson letter, which appears on page 13 of the Review tract:

“If there have been cases where our sisters have appropriated their tithe to the support of the ministers working for the colored people in the South, let every man, if he is wise, hold his peace….

“I commend those sisters who have placed their tithe where it is most needed to help do a work that is being left undone.”

Especially puzzling is the writer’s recommendation that “the only safe course to follow, as regards Mrs. White’s position on the tithe question, is to let her speak for herself.” Page 6

Why, then, should the writer pose two questions about Ellen White’s writings (on pages 5 and 6) and refer us to two interpreters of Ellen White’s writings for the answers? We are reminded of her own words:

“My Instructor said to me, Tell these men that God has not committed to them the work of measuring, classifying, and defining the character of the testimonies.” Selected Messages, book 1,49

I intend no disrespect to anyone, but I prefer to look at Ellen White’s writings with my own eyes and not through the eyes of another.

Arguments Based on Supernatural Knowledge

On page six of the tract we find two statements that go far beyond human knowledge and could only be made by persons who are writing with supernatural wisdom of some kind.

In the first, a White Estate archivist makes reference to the Document File 213 and writes: “The Watson letter is the only Ellen White statement from which they formed their conclusions.” Compare this with some lines from the statement itself: “To give extracts from Sister White’s writings…. To show that her testimony and her own usual practice….. To show further from her writings.”

We see here no indication that they considered nothing but the Watson letter In the absence of such an indication, to state what they did or did not consider would require supernatural knowledge.

On page 6 of the tract we find this bold statement: “And it is an undeniable fact that Mrs. White never counseled anyone to place his or her tithes anywhere except in the denominational ‘treasury.” ‘

This is breathtaking. How could any human being know with such certainty what Ellen White never did? Only by supernatural knowledge. A logician would point out that nothing can be proved by the absence of evidence. It would be more accurate and more modest for a writer to state that he had found no evidence of such counsel in the written records. But, to firmly state as an “undeniable fact” that she never gave any such counsel would surely require godlike powers.

Similar in nature is the bold statement on page 9 of the tract: “Ellen White never even considered such an option.” How can any human being state with such assurance what another person has or has not considered? Would not this require supernatural knowledge?

On page 10 the Review tract writer does not hesitate to tell us what Ellen White intended and on page 15 he explains to us what Ellen White had in mind on a certain occasion. All of this requires powers that are not possessed by ordinary humans. Most of us would have to admit that we are not able to read the minds of our contemporaries, much less the minds of persons who died long before we were born. Surely such statements should be regarded with extreme caution.

Arguments Ad Hominem

A long established principle of discussion is that those who have evidence will present their evidence, whereas those who do not have evidence will attack the man. This is called the argument ad hominem, against the man, also expressed in the statement:

“As evidence decreases, vehemence increases.” It is to be regretted that the Review tract writer makes several references to those who “solicit or accept” tithe. As stated earlier, I have never heard of any ministry that solicits tithe. Also as stated before, tithe comes to independent ministries unbidden from distressed and disenchanted church members. Ellen White herself did not reject such tithe. (See the Watson letter.)

Neither have I ever heard of anyone who accuses the church of being in apostasy simply because of a different view regarding the human nature of Christ. See “Theological Questions” below. For the evidence which causes most historic Adventists to reject the author’s reasoning about the human nature of Christ, we refer the reader to our 365- page research report, The Word Was Made Flesh, available from Hope International.

When a writer proposes that he will present to us a “fair reading” of Ellen White’s writings (page 11), he is alleging that only an unfair person could understand the matter differently than he does.

And to suggest or imply that persons who quote a portion of a long statement have sinister purposes m mind is again to lay claim to supernatural abilities to read minds and to judge motives.

Since Ellen White strongly indicated in the Watson letter that she preferred that her personal handling of tithe funds not be widely advertised, it is alleged that persons like myself who have made reference to the letter are at fault. This allegation overlooks the fact that the entire letter has been published twice by the White Estate itself, in 1987 in Manuscript Releases, Vol. 11, pages 99- 100, and in 1981 in Elder Arthur White’s Ellen 0. White: The Early Elmshaven Years, pages 3953%. To fault those who now make reference to it is hardly candid.

The tendency to use the argument against the man reaches its climax on page 7, where it is proposed that it may eventually be discovered that

(1) “Those who now take the position that the church has apostatized were themselves guilty of apostasy.”

We respond again that the vast majority of the thousands of members who are calling for the church to return to its pure teachings are not saying that the church has apostatized. They are saying there is apostasy in the church, which the Review tract writer himself concedes (page 3). And we take exception to the writer’s definition of these people’s views about God’s storehouse:

(2)… “teaching others that God’s ‘storehouse’ today is the treasury of any place where Sabbath- keeping religious work for Christ is being performed.”

I have never heard of any person who would so describe the storehouse. To so characterize those who are pleading for the church to hold to all of the doctrines of our historic faith, including the sanctuary, the three angel’s messages, and so on, is not appropriate.

I must commend the Review tract writer, however, for not indulging in the type of argument “against the man” that some others are employing. The allegation is that those who are appealing for the church to heed and follow God’s counsels are setting themselves up as “more holy,” “holy ones,” “pious critics,” “the only ones who are right.” These allegations constitute the nadir, in my opinion, of the arguments against the man.

It is left to the considered judgment of the reader how well the cause of truth is served by such allegations as these. As for the Review tract writer’s attempt to apply the principle of Matthew 18: 15 to the present problem in the church, I refer the reader to Testimonies, Volume 2, page 15, where it is emphasized that Matthew 18: 15 applies to personal injuries, not church problems.

The Review tract writer does not seem to allow for an independent ministry to be legitimate and loyal unless it is to some degree under the supervision and/ or control of the church organization. This is similar to the views expressed in the eleven demands that were made upon independent ministries some time ago. According to P. T. Magan, who with E. A. Sutherland was a co- founder of Madison College, Ellen White’s views were a bit different. From Magan’s copious diaries we excerpt a few lines:

August 8, 1904: “He [E. A. Sutherland?] says that he worked with W. C. White during the forenoon getting articles and plans ready regarding the incorporation of the school at Nashville. In the afternoon he met with Daniels,( the General Conference president,) Prescott, (field secretary of the General Conference,) Griggs, Washburn, Byrd, and W. C. White to consider our plan of organization. Daniels did not like it.”

As later entries in the diary indicate, the Spirit of the Lord was giving instructions through Ellen White to the founders of Madison College which the General Conference president did not like. August 9, 1904: “Talk with Mrs. E. G. White and W. C. White regarding our plans for organization. She said we were not to go under the dominion of the Southern Union Conference.”

August 14, 1906: “Spent forenoon with Daniels. Told him why our school was independent and would have to eat showbread.” May 7, 1907: “Talked with Sister White regarding attitude of General Conference toward us. Mrs. Sara McEnterfer and Lillian present. Told Sister White about the administration view that we had no right to go and get money unless we were owned by the conference. She replied: “You are doing double what they are. Take all the donations you can get. The money belongs to the Lord and not to these men. The position they take is not of God. The Southern Union Conference is not to own or control you. You cannot turn things over to them.”

May 14, 1907: “I talked to her [E. G. White] about the General Conference position that concerns non- conference owned should have no money. She answered: ‘Daniels and those with him are taking a position on this matter that is not of God. ‘”

May 23, 1907: “Spent the forenoon with W. C. White. He gave me Sister White’s letters to Daniels regarding us. He told me he did not agree with the administration at Washington in insisting that all monies pass through their hands. Said that he would not agree to our going under conference domination.”

As is noted by the Review tract writer, Ellen White served as a board member of Madison College. This would seem to indicate that in her view an institution and/ or a ministry could be totally independent from the church organization and still be approved by. the Lord. But, as in Ellen White’s time, this view is still not appreciated by some of our church administrators.

Theological Questions

Although we have already pointed out that the heart of the present tithe issue is a theological problem, the theological points raised by the Review tract writer have been purposely deferred to this section for comment.

After conceding that there is apostasy in the church, the Review tract writer strangely takes no notice at all of the fact that this apostasy is the immediate and urgent concern of probably 95 percent of the people whom he is trying to correct. This apostasy is the specific reason for the redirection of their tithe.

Instead of dealing with this problem, the writer addresses his remarks toward a minuscule group who may be guilty of various charges that he directs at them. This tactic is not helpful to the thousands of church members who are not doing the things that he deplores, but who are deeply concerned about the increasing apostasy in the church. Their question is, Why does he not address our problem? Why doesn’t he talk to us?

And I wish to address to the Review tract writer, as well as to all others who have expressed similar concerns, the same question: Why don’t you talk to us? Why do you tilt at windmills? Why do you flog dead horses? Why do you focus on the symptoms and ignore the disease? Why do you set up straw men and then beat them to pieces while we can only look on in wonderment?

The vast majority of church members who are variously known as “historic Adventists,” “Independents,” and so forth, do not recognize themselves at all in the pictures often painted. The Review tract writer sets out to fault and hopefully correct certain persons whom he apparently suspects of evil purposes toward the church. He identifies these persons by three characteristics which he vigorously condemns:

  1. Solicitation of tithe,
  2. Saying that the church is in apostasy, and
  3. Basing the above accusation on a view of the nature of Christ. When the writer repeatedly describes the offenders as persons who solicit tithe, we can only respond that we do not know of whom he is speaking. I, personally, have never heard of any person who solicits tithe.

When the writer faults persons who say the church is in apostasy, we wonder, “To whom is he referring?”

And when the Review tract writer takes aim at persons who allegedly set forth a different view of the nature of Christ as the basis of their accusation that the church is in apostasy, we ask again, “Of whom is he speaking?” I have never heard of such persons.

The people to whom I minister have enormously larger concerns. They are witnessing, for example, rejection of our sanctuary doctrine, the introduction into our church of false Calvinistic doctrines of justification and sanctification, rejection of the Spirit of Prophecy, and a general lowering of the church standards. They are not helped by the singling out of the nature of Christ as if that were the only issue.

We pause to point out that the true doctrine of the nature of Christ is set forth in the new Seventh- day Adventists Believe, pages 37- 56. Check and see. The Review tract writer places before us an unhelpful comparison of the present apostasy with the pantheistic apostasy of Dr. J. H. Kellogg. We must remember that Kellogg’s apostasy was met head- on. It was not ignored until apostasy had spread through a large portion of the church, as is happening today. A. 0. Daniels, General Conference president at the time, used the power and influence of his office to defend the truth and to oppose the error. We look in vain for such decisive action today, in spite of clear Spirit of Prophecy counsels that apply to both apostasies.

There is a crying need for communication on the part of our church leaders, a communication that includes some attentive, open- minded listening. There are mountains of misunderstanding.

I am finding it more and more difficult to persuade the historic Adventists to whom I minster that the misinformation that is being constantly circulated about them is done in ignorance and not with malice. It is not easy to explain to those who want only to believe and practice the faith that they accepted when they joined our church why they should now be called divisive, controversial, troublemakers, legalists, rightwingers, destructive critics, attackers of the church, and so forth. They see these epithets as grossly unfair, untrue allegations. I believe that any impartial court would agree with them. Surely any fair- minded person would agree that those who are promoting theological changes are the ones who produce division, and those who resist theological changes should not be so accused. To represent those people as attacking the church is absurd. To call for a church to be true to the counsels of the Lord is surely not attacking the church.

We now come to my strongest point of disagreement with the Review tract writer. He presents the following question and answer:

  1. “I recently read that the SDA church leadership is out to resolve its ‘tithe- problem’ by ‘crushing’ and ‘destroying’ independent ministries that are doing a lot of good. Is this so?”
  2. “The answer is No.” (It is followed by a lengthy explanation.) I do not question the sincerity of the writer, but I do not find it possible to accept this answer. At a camp meeting in the Northwest in 1991, a speaker who represents our church administration at its highest level unburdened himself of some opinions about independent ministries. When audio tapes of his messages were sent to me, I listened in deep sadness to language that was inaccurate, intemperate, and highly inflammatory. When copied to typewriter paper, the tirade filled two pages single- spaced, and ended with an appeal to his hearers to “deal with” the offenders in their local churches.

The speaker apparently was not even aware of his inappropriate use of the word “new” to describe the views regarding the nature of Christ that are held by most of the historic Adventists. There are 1200 statements from pre- 1950 Seventh- day Adventist writers, including 400 from Ellen White, to support the position that the historic Adventist view is the “old” and the Calvinistic view is the “new.” Sadly, the speaker seems to regard these 1200 statements as “snake- oil.”

I know of no independent ministry whose books are not audited. I know of no independent ministry that pays anyone a yearly salary of $100,000 or more. Far, far from it. All of the independent ministries of my acquaintance are legally registered as nonprofit corporations and can provide donors with full accountability in the form of tax- deductible receipts. I know of no independent ministry that is trying to divide or destroy the church. Many independent workers are former denominational workers, intensely loyal to the church, who feel called to the work they are doing.

When a church administrator compares certain Seventh- day Adventists to the butchers of Auschwitz and Dachau who exterminated millions of Jews, I feel that we are forced to recognize that it is an attempt to fan the flames of passion against those church members, preparatory to disfellowshiping them. Already it seems that some other church leaders are taking the cue and are adding fuel to the flames.

But will this injustice crush and destroy the faith of those who do not wish to change their theology? I doubt it. It might even cause that faith to grow and to multiply. It has happened before in the history of religion.

A retired Union Conference president said to me recently, “I hope the brethren will not forget that our conservative members are the financial backbone of our church.” This point is worthy of reflection.

To summarize and to state the problem in simple terms: The Seventh- day Adventist church today contains three groups of church members. At one end of the spectrum is a group who know very well what they are doing. They are working vigorously to change the doctrines of our church and with the flexibility of method provided by their theological principle that God does not expect anyone to stop sinning. Hence, the misrepresentations, false allegations, and so on.

At the other end of the spectrum is another group who know very well what they are doing trying to preserve in their purity the doctrines of our church and to prepare a people for the coming of the Lord. In spite of bitter opposition and misrepresentation, this group is growing very rapidly.

In the center of the spectrum is a third and larger group who apparently have not yet comprehended what the tensions are about, or who lack the courage of their convictions.

Over all preside our church administrators, most of whom seem to be looking on, either benignly or indifferently, while attempts are being made to change our theology, from time to time issuing piteous pleas for unity which can only remind us of the Ellen White warning:

“We are to unify, but not upon a platform of error.” Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 2, article “Freedom in Christ,” 47

And we are presently witnessing what appears to be an orchestrated propaganda campaign, conducted for the purpose of fanning the flames of prejudice against historic/ independent church members, preparatory to disfellowshiping them from the church.

So— the historic Adventists continue to ask, “Why will nobody talk to us? Why can we not even be granted a fair hearing? Why are we being so continuously misrepresented and falsely accused? And why do those who thus deal with us yet think they have a right to demand our tithes and offerings?”

I submit that these are valid questions. Since this article began with questions about tithe, let me conclude it with some final thoughts on that subject. Recently I sat in a meeting with a thousand other church members and listened to a General Conference representative repeatedly denounce “the independent ministries who are draining off the church’s money.”

I listened in silence, but the language of my heart was, “Get real, Brother. Get real.” I had heard in my own church a pastor say that televangelist Jerry Falwell counts Seventh-day Adventists as his second largest group of financial supporters. It was stated that the source of this information was a Union Conference secretary. I telephoned’ the secretary, and he verified the report. He had heard it from Falwell’s own lips.

The Union secretary added that an Adventist Church member who had spent some time working with televangelist Pat Robertson’s organization reported the same was true there. When we remember that these men count their receipts in many millions of dollars per year, we have to recognize that the portion they receive from Seventh- day Adventists, their second highest donor group, must also be measured in millions. It is doubtful that the combined budgets of all the Adventist independent ministries would equal what even one of these televangelists is collecting from Seventh- day Adventists each year.

Why is nobody asking why? Why do so many of our leaders seem to be unaware of the malaise that is affecting so many of our churches, where so few messages from the pulpit reflect any sense of the urgency of our task? Is it any wonder that church members, who have never doubted that our Creator is a loving, caring God, (a message they could hear in most non-Seventh- day Adventist Christian churches) grow weary of hearing this truth endlessly repeated, and turn to preaching that seems to have more immediate significance?

Preaching the wonderful love of God we must do, but not leave the other undone. Let us remember that if Noah had done nothing but preach about a loving, earing God, there would have been no ark and his family would have perished in the Flood. If Moses had done nothing but preach about a loving, caring God there would have been no deliverance of God’s people from the land of bondage. If we do no more than preach about a loving, caring God, it will be necessary for God to raise up another people to take the three angels’ messages to the world. Our loving, caring God is a God of action, and His saving action for this world is in its final stages. The last warning message must go to the world. Will it be carried by a faithful Adventist ministry and people, or by those whom God calls to take their places?

And now a thought question. There are two distinct series of Ellen White predictions about the Adventist ministry of the end- time. One series describes how unfaithful ministers will arise among us, and is expressed in such shockingly clear statements as these:

“Many will stand in our pulpits with the torch of false prophecy in their hands, kindled from the hellish torch of Satan.” Testimonies to Ministers, 409- 410

“In the very midst of us will arise false teachers, giving heed to seducing spirits whose doctrines are of satanic origin. These teachers will draw away disciples after themselves.” Review aud Herald, vol. 5, 9

The other series of predictions emphasizes that in the closing work God will pass by many ministers who have been trained in “literary institutions,” and will call men from their regular employment to finish the preaching of our message. See The Great Controversy, 608, and Testimonies, vol. 5, page 80 Two classes of ministers are thus placed before us. One group are highly educated but selfconfident, self- dependent, and in some cases unfaithful. The other group, though having less formal education, place their confidence in God, in His Word, and in the Spirit of Prophecy.

Which of these two groups of ministers, according to your convictions, should be supported by our tithes? And are we safe in assuming that this description is a faraway scenario that will probably not occur in our time?

Two very powerful forces within the Seventh- day Adventist Church are now on a collision course and seem to be moving inexorably toward what may well be a major confrontation. One force is represented by the rapidly increasing number of church members who are reacting against changes in our theology and are making firm decisions that, come what may, by God’s grace, they will be true to the Scriptures and to the Spirit of Prophecy.

The other force is represented in what appears to be a heedless, headstrong authoritarianism in which there is an equally firm determination that regardless of circumstances, all church members must be required to submit to the authority of the church. Theological questions, the heart of the problem, are being brushed aside as irrelevant, or are themselves being subordinated to church authority in an echo of the papal policy that the Scriptures mean whatever the church says they mean.

We cannot but view the scene with apprehension as we reflect about similar confrontations in the past. It was headstrong authoritarianism that divided Israel from Judah in the days of Rehoboam. It was similar authoritarianism that divided the followers of Christ from Israel in New Testament times and that divided Protestants from Catholics in Reformation times. Will it be the same with us? Is the remnant church foredoomed to also founder in the shoals of authoritarianism? Or might we yet be able to turn the church back from disaster by joining the apostle Paul in placing the test of truth above all other tests?

As we ponder such matters, we find ourselves struggling with two concepts. On the one hand we have a hope, to which we cling desperately, that the church we love so ardently will recover and complete our God- given task.

On the other hand, we have before us the Spirit of Prophecy predictions that our church will experience an enormous convulsion as we near the end of time, a shaking and a purging that will take many of our leaders and more than half of our members out of the church.

Which experience are we now entering? Will we be granted a respite? Or must we brace ourselves for the shaking time?

In any case, let us remember that the greatest hours of our message, the loud cry and the latter rain, are after the shaking time. Let us take to our hearts the words of the lord to Joshua:

“Have not I commanded thee? Be strong.” Joshua 1: 9

Buy copies of the Tithe Problem in our bookstore.

The Tithe Problem, Part I

The Tithe Problemby Ralph Larson

An Open Letter to the Church

Dear Brethren: For several years I have been receiving from many troubled church members questions about their Christian stewardship of tithes and offerings. The central problem in their minds has been whether God required them to give financial support to the preaching of doctrines that they believed to be contrary to our faith

In response to those questions, I spent much time in research in the Spirit of Prophecy and published a report of my findings on the subject in Our Firm Foundation, September, 1991. My conclusions were the same as those that had been reached by Elders Willie White, A. 0. Daniells, and W. W. Prescott, who had conducted similar research in the early 1900’s.

The reaction to my report on the part of some church officials has been unusual, to say the least. A Union president wrote to me a letter bristling with personal abuse. The president of the Canadian Union, D. Douglas Devnich, wrote a two- page article in the December, 1991, issue of The Canadian Union Messenger, in which he applied to me and to my article such malicious terms as “half- truths”, “distorts the writings of Ellen White”, “gross misquotations drawn out of context”, “accuses the pastors and leaders of the Church with falsity and apostasy”, “deceptive”, “dishonesty”, “willful intent to mislead”, “unscrupulous”, etc.

With minor changes, this article was reprinted in the Columbia Union Visitor, April, 1992, and described as “important counsel beneficial to members around the world”.

This unprecedented procedure has been very disturbing to many church members who have not previously witnessed our church papers being used for launching personal attacks against the character and integrity of a Seventh- day Adventist minister. And since my conclusions were identical with the conclusions of Willie White, A. 0. Daniells, and W. W. Prescott, the question also arises, “Are these former church leaders not being similarly condemned as persons of no integrity?”

And why do church administrators and editors rush such accusations into print without checking them for accuracy, thereby seeming to establish a new low in journalistic irresponsibility?

These questions are lent added significance by the fact that the accusations in the Devnich article can be readily demonstrated to be without foundation. To illustrate this point, I will hereby offer Pastor Devnich a reward of $1,000 if he will produce from my writings a statement that “accuses the pastors and leaders of the church with falsity and apostasy”, as he charged in the Canadian Union Messenger.

I firmly deny that in my writings there are “gross misquotations drawn out of context”, and I challenge Pastor Devnich and those who have reprinted his article to produce their evidence in support of this charge. I will also offer to Pastor Devnich an additional reward of $1,000 if he will produce from my writings a “gross misquotation drawn out of context” from the writings of Ellen White or any author.

Pastor Devnich accuses me of distorting a passage in Testimonies, vol. 7, 176- 177 on the grounds that the word “tithe” does not appear there. I made no claim that the word “tithe” does appear there. The word “stewardship” does appear there several times. I see no way that the responsibilities of Christian stewardship can be properly fulfilled without the payment of tithe. Many persons, speaking in behalf of the SDA organization, have invoked the story of the widow and her two mites (Mark 12: 42) as evidence that all tithe should be paid through organizational channels regardless of existing conditions. Yet, the word “tithe” does not appear in that story. Shall we, therefore, accuse these persons as being “deceptive”, “dishonest”, “unscrupulous”, etc.?

Several weeks ago a “leak” was communicated to me from our world headquarters that my name was at or near the top of a “hit list” of persons who were to be disfellowshiped from the church. I was told that the first step in the planned procedure would be the launching of a smear campaign for the purpose of destroying my reputation and character, which would prepare the minds of the church members for the disfellowshiping that would follow.

The first part of the procedure appears to be well under way, but have the results of this action been carefully considered? What will be the reaction of fair- minded church members? When church members learn that the appalling charges are without foundation in fact, how will this affect their confidence in church leadership? Will this draw them closer to the organization, or will it have the opposite effect?

May I respectfully suggest that all of you have a responsibility in this matter. I believe that since the false accusations have been spread world- wide, there must be an equally world- wide correction.

The church, which by the various articles, has had its attention drawn to this unprecedented personal attack, is watching to see whether there will be fair play and justice. It would seem that a minimal standard of fairness would require that such an accused person should be provided opportunity and space in the papers to respond to the accusations that have been made. I have made this request twice to the editors of The Canadian Union Messenger without results. I am hereby drawing it to your attention and requesting that your influence be exercised in behalf of justice and fair play.

Contrary to what you may have heard, I have never spoken against the church to which I and my wife have given our lives in service. I have spoken out against apostasy in the church, which I understand to be a fulfillment of my ordination vow. In all of my travels and in all of my seminars I urge people to never leave the church but to work for its revival and reformation. My theology is precisely and specifically the theology set forth in the book Seventh- day Adventists Believe. If I am divisive, that book is also divisive.

And one last question, Brethren. If you are the captain of the ship and a crew member warns you that there is a dangerous leak in the hull, what is the wisest procedure? To repair the leak or to throw the crewman overboard?

May the Lord bless and guide you as you consider this matter.

Very sincerely yours,

The Tithe Problem Part I

Today the question of accountable stewardship is becoming an issue in the minds of many Seventh- day Adventists. The awareness that we all have an individual accountability before the heavenly universe, to administer the trust committed to us of God has, in recent years, raised questions in our minds as to how to best fulfill that responsibility. It is not the purpose of this paper to solicit funds, or to attempt to point out what one’s personal responsibility is, but to give our readers information that will help them fulfill their position as God’s stewards.

The subject of tithe has come to be an emotional mine field, and so let us proceed with caution. Voices usually calm are likely to become strident when the subject is introduced, and not infrequently, strongly stirred feelings find expression in bitter accusations. Yet the problem is real, and it is here. It shows no sign of diminishing, but rather is steadily increasing. Ignoring it is not likely to be an adequate answer, nor yet is indulging in emotional outbursts which tend to aggravate tensions rather than to relieve them. Is it possible to calmly consider this problem? Let us try.

My own exposure to the problem has been educational. While I was teaching classes of ministers in the Asian Adventist Theological Seminary I sometimes met the question, “Is it ever proper to send tithe anywhere other than through the regular church channels?” I answered the question with a firm and uncompromising “No. Diverting the tithe to other than the regular church channels could never, under any circumstances, be the right thing to do.”

I must confess that I did not give this answer because of evidence that I had seen, but because of evidence that I was sure I would find in the Spirit of Prophecy if I looked for it. However, since the question did not seem to be an urgent one at the time, and I was very busy with classes, evangelistic meetings, and other projects, I did not engage in any research on this particular topic.

But upon returning to the States in 1985 I was surprised to find that the question was seriously troubling many church members. With full confidence I set out to find the Spirit of Prophecy evidence that tithe should always go through the regular church channels and never anywhere else. This research brought my second and much greater surprise. I did not find what I was looking for. It just was not in the inspired writings.

Was I failing to properly understand what I had read? Apparently not. I did find a statement regarding the question that had been prepared by Willie White (Ellen White’s son and secretary), Elder A. G. Daniells, and Elder W. W. Prescott, which indicated that neither had they found such evidence in Ellen White’s writings. The historical context of their statement is as follows:

On May 9, 1907, a Charles E. Stewart of Battle Creek sent to Ellen White’s office at Sanitarium, California, a 49- page compilation of questions and charges intended to cast doubt on the Spirit of Prophecy as manifested in her ministry. In October of the same year, the material was bound into a small book and published, apparently in Battle Creek. At some later date it was republished by another of Ellen White’s critics, E. S. Baflenger, of Riverside, California. Document WDF 213, in the White Estate Office in Loma Linda, is a record of the plans made by Willie White, Daniells, and Prescott to deal with the charges in the book, one of which was that Ellen White’s counsels and practice in regard to the tithe were not consistent, in that she did not always follow her own recommendations. Paragraph six on page two of the document is a clear statement of how these brethren understood the totality of Ellen White’s teachings in regard to the paying of tithe. “ 6. As to the proper use of the tithe: The outline of a statement on this subject which was agreed upon was briefly this: To give extracts from Sister White’s writings as to the tithe and its use; to show that her testimony and her own usual practice was in favor of paying the tithe into the regularly designated treasury, to be used under the counsel of the committees appointed for such purposes; to show further from her writings that when those who have charge of the expenditure of the tithe so far fail in the discharge of their duty that the regularly organized channels for the distribution of tithe become hindrances to its proper use, then in order to carry out the divine plan that the tithe should be expended in the wisest manner for the furtherance of the work, individuals have the right to pay their tithes direct to the needy fields; but that this involves a considerable degree of personal responsibility, which must be assumed by those who decide to follow this plan. It was thought that this matter could be handled in a way to show that the departure from the regular plans was authorized only when the regular plans failed to be carried out by those in positions of responsibility.”

This statement appeared to be strong evidence that I had not misunderstood the materials I had examined. The conclusions of these brethren were not different from my conclusions, after my study.

As indicated in the quotation, their purpose was to enlarge the outline into a tract or paper on the subject. We would, no doubt, find it helpful if we could read the paper itself, but I have not yet been able to locate a copy.

Certain basic points in regard to tithe paying stand out very clearly in Ellen White’s writings. She had no doubt that returning tithe to the I£ rd is a Christian duty, and that a failure to perform this duty is tantamount to stealing from God (see Malachi 3). She is equally clear and firm in her conviction that the tithe has only one proper use, the support of the ministry of the Word of God. Although she includes those who minister with pen as well as with voice, she specifically excludes other forms of Christian endeavor, such as “school purposes” and “canvassers and colporteurs” (See Testimonies, vol. 9, 248- 249), a poor fund or church expense. See Counsels on Stewardship, 103, and other references.

According to the testimony of God’s inspired messenger, tithe should always be faithfully returned to the Lord, and all of the tithe should be used for the support of the ministry. But which ministry or what ministry? This is the question that is troubling us now. What if a ministry strays from the path of sacred duty? What if a ministry becomes so theologically confused as to depart from the truths of God’s Word and begins preaching a false gospel? What if church leaders begin to use tithe funds for purposes other than the ministry of the Word, such as those listed above, or even to pay the fees of non- Adventist lawyers? What, then, is our Christian duty? We may seek to escape from these troubling questions by shrugging them off and saying, “There is no need for us to concern ourselves about things like that. They could not happen in our church.” But in view of Ellen White’s predictions of a great Adventist apostasy, is this a realistic attitude? Willie White, Daniells, and Prescott took no such position. They did not deny the possibility of a malfeasance, as indicated by these words:”. .. when those who have charge of the expenditure of the tithe shall so far fail in the discharge of their duty that the regular organized channels for the distribution of the tithe become hindrances to its proper use . .

“When the regular plans failed to be carried out by those in positions of responsibility . . . .” Document WDF, 213

Let us remind ourselves that these brethren were not expressing their own opinions. They were setting forth what they understood to be the totality of the teachings of Ellen White. They had before them the example of Ellen White. In the year 1905, two years before their meeting, Ellen White had written a letter to the president of the Colorado conference in which she had revealed that “for years” she had been using her tithe to assist needy ministers who were being neglected by the organization. When this statement was first called to my attention, I dismissed it very easily (I thought) by saying, “She was a prophet, and I am not a prophet. God often gives instructions to His prophets that do not apply to other people.”

But the matter is not quite that simple. The letter also revealed that when other persons offered her their tithe to use as she thought best, she accepted it and used it as indicated above, in support of needy ministers. Perhaps we could still say that she was exercising the prerogatives of a prophet, since the money passed through her hands.

But that would not be true of the third type of tithepayers who are mentioned in her letter: “If there have been cases where our sisters have appropriated their tithe to the support of the ministers working for the colored people in the south, let every man, if he is wise, hold his peace.”

There is no suggestion that this money passed through her hands, or that she was consulted about it. The money was apparently sent directly to needy ministers whose condition had become known to the tithepayers. Ellen White obviously did not disapprove of the actions of these persons, much less accuse them of “stealing” the tithe.

We must recognize that Willie White, Daniells, and Prescott, who were charged with the responsibility of setting forth a comprehensive statement regarding Ellen White’s counsel and practice regarding tithe paying, were faithful to the evidence that was before them. They frankly reported their findings to the people, with neither understatement nor overstatement. They felt that there was no self- contradiction between Ellen White’s writings and her practice. In neither her writings nor her practice was there any- thing to support the view that all tithe, regardless of circumstances, must be paid through regular church channels.

It is probable that they did not anticipate any great trouble for the church organization as the result of the publishing their frank statement. The conditions that they described as making it permissible, according to Ellen White’s writings, for a church member to exercise individual judgment in deciding where to send tithe, (the failure of persons in places of responsibility to use the tithe for its proper purpose) hardly existed in their time, if they existed at all. These leaders could not have been expected to foresee the conditions that have now developed in the church as a result of the great Adventist apostasy that has been the subject of this series of studies.

But church members in our time could hardly be expected not to see these conditions. Many have recoiled in horror from the revelation that hundreds of thousands of dollars of sacred tithe funds have been used to employ Catholic and other non- Adventist lawyers to sue and prosecute persons for calling themselves Seventh- day Adventists, and in at least one case assessing huge fines and putting the person in jail.

Some members may not be aware of such specific incidents as this, but it would be difficult for any member in the North American Division to be unaware of the great theological apostasy which is the very heart of the tithe problem. He or she is likely to encounter it in church on any Sabbath morning.

It is an undeniable fact that there are pastors in Seventh- day Adventist churches, teachers in Seventh- day Adventist colleges, and persons at all levels of church administration who are persistently presenting as truth the devil’s great lie, that Christians cannot stop sinning even by the power of God. Ellen White has identified this assertion no fewer than 35 times as a lie that originated in the heart of Satan, and that was proved to be false by our Lord Jesus Christ. Undoubtedly the strongest of her statements is this:

“Satan declared that it was impossible for the sons and daughters of Adam to keep the law of God, and thus charged upon God a lack of wisdom and love. If they could not keep the law, then there was fault with the Lawgiver. Men who are under the control of Satan repeat these accusations against God, in asserting that men can not keep the law of God. Jesus humbled Himself, clothing His divinity with humanity, in order that He might stand as the head and representative of the human family, and by both precept and example condemn sin in the flesh, and give the lie to Satan’s charges.” Signs of the Times, vol. 3, 264

May we suggest a second thoughtful reading of the above inspired statement? Its implications are staggering. Can it be possible that there are ministers, teachers, and administrators all through our ranks who are under the control of Satan? If the writings of Ellen White are inspired, we have no choice but to believe it.

Here is the heart of the tithe problem. Here is the answer to our question, Who is responsible? Would it not be the ministers who present poison from the pulpits, the teachers who present poison in the classrooms, and the administrators who support and defend them, ignoring desperate appeals from church members?

To blame the tithe problem on independent ministries is as illogical and unjust as to blame the historic Adventists for divisions being created in the church by the preaching of the false doctrines of Calvinism among us. May we here earnestly appeal for clear thinking and fair judgment on this matter?

Consider the problem of a church member who understands our message, is devoted to the truth as it is in Jesus, and has always been a faithful tithepayer. During the years he has built up a small library of Ellen White’s writings and has studied them with care. Then he is confronted with a series of shocks.

On Sabbath he hears his pastor proclaim that our Lord came to earth in the human nature of the unfallen Adam, making Him very different from ourselves. He finds it puzzling, and so spends some time on Sabbath afternoon looking through his copy of The Desire of Ages. He finds the opposite affirmed to be true on pages 25, 49, 112, 117, 174- 175, and 311- 312. Soon after, he hears his pastor preach that it is impossible for Christians, by any means, to stop sinning and that it is impossible for anyone to obey the law of God. In his The Desire of Ages the church member finds this statement described as Satan’s lie on pages 24,29, 117, and 761, and he finds in that volume a total of 78 statements that it is possible, through the power of Christ for Christians to obey God’s law. He then turns to The Great Controversy and reads on page 489 that “[ Satan] is constantly seeking to deceive the followers of Christ with his fatal sophistry that it is impossible for them to overcome.”

As this heart- wrenching experience continues, the church member is eventually forced to recognize that Ellen White’s predictions about the great Adventist apostasy are being fulfilled before his eyes. Then comes the agonizing question, “Does God require me to pay my tithe to support the great apostasy?”

Like many others before him, he decides that this line of reasoning just doesn’t make sense. He then turns to an independent ministry holding the Seventh- day Adventist historic faith, preaching the message that he accepted when he joined the church. He now begins to send his tithe to that ministry.

Now the question for every fair- minded person to consider is, Who is responsible? Has the church member’s problem been created by the independent ministry, or by the preaching of the false doctrines of Calvinism in his own church?

And will this problem be solved by crushing independent ministries and letting the false preaching continue? The answer is self- evident. To destroy the independent ministries will not solve the church member’s problem, nor will it be solved by cracking whips of church authority over his head, excluding him from church office, or by any other means of coercion.

Tragically, this obvious truth seems to be lost on some church administrators who continue to condemn and rail at independent ministries as if they were the cause of all the difficulty, and that the solution is simply to put them out of existence. It appears that some of these ministries are now being threatened with church discipline as a first step in that direction.

I have been invited to several meetings ostensibly called for the purpose of resolving tensions between independent ministries and the church organization. At none of these meetings did I discern the slightest recognition that the preaching of false doctrines in our churches was the real problem, or even any part of the problem. At none of them did I hear the slightest hint that any attempt would be made to correct this evil. Rather, the message delivered to the independent ministries is simple, “You, and only you, are the problem, and if you do not stop what your are doing, in particular if you do not stop accepting tithe, you are going to suffer the consequences.”

Some are already suffering the consequences. Members of independent ministries have in some places been denied the right to transfer their membership either into or out of the churches where they live. It should be remembered that transfers are a right of church membership and may be denied, according to the church manual, only by properly conducted church disciplinary actions. See pages 162- 163 of the Church Manual.

For that matter, the Church Manual also recognizes the right of independent ministries to exist (see page 158), and also provides that no church member’s standing should be called in question because of his failure to give financial support to the church. See page 165

But strong emotion is the enemy of reason, and as we noted at the beginning of this study, emotions tend to run high when the tithe problem is mentioned- so high that in some cases neither appeals to the Church Manual, to the Spirit of Prophecy, or even to the Bible itself bring any result.

Emotional tensions also contribute to the mishandling of evidence found in various public statements about tithe, and the accusations accompanying them. Possibly the outstanding example of mishandled evidence is a variety of Ellen White statements, written to show that tithe should be used only for the ministry of the Word and not for other Christian endeavors, are misconstrued to mean that tithe should be paid only to one ministry of the Word and not to the other minis- tries of the Word. An oft- quoted example of this misconception is on page 247 of Testimonies, vol. 9:

“Let none feel at liberty to retain their tithe, to use according to their own judgment. They are not to use it for themselves in an emergency, nor to apply it as they see fit, even in what they may regard as the Lord’s work.” Emphasis supplied

What Ellen White meant by the clause “what they may regard as the Lord’s work,” is made clear on the following pages by these lines:

“One reasons that the tithe may be applied to school purposes. Still others reason that canvassers and colporteurs should be supported from the tithe. But a great mistake is made when the tithe is drawn from the object for which it is to be used— the support of the ministers.” 248- 249

In view of the general frailty of human nature, and the specific predictions by Ellen White that there would be many apostates in the Seventh- day Adventist ministry in the last days, (see Testimonies to Ministers, 409- 410; Testimonies, vol. 5, 80- 81, 707) it would have been hazardous indeed for the messenger of the Lord to have singled out any particular group of ministers as the only ones who should ever be supported by tithe, and even more hazardous to maintain that they must be supported by tithe regardless of what they might be teaching or doing.

“It would be poor policy to support from the treasury of God those who really mar and injure His work, and who are constantly lowering the standard of Christianity.” Testimonies, vol. 3, 553

“There are fearful woes for those who preach the truth, but are not sanctified by it, and also for those who consent to receive and maintain the unsanctified to minister to them in word and doctrine.” Ibid., vol. 1, 261- 262

“As there are woes for those who preach the truth while they are unsanctified in heart and life, so there are woes for those who receive and maintain the unsanctified in the position which they cannot fill.” Ibid., vol. 2, 552

Let us take note, also, of Ellen White’s use of the expression, “the treasury of God.” In her letter to the Conference president to which we have already referred, she first tells of her practice and then adds, “The money is not withheld from the Lord’s treasury.” Obviously she did not have the limited view of “the Lord’s treasury” that some have today.

Some independent ministries have pointed out Ellen White’s statements that it is not necessary for all “funds” or “means” to flow through the same channels, and since no exception is stated in regard to tithe, they have concluded, not unreasonably, that these general terms include both tithes and offerings. But some writers have seized upon this conclusion and made it the basis for accusations of dishonesty. Surely this accusation could be termed uncontrolled emotionalism. We certainly want to have much stronger evidence before we accuse any persons of being dishonest.

You and I cannot solve the problems of the church nor the problems of the independent ministries, but we can and must resolve our own personal and individual problem in regard to the type of ministry that we support with our tithe. This problem is best solved by each one of us on his knees before the I£ rd, with the inspired writings before him. Probably none of us should presume to instruct others as to their duty.

Some may think of the widow and her two mites upon whom the Lord pronounced a blessing in spite of the corruption among church leaders at that time.

Others may reflect that we have no evidence that the widow was aware of the corruption, and that in any case there was no representative church government such as we have now. Some will be influenced by Ellen White’s statement:

“God desires to bring men into direct relation with . . . . . Every man has been made a steward of sacred trusts; each is to discharge his trust according to the direction of the Giver; and by each an account of his stewardship must be rendered to God . . . . We are responsible to invest this means ourselves.” Testimonies, vol. 7, 176- 177

“Do we individually realize our true position, that as God’s hired servants we are not to bargain away our stewardship? We have an individual accountability before the heavenly universe, to administer the trust committed us of God.” Testimonies to Ministers, 361- 362

And we must not overlook the warnings previously quoted that there are woes upon those who consent to receive and maintain ministers whose unsanctified attitudes injure the work of God.

It has not been the purpose of this study to give directions to any person as to his individual responsibility. It has been our purpose to prove the following points:

  1. There is no biblical or Spirit of Prophecy evidence to support the view that all tithe must, regardless of circumstances, be paid through organizational channels. Such a position might in some cases require that outright apostasy be supported by tithe, which is far beyond the boundaries of reason.
  2. We have been given through God’s appointed messenger an abundance of clear warnings that there would be a time when apostate ministers would be preaching in many Seventh- day Adventist pulpits, and that the apostasy would sweep through the ranks of our ministers and our members.
  3. If we are to take Ellen White’s words at their face value, that time has at least partially arrived, in that many ministers are now occupying Seventh- day Adventist pulpits who are preaching as truth the devil’s great lie- that Christians cannot stop sinning even through the power of Christ. By unmistakably clear Spirit of Prophecy definition, such ministers are “under the control of Satan.”

Therefore, as Christian stewards under God, we have a solemn responsibility to fulfill in regard to our tithes and our offerings.

May the Lord help each one of us to prayerfully, carefully, and conscientiously return the sacred tithe, as the Lord has directed, for the support of the ministry. May we never be confused and uncertain as to what kind of ministry the Lord deems worthy to receive the tithe. And may we never be confused or uncertain as to who is responsible for the present tithe problem. The responsibility must be placed squarely at the doors of those who are preaching among us the false doctrines of Calvinism and the administrators who are supporting and maintaining them in their positions.

The messenger of the Lord counseled parents, guardians of youth, and those who minister in the service of God:

“When existing evils are not met and checked, because men have too little courage to reprove wrong, or because they have too little interest or are too indolent to tax their own powers in putting forth earnest efforts to purify the family or the church of God, they are accountable for the evil which may result in consequence of neglect to do their duty. We are just as accountable for evils that we might have checked in others, by reproof, by warning, by exercise of parental or pastoral authority, as if we were guilty of the acts ourselves.” Testimonies, vol. 4,516

May God give us faith, courage, and power in these troubled times to know and do the will of the Lord.

Part II

Health – The Rise of Veganism

Browsing the grocery store aisles, one can’t help but notice the rise of veganism in the United States. There are more vegan products on the shelves by the week. Multiple documentaries have been released on Netflix, such as The Game Changers in 2019, or HOPE – What You Eat Matters in 2018 on YouTube. People are turning to the vegan lifestyle because the future of our planet is at stake.

Meat and dairy production is the single largest contributor to global warming. Rainforests, the lungs of our planet, are being cleared to graze cattle or cultivate cattle feed, such as soybeans. Only 2% of soy produced worldwide is consumed by humans. Seventy percent is cattle feed, 28% biofuel.1 Animal agriculture consumes more precious water than all the other world’s industries combined.

 

NETFLIX YOUTUBE
What the Health H.O.P.E. What You Eat Matters
The Game Changers Food Choices
Cowspiracy Super Size Me
Vegucated Diet Fiction
Fat, Sick & Nearly Dead Forks over Knives
Food, Inc. Eating You Alive
Plant Pure Nation
Let us be Heroes

 

Environmental agencies had traditionally focused on plastic waste and car pollution, but the largest threat to our planet was a taboo. Why? Food is a sensitive issue. People react with anger when someone tells them what to eat or not to eat, especially when we’re talking about meat. As a society, we have been fed the meat industry lie that meat and dairy are essential for our nutrition. Only recently, these taboo questions are being answered and the public is learning the truth.

As Seventh-day Adventists, we have known this truth for 150 years. Yet, we have been unable to convince the public with our health message. Not only that, we have been abandoning these truths in order to be more “mainstream.” According to the PBS research, only 30% of Seventh-day Adventists practice some form of vegetarianism.2 Even with just 30%, we achieve better health and longevity than the general population. Imagine the difference if all church members adhered to the health message. The results would be worth bold letters in every news outlet.

As Adventists, we should be on the cutting edge of nutritional science, plant-based culinary arts, and exemplary lifestyle. Yet, quite the opposite has been the case. Those of us who adhere to some form of vegetarianism have earned the reputation for bland food preparation. I often get inspired by one of my favorite cuisines – Indian food, which is considered one of the world’s best ethnic kitchens. Why? The Hindu people of India have been on the vegetarian diet for thousands of years. They have had all these years to perfect their recipes to the gourmet level of today. Various vegan movements turn to Hinduism as the poster child for humane treatment of animals and saving our planet.

Shouldn’t it be the Seventh-day Adventists that the world is turning to? At one point in history, Seventh-day Adventists changed the way America eats breakfast. How did it happen that we are so behind modern food trends? Sadly, we have abandoned our health message.

If we had upheld the health message that was given to us in the 1800s, the world today would be at our feet asking for help and expertise. What a tremendous evangelism opportunity lost! I can’t think of a greater opportunity lost in the entire history of Adventism. The entire world would learn of Seventh-day Adventists and their message via mainstream media. For free! Instead, it’s the Hollywood stars who are spreading the health message. Every week I hear of a new Hollywood star going vegan.

When watching the various documentaries on veganism that have become popular in recent years, I see the Adventist health message being preached. I can’t help but notice that many of the nutritional experts take their knowledge directly out of Spirit of Prophecy, down to the last letter. The history is being repeated as in biblical times. If God’s people abandon the message that God gave them, He can raise someone else to do the work—in this case, saving our planet from an ecological collapse. This could have been our role that God had in store for us, but we turned it down. God gave us decades of preparation time for this moment in history. We have had over 100 years to perfect our nutritional science, culinary arts, and natural medical treatments. Yet, we have lost the opportunity. As today’s vegan movement is gaining momentum, no one knows that this message has existed for over 100 years, gathering dust on the bookshelves of Adventist households.

Is it too late? As the saying goes, better late than never. Although the health food world is light years ahead of us, we can still come to the forefront and say: “Hey, we have known all this for 150 years! But nobody paid attention.”

There are various diet trends such as the Atkins diet, gluten free diet, ketogenic diet, etc. But veganism is not a temporary fashion. It is here to stay. Let’s dust off our treasured publications such as The Ministry of Healing, Counsels on Diet and Foods, and Christian Temperance and Bible Hygiene. People will be astounded to find out that this information has been available for over 100 years. Although the majority of Seventh-day Adventists are indifferent to the health message, there are a few who adhere to it. Let’s talk to people, let’s share the newest documentaries available (see table for list) as a conversation starter. No one will say that this is extreme anymore. People accept this message because the very existence of our planet is at stake. Let’s share our recipes with people. Let’s forge strong friendships. Relationships are created around food in all of the world’s cultures. We have forgotten this reality in our country. Let’s start cooking at home and share with friends and neighbors. You can make a difference.

I live in a condominium unit in a large city and have made friends with my neighbors. Lately I had overseas visitors staying in my home. I enjoyed cooking for them and one night we just had too much food left over. I called one of my neighbors, explained the situation, and asked if I could bring her a take-out box of food. She happily accepted and said that she hadn’t had her dinner yet and was thinking what to eat, but her fridge is empty. I delivered the box promptly; she said a big thank you. The next day, I received a phone call. The lovely lady asked from what restaurant I ordered the meal. Hah! It was made from scratch in my kitchen! Ravioli garnished with fresh basil pesto (see a pesto recipe on page 49). Fresh herbs make a big difference and give your dish a gourmet touch.

My neighbor requested a visit in my home for a basil pesto demonstration. She is a successful woman in her ‘70s who operates her own business. She suggested a Saturday morning as it’s the best time for her new boyfriend to come as well, whom she’d love for me to meet. I assured her that her boyfriend is welcome as well and explained that Saturday mornings are not suitable for me because I attend a church at these hours. “On Saturday?” she asked. “Come on Sunday morning and I’ll explain why my day of worship is Saturday,” I replied. She happily agreed. Talking about outreach opportunities! They come themselves if we are friendly to our neighbors!

Large cities also have vegan support groups. Many people want to start this lifestyle, but don’t know how and search for like-minded individuals. These places are great to get involved. You can make friends there, organize potluck lunches, or the like.

But first, we have to return to our roots, to our health message. Once people find out what a treasure we have, they will request visits to our homes. May God bless you and keep you as you live His health message.

1 H.O.P.E. What You Eat Matters

2 www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/2012/03/23/march-23-2012-seventh-day-adventists-and-health/10575/

A New Day Dawns

On the banks of the old Erie Canal was situated the town of Port Gibson, New York. A mile south of town lay the farm of Hiram Edson. He was the leader of the advent believers in that community and they often met in his house when the district schoolhouse was not available.

Dr. Franklin B. Hahn, a physician living nearby, was another prominent member of the Adventist company in that area. A third influential member was Owen R. L. Crosier, an orphan youth that had become a keen Bible student and promising writer. Edson and Hahn had befriended him and provided him with a home.

These three men joined together and published a paper called the Day-Dawn. It was one of a number of Adventist journals that were published following the Disappointment. Crosier served as editor of the paper.

Like thousands of other Adventist groups scattered over the land, those in Port Gibson met on October 22, 1844, to wait for the expected return of Christ. Edson invited the people to come to that last meeting, and said good-by to those who refused, expecting to never see them again.

The believers “reviewed the evidences, and lived in hope as the hours passed slowly away. Spalding phrases it impressively: ‘Would it be in the morning? The frost of the dawn melted under the rising sun. Might it be at noon? The meridian was reached and the sun began to decline. Surely the evening! But the shades of night fell lowering. Still there was hope:’ ‘For ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cock crowing, or in the morning.’

“The neighborhood company of believers expected to meet their Lord at any moment. Says Edson: ‘We looked for our coming Lord until the clock tolled twelve at midnight. The day had then passed, and our disappointment became a certainty. Our fondest hopes and expectations were blasted.’” The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers, 878, 879.

At the dawning of October 23 many of the believers returned to their homes. Edson suggested, to those that remained, that they go into the barn and pray. There they poured out their souls to God in earnest prayer that He would not desert them and would shed light as to what to do next. Finally the conviction came that their prayers had been heard and accepted and that light would be given explaining the Disappointment. Edson was reassured that there is a God and that His word is sure. God had blessed them abundantly in their advent experience, and He would make known to them the nature of their mistake and reveal His plan. Edson said that the cause of their perplexity would be made plain as day. He further encouraged the believers to have faith in God.

After breakfast, Edson suggested to Crosier that they should go and reassure the other believers of God’s promise to guide them through this crisis. To avoid meeting people on the way Edson thought it would be wise to not travel on the roads but to go cross-country instead.

As they walked along silently, suddenly Edson stopped and in deep meditation he looked to the skies overhead and prayed for light. He pondered the Biblical evidence of Christ’s ministration, in the sanctuary in heaven, on the anti-typical Day of Atonement. Suddenly he realized that there were two phases to Christ’s ministry in heaven as there had been in the earthly sanctuary of Old Testament times. “In his own words, an overwhelming conviction came over him—

‘That instead of our High Priest coming out of the Most Holy of the heavenly sanctuary to come to this earth on the tenth day of the seventh month, at the end of the 2300 days, He for the first time entered on that day the second apartment of that sanctuary and that He had a work to perform in the Most Holy before coming to this earth.’” Ibid., 881.

Thus the light shown on the confusion over the Disappointment and revealed that the sanctuary to be cleansed was that in heaven and not the earth. This came to Edson as a new idea and a wondrous discovery. It was the answer to the prayer he and Crosier had made that morning. He saw how Christ, the Bridegroom, went at that time to the Ancient of days to receive dominion, glory and a kingdom; and that we are to wait for Him to return from the wedding.

Edson stated, “My mind was directed to the tenth chapter of Revelation where I could see the vision had spoken and did not lie.” Ibid., 883. This chapter reveals the symbol of the sweet followed by the bitter book. The experience of the advent believers had surely been sweet in the beginning but had become as gall following the day of disappointment. The prophecy indicated that they were to testify again. But how was that to be? After October 22, when Christ did not come as proclaimed, who would listen?

Edson and Crosier walked quickly from home to home telling the brethren the good news that Christ’s priestly ministry in heaven was fulfilling another Mosaic type, that He had just entered into, instead of coming out of, the Most Holy as they had formerly believed. This meant that this was the beginning, not the ending, of the anti-typical Day of Atonement. Christ had fulfilled the prophecy. It would be some time before He completed His work, and not until then would He come out as King.

Edson and Crosier invited Dr. Hahn to join them in continuing Bible study of the prophecies regarding Christ’s work in the sanctuary as revealed in the book of Hebrews, especially chapters 8 and 9, until it should be made clear. They focused upon the whole Mosaic system of types and ceremonies and their meaning for the end time. They also studied diligently the prophecies as outlined in the books of Daniel and Revelation concerning the latter times. This study time went on for many months and confirmed their understanding of how and why Christ had entered the Most Holy place to cleanse it.

“But there was yet another angle demanding study, an inkling of which had also been caught by Edson as he walked through the cornfield that epochal October day in 1844. With Crosier and Hahn he also saw that the bitterness of the Disappointment—and in fact of the whole advent experience—was itself a matter of inspired prediction, portrayed through the apostle John in Revelation 10. This they also studied. Here a message, that ‘there should be time no longer,’ is represented as proclaimed on land and sea by a ‘mighty angel come down from heaven.’ And the heavenly messenger ‘clothed with a cloud’ seemingly indicated something that at the time was obscured, or not clearly understood. And with the message that prophetic ‘time shall be no longer,’ there was opened a ‘little book’—apparently the book of Daniel, a portion of which had been sealed. The eating of this bittersweet book obviously symbolized the joy of expectation and the bitterness of disappointment, after which came the declaration, ‘Thou must prophesy again.’ Apparently God still had a work to be done by those who had passed through the disappointment. Another message was obviously to go forth, after the first and second angel’s message had spent their initial force. But how—with all the bitter, unreasoning prejudice from without and the factional disputes within already beginning to grow out of the Disappointment—could they meet the people? And what would be their message?” Ibid., 900.

By the spring of 1845 the studies of the sanctuary and its services were sufficiently solidified in their minds to the point that they understood more clearly the whole question of the Disappointment as well as the justification for the existence of the Advent Movement. It gave meaning to their past experience and direction for their present and future course of action.

Edson, Crosier and Hahn decided to publish another issue of the Day-Dawn to spread the truth regarding the cleansing of the sanctuary and the work of Christ therein. The paper came into the hands of Joseph Bates and James White, both of whom received it gladly. Edson and Hahn submitted an expanded article that was published in the Day- Star Extra (another Adventist journal published following the Disappointment). Bates and White were especially pleased with this enlarged treatise. Bates said it was the best produced so far on the subject bringing light and hope to many people.

A conference was convened at Edson’s place and Bates was invited to attend. “Bates’ burden was the relation of the seventh-day Sabbath to the sanctuary position. During his presentation Edson became so interested and delighted that he could hardly keep his seat. And upon its conclusion he was on his feet with the declaration: ‘That is light and truth!’ He had already caught certain glimpses of the Sabbath through his study of the sanctuary, the ark, and the Ten Commandments, and through reading ‘a few lines from T. M. Preble,’ but he had not yet seen its importance. This was the first public instance of joining the sanctuary and the Sabbath position in united relationship, these constituting two of the three distinctive tenets of faith characterizing this slowly forming body of believers, which had their inception in widely separated spots.” Ibid., 904.

The Port Gibson group was the first to take a stand on the two phases of Christ’s work in the sanctuary. This group made contact with those in New Hampshire that had begun keeping the Seventh-day Sabbath. These two groups were the nucleus of Sabbatarian Adventism that developed into the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

Report on the Lawsuit Against Raphael Perez

It is with regret and sadness that we share this report regarding the lawsuit filed by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists against Raphael Perez and the Eternal Gospel Church of Laymen Seventh-day Adventists.

Brother Perez was asked by the Southeastern Conference to start a Spanish speaking church in July of 1990. With the approval of the Southeastern Conference, he and the church began a radio ministry for the Spanish speaking people, broadcasting from the West Palm Beach area. Eventually the broadcast was being aired on five radio stations.

Taking seriously the counsel in Evangelism, 129, Raphael and the Eternal Gospel church told the conference administration that they would like to start putting advertisements in newspapers. The first one they started with was a tract which they received from the Florida Conference Adventist Book Center entitled “The Law of God” which they thought would especially appeal to the Jewish segment of the population. They bought a full page of advertising space in the Palm Beach Post, in 1991, to spread the message of this tract about the importance of God’s law.

In a matter of time, complaints started coming, and Pastor Perez was asked by his conference president to discontinue the radio program “because it was going outside his district.” He was also told to stop the newspaper ads. It seemed evident that the Lord was blessing with responses to the broadcast and the ads, and Pastor Perez felt that he must continue to spread the warning message for a lost world to all who would listen or read. Eventually, as conflict over these evangelistic outreach efforts developed, the Eternal Gospel Church was disowned by the conference and Pastor Perez was disfellowshipped from the conference. However, he and the group of Seventh-day Adventist believers in the Eternal Gospel church continued to expand their efforts as the Lord provided the way.

Through the next few years, the Eternal Gospel Church of Laymen Seventh-day Adventists arranged for ads in major newspapers across the nation. In 1993, the text of “Earth’s Final Warning” was placed in a full page ad in the Fort Lauderdale “The Sun Sentinel.” In 1995, an ad was placed in the “New York Daily News.” This brought some vocal reaction from the prominent Roman Catholic, Cardinal O’Conner and also from a General Conference representative who called the “New York Daily News.” As a result the “New York Daily News” defaulted on the contract for a second ad.

In 1998, ads were placed in the “Washington Times,” “The Miami Herald,” and “The Los Angeles Times.” Ads have also been placed in all the major Spanish newspapers of the nation. Following the appearance of an ad, on September 11, in the “Washington Times,” a Cardinal Hickey wrote an article of protest which was published in the newspaper. In it he called for the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist church to make a public apology for the “unconscionable attack” upon the pope and the Catholic church. About the same time, the “Washington Times” was contacted and threatened with a lawsuit for their publication of the advertisement. Pastor Perez had previously received messages from Kermit Netteburg, and eventually from Vincent Ramik, the Roman Catholic attorney who had previously been hired by the General Conference in trademark lawsuit issues, threatening him with court action if he did not quit using the name Seventh-day Adventist.

Finally, on December 3, 1998, Pastor Perez and the Eternal Gospel Church of Laymen Seventh-day Adventists were served with a summons to answer to charges filed by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. These charges included unfair competition, and trademark infringement. It is also charged that Pastor Perez and the other members of the church have caused “damage and injury” to the General Conference that is “irreparable,” and further that the use of the term “Seventh-day Adventist” by Pastor Perez, “has caused and/or is likely to cause confusion, mistake or deception” producing “irreparable damage and harm.”

The General Conference in this lawsuit, civil action case #98-2940 in the United States District Court of the Southern District of Florida, seeks a court order enforcing that “all their owners, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, their heirs, successors, and assigns, and all persons acting in concert or participation with them” be “restrained pendente lite [while the lawsuit is in progress] and permanently” from using the words “Seventh-day Adventist” and “SDA” or any other words that are similar in connection with their activities. In addition, the General Conference asks the court to order Pastor Perez and the Eternal Gospel Church to forthwith “cease all advertising which includes” the use of the words “Seventh-day Adventist,” “SDA,” and their equivalents in Spanish. The General Conference desires that the court instruct Pastor Perez and his fellow Seventh-day Adventist believers to “deliver up to the Clerk of this court for destruction all signs, advertisements, stationary, and all other materials in the possession or under the control of Defendants” that have the words “Seventh-day Adventist” and “SDA.” The lawsuit also requests payment for “damages suffered by the Plaintiff and for all attorney’s fees and costs incurred in the General Conference action to take this case to court, and any other further amount for which the court will make provision.

With the help of Max Corbett, a Seventh-day Adventist attorney in Texas, Pastor Perez returned a response to the court on January 19, 1999. In this response the Defendants admit to using the name Seventh-day Adventist, but deny that it is causing damage to the General Conference or that the General Conference even has the right to trademark the name. The Defendants have not engaged in the alleged unfair competition, nor in deceptive and unfair trade practices. They further state that the name Seventh-day Adventist is the name of a faith, and as such is an article of faith, and faith and belief cannot be trademarked. The freedom to use the name Seventh-day Adventist, as an expression of faith, is a fundamental right, and falls under the freedom of religion protected by the Unites States Constitution.

The Defendants also point out that there are a number of organizations and groups outside the General Conference that use the name “Seventh-day Adventist” and that to allow any of them to use the name to the exclusion of the others is to favor some to the exclusion of others which is a violation of the first amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Defendants state that the lawsuit is actually a case of “malicious prosecution,” and that in reality the Defendants are doing what every Seventh-day Adventist should be doing, namely warning the world about coming chaos to the cities and the enforcement of the national Sunday law—the mark of the beast. In addition to asking the court to make the General Conference pay the costs of conducting the lawsuit, they ask the court to declare that the trademark registration is null and void, and unenforceable.

Pastor Perez asked if the General Conference would be willing to work out a settlement outside of court, and the General Conference responded with a settlement proposal dated January 19, 1999. In it Pastor Perez and the rest of the group were to discontinue all use of the name “Seventh-day Adventist,” “SDA,” and “Adventist,” especially on church signs, in advertisements and publications, church activities, Sabbath services or schedules, pamphlets, magazines, stationary, envelopes, faxes, telephone calls or audio materials, etc. The settlement also required that Pastor Perez was to keep all the terms of the agreement confidential (emphasis and underlining in the original). He was to further agree that if in the future he was found by the court to be guilty of using the name in any of the ways that were forbidden he would agree to pay all court costs, attorney’s fees, and “damages.” This settlement was to be binding upon Pastor Perez, all his associates, successors, and assigns.

Even as the General Conference lawsuit was getting under way, an ad was published on January 25, 1999, in the “St. Louis Post Dispatch” when the pope was making his appearance in St. Louis. A man who had been waiting, for 7 to 8 hours, to see the pope bought a newspaper while he was waiting and in the course of looking through it he came to the advertisement with “Earth’s Final Warning.” He read that the pope was the antichrist, and that the Catholic church had changed the day of worship from Sabbath to Sunday. He went to the phone, called the number given at the end of the advertisement, and exclaimed that he had just found out that he had been waiting for eight hours to see the antichrist. He requested more information and literature that was offered.

As can often happen to those who endeavor to stand firmly for the standards of God’s Word, Pastor Perez has been viewed as being “against” the church, although he has publicly offered $1000 to anyone furnishing evidence that he has ever called the church Babylon, or encouraged people to leave the church. People have told him, “You don’t want to work with the conference.” He has responded that he would be happy to work with the conference. He has even stated that he would be willing to stop the radio broadcasts and newspaper advertisements if it can be clearly shown that the Lord wants these stopped. But it would be wrong to stop these things just because man says to stop, when the Lord clearly instructed us to go and preach to all nations and give the last warning message of mercy and impending judgments to the world.

Sometimes, it also happens that General Conference officials will state that they are not filing a lawsuit, only an injunction. An injunction, by definition, is a court order prohibiting or requiring certain actions. A lawsuit, by definition, is a case brought before a court for settlement. An injunction, is a particular kind of lawsuit. It would be a little like pointing to an oak tree and saying: “This is not a tree, it is an oak.” The issue here is whether the court is being sought to carry out and enforce an action.

LETTERS URGENTLY NEEDED

Do not be like the people of Meroz who brought upon themselves the curse of God for doing nothing in an emergency. (See Testimonies, vol. 3, 281.) If you want the Third Angel’s Message to be publicly proclaimed without reprisal, we earnestly ask that you write a letter as soon as possible to Pastor Raphael Perez.

Your letters of support and those of many others are urgently needed. They may be used in court by the lawyers who will be representing the defendants. These letters are part of an Amicus Curiae brief which refers to friends of the court who want to file evidence for use in the case (in this situation on behalf of the defendant). These letters should state reasons why a ruling against the defendants would also be against many others who subscribe to the Seventh-day Adventist faith. All of the letters need to be written in a calm and Christlike way, but should clearly express the concerns which we have. Statements from the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy supporting the concerns which you express are appropriate. We have included some examples of such statements with this report. These letters should be forwarded to Pastor Raphael Perez at the following address:

Eternal Gospel Church of Seventh-day Adventists
P.O. Box 15138
West Palm Beach, FL 33416
Phone: 561-688-2150
Fax: 561-688-0470

The following are points to be considered when you compose your letter.

  1. This lawsuit is civil action case #98-2940 in the United States District Court of the Southern District of Florida.
  2. The author of the letter holds beliefs like those of the defendants in this lawsuit.
  3. Those who share this faith believe that it is our duty to God and our fellow human beings to give the last warning of mercy to the inhabitants of this earth as Pastor Perez and his co-defendants have been actively engaged in doing.
  4. When communicating our faith, Pastor Perez, and all of us who share his faith, should be free from the threat of prosecution.
  5. The name Seventh-day Adventist is a statement of faith and is not the sole property of a group claiming that title. The name was given by God Himself to His last day people.
    “We are Seventh-day Adventists. Are we ashamed of our name? We answer, ‘No, no! We are not. It is the name the Lord has given us. It points out the truth that is to be the test of the churches.’ ” Selected Messages, Book 2, 384.
  6. Those who hold to the historic beliefs of Seventh-day Adventism should not be forced to forfeit the name that represents our beliefs. The use of a name that expresses our faith is a fundamental right and is protected by freedom of religion as outlined in the first amendment of the United States Constitution.
  7. The actions of the Eternal Gospel Church of Seventh-day Adventists do not constitute competition or trademark infringement as the sharing of our faith and the last warning message of mercy to the world is not a competitive or profit making venture.
  8. Those who believe and practice the historic tenets of the Seventh-day Adventist faith will not feel damaged or injured by the proclamation of those beliefs to the public. We do not believe that the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventist has suffered any damage or injury by the actions of the Eternal Gospel Church.
  9. This lawsuit is actually a case of “malicious prosecution” of those who are doing what every faithful Seventh-day Adventist should be doing. As such, those who brought the case should bare the costs of conducting the case.
  10. Since the name Seventh-day Adventist is used by many groups and organizations that work outside the General Conference, to allow some to freely use the name while forbidding others is to favor some to the exclusion of others.
  11. The trademark registration of the name Seventh-day Adventist should be declared by the court to be null, void and unenforceable.

You can also send a copy of your letter to the General Conference President. You may use information from this report as a basis for your thoughts. It would also be appropriate to point out that this action is totally contrary to the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. As Seventh-day Adventists, we feel that a great injustice is being done to fellow believers, and that God is being dishonored and brought to open shame by this action on the part of the General Conference. We urgently request that this case be dropped as soon as possible. The address for the General Conference President is:

General Conference President
General Conference of SDA
12501 Old Columbia Pike
Silver Springs, MD 20904
Phone: 301-680-6090
Fax: 301-680-6464

Thank you for your prayers and help.

Statements About Lawsuits from the Pen of Inspiration:

“These men cast aside the counsel God has given, and do the very things He has bidden them not to do. They show that they have chosen the world as their judge, and in heaven their names are registered as one with unbelievers. Christ is crucified afresh, and put to open shame. Let these men know that God does not hear their prayers. They insult His holy name, and He will leave them to the buffetings of Satan until they shall see their folly and seek the Lord by confession of their sin.” Selected Messages, Book 3, 299.

“God will deal with the unworthy church member who defrauds his brother or the cause of God; the Christian need not contend for his rights. God will deal with the one who violates these rights. ‘Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.’ Romans 12:19. An account is kept of all these matters, and for all the Lord declares that He will avenge. He will bring every work into judgment.” Ibid., 300.

“I have written largely in regard to Christians who believe the truth placing their cases in courts of law to obtain redress. In doing this, they are biting and devouring one another in every sense of the word, ‘to be consumed one of another.’ They cast aside the inspired counsel God has given, and in the face of the message He gives they do the very thing He has told them not to do. Such men may as well stop praying to God, for He will not hear their prayers. They insult Jehovah, and He will leave them to become the subjects of Satan until they shall see their folly and seek the Lord by confession of their sins.” Ibid., 302.

“I call upon you in the name of Christ to withdraw the suit that you have begun and never bring another into court. God forbids you thus to dishonor His name. You have had great light and many opportunities, and you cannot afford to unite with worldlings and follow their methods. Remember that the Lord will treat you according to the stand that you take in this life. . . .

“I tell you solemnly that if you take the action which you now purpose to take, you will never recover from the result of it. If you open before the world the wrongs that you suppose your brethren have done you, there will be some things that will have to be said on the other side. I have a caution to give you.

“In regard to the case of those who shared large responsibilities with you in the Review and Herald, and who have turned to be enemies of the work, you will not wish to hear the verdict that shall be passed upon them when the judgment shall sit and the books shall be opened, and every man shall be judged according to the things written in the books. I want to save you from following a course that would link you up with those who have linked themselves up with fallen angels, to do all the harm they possibly can to those who love God, and who, under great difficulty, are striving to proclaim present truth to the world.” Ibid., 304–305.

The Road to the Inquisition

{{“We should be very cautious lest we take the first steps in this road that leads to the Inquisition.”}}

Solemn events are unfolding around us, both in the world and in God’s professed church. As we see the Bible prophecies being fulfilled in catastrophic world events and political movements, we also see the fulfillment of solemn warnings given to God’s last day people by God’s prophet.

The prophet Isaiah predicted that in the last days God’s chosen people would rebel against Him, and turn their ears away from hearing the Law. They will say to the prophets, who are sent to them, “Prophesy not unto us right things, speak unto us smooth things, prophesy deceits: Get you out of the way, turn aside out of the path, cause the Holy One of Israel to cease from before us.” Isaiah 30:10, 11.

We must ask ourselves the serious question, Have we in Adventism turned aside from hearing the words of God’s prophet? Have we turned from following God’s Holy Law to follow the commands of another leader?

In this article we will trace the steps of the apostasy, in Adventism, in order to understand how we arrived at the place we now occupy in the Historic Adventist movement. We will also consider where this path is leading and what the sure results will be (according to inspiration) unless a complete change is made.

The Road to the Inquisition

Throughout history Satan and his associates have used a consistent series of methods to destroy those who do not agree with them or will not submit to their authority. Speaking of these steps in Signs of the Times, May 26, 1890, Ellen White wrote, “The papal authorities first ridiculed the reformers, and when this did not quench the spirit of investigation, they placed them behind prison walls, loaded them with chains, and when this did not silence them or make them recant, they finally brought them to the fagot and the sword.” But, you might ask, How does this affect us today? God’s prophet continued: “We should be very cautious lest we take the first steps in this road that leads to the Inquisition.”

Although we may not have seen open, physical persecution, are there other ways that one can lead down the road to the inquisition? Consider carefully another quotation where Ellen White outlines how an inquisition has been set up even among God’s professed people. “An inquisition has been set up among those who should be free from all overbearing. God calls for the extinction of this satanic devising. The love of Christ in the heart forbids all oppression . . . But for years, some, even among those who claim to believe present truth, have acted in an oppressive manner, cherishing in the heart that fearful, hateful thing which has led them to exclude their brethren from their fellowship and their councils, because they supposed them wanting in some respects, as though the Lord has made them judges of character.” Review and Herald, January 7, 1902. [All emphasis supplied.]

Has Adventism begun down the road to the inquisition? We will begin our investigation with the General Conference Session in 1888.

The 1888 General Conference

The issues surrounding the 1888 General Conference have been widely discussed through Adventist circles, but the central issue, which Ellen White labored hardest to combat, has received little attention. That overruling problem was the kingly power that existed among the Adventist leadership at that time, which had led to a restriction of God’s work. In the 1888 Materials, Ellen White wrote about this problem many times. The following is a brief sample:

“Over and over again men have said, ‘The voice of the conference is the voice of God; therefore everything must be referred to the conference. The conference must permit or restrict in the various lines of work.’ As the matter has been presented to me, there is a narrow compass, and within this narrow compass, all the entrances to which are locked, are those who would like to exercise kingly power. But the work carried on all over the field demands an entirely different course of action. There is need of the laying of a foundation different from the foundation which has been laid in the past.

“We have heard much about everything moving in the regular lines. When we see that the ‘regular lines’ are purified and refined, that they bear the mold of the God of heaven, then it will be time to endorse these lines. But when we see that message after message given by God has been received and accepted, yet no change has been made, we know that new power must be brought into the regular lines.” 1888 Materials, 1727, 1728.

“The spirit of domination is extending to the presidents of our conferences. If a man is sanguine of his own powers and seeks to exercise dominion over his brethren, feeling that he is invested with authority to make his will the ruling power, the best and only safe course is to remove him, lest great harm be done and he lose his own soul and imperil the souls of others . . . A man’s position does not make him one jot or tittle greater in the sight of God; it is character alone that God values.” Ibid., 1445.

“Now I want to say, God has not put any kingly power in our ranks to control this or that branch of the work. The work has been greatly restricted by the efforts to control it in every line . . . Let me tell you, if your heart is in the work, and you have faith in God, you need not depend upon the sanction of any minister or any people; if you go right to work in the name of the Lord, in a humble way doing what you can to teach the truth, God will vindicate you.” Ibid., 1746.

What were the results of this kingly power? The first was that the work of spreading the Three Angels’ Messages was hindered, and because of this, Ellen White began to give her support to various independent workers and organizations. The foremost of these was Madison College established by E. A. Sutherland and Percy Magan, in 1908.

The Madison School

For years, Sutherland and Magan had worked in Adventist educational institutes. In 1897 they were both serving at Battle Creek College. Under the conviction that the church had not followed the divine plan for education, as set forth in the counsel of Ellen White, they began attempting to make reforms in that institution. They met stiff opposition, and finally they decided to move the college away from Battle Creek to Berrien Springs, where the new college was called Emmanuel Missionary College. Unfortunately, they still faced severe opposition as they tried to follow the divine plan, so, in 1904, they both resigned and made plans to open a self-supporting school in the South. Under the direction of the Lord, Ellen White helped Sutherland and Magan find the property for the new school, Madison College. She also gave direction for the planning of the school and served as a charter member of the board (the only college board one which she ever served ).

All was not easy for the new self-supporting school. Sutherland and Magan faced opposition (although often not open) from the leaders in the conference, and they received no financial support from the denomination. Despite all of this, Ellen White still counseled them to remain independent from the conference. She wrote: “When my advice was asked in reference to the Madison school, I said, Remain as you are. There is danger in binding every working agency under the dictation of the conference. The Lord did not design that this should be. The circumstances were such that the burden bearers in the Madison school could not bind up their work with the conference. I knew their situation, and when many of the leading men in our conferences ignored them, because they did not place their school under conference dictation, I was shown that they would not be helped by making themselves amenable to the conference. They had better remain as led by God, amenable to Him, to work out His plans. But this matter need not be blazed abroad.” Manuscript Releases vol. 8, 203–204.

God knew that if the school was under conference direction, the work of spreading the Three Angels’ Messages would be slowed, just as it had been in the older schools that had been established. Sister White wrote: “I have been shown that in our educational work we are not to follow the methods that have been adopted in our older established schools. There is among us too much clinging to old customs, and because of this we are far behind where we should be in the development of the Third Angel’s Message.” Special Testimonies 11,29.

So, we have seen that because of the problems with kingly power and the unwillingness of the Adventist leadership, in Ellen White’s day, to receive her inspired counsel, the Lord had to raise up independent organizations to train workers and spread the Three Angels’ Messages. And, very often, these independent workers were shunned, or their work was hindered because they wanted to follow the divine counsel. Kingly power wants to crush out individuality and freedom to act upon the dictates of your own conscience. This is what the conference did not like.

Has there been a reformation among the Seventh-day Adventist leadership? Or does the same problem of kingly power, which existed in the last century, still exist today? Have advances down the road to the inquisition been made? We do not have to look very far to discover the answers. Notice what happened to the people in the Hungarian General Conference, during the 1960s and 70s, and you decide if you think the problem has been solved or if it has gotten worse.

The Hungarian Crisis

In 1957, the Hungarian Union of Seventh-day Adventists joined the Council of Free Churches, a Hungarian inter-church ecumenical federation. This was done voluntarily and without any governmental coercion. (The Council of Free Churches is the Hungarian branch of the World Council of Churches, which is pushing for a national Sunday Law among other ecumenical goals.)

The knowledge that their own churches were involved in such an activity was very distressing to the faithful Adventist people in Hungary. Faithful Adventists could not keep silent when they saw such apostasy. Did they have a right to be concerned about the Hungarian Union being a part of the World Council of Churches? Notice carefully these words from the pen of inspiration which the faithful Hungarians used to defend their course of action: “The wide diversity of belief in the Protestant churches is regarded by many as decisive proof that no effort to secure a forced uniformity can ever be made. But there has been for years, in churches of the Protestant faith, a strong and growing sentiment in favor of a union based upon common points of doctrine. To secure such a union, the discussion of subjects upon which all were not agreed—however important they might be from a Bible standpoint—must necessarily be waived. Charles Beecher, in a sermon in the year 1846, declared that the ministry of ‘the evangelical Protestant denominations’ is ‘not only formed all the way up under a tremendous pressure of merely human fear, but they live, and move, and breathe in a state of things radically corrupt, and appealing every hour to every baser element of their nature to hush up the truth, and bow the knee to the power of apostasy. Was not this the way things went with Rome? Are we not living her life over again? And what do we see just ahead? Another general council! A world’s convention! Evangelical alliance, and universal creed!’ When this shall be gained, then, in the effort to secure complete uniformity, it will be only a step to the resort to force.” Great Controversy, 444, 445.

What are the results of an ecumenical movement? This inspired warning tells us that the sure results will be persecution for God’s true people. For, it will be through ecumenism that Protestant America will form an image to the Roman hierarchy, and civil penalties for the faithful will inevitably result.

How did the Adventist leadership respond to this apostasy by the Hungarian Union? In a sermon, Neal Wilson, the President of the General Conference at that time, replied to the faithful Seventh-day Adventists who were protesting this union with the Council of Free Churches. In regard to those who had joined the CFC he stated: “They did something which seemed good in their eyes. To try to cooperate, to receive those benefits and privileges which they are entitled to by this. If we were to talk over this question today, and if they would ask us whether to enter or not, we would advise them not to enter. Not because it is wrong, or because it would be a denial of what God said . . . Not because we violate our teaching by this, and not because the Union would be committing apostasy by joining the Council of Free Churches. We do not believe this. Never think of it in this way. But because our opinion is that it would be wiser to do so.” The Hungarian Union Apostasy, Pilgrim’s Tractbooks, page 63. [All emphasis supplied.]
Was it apostasy for Adventism to join with the fallen daughters of Babylon in an ecumenical bond, in light of the clear testimony of God’s inspired word? The answer is a resounding Yes! “It is a backsliding church that lessens the distance between itself and the Papacy.” Signs of the Times, February 19, 1894.

The faithful Hungarian brethren pleaded with the Hungarian Union to withdraw from the Council of Free Churches, but they would not. As a result, whole churches that persistently protested this union were disbanded. Those who chose to stay a part of the Conference, in order to restore their membership, had to sign a declaration which stated that they were wrong and that they would remain loyal to the General Conference and accept all church policies. Twelve hundred faithful Hungarian Adventists would not sign the declaration, and all 1200 were disfellowshiped. Twenty-six ministers and Bible workers were discharged for protesting the ecumenical involvement, and five church buildings were shut down and the doors barred to keep the faithful Adventists from gathering there. And at one church, in Budapest, guards were stationed around the church to make sure none of those who had been disfellowshipped could use the building.

Open Apostasy in Russia

About the same time as the Hungarian Crisis, a similar situation occurred in Communist Russia. The issues that the faithful Adventists in Russia faced at this time were that the Conference was 1) promoting SDA children attending school on Sabbath, 2) working to stop evangelism in Russia and 3) allowing the pastors to read fictional books from the pulpit on Sabbath morning.

The faithful Seventh-day Adventists began to write letters to the General Conference about the issue sending their children to school on the Sabbath. Their reply was that they could not find a Biblical reason for them not to be attending schools on the Sabbath. (See The Kulakov File, 49.)

Kulakov, a self-appointed leader, was a strong supporter of all of the apostasy which the faithful Adventists were standing up against. When these faithful ones went to the General Conference for help, with reports of what Kulakov was promoting, not only did they not receive any help, but Kulakov received the support of the GC.

With the backing of the General Conference, Kulakov went to the civil authorities, and with their help, forced the faithful Adventists out of their long established churches. He and his followers then became the registered church in Russia. This then made the faithful Adventists an illegal organization, no longer recognized by the state as legitimate, and this forced them to go underground and hold their worship services in secret.

Do you see the progression down the road to the inquisition? Not only were the members disfellowshipped by the church without Biblical grounds, but the conference did nothing to stop Kulakov from using the civil authorities to disband faithful Adventist churches. This action is directly contrary to God’s express word. In Acts of the Apostles, 305–306, we read: “Christians should not appeal to civil tribunals to settle differences that may arise among church members. Such differences should be settled among themselves, or by the church, in harmony with Christ’s instruction . . .

“It was apostasy that led the early church to seek the aid of the civil government, and this prepared the way for the development of the papacy—the beast. Said Paul: ‘There’shall ‘come a falling away, . . . and that man of sin be revealed.’ 2 Thessalonians 2:3. So apostasy in the church will prepare the way for the image to the beast.” Great Controversy, 443–444.

It was apostasy for the early church to seek the aid of the civil government, and it is apostasy when Adventists seek the aid of the civil government today. So, we must ask ourselves, what is the underlying issue that leads men to seek the aid of civil governments to prosecute their brethren? The fundamental issue is the unregenerate heart which seeks to control others. Jeremiah 17:9 says, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?”

When church leaders begin down the road of kingly power, and they wish to control the minds of their brethren, they become progressively more willing use whatever methods they can find to accomplish their purpose. They may start with ridicule, evil-speaking and withholding support, then they may disfellowship the dissenting members, and if that is not successful they may turn to civil authority to meet their end.

All this happened twenty or more years ago in the Adventist Church. Has there been a change since then? Sadly, the answer is no. There has been no reformation among the leadership of the Adventist Church. There is still the same desire to control the work. And many more people, who have been unwilling to submit to the Conference and go along with the apostasy, have been disfellowshiped or have been forced to leave their churches. As this article is being published, the General Conference is using the strong arm of the court to stop the work of a faithful minister (who has been working tirelessly to spread the Three Angels’ Messages), because he uses the name “Seventh-day Adventist.”

A Faithful Adventist Sued

Raphael Perez was a Conference pastor who was preaching the Three Angels’ Messages on radio stations in Florida. When he would not stop presenting the messages, as the Conference demanded, his ministerial license was revoked. Since that time, Raphael’s ministry has expanded to more radio stations and he now puts full-page advertisements in large city newspapers around the United States, giving the final warning message with clarity and power. The suit he is now facing threatens to destroy his ministry and make it financially impossible for him to continue giving the Three Angels’ Messages.

What exactly is the charge in the suit against Pastor Raphael Perez? In his court summons the Conference reveals their true purpose. “[Eternal Gospel has embarrassed the SDA church by his hateful denunciations of the Catholic church.]

The Conference is embarrassed by the clear presentation of the message we have been commanded to give to the world! They have shown this over and over again in recent years. Just this past January, when the Pope visited St. Louis, a number of Historic Adventist groups were there to pass out literature which exposed the Beast and the Mark of the Beast. The conference made a public apology for these “fringe groups” as they called them.

The statement posted on the Adventist Today webb page said, “The recent visit of Pope John Paul II and his message of hope, plea for high moral standards, end to racism, abortion, assisted suicide and the death penalty emphasized issues that need to be at the forefront of thought.

“Unfortunately, in conjunction with the Papal visit, offshoot groups claiming association with the Seventh-day Adventist Church have coordinated negative media campaigns which misrepresent the care, compassion and respect we have for people of all faiths . . .

“As Seventh-day Adventist Christians, we would like to apologize for any and all communications that have advocated discrimination, hatred and unwarranted persecution of members of the Roman Catholic Church . . .

“Kermit Netteburg, communication director for the Adventist Church in North America [said] ‘The public needs to be aware that fringe groups are using the Adventist Church’s name, and not identify the official Church with these ads.’ ”


What a sad day we have come to when the professed people of God no longer call sin by its right name, or call people to come out of Babylon, but instead give medallions to the Pope, complement him for the “good” he has done and participate in his masses.

Has Rome changed? Or does God still require that we expose her iniquity? “The Roman Church now presents a fair front to the world, covering with apologies her record of horrible cruelties. She has clothed herself in Christlike garments; but she is unchanged. Every principle of the papacy that existed in past ages exists today. The doctrines devised in the darkest ages are still held. Let none deceive themselves. The papacy that Protestants [professed Adventists] are now so ready to honor is the same that ruled the world in the days of the Reformation, when men of God stood up, at the peril of their lives, to expose her iniquity. She possesses the same pride and arrogant assumption that lorded it over kings and princes, and claimed the prerogatives of God. Her spirit is no less cruel and despotic now than when she crushed out human liberty and slew the saints of the Most High.” Great Controversy, 571

It is not time to join hands with Rome. It is time to give the message with clearly that “Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” Revelation 14:8. God’s prophet said, “Time is short. The First, Second, and Third Angel’s Messages are the messages to be given to the world. We hear not literally the voice of the three angels, but these angels in Revelation represent a people who will be upon the earth and give these messages . . . With pen and voice we are to proclaim that very message to the world, not in a tame, indistinct whisper.” 1888 Materials, 926.

Dear friends, the time that remains for this world is very short! Right now we must take advantage of every opportunity to present the last warning message to a dying world, for soon it will be forever too late. Let us each surrender ourselves fully to the Lord so that He can change our hearts, so hardened by sin, and make us fit vessels to do His work. For without Him we can do nothing. We must ask ourselves the question, “Which side am I on? Have I taken the first steps that lead down the road to the Inquisition?” Remember, in the final conflict there will be only two groups, the faithful who will be persecuted and those who will be persecuting. May God help us to be among the faithful.

How Do You Know if You Are Listening to Error?

We know that the world is rapidly growing worse, and that the apostasy in the church is also rapidly growing worse. These conditions in the world and in the church set up a context of urgency. We have again come to the place where the children of Israel were when the Lord sent a special message to Amos. “Thus He showed me: and, behold, the Lord stood upon a wall made by a plumbline with a plumbline in His hand. And the Lord said unto me, Amos, what seest thou? And I said, A plumbline. Then said the Lord, Behold, I will set a plumbline in the midst of My people Israel: I will not again pass by them any more.” Amos 7:7, 8.

A plumb line is a string with a weight attached and it is used by builders to make things straight and true vertically. It is an instrument of testing, measuring and judging. This text in Amos pictures the Lord standing on a wall which was made by a plumb line, with a plumb line in His hand.

What is the meaning of this wall? When God called His people out of Egypt, He had sought to teach them obedience by many kinds of miracles, and providential deliverances and even some severe punishments. But the record shows that the majority did what the majority always seem to do. They apostatized.

The Lord put a wall of separation between them and the nations around about them. That wall was made up of the truth of God and it protected them from the things that were evil outside. The stones or building blocks of that wall were: no human sacrifices, no temple prostitution, no paying to the sun god, no burning of children in fire as offerings to the sun god.

However, the people did not like the wall, and they tried to tear it down. “And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord, and forgat the Lord their God, and served Baalim and the groves.” Judges 3:7. In spite of the Red Sea crossing, in spite of the Jordan miracle, in spite of the falling of the walls of Jericho, in spite of the manna, no matter what God did, the majority always turned their back on Him.

This sad observation is repeated five times in the book of Judges, which covers a history of a few hundred years. A remnant stayed true and faithful, but the majority always turned their back on God. Look at Judges 3:12. “And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord.” Then Judges 6:1. “And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord.” A little further on to Judges 10:6. “And the children of Israel did evil again in the sight of the Lord,” . .. again and again and again.

But in Amos 7:8, the Lord said, “I will not again pass by them any more.” He had punished them and they had repented and He forgave again and again and again and again. Finally He said, “No more.” It is over.

There is an epitaph in 2 Chronicles 36:14–16 which says: “Moreover all the chief of the priests [apostasy usually comes from the top down], and the people, transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the house of the Lord which He had hallowed in Jerusalem. And the Lord God of their fathers sent to them by His messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because He had compassion on His people, and on His dwelling place: But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised His words, and misused His prophets, until the wrath of the Lord arose against His people, till there was no remedy.” At last there could be no remedy! Jerusalem was destroyed by fire a little later.

The Case of Modern Israel

What can be said about modern Israel then? Again God called a people out of Egypt—out of the darkness of apostasy. He worked many remarkable miracles of deliverance, and He gave some punishments at times. Incredible things were done under the leading of the Lord. But once again the people have demonstrated the principle that the majority will always turn away from God. A remnant will stand true, but the majority will always turn away from God. We cannot escape this unpleasant fact. Are God’s professed people today honoring the prophets that He sends or are they misusing the prophets and speaking against them? I think you can answer that.

For modern day Israel, God also made a wall. This wall was straight and true, there were no false stones in it: no false Sabbath, no false state of the dead, no false infant baptism, no false applications of prophecy. But people are not satisfied with that wall and they are trying to tear it down. They are not taking the last warning message to the world, saying, “Repent and turn away from your sins.” Instead, the popular message is, “Never mind, you do not need to stop sinning. The Lord is too merciful to allow you to be lost.”

All Seventh-day Adventists used to say, “The hour of God’s judgment is come.” But now many are saying, “There is no longer a need for a judgment. The judgment was all done on the cross.” Scripture in no way supports this teaching, which has become so popular among professed Adventists. We will examine several scriptures that readily prove that point. “Because He hath appointed a day, in which He will judge the world in righteousness by that Man whom He hath ordained.” Acts 17:31.

“And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come.” Acts 24:25.

“In the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.” Romans 2:16. “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ.” 2 Corinthians 5:10.

“I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at His appearing in His kingdom.” 2 Timothy 4:1.

“And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment.” Hebrews 9:27.

“For if we sin willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation.” Hebrews 10:26, 27.

“Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.” Hebrews 13:4.

“So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged.” James 2:12.

“Who shall give account to Him that is ready to judge the quick [the living]and the dead.” 1 Peter 4:5. “The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment.” 2 Peter 2:9.

“And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, He hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day.” Jude 6.

Here are twelve verses in the New Testament which all talk about a judgment that is to come. How then can anyone delude or deceive a Seventh-day Adventist by telling them that the judgment was all finished on the cross? That is a problem and it worries me.

How to Know Error

Some time ago, I presented a sermon in which I read Spirit of Prophecy statements about the danger of listening to error. A lady came to me afterward and said, “I am not sure I would know when I am listening to error.” This made me really sad! Any Seventh-day Adventist who is spending much time with his or her Bible should not have that problem. Let me give you a few examples of errors you are likely to hear, and if you do, I warn you to flee for your life.

On a trip to Texas, Betty and I visited Southwestern Adventist University. We went to see the new men’s dormitory and there we picked up a student newspaper. In that paper there was an article written by a fourth year theology student who, in a few short months would be out ministering to churches. He was the assistant to the chaplain. The headline reads, “IT IS OK TO SIN.” In the opening paragraph he uses a filthy four-letter word. He then goes on to describe his concern in these words: “I read an article in the last “Southwesterner” [this student newspaper] and I perceived or felt its understanding to be that we could not live in sin and still be children of God. This is exactly what I have spent my last four years of ministry fighting against.” [Emphasis supplied.]

The point he wants to prove in this article is that one can live in sin and still be a child of God. Further down there is a line like this, “We are saved even before we are born. [This is reflecting Calvinistic theology.] The whole world was saved at the cross. Jesus not only saved us before we were born, but He has forgiven us of all unrighteousness. His sacrifice was not only for professed Christians, but also for all who ever were or ever will be. He forgave every sin we will ever do at the cross.”

That is a better deal than Tetzel offered in Luther’s time when you had to drop some money in the chest before the soul flew up to heavenly rest. Here there is no charge whatsoever. This deluded young man continued: “He forgave all of your sins that you ever will do before you were even born. If Christ had wanted us to be sinless, He would not have had to die on the cross.” This is an absolute contradiction of the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. The Calvinistic wolf has its teeth in the throat of the Bride of Christ.

My next example is worse. So much worse that I cannot print a single line from this article which was published in a student newspaper at Andrews University. This article was written by a professor who uses his entire article to strongly recommend licentious practices to the students of that University, with written details. His article is a manual of how to practice licentious habits. Those habits that the Spirit of God has clearly told us are defiling, debasing and degrading he calls beautiful and recommends that everyone should be practicing them. I do not see how a man with a licentious mind, like this, could be allowed to influence the students on the campus of an Adventist College.

Men want salvation in sin, but it does not work that way. God’s wall is going to stand. God said to Amos, “Behold, I will set a plumbline in the midst of My people Israel: I will not again pass by them any more.” Amos 7:8. That means that God’s judgment is going to be done once and for all.

My Appeal to Adventist Ministers

In the book The Great Controversy, 654, 655, we have an interesting line. “The minister who has sacrificed truth to gain the favor of men now discerns the character and influence of his teachings. It is apparent that the omniscient eye was following him as he stood in the desk, as he walked the streets, as he mingled with men in the various scenes of life. Every emotion of the soul, every line written, every word uttered, every act that led men to rest in a refuge of falsehood,has been scattering seed; and now, in the wretched, lost souls around him, he beholds the harvest.”

These religious leaders are leading people to perdition while pretending to guide them to the gates of Paradise. Yet we know that this sad state has been predicted in exact detail. “The clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light lest it should shine upon their flocks. By every means at their command, they will endeavor to suppress the discussion of these vital questions.” The Great Controversy, 607.

They will not let a historic Seventh-day Adventist speak at their pulpit, but they will let a Catholic priest. “They try by every means to suppress the discussion of these vital questions.” Read these words of warning. “The people see that they have been deluded. They accuse one another of having led them to destruction; but all unite in heaping their bitterest condemnation upon the ministers.” The Great Controversy, 655.

I want to appeal to my brethren in the ministry of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, who I love very dearly. Please, hear my words! Those of you who are prostituting the pulpits of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, using improperly that which was ordained for a holy use, prostituting it to the devil’s use, please, hear my words! You who are prostituting the classrooms of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, defiling the minds of young people with falsehood and doctrines, listen! You who are prostituting the publications of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and you who are even prostituting the Conference Offices of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, using them to support falsehood and error, hear my words!

You may be saying like the people of Israel, “The Lord will not do good, neither will He do evil,” so let me do what I want to do. (Zephaniah 1:12.) But God is keeping record and everything is going into His computer and, when God pushes the right button, it is all going to come right back on the screen and you are going to be looking at yourself, telling people that they do not need to stop sinning. You are going to be looking at yourself telling people that the judgment was all done on the cross, while you stand in judgment! May God have mercy! I implore you, my brethren, I plead with you, my brethren, be done with it. Finish it off. Recognize that you cannot win.

There is an old black folk sermon that says, “Young man, young man, your arm is too short to fight with God.” I appeal to any minister of the Seventh-day Adventist Church who ever reads these words; you cannot fight with God and win.

More Errors to Flee From

To those of you who may ask the question, “How do I know if I am listening to error?” here are some suggestions. Do you hear “It is O.K. to sin”? Scream and run for your life. If you are not hearing any sermons on overcoming, if you are not hearing any sermons on the Sanctuary, but you are hearing the statement made that it was all done on the cross, flee from the wrath to come.

Are you hearing that obedience is legalism? So many people are being accused of legalism because they want to obey the law. What is legalism? Let’s read Paul’s comparison. “For it is written that Abraham had two sons [Isaac and Ishmael], the one by a bondmaid [Hagar], the other by a freewoman [Sarah]. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory; for these are the two covenants.” Galatians 4:22–24.

There you have a very clear Biblical definition of legalism. We must ask the question delicately and chastely. Was the physical action of Abraham that resulted in the birth of Isaac any different from the physical action of Abraham that resulted in the birth of Ishmael? No, the action was the same. Legalism has nothing to do with actions. The actions can be identical, legalistic or not legalistic.

The difference is the attitude of the heart. In the case of Hagar, the mother of Ishmael, Abraham was saying, “I know how to do this. The laws of the country provide for this. It has all been worked out. I do not need the Lord; I can do this by myself.” That is legalism. In the other case Abraham was saying, “This will not work unless the power of the Lord comes into the situation. There is no way this can be done except by the power of the Lord.” That is not legalism.

Fix this fact in your mind. Legalism is not an action. Legalism is an attitude of the heart. So if you say, “I believe I should obey the commandments of the Lord,” and someone tells you, “Oh, you are a legalist,” you just say, “How long have you been on the throne of God? Can anybody other than God read the heart and see what attitude is there?”

Be warned, if you hear many sermons on justification and very few on sanctification; if they tell you from the pulpit that Christ came in the unfallen nature of man; if they tell you that they believe in original sin. By the way, they probably will not use the word “original sin.” They will probably say something like the definition given in The Review and Herald, January 25, 1990, in an article written by a Seventh-day Adventist theologian and professor in one of our colleges. He describes it very succinctly like this. “If a baby dies a few hours or days after birth, it is still subject to the second death, the condemnation death even though it has never broken any commandment.”

According to the Calvinistic theology that this man is following, that little baby is going to hell and he will burn and burn and burn, and never stop burning! That is where they are taking us. May God have mercy!

If your minister is talking a lot about the Eucharist instead of the Lord’s Supper, watch out. If you hear the line that behavior has nothing to do with salvation, beware. Where did that come from? A Calvinistic theologian wrote, “It is an error to think that there is anything that must be done to inherit eternal life. When we bring the message of Scripture, we must be careful not to create the impression that human repentance, faith and obedience contribute in even the smallest way to divine forgiveness.

“We are not saved by anything we do, not even by our decision to believe. As paradoxical as it may seem, imperfect faith is an evidence of our union with Christ. . . We must get rid of all thought about our actions.” Neal Punt, Unconditional Good News, 135–139. How sick can the human mind become? There does not seem to be any limit. And today Adventists are following in the road of Calvinism.

So what can you do? If you are sneered at and asked if you think you are perfect, just take it and look for a city of refuge. Go to a historic campmeeting and look around, get acquainted. You may find someone from your own area that you did not know about who is feeling the same way you are and having the same problem you are having. Historic Adventists have to find each other, and get to know each other, and unite with each other in a way that will bring the harmony and the unity that God calls for without sacrificing any principle of truth. There is a power that will come with unity that cannot be obtained in any other way. We are claiming that promise. May God bless you and strengthen you to stand for the truth.

Holy Flesh & Celebration Music, Part II

Haskell’s Eye Witness Report

Steven N. Haskell and Elder A. J. Breed were sent by the General Conference to investigate what was going on in the Indiana Conference. They were also to be guest speakers at the 1900 Indiana camp meeting.

“The camp meeting at which this experience took place was held in Muncie, Indiana, while Ellen White was on board ship returning to the United States,” Arthur White wrote. “When James Edson White journeyed to the West Coast to greet his mother, he handed her a letter from Elder Haskell in which he described some of the things that had taken place.” The Early Elmshaven Years, 101, 102.

Haskell had written a second letter to Ellen White describing in more detail the teachings of the Holy Flesh advocates. This second Letter Haskell mailed from Battle Creek, Michigan, the same day he handed Letter #1 to Edson White to deliver to his mother in person. This document is known as the Haskell Letter #2, September 25, 1900.

Arthur White did not refer to the second Haskell letter in his narration of the history of the Holy Flesh Movement. Why? Could it have been because the second letter revealed what the Holy Flesh advocates really taught about the human nature Christ assumed while in the flesh? This second Haskell letter proves that the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church is now teaching the same false doctrine on the human nature of Christ as it was taught by the Holy Flesh advocates!

The Erroneous Holy Flesh Teaching of the Human Nature Of Christ

The Holy Flesh advocates taught that Jesus came to earth in a nature like that which Adam possessed before the fall in the Garden of Eden. Note carefully Haskell’s clear eye-witness description of this false teaching in his second letter to Ellen White.

“When we stated that we believed that Christ was born in fallen humanity, they would represent us as believing that Christ sinned,” Haskell wrote, “notwithstanding the fact that we would state our position so clearly that it would seem as though no one could misunderstand us.” Haskell Letter #2.

“Their point of theology in this particular respect seems to be this,” Haskell continued. “They believe that Christ took Adam’s nature before he fell; so He [Christ] took humanity as it was in the garden of Eden, and thus humanity was holy, and this is the humanity which Christ had; and now, they say, the particular time has come for us to become holy in that sense, and then we will have ‘translation faith’ and never die.” Ibid.

Notice the two important points in the above statements. Haskell stated that:

“When we stated that we believed that Christ was born in fallen humanity, they would represent us as believing that Christ sinned, notwithstanding the fact that we would state our position so clearly that it would seem as though no one could misunderstand us.” This problem still exists today. When anyone states that “Christ was born in fallen humanity,” he or she is accused of believing that Christ sinned.

The Holy Flesh advocates “believe that Christ took Adam’s nature before he fell; so He took humanity as it was in the garden of Eden, and thus humanity was holy, and this is the humanity which Christ had.”

Ellen White had just returned from several years in Australia, and as she came ashore, the Haskell Letter #1 was handed to her in person by her son, James Edson White. Haskell’s Letter #2, arrived in the mail a few days later. Ellen White confronted the false teaching of the Holy Flesh Movement with dispatch. At the close of the 1901 General Conference session, on Wednesday morning, April 17, Ellen White arose and presented a testimony directly to the General Conference. R. S. Donnell, President of the Indiana Conference, and S. S. Davis, the Conference evangelist, who had led out in the false teachings, were present at this meeting.

Ellen White stated in part: “Instruction has been given me in regard to the late experience of brethren in Indiana and the teaching they have given to the churches. Through this experience and teaching the enemy has been working to lead souls astray.” General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 419–422: Selected Messages, Book 2, 31–35.

At the early morning workers’ meeting the following day, Elder R. S. Donnell, Indiana Conference President, confessed that he was wrong. (See “Confession, Donnell,” General Conference Bulletin, vol. IV, Extra No. 18, April 23, 1901, 422.)

Following the General Conference session in 1901, a local Conference session was convened in Indianapolis, Indiana, May 3–5, 1901, to elect new officers. Attending this conference business meeting were Elders A. G. Daniells, W. W. Prescott, A. T. Jones, P. T. Magan, and W. C. White. Ellen White also attended this meeting and addressed the delegates. At the close of her address Ellen White stated: “When I am gone from here, none are to pick up any points of this doctrine and call it truth. There is not a thread of truth in the whole fabric.” G. A. Roberts, The Holy Fanaticism, Ellen G. White Estate, Document File #190.

Notice that Ellen White warned that “none are to pick up any points of this doctrine and call it truth.” And further that, “There is not a thread of truth in the whole fabric.” Not a thread of truth in any point of the Holy Flesh doctrine. Not in their “celebration” type of music—not in their pre-fall of Adam human nature of Jesus Christ doctrine. Yet the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church is vigorously promoting both “celebration” music worship services, and the pre-fall nature of Christ, (as used by the Holy Flesh advocate)!

“Listen to the music, to the language, called higher education,” Ellen White counseled. “But what does God declare it?—The Mystery of Iniquity.” (An Appeal for Missions, 11.)

False Concept of Christ’s Human Nature

As noted above, S. N. Haskell, in a second letter, wrote to Ellen White that leaders of the Holy Flesh Movement in Indiana were teaching the false doctrine that Christ came to earth in the human nature of Adam before he fell in the garden of Eden. Ellen White stated that “none are to pick up any points of this doctrine and call it truth.” Why? Because, “There is not a thread of truth in the whole fabric.” White Estate Document, File #190. According to this statement, if one was to teach that Christ came to earth in the human nature of Adam before he fell in the garden of Eden, he would be teaching a doctrine held by the Holy Flesh Movement! Or if one was to teach the “celebration” music concepts in worship, they would also be teaching a doctrine held by the Holy Flesh Movement. If she were alive today, what would Ellen White say about the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church teaching both Holy Flesh concepts on music and the human nature of Christ?

Holy Flesh False Doctrines Taught Today

“He [Christ] was like Adam before his fall,” Leroy Edwin Froom wrote, “who was similarly without any inherent sinful ‘propensities.’ ” L. E. Froom, Movement of Destiny, 428.

“He [Christ] was perfect in His humanity, but He was none the less God, and His conception in His incarnation was overshadowed by the Holy Spirit so that He did not partake of the fallen sinful nature of other men,” Dr. E. Schuyler English, noted Evangelical leader wrote. (Froom, op. sit., Dr. E. Schuyler English, editor Our Hope, MD, 469.) In his reply letter to Dr. English, Froom stated, “That, we in turn assured him, is precisely what we [Seventh-day Adventists] likewise believe.” Ibid., 470.

“Although born in the flesh, He was nevertheless God, and was exempt from the inherited passions and pollutions that corrupt the natural descendants of Adam.” Questions on Doctrine, 383.

“Jesus was not like you and me when He was here upon earth, for He was never a sinner,” Donald Reynolds wrote. “He came to this earth as Adam before Adam fell.” Donald G. Reynolds, “Adam and Evil”, Review and Herald, July 1, 1965.

The Church is now officially teaching a cardinal doctrine held by the Holy Flesh Movement in direct opposition to the Spirit of Prophecy which stated clearly that, “When I am gone from here, none are to pick up any points of this doctrine and call it truth,” for, “there is not a thread of truth in the whole fabric.”

Falsifying History To Sustain A Doctrinal Position

In 1958, Arthur White, then chairman of the Ellen G. White Estate, wrote a Compiler’s Note in Selected Messages, book 2. The Note is found on page 31, before the chapter titled, “The Holy Flesh Doctrine.” The statement in the Compiler’s Note that “during Christ’s agony in Gethsemane He obtained holy flesh comparable to that possessed by Adam before his fall,” is erroneous. The correct teaching of the Holy Flesh advocates was that “Christ came to earth [when He was born] in the nature of Adam before he fell in the Garden of Eden.”

“They [Holy Flesh advocates] believe that Christ took Adam’s nature before he fell,” Haskell had written to Ellen White, “so He took humanity as it was in the garden of Eden.” Haskell Letter #2.

The deception can be very subtle and confusing. An easy way to separate the confusion is to think of, 1) “the Garden of Eden,” versus, 2) “the Garden of Gethsemane.” The Garden of Eden was before man fell—the Garden of Gethsemane was after man fell.

Arthur White’s Historical Source For the Compiler’s Note

Arthur White’s source for the position in the Compiler’s Note was taken from a letter written by Burton Wade. The letter was dated January 12, 1962, and addressed to Arthur White. Wade had “attended the camp meeting held in Muncie, Indiana, in September of 1900.” Although Burton Wade was 86 years old at the writing of this letter, and was recalling an event that took place 62 years prior, he claimed to have a vivid and clear memory of that camp meeting. Wade stated that the Holy Flesh advocates “believed that, when Christ suffered in Gethsemane, he obtained ‘Holy Flesh’ such as Adam had in the beginning before the fall.”

“This position is a bit at variance with those of G. A. Roberts and S. N. Haskell,” Kenneth Wood wrote, “but how do we know which of these men was capable of making a definitive theological statement?” Kenneth Wood Letter, to William Grotheer, dated at Takoma Park, Maryland, March 13, 1968.

Think for a moment, dear reader, about Kenneth Wood’s question, “but how do we know which of these men was capable of making a definitive theological statement?” Three men gave eyewitness accounts of what the Holy Flesh advocates were teaching on the doctrine of the Incarnation of Christ. Let us consider the relative theological background of each of these three men carefully.

Elder Stephen N. Haskell

Elder Stephen N. Haskell was a well-known Seventh-day Adventist pioneer and writer. Four of his most famous works were, The Cross and Its Shadow, The Seer of Patmos, Daniel the Prophet, and, Haskell’s Handbook (a doctrinal study guide for the layman, published in 1919). Ellen White cited Haskell for his stand on truth in 1888. (Ellen G. White, Ms. 15, 1888, See Through Crisis to Victory, 301). He had been sent to the Indiana Conference to investigate the teaching of the Holy Flesh advocates by the General Conference and was a speaker at the 1900 camp meeting at Muncie, Indiana. Haskell was 67 years old at the time. Burton Wade was a young man of 24 years. Haskell wrote his account two days after the Muncie camp meeting. Burton Wade wrote his letter, recalling the event, 62 years later, and he was 86 years old at the writing of his letter. At this conference, Haskell had discussed doctrinal concepts directly with the leaders of the Holy Flesh Movement. Two days after returning to Battle Creek, Haskell wrote two letters to Ellen White reporting the teachings of the Holy Flesh advocates. One letter he mailed, the other he gave to Edson White, who was passing through Battle Creek on his way to meet Ellen White at the docking of the ship from Australia. Again, both Letter #1 and #2 are on file at the Ellen G. White Estate, of which Kenneth Wood was a trustee.

Elder G. A. Roberts

Elder G. A. Roberts, who later served as President of the Inter-American Division (1936–1941), was also an eyewitness of the Holy Flesh Movement. He had attended their meetings at Indianapolis. Roberts was also a close friend of R. S. Donnell, one of the leaders of the Holy Flesh Movement. Twenty-three years later he wrote his observations of the experience. About the position held by the Holy Flesh advocates on the doctrine of the Incarnation he stated in part: “It was taught that Jesus had holy flesh, and that those who followed Him through this garden experience would likewise have holy flesh; that the text, ‘A body hast thou prepared me,’ showed that Christ had a specially prepared holy body. The Scripture, Hebrews 2:7–14, was used to prove that Christ was born with flesh like ‘my brethren’ and ‘the church’ would have after they had passed through the garden experience.” G. A. Roberts, The Holy Flesh Fanaticism, June, 1923, Document File #190.

Notice that Roberts stated the Holy Flesh advocates believed that:

  • “Jesus had holy flesh”
  • “Christ had a specially prepared holy body” when He came to earth
  • “Christ was born with flesh like My brethren,”
  • “the church would have after they had passed through the garden experience.”

This statement clearly shows that the Holy Flesh advocates believed that Jesus came to earth in the nature of Adam before the fall, and that the Church would obtain this same flesh after passing through the “Garden of Gethsemane” experience. Then they would no longer sin and would be fit for translation.

Burton Wade

Burton Wade, the person who Kenneth Wood and other Seventh-day Adventist leadership depended on for their historical source, was a lay member from Denver, Indiana. In order for Kenneth Wood and the Adventist leadership to accept Wade’s testimony, they had to cast aside the testimony of the three reliable General Conference men, S. N. Haskell, A. J. Breed, and the testimony of G. A. Roberts. Haskell, Breed, and Roberts all agree. Burton Wade gave a different account. It will be left with the reader to decide which of these four men were capable of making “a definitive theological statement.”

Jesse Dunn, an older man who also lived at Denver, Indiana, and was the State Agent at the time, “understood the doctrine as taught by the Holy Flesh advocates in harmony with Haskell and Roberts.” William A. Grotheer, The Holy Flesh Movement, 59. Why did the compilers of the book Selected Messages, Book 2, choose the testimony of Burton Wade over Jesse Dunn, the other eyewitness from Indiana? More important, why did they choose Wade’s testimony over S. N. Haskell and A. J. Breed, the two men sent by the General Conference to investigate the teachings of the Holy Flesh advocates? Why did they ignore the testimony of G. A. Roberts, another reliable General Conference eyewitness?

Startling Discrepancy In Source Dates

The Burton Wade letter was stated to be the source for the Compiler’s Note in Selected Messages, Book 2. However, the book was copyrighted in 1958 and the Wade letter was dated 1962, four years after the book Selected Messages, Book 2, was published!.

“What then is the source of the Compiler’s Note?” Grotheer asked. “Or worse yet, perish the thought, were the first two paragraphs of the Wade letter `planted’ to give substantiation to the basic error in the Compiler’s Note?” William Grotheer, Letter to Kenneth Wood, dated at Florence, Mississippi, March 15, 1968. Grotheer stated further that, “Unless other proof can be offered to the source of the note, this last idea needs to be investigated further, for it would then have validity.”

The Compiler’s Note in the book Selected Messages, Book 2, was published in 1958. The Evangelical Conferences with Dr. Donald Barnhouse and Walter Martin took place two years prior in 1955–56. It was at these Evangelical Conferences that concessions were made on the “Atonement” and the “Human Nature of Christ.” The book Questions On Doctrine, in which these concessions were stated, was published the previous year in 1957.

The Objective Of the Compiler’s Note

Why does the leadership of the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church aspire to teach that the Holy Flesh advocates believed that Christ obtained the nature of the pre-fall Adam “during His agony in Gethsemane”—rather then “Christ obtained Adam’s unfallen nature when He came to earth”? Is it that the leadership now teaches that “Christ obtained Adam’s unfallen nature when He came to earth,” the very same false doctrine as the Holy Flesh advocates taught?

If the Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders accepted Haskell’s and Roberts’ testimony, they would have to concede that they are now teaching a doctrine held by the Holy Flesh advocates. Then the Seventh-day Adventist Church leadership would have to explain why they are teaching a doctrine in direct opposition to the Spirit of Prophecy. They would have to negate the statement by Ellen White that: “There is not a thread of truth in the whole fabric,” and again, “when I am gone from here, none are to pick up any points of this doctrine and call it truth.” Is it not curious that the Church leadership cannot see the truth on this point as both the G. A. Roberts’ document and the Haskell letters are in the files of the Ellen G. White Estate and are available for research?

In a letter to William Grotheer, Arthur White stated that to him the teaching of the Holy Flesh advocates on the human nature of Christ was, “a matter of little importance.” He added further that, “Except as there may be lessons in the experience for us today, it is not a matter of great interest or consequence to the church now.” Arthur L. White, Letter to William H. Grotheer, dated at Takoma Park, Washington D. C., December 13, 1968.

This, of course, is not true. Thirty years after Arthur White made this statement, the Seventh-day Adventist Church is divided in a debate over the human nature Christ assumed while in the flesh and the “celebration” music style of worship now prevalent throughout Adventism. Both of these false concepts were first advocated by the Holy Flesh movement. There are tremendous lessons for the Church today in relation to the Holy Flesh Movement of Indiana.

“We have nothing to fear for the future,” Ellen White counseled, “except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history.” Life Sketches, 196.

In his letter, Arthur White admitted that the truth on this matter could not be determined “without thorough, painstaking research (which seemed uncalled for in this case)” because only a brief historical note was being written. Ibid., White Letter, December 13, 1968. This statement reveals that historical inserts to the writings of Ellen G. White were made, “Without thorough, painstaking research.”

After Arthur White’s attention had been directed to the Haskell statement he admitted that, “Elder Haskell saw it differently than I have reported.” White observed further that, “The Wade testimony is interesting. I felt it was corroborative.” But what was it corroborative to? It was corroborative to the position White had presented in the Compilers Note! As an after thought, White admitted that the Wade letter “is not conclusive because of the time lapse (62 years).” He concludes the paragraph by stating, “One is led to say, ‘So what?’ ” Ibid.

So what? The Wade letter was written in 1962, four years after the Compiler’s Note was published in Selected Messages, book. 2, in 1958. How could Arthur White use the information in the Burton Wade letter, written four years after the Compiler’s Note was written?

In his letter, Arthur White promised to restudy the issue “and if I am convinced that the note does not correctly represent the facts, I shall request the Board of Trustees of the Ellen G. White Estate to approve a rewording which we will ask the publishers to place in the next printing of the book.” Ibid. The book has been reprinted since this letter was written by Arthur White in 1968. Over 30 years have passed, and the Compiler’s Note remains unchanged.

Still Ignoring the Haskell Letter #2

In 1983, fifteen years after his letter to William Grotheer, Arthur L. White wrote a six volume set of books on the life of Ellen White. In volume 5, The Early Elmshaven Years, 1900–1905, pages 100-107, White covered the history of the Holy Flesh Movement of Indiana. On pages 101 and 102, White quoted from the Haskell Letter #1. Although for the past fifteen years he was aware of, and had access to, the Haskell Letter #2 in the Ellen G. White Estate Document Files, White still chose to ignore this second Haskell Letter. Why? It seems very probable to this author that it was because the second Haskell letter was theologically opposed to the present Seventh-day Adventist position on the human nature of Christ, and to the Compiler’s Note that White had written in Selected Messages, Book 2.

Today, in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, we see not only the very same false doctrine of Christ’s human nature as taught by the Holy Flesh advocates, but also the very same “celebration music” services of the Holy Flesh advocates in many Seventh-day Adventist Churches. It is past time that we consider the seriousness of this matter and where it is leading us.

Note: If you would like more information about the danger of the Celebration movement in Adventism today, call Steps to Life and order our booklet titled No Time to Celebrate. Available in English and Spanish for $1.00 per booklet. Call for bulk prices.