Seventh Day Adventist

1901 Rejected, part 2

by

When Nimrod and his followers declared their independence from the Lord, Nimrod became the first King of Babylon and eventually built the tower of Babel.

“The tower had reached a lofty height, and it was impossible for the workmen at the top to communicate directly with those at the base . . . Confusion and dismay followed. All work came to a standstill . . . in their rage and disappointment they reproached one another . . . Men were made to feel that there is a God who ruleth in the heavens and that He is able to confuse and to multiply confusion in order to teach men that they are only men.” Testimonies, vol. 8, 214.

When the 1903 General Conference adopted a plan for a “World General Conference” with one General Conference President, Ellen White used this tower to illustrate the problems of centralization” as a “confederacy” born of “rebellion against God.” (Testimonies, vol. 8, 213.)

When Israel rejected the Lord as their King, and asked Samuel for a king, this form of centralized government under men eventually led to the division of the nation and destruction of Israel. Men had failed to learn from the tower of Babel that man cannot stand where God is to stand. The same discord generated at the tower of Babel was not comprehended by God’s people. Just as the tower led to confusion, Jerusalem eventually became “the city of confusion.” Isaiah 24:10. Choosing a king only deepened an apostasy into a “conspiracy” that broke the covenant, making Jerusalem a curse. The Lord had to destroy Jerusalem because of a false witness to the world. The prophecy of Isaiah 24:10 is a final day prophecy that applies to spiritual Jerusalem in the final days of earth’s history when the “gleaning grapes” (remnant) “lift the voice” against “the treacherous dealers” which causes “the shaking.” Isaiah 24:13, 14.

Centralization of powers in an hierarchical system in the days of Israel compounded abuses which were considered as treachery against the Lord and a backsliding to the gods of “strangers.” (Isaiah 1:7; Jeremiah 2:11, 25.) The treacherous dealers, according to Scripture, are those who “as a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so ye deal treacherously with Me, O house of Israel, saith the Lord.” Jeremiah 3:20.

 

What Might Have Been

 

It was the Lord’s plan in 1901 to spare the Church from repeating the history of Israel by a knowledge of their mistakes. But warnings from the messenger in 1901 and at the beginning of the 1903 session were not heeded. (General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 26; 1903, 29–30.)Decentralization had been stressed during the 1890s in an attempt to direct the Church away from a layer system of government. Decentralization was the theme of the 1901 plan of reorganization, which provided for the division of the field into the American General Conference and the European General Conference. The presidents of these conferences were to serve under Christ, the Captain of the 1901 plan. But since the brethren failed to come into unity in an upper room experience, “What might have been” (Testimonies, vol. 8, 104–106), was an impossibility. “Men did not humble themselves before the Lord,” and the presence of the Holy Spirit which was essential to unite men under Christ as “Captain” of the 1901 plan, was “not imparted.”(Testimonies, vol. 8, 104.)

Because men refused to unite under Christ in the 1901 plan, the 1903 plan of centralization under man became a necessity to prevent total fragmentation of the work. To maintain any semblance of organizational unity, the American General Conference transformed itself into “a World General Conference,” and coerced the budding European General Conference to revert to the European Union Conference. The delegates chose one man as General Conference President just as Israel chose a king; and the 1903 plan of centralization under man replaced the 1901 apostolic plan under Christ. This was an hierarchical plan of church organization in which man would rule over man in a layer system of organization. This plan was introduced on April 6, 1903 and was accepted on April 9, 1903.

 

The Most Terrible Sorrow of My Life

 

Prior to the 1903 General Conference, Ellen White had doubts about attending the session because of her disappointment over the results of the 1901 conference.

“I do not now expect to attend the General Conference. I should not dare to go; for I am very much worn with the responsibilities . . . I feel very intensely, because I understand the peril of those who as blind men have followed their own counsel. Were I to go to the Conference, I should be compelled to take positions that would cut some to the quick . . .

“The result of the last General Conference has been the greatest, the most terrible sorrow of my life. No change was made . . . they did not walk in the light that the Lord had flashed upon their pathway, but carried into their work the wrong principles that had been prevailing in the work at Battle Creek.

“The Lord has marked every movement made by the leading men in our institutions and conferences. It is a perilous thing to reject the light that God sends.” Letter from Ellen White to Judge Jessie Arthur on January 15, 1903.

Thus, in less than two years, the test of time revealed that “wrong principles” had been carried into the work and “no change” was made after the 1901 session. In spite of her disappointment, Mrs. White arranged to attend the 1903 session which convened March 27, 1903, at Oakland, California.

 

Brethren Cautioned to Look Beneath the Surface

 

At the April 5 meeting, she expressed deep concern over the decisions of the delegates that would influence the work of God.

“I have been carrying a very heavy burden. For the last three nights I have slept very little. Many scenes are presented to me. I feel an intense interest in the advancement of the work of God, and I say to our leading brethren, As you consider the questions that shall come before you, you are to look beneath the surface. You are to give careful consideration to every question discussed.” General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 104.

 

Elder Daniels’ Proposal

 

The Foreign Mission Board, chaired by A.G. Daniels, was still an international organization between 1901 and 1903, which provided the wedge to introduce the new plan of organization.

On April 6, 1903, one day after Ellen White warned the brethren to look beneath the surface, Elder Daniels made his proposal:

“Now, with reference to making the General Conference Committee the Mission Board: As the work is now shaping, the province of the General Conference Committee is of an advisory character to a large extent—not altogether, by any means—and is of a missionary character or phase.

“One who has not been in our office can scarcely realize what a complete change has been wrought at the headquarters of the General Conference . . .the administration in the United States has all been taken away, and is now placed in the hands of scores of men. But while that has been going on, our missionary problems have been greatly increasing . . .

“I have become convinced that one of the great purposes of the General Conference Committee would be to deal with these world-wide problems everywhere.” General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 100, 101.

Elder Daniels’ proposal was actually a cry for help for a human method to give unity of action within the organization. Men in authority could not work under Christ in the 1901 plan because they failed to come into “working order.” (General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 23.) Without Christ as “the Captain,” the only alternative was a strong central committee under man. A world Conference Committee chaired by one president, a concept foreign to the principles of the 1901 plan, was now proposed to manage “world-wide problems everywhere.”

Elder Daniels continued: “I believe that the Committee ought to be composed something like this: That the president of every Union Conference and the chairman of every Union mission field in the world ought to be a member of that committee. This will give us a larger and more representative committee, even, than we have today. We get the whole world directly represented on the General Conference Committee. Then add to that the heads, the leading men in special departments, such as education, publishing, and medical, and put on a few men of special experience, and special ability from their experience, and you have a thoroughly representative committee, representing all interests of this great work in all parts of our little world. And that will give us a truly representative and General Conference Committee, a World’s Conference Committee.

“Now, that, to my mind, brethren, is what should be the Mission Board of the Seventh-day Adventist denomination . . .Then the members of the committees can go to different parts of the field working harmoniously, every one, though separated, to carry out this policy. Now, there must be some executive body appointed to carry out the policy.” General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 100, 101.

 

Strong Objections From the Minority

 

The Mission Board, which was still an international organization, became the vehicle for the American General Conference at Battle Creek to grow into a super conference, a World General Conference.

Acceptance of Elder Daniels’ plan did not come easily. The strong objections of the minority report were supported by the plea of Percy T. Magan claiming the new plan swept away the reorganizational principles of the 1897 and 1901 Conferences and opened the way for the papal form of church government.

“But I want to say to you that any man who has ever read those histories, Neander’s History of the Christian Church, Mosheim’s or any other of the great church historian—any man who has ever read those histories can come to no other conclusion but that the principles which are to be brought in through this proposed constitution, . . . are the same principles, and introduced in precisely the same way, as they were hundreds of years ago when the Papacy was made . . .

“I do not deny for a moment but what improvements have been made in the distribution of administrative power. I am heartily in favor of all that has been done in regard to Union Conferences, but I say that, as far as the head of the thing is concerned, . . . the moment you vote it you vote yourselves right back where we were two years ago and before it.” Percy T. Magan, General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 150.

E.A. Sutherland stated that it was his impression that the General Conference was to be broken up into three parts: “I understood six years ago, when they elected their president of Europe, and also of Australia, and of this country, that those three men were supposed to be on the same plan . . . and that, when the General Conference should be called, it would be the calling of all of these men from these three parts, and that no one of these presidents would be supposed to occupy any greater position than either of the others . . . I know that it was talked at that time, that it should be so, and this country was divided up into Union Conferences, or we called them districts at that time; but the plan was the same as we are following at the present time.

“I believe, brethren, the thing to do is to go back where we were two years ago in the matter of reorganization, and take it up, and carry it out, and give it a fair trial, because those who have been in the responsible places have admitted that they did not carry out the letter of that,because they did not believe that it was possible. I believe that it is possible.” E. A. Sutherland, General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 168, 169.

 

Unbelief Gives Birth to 1903 Plan

 

The majority of the brethren simply “did not believe it was possible!” The same unbelief that prevented the Israelites from entering the promised land, permeated the General Conference and prevented the “Captain” of the heavenly hosts from leading His people into the heavenly Canaan. In spite of many hours and days of deliberations, the 1903 plan of centralization gathered support. Elder G. I. Butler exerted a strong influence for centralization.

“We are talking now on principles, brethren, and you will pardon one of the old hands, who has been in the work for so many years, and who has had the presidency of the General Conference for thirteen terms, for saying that he fails to see that anything of a kingly nature can be brought into it. I do not believe there can . . .

“The difficulty in all these things, I believe, is in regard to the principles being put in practice by the men that are placed in office . . . I cannot see a particle of danger in our old system of organization . . .

“If men will walk humbly before God, and remain willing to be instructed by the Testimonies of His Spirit, they will never find anything wrong in the old system of organization brought under the express influence of the Spirit of God . . .

“As one of the old hands, I see in this new constitution the same principles that we had in the beginning, that were endorsed by Sister White at the first. This is why I favor the new constitution.” G. I. Butler, General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 163.

 

James White’s Position on Organization

 

  1. I. Butler was a known advocate of “centralization.” He propounded his position to the General Conference in a paper on “Leadership” in 1873. (Review and Herald, November 18, 1873.) His position was endorsed by the delegates at that conference which stirred James White to write an editorial on the dangers of centralized leadership as best understood by the “prophetic eye of the Son of God” when he indicated “all ye are brethren.”

“And at no time during his public ministry does Christ intimate that anyone of his disciples should be designated as their leader . . .

“And there is no intimation that the apostles of Christ designated one of their number above another as their leader . . .”The apostle exalts Christ as the great head of the church, and the only one to whom she should look for leadership, in Hebrews 12:1, 2.

“Moses was simply a faithful servant in the Jewish house, while Christ is a son over his own house. Moses was not a lord in the Jewish house. He was servant, while Christ was lord . . .

“Christ, then, is the leader of His people in all the ages . . .

“But here we wish it distinctly understood that officers were not ordained in the Christian church, to order, or to command the church, and ‘to lord it over God’s heritage’ . . . Christ will lead His people, if they will be led.” James White, Review and Herald, December 1, 1874.

In 1875, G. I. Butler’s position on leadership was considered “incorrect” and was “rescinded” as recorded in the Conference Constitution (August 1875). Elder White later emphasized in an editorial in 1881 that no one “can properly represent Christ who surrenders his judgment to his fellowmen.”

“It was not the design of God that any system of organization should exist in the Christian Church that would take the leadership from Christ.

“The minister who throws himself on any Conference Committee for direction, takes himself out of the hands of Christ. And that committee that takes into its own hands the work of directing the ambassadors for Christ, takes a fearful responsibility. ‘One is your master [leader], even Christ, and all ye are brethren.’ Matthew 23:8. May God preserve to us our organization and form a church discipline in its original form.” Review and Herald, January 4, 1881.

Unfortunately, James White had been laid to rest years previously and he could offer no rebuttal to G. I. Butler’s position. The majority of the delegates were charmed into voting for a World General Conference on April 11, 1903 in the most controversial session in the history of the denomination. Eighty-five delegates gave an affirmative vote, twenty delegates were opposed, and three abstained. (General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 73.) A layer system of authority under man in 1903 replaced the 1901 plan of Jesus given through the Lord’s messenger and supported by the teachings of Jesus.

“Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be among you.” Mark 10:42.

 

The Europeans are Forced to Submit

 

After the 1901 plan was officially rejected at the 1903 Session, President L. R. Conradi went home as “First Vice-President . . . to labor in the European Union Conferences and Missions, as the Executive Committee (in Battle Creek) may advise, and to preside at the councils of the members of the Executive Committee, which may be held in Europe, in the absence of the president.” General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 145. The majority were determined to have a “one-man president” over the whole world. Although the Europeans objected, they were finally forced to their knees at Friedensau in 1907 to accept their position as a Union Conference. World control of the ministry, the Sabbath school, the publishing work, the educational, and medical work by the General Conference Committee headquarters in America was now undisputed.

The Stone which was to be the Head of the corner, was set at naught by the delegates of the 1903 session. Nevertheless, Ellen White supported Elder Daniels just as Samuel supported King Saul.

 

A Pretense of Building on the Right Foundation

 

Ellen White had absented herself from the discussion of the 1903 plan, but a few days after the 1903 session was adjourned, the Lord gave her a special message for the Church. Two years previously when planning for the reorganization in 1901, she had made it clear that the brethren were to go back to the “foundation” and “build on a different principle.” General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 25. The Lord revealed the truth about the 1903 plan on April 21, 1903.

“The heavenly Teacher inquired: ‘What stronger delusion can beguile the mind than the pretense that you are building on the right foundation and that God accepts your works, when in reality you are working out many things according to worldly policy and are sinning against Jehovah.” Testimonies, vol. 8, 245.

 

They Have Chosen Their Own Ways  I Will Choose Their Delusion

 

The delegates at the 1903 session got off the “foundation” when they failed to “look beneath the surface.”

“One who sees beneath the surface, who reads the hearts of all men, says of those who have had great light . . . ‘Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations. I also will choose their delusions…’ ‘God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie,’ ‘because they received not the love of the truth that they might be saved,’ ‘but had pleasure in unrighteousness.’ Isaiah 66: 3, 4; 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 10, 22.” Testimonies, vol. 8, 249.

 

Problems in Managing A Great Business

 

The difficulty in administrating a World General Conference is best illustrated by Elder Daniels himself who referred to this experience as being “pressed by seemingly endless problems . . . and succession of crises. Extensive travel . . .necessary that he might have first hand knowledge . . . crowded him for time. He failed to ‘tarry’ he said, until he was endued with ‘power from on high’. . . He had been much like the busy conductor of a transcontinental train, the captain of a great ship, or the manager of a great business concern. He called it the ‘peril of sheer activity of God’—the encroachment of the mechanical, and the submergence of the spiritual. That he said, was where he had erred.” Movement of Destiny, 25.

Saddled with the system that replaced the 1901 plan, A. G. Daniels misinterpreted its pitfalls as his own shortcomings. How many World General Conference Presidents with finite minds could share his frustrations in attempting to fulfill a position requiring the One with infinite capacity?

When the 1901 plan was rejected, Battle Creek could not be preserved. But the denominational pillars of faith had to be saved from pantheistic heresies described as “the alpha of deadly heresies.” Series B, No. 2, 50. The 1903 hierarchical plan became necessary. Although the 1903 plan could not bring men into one accord, the presence of Elder Daniels as “the right man in the right place” (Series B, no. 2, 41) preserved the denomination from falling to pantheistic theories that infiltrated our ranks through the influence of liberal Protestants visiting Battle Creek. A Seventh-Day Baptist educator may have been instrumental in undermining the faith of Kellogg and many others at Battle Creek. (See Movement of Destiny, 351, 352.)

An hierarchical form of church government was required by default. When the brethren failed to enter into an “upper room” experience, thy also failed to see “a particle of danger in the old system of organization” and the “new constitution.”

The 1903 plan that allowed a powerful personality like Daniels to meet the Alpha would permit the Omega to follow (Series B no. 2, 50); because, the 1903 plan based on human power allowed “self” to be exalted. Self-exaltation was the basis of the Alpha. (Ibid. 91.) It is certainly a problem in an hierarchical form of ecclesiastical rule. Placing the entire denominational leadership under an hierarchical plan would affect the attitude of every worker. Therefore the entire Church leadership would be threatened by the Omega.

Will a “one man president” of “a world General Conference” be preserved from the Omega (pantheistic theories) that are rampant among other denominations today?

Will a “one man president” meet the deadly heresies of the Omega “with full steam ahead”? Or, will he fail with it?

Will the delegates at G. C. ’85 consider the 1901 apostolic plan, a plan designed by Jesus prior to His ascension, and given again to His people at the 1901 session?

Will the Lord raise up delegates who will stand as Sutherland “and take it up, and carry it out, and give it a fair trial?”

Will the delegates present a resolution to reconsider the 1901 plan?

 

1901 Rejected, part 1

by

“In reviewing our past history, having traveled over every step of advance to our present standing, I can say, Praise God! As I see what the Lord has wrought, I am filled with astonishment, and with confidence in Christ as leader. We have nothing to fear for the future, except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us, and His teaching in our past history.” Life Sketches of Ellen G. White, 196.

 

Introduction

 

During a visit with fellow Christians who had escaped severe persecution under Communist controlled Eastern Europe, a discussion came about as to the purpose of the 1901 plan that provided for the European General Conference. Because the plan failed, these people suffered great religious persecution and hardship. To them, the 1901 plan was a call for God’s people to “turn (their) eyes upon Jesus.”

During the opening session, Ellen White said that God’s people must be “born again.”

“There must be a renovation, a reorganization; a power and strength must be brought into the committees that are necessary. Let every one of you go home, not to chat, chat, chat, but to pray. Go home and pray. Talk with God. Go home and plead with God to mold and fashion you after the divine similitude.” The General Conference Bulletin, 1903.

A “renovation” was essential for the 1901 plan of reorganization to function. The call to look to Jesus is the very meaning of the Third Angel’s Message. (Testimonies to Ministers, 93.)

“But the work that all heaven was waiting to do as soon as men prepared the way, was not done; for the leaders closed and bolted the door against the Spirit’s entrance. There was a stopping short of entire surrender to God. And hearts that might have been purified from all error were strengthened in wrong doing . . . and said to the Spirit of God, “Go thy way for this time; when I have a more convenient season, I will call for thee.” Letter to J.H. Kellogg from Ellen White, August 5, 1902.

When there was no renovation, the plan of reorganization could not be implemented. The 1901 plan was rejected and it had to be replaced with A.G. Daniells’ plan: “a World General Conference” that destroyed the European General Conference. At a time when our people are suffering great persecution in Eastern Europe, there is a call to look to Jesus with the 1901 plan.

 

The 1901 Plan of Reorganization of the General Conference

 

When Ellen White stepped to the podium on April 2, 1901 on the first day of the General Conference session, she wasted no time in calling for a reorganization.

“What we want now is a reorganization. We want to begin at the foundation, and to build upon a different principle . . .

“According to the light that has been given me—and just how it is to be accomplished I can not say—greater strength must be brought into the managing force of the conference.” The General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 25.

Just how greater strength within the organization was to be accomplished was not understood until two days later when the Committee on Plans presented the formation of a separate Union Conference for the work of the South. The work in the South had unique requirements and a multitude of problems because of the illiteracy, poverty and racial difficulties still being experienced in the post Civil War period. The Committee on Plans felt that the uniqueness of the work would present special management problems making it desirable for the South to organize into a Union Conference. They had also discussed the formation of the American Union Conference, which had been sanctioned and approved by the General Conference in 1897. The European Union Conference had already been formed in 1898. (The General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 67.) In this discussion, it was assumed that both of the conferences would return a tithe to the General Conference. (The General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 67.)

At this time in history, the Australasian and European Union Conferences were under the administration of the General Conference in Battle Creek. The new proposal would bring two additional Union Conferences in America under the General Conference at Battle Creek.

It was during this meeting, that Mrs. White was given the actual plan of reorganization: “I am thankful that there is to be a time when the mists will be cleared away. I hope that this time has begun here. We want the mists here to be cleared away. I want to say that from the light given to me by God, there should have been years ago organizations such as are now proposed. When we first met in Conference, it was thought that the General Conference should extend over the whole world. But this is not in God’s order.” The General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 68.

Heretofore, it was thought that all territory organized into the conferences would be under the administration of the General Conference at Battle Creek. At that time the Foreign Mission Board was still a separate organization from the General Conference and had the responsibility of the mission fields. Many messages had been given in the prior decade on the decentralization of the work at Battle Creek, but it was not understood until this meeting just how this was to be accomplished. Now it was clear [that] the field was to be divided so that the administrative responsibilities would not be centralized in one General Conference committee. To expect one group of men, regardless of the size of that committee, to grasp the problems and supervise the entire organized world field was beyond the capabilities of finite minds.

Ellen White continued: “Conferences must be organized in different localities, and it will be for the health of the different Conferences to have it thus. This does not mean that we are to cut ourselves apart from one another, and be as separate atoms. Every Conference is to touch every other Conference, and be in harmony with every other Conference. God wants us to talk for this, and He wants us to act for this. We are the people of God, who are to be separate from the world. We are to stand as representatives of sacred truth.” The General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 68–69.

The problem of a General Conference that attempted to extend over the whole world was then illustrated by Mrs. White noting several instances of mismanagement she observed on her trip to Battle Creek. There were delays as well as problems resulting from decision making by those without first-hand knowledge of the issues. Also, the centralization of the work had created a dependency at the local level which caused weakness in the work of God. There was a loss of urgency in giving the Three Angels’ Messages, the most important work ever entrusted to a people and the only hope for a perishing world.

The work of the church was not to utilize the management principles of the world by centralization in finite human beings. The work of God was to centralize in Christ, the great General He would direct the various fields of labor “through the Holy Spirit.”

“We want to understand that there are no gods in our Conference. There are to be no kings here, and no kings in any Conference that is formed. ‘All ye are brethren.’ . . . The Lord God of Israel will link us all together. The organizing of new Conferences is not to separate us. It is to bind us together. The Conferences that are formed are to cling mightily to the Lord, so that through them He can reveal His power . . .

“Remember that God can give wisdom to those who handle His work. It is not necessary to send thousands of miles to Battle Creek for advice, and then have to wait weeks before an answer can be received. Those who are right on the ground are to decide what shall be done. You know what you have to wrestle with, but those who are thousands of miles away do not know.” The General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 68–69.

Decentralization was the theme of the reorganization of the General Conference in 1901. The call for “a renovation, a reorganization on an entirely different principle” on April 2, was now made clear on April 4. Christ was to link heads of conferences and institutions. He would do the binding. The 1901 plan was a call to look to Christ.

The clarification of basic principles of organization on April 4, 1901 resulted in the division of the field and the supervision and management of the work of God being placed in different locations. The European General Conference was formed in July, 1901 with L.R. Conradi as the President. A. G. Daniells became president of the General Conference in America. Our most dedicated Adventist Church history substantiates this fact: “Hence, the European field came to be regarded as a self-sufficient continental unit, and it was called ‘The General Conference in Europe,’ while the organization in the land of origin was called ‘The General Conference in America.’ And there was, besides, the Australasian Union Conference.” Origin and History of Seventh-day Adventists, vol. 3, 348.

The action taken at the 1901 session in limiting the General Conference geographically received the approbation of “the God of heaven and His angels” who “walked up and down the aisles” during that meeting. (The General Conference Bulletin, 1901, 463.)

There was no suggestion of a “World General Conference” in the 1901 plan for reorganization.

“The question to be settled is who is God? . . . In his efforts to dethrone God and to put himself in the place of God, Satan has deceived man in the rebellion . . . When the true God is known and acknowledged for what He really is, when He is given the place which belongs to Him in all things, and we take the place which belongs to us, then He is glorified and we are glorified in Him. This means our salvation from sin now and eternally.” The General Conference Bulletin, 1898, 221.

The geographical limitations of the General Conference in Battle Creek were also in alignment with counsel from the servant of the Lord given in August, 1896: “As a people we should study God’s plans for conducting His work. Wherever He has given directions in regard to any point, we should carefully consider how to regard His expressed will. This work should have special attention. It is not wise to choose one man as president of the General Conference. The work of the General Conference has extended, and some things have been made unnecessarily complicated. A want of discernment has been shown. There should be a division of the field, or some other plan should be devised to change the present order of things.” Testimonies to Ministers, 342.

This counsel appeared in The General Conference Bulletin, 315, in 1897 and said our world work should be divided up into three divisions: “The presidency of the General Conference Association, the presidency of the Mission Board, and the presidency of the General Conference work in North America, should be placed on three different men.”

The brethren honestly attempted to respond to this counsel at the 1897 General Conference session by electing three presidents who presided over the General Conference Committee, and the Foreign Mission Board.

In the 1901 plan of reorganization, Christ was to be the “greater strength” to direct and unify the different General Conferences. Mrs. White was elated. The 1901 plan was the very essence of the Third Angel’s Message applied to church government. Leadership was to look to Christ instead of man. Heads of large conferences and various institutions were to stand as equals under Christ in an apostolic form of church government. However, only a few months after the 1901 session problems erupted over management. Edson White’s ministry in the South caused some difficulties with the administration. Nevertheless, his mother was confident that the problems would be resolved. A portion of a letter from Ellen White to her son Edson has been released for publication: “Your course would have been the course to be pursued if no change had been made in the General Conference. But a change has been made, and many more changes will be made and great developments will be seen.” Letter 54, 1901.

Unfortunately, as the months passed by, leadership’s failure to implement the 1901 plan became evident. Her confession is written in a private letter to a friend and confidant: “The result of the last General Conference has been the greatest, the most terrible, sorrow of my life. No change was made. The spirit that should have been brought into the whole work as the result of that meeting was not brought in because men did not receive the testimonies of the Spirit of God. As they went to their several fields of labor, they did not walk in the light that the Lord had flashed upon their pathway, but carried into their work the wrong principles that had been prevailing in the work at Battle Creek.” Letter to Judge Jesse Arthur from Ellen White, Elmshaven, January 15, 1903.

What happened? The cause was revealed to her ten days prior to writing the letter to Judge Arthur. On January 5, 1903 she was considering what might have been done at the last General Conference when she lapsed into a dream.

“The speaker turned to those who had been praying, and said: ‘We have something to do. We must confess our sins, and humble our hearts before God.’ He made heartbroken confessions and then stepped up to several of the brethren, one after another, and extended his hand, asking forgiveness. Those to whom he spoke sprang to their feet, making confession and asking forgiveness . . . The spirit of confession spread through the entire congregation. It was a Pentecostal season . . . Then I aroused from my unconsciousness, and for a while could not think where I was. My pen was still in my hand. The words were spoken to me: ‘This might have been’ . . . disappointment came over me as I realized that what I had witnessed was not a reality.” Testimonies, vol. 8, 104–106.

Pride prevented certain men in responsible positions at the 1901 session from settling their differences so they could look to Christ. As a result, “What Might Have Been” (The 1901 plan of reorganization) was lost to Seventh-day Adventist Church and to the world. Without an upper room experience, the could be no Pentecost. Pride, presumption, and the love of position prevented Christ from leading a people in an apostolic form of church government. The brethren preferred to be like the “Gentiles” who have “their great ones” exercise “lordship” and “authority upon them.” (Mark 10:42.) Christ was rejected as the “Captain” and the “greater strength” of the 1901 plan. A fundamental principle of “the Third Angel’s Message” was disregarded when the delegates were determined to “look to man and expect much help from man.” (Testimonies to Ministers, 93.) The 1901 plan did not fail, but men failed the plan when they failed to look to Jesus as their Captain.

Taken from the book 1901 Rejected by Deone Hanson, pages 2–7.

 

What is a Harlot Church?

by

When a church becomes what the Bible describes as a harlot, that church cannot go to the kingdom of heaven. The Lord gives it opportunity, but if that opportunity is not taken, it will be shut out from the kingdom of heaven unless it repents and stops its fornication.

We read the experience of the Jewish church in Jeremiah 3:2, 3. It says, “Lift up your eyes to the desolate heights and see: Where have you not lain with men? By the road you have sat for them Like an Arabian in the wilderness; And you have polluted the land With your harlotries and your wickedness. Therefore the showers have been withheld, And there has been no latter rain. You have had a harlot’s forehead; You refuse to be ashamed.”

The Jewish church had become a harlot church, but they had not committed the unpardonable sin. They could still return. In verse 14 it says, “ ‘Return, O backsliding children,’ says the Lord; ‘for I am married to you. I will take you, one from a city and two from a family, and I will bring you to Zion.’ ”

What were they to do? They were to return. Verses 12, 13 say, “ ‘Return, backsliding Israel,’ says the Lord; ‘I will not cause My anger to fall on you: For I am merciful,’ says the Lord; ‘I will not remain angry forever. Only acknowledge your iniquity, That you have transgressed against the Lord your God, And have scattered your charms To alien deities under every green tree, And you have not obeyed My voice,’ says the Lord.”

How did the Jewish church become a harlot and how does the Christian church become a harlot today? In James 4:4 it says, “Adulterers and adulteresses! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God.”

It is by some type of friendship with the world that the church becomes a harlot or loses her virginity. How does the church become united with the world? Ezekiel 16:15 is talking about Jerusalem which was God’s people in his day. Ezekiel said: “You trusted in your own beauty, played the harlot because of your fame, and poured out your harlotry on everyone passing by who would have it.

“Moreover you multiplied your acts of harlotry as far as the land of the traitor, Chaldea; and even then you were not satisfied. ‘How degenerate is your heart!’ says the Lord God, ‘seeing you do all of these things, the deeds of a brazen harlot.’ ” Ezekiel 16:29, 30.

It was by connecting with the Gentile nations that she lost her virginity. Look at Ezekiel 23:19–21: “She multiplied her harlotry In calling to remembrance the days of her youth, When she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt. For she lusted for her paramours, Whose flesh is like the flesh of donkeys, And whose issue is like the issue of horses. Thus you called to remembrance the lewdness of your youth, When the Egyptians pressed your bosom Because of your youthful breasts.”

By aligning herself and making alliances with the world—by connecting with the world, by using the powers of the world instead of depending on the Lord, she lost her innocence and became a harlot.

Ellen White describes it in The Great Controversy, 381, 382: “The unfaithfulness of the church to Christ in permitting her confidence and affection to be turned from Him, and allowing the love of worldly things to occupy the soul, is likened to the violation of the marriage vow. The sin of Israel in departing from the Lord is presented under this figure; and the wonderful love of God which they thus despised is touchingly portrayed: ‘I sware unto thee, and entered into a covenant with thee, saith the Lord God, and thou becamest Mine.’ ‘And thou wast exceeding beautiful and thou didst prosper into a kingdom. And thy renown went forth among the heathen for thy beauty: for it was perfect through My comeliness, which I had put upon thee. … But thou didst trust in thine own beauty, and playedst the harlot because of thy renown.’ ‘As a wife treacherously departeth from her husband, so have ye dealt treacherously with Me, O house of Israel, saith the Lord;’ ‘as a wife that committeth adultery, which taketh strangers instead of her husband!’ Ezekiel 16:8, 13–15, 32; Jeremiah 3:20.”

In summary, “It was by departure from the Lord, and alliance with the heathen, that the Jewish church became a harlot.” Ibid., 382.

It was by departure from the Lord; the affections were weaned away from the Lord and placed upon the power and things in the world. How does the church use the power of the world? In The Great Controversy, 443, Ellen White says, “When the early church [the true church] became corrupted by departing from the simplicity of the gospel and accepting heathen rites and customs, she lost the Spirit and power of God; and in order to control the consciences of the people, she sought the support of the secular power.”

Notice what happened. By “accepting heathen rites and customs, she lost the Spirit and power of God.” Without the Spirit and power of God, she was powerless.

Concerning Christians in the fourth century, the pagans would say, Why would you want me to be a Christian? I know Christians who have lied to me and I have never lied to anybody. I know a Christian who has stolen goods and I have never stolen from anybody. I know a Christian who has been unfaithful to his matrimonial vow and I have never been unfaithful to my matrimonial vow. Why would the pagans become Christians when they considered the Christians not as good as they were?

Because they had accepted heathen rites and customs and had lost the Spirit and power of God, the early Christian church had no power over their own members and no power to influence the world. What does a church do when it is powerless? “When the early church became corrupted by departing from the simplicity of the gospel and accepting heathen rites and customs, she lost the Spirit and power of God; and in order to control the consciences of the people, she sought the support of the secular power.”

When the church has lost the Spirit and power of God, she does not have any power from within to help the people be good, and she resorts to the power of the state. “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.” Ibid.

Apostasy in the church will also prepare the way for the image to the beast. It was apostasy in the church that resulted in the church seeking power from the secular government and the result was the development of the papacy. In a similar way, the image to the beast will be formed. “When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters will inevitably result.” Ibid, 445.

Notice it says, “shall influence the state”; the church will use the power of the state. “When the leading churches of the United States, uniting upon such points of doctrine as are held by them in common, shall influence the state …” The church uses the state.

It was the church using the power of the state that caused Jesus to be crucified. The Romans would have never crucified Jesus, but it was the church that used the power of the state to kill Him and it was that same church that had the apostle Paul beheaded and the apostle James martyred.

How does a church lose its virginity and become a harlot church?

The first thing that happens for a church to lose its virginity and become a harlot church is that they accept heathen rites or customs and go into apostasy because they have withdrawn their affections from the Lord and begin to love something in the world.

In the 4th century the church could not get the people to attend church so they made a law to help the people to be good. The first Sunday law was passed in 321, but it was not strong enough because it merely required that people not go to work. When the people could not work on Sunday, they went to the circus so a law was then made that would close down the circus so that the people could not go there on Sunday. The people then just stayed home on Sunday. Finally, a whole series of laws were made stating that not only must you stop working or conducting business on Sunday, but you had to go to church as well.

Why did that happen? When heathen rites and customs are accepted into the church it loses the spirit of God and the church has no power. If the church is devoid of power, why would anybody want to go? If nobody wants to go, the church will die. Then the church has to do something to keep it from dying and in order to do that she needs to get some help from the state and pass laws. In this way the Christian church used the state to enforce her teachings. These laws progressively became stricter over the following 100 years.

First the Jewish church, and then the Christian church lost its power by departing from God and relying on the world.

Any time a church begins to use civil power to enforce her laws or her institutions, her will or her teachings, that church has become a harlot church devoid of the Holy Spirit because of her apostasy and cannot go to the marriage supper of the Lamb.

Remember that Christ is the High Priest and only a virgin—a pure church—can become His bride.

In this world, once a woman has become a harlot she can never again become a virgin. But Jesus is able to take a sinner, take away all of the guilt and the power of sin so that the person who was a sinner becomes as though he had never sinned. Jesus can take away the sin and recreate a pure person again. That same thing can also happen to a harlot church if she repents. A church can begin to use civil power to enforce her laws and institutions in three ways:

Appealing to the king or the president to enforce her will. This has been done thousands of times in past history.

Using the civil power to enforce her will by going to the legislature—the congress—appealing that specific laws be passed to enforce her teachings.

Ellen White states that when the churches go to the state to enforce her will, they will have made an image to the beast. See The Great Controversy, 445.

Those alive in Nebuchadnezzar’s day could have watched his image being formed, first the feet and then the legs until the whole image was completed. They may have felt very safe and secure watching it go up, but once it was completely finished, the people were commanded to worship it or be killed.

That same thing is happening today. The image to the beast is being formed right now before our eyes. We may be living in America, the land of the free, but when that image to the beast is completed, everyone will be commanded to worship it.

Appealing to the court system

Any time a church goes to the courts to enforce her will, that church has already become a harlot church and will never go to the marriage supper of the Lamb unless there is repentance and her sins are forsaken. That act is religious harlotry. The Seventh-day Adventist church has been doing this now for many decades. To make it plain, the Seventh-day Adventist church is not going to the marriage supper of the Lamb in her present condition, unless there is repentance, and she stops taking people to court.

There is a principle in Revelation 18:4. It says, “I heard another voice from heaven saying, ‘Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues.’ ” For over 150 years the truth about the Bible Sabbath has been proclaimed and rejected by the Sunday keeping Protestant churches of the world. These churches are referred to in Revelation as Babylon, and the Lord says that you are going to have to get out of there because if you stay in there then you are participating in their sins.

One lady who attended our prophecy seminar said she believed everything we taught, including the Sabbath. She said she was going to keep the Sabbath, but she was also going to continue going to the Baptist church because that was where her friends were. She planned to keep the Sabbath at home without really understanding the principle involved that if you attend the church on Sunday, you are supporting that church in her sin with your presence, your influence and your money. You are participating in the sin by even going there. The Lord says that if you stay there, you are going to receive the seven last plagues. If you do not want to receive the plagues, then you cannot participate in the sin and obey the command to “come out of her My people.”

This principle must apply to any harlot church. I do not want to be misunderstood, and I did not call the Seventh-day Adventist church Babylon. I have never done that, but at the present time it is a harlot church and no harlot church is going to the marriage supper of the Lamb unless that harlotry is confessed, repented of and forsaken.

People have a difficult time getting around this. Some people say that the organization is doing this, but I am not part of it. If you are a member and you are supporting it with your influence, your time and your money, you are a part of it. In the books of heaven you are accounted as part of it. The sins that they are doing, you are part of if you are supporting it. Look at the following example.

“The trades unions and confederacies of the world are a snare. Keep out of them, and away from them, brethren. Have nothing to do with them. …

“We are not to unite with secret societies or with trades unions. …

“These unions are one of the signs of the last days. Men are binding up in bundles ready to be burned.” Notice—they are binding up into a bundle—what is the bundle? It is the trade unions and secret societies. They say, I am not part of it, but when that bundle is burned, they will burn right with it because they are bound up with it. She then says, “They may be church members, but while they belong to these unions, they cannot possibly keep the commandments of God; for to belong to these unions means to disregard the entire Decalogue.” Selected Messages, Book 2, 142, 143.

Then is quoted the following text in Luke 10:27: “So he answered and said, ‘You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,’ and ‘your neighbor as yourself.’ ” These words sum up the whole duty of man. They mean the consecration of the whole being—body, soul, and spirit—to God’s service. How can men obey these words, and at the same time pledge themselves to support that which deprives their neighbors of freedom of action? You cannot love God with all of your heart, soul and mind and your neighbor as yourself and belong to an organization which is deliberately depriving others of freedom of action. That is impossible, and in the books of heaven you are accounted as a commandment breaker, not as a commandment keeper—even if you call yourself a Seventh-day Adventist.

Somebody can say, Yes I know that I am in an organization that is in open sin, but I am not part of it, so I am all right. People use the parable of the wheat and the tares to excuse it and say they both grow together until the harvest. That is a gross distortion of the words of Jesus. Read the meaning of the wheat and tares in the book, Christ’s Object Lessons. Jesus never taught in the parable of the wheat and tares to just let all the good and the evil to go until the harvest. She explains that a tare is described as a person who appears, by human vision, to be keeping the commandments of God, but their heart is not right. However, when the tare goes to seed (meaning when open sin is involved), Christ taught that they were to be disfellowshipped from the church. You do not allow the wheat and tares to grow together when there is open sin.

I hear people say, “I know there is open sin in the organization, but I am not part of it so I am all right.” No, you are not all right. Do you want to go to the marriage supper?

Those who are serious about going to the marriage supper cannot voluntarily be a member of an organization that is in open sin without being accounted a commandment breaker in heaven.

When God asked Adam and Eve in the garden where they were, He knew exactly where they were, and He knows where you are too. Since God knew already where they were, why did He ask? He wanted Adam to think through the answer to the question just as He wants you to think through the answer to this question: Where are you? You can say, “I am not in Babylon”; then where are you?

If you support with your presence, your influence, your time, your money, a church that is involved in harlotry, you are part of it and you are not going to the marriage supper. Either you will have to persuade whatever church you are in to quit the harlotry business and repent, or you will have to get out if you want to go to the marriage supper.

Jesus is our High Priest and He is not going to unite Himself with a harlot. He will only unite Himself with a church that is pure, that has been made into a virgin.

Where are you? God wants you to figure out where you are. There are a lot of people who do not know where they are but only you can answer the question. The answer depends on where your sympathies and where your affections are. Where your heart is, that is where you are.

“As the storm approaches, a large class who have professed faith in the third angel’s message, but have not been sanctified through obedience to the truth, abandon their position and join the ranks of the opposition. By uniting with the world and partaking of its spirit, they have come to view matters in nearly the same light; and when the test is brought, they are prepared to choose the easy, popular side. Men of talent and pleasing address, who once rejoiced in the truth, employ their powers to deceive and mislead souls.” The Great Controversy, 608.

What a tragedy! These people have been in the Seventh-day Adventist church, but their sympathies and affections are in the world. When the test is brought, you will not go where your intellect tells you but you are going to go where your sympathies and affections are. That is why you need to ask yourself the question now. Where are your sympathies? Where are your affections? Wherever your sympathies and affections are right now can indicate where you are going to be in the future.

Pastor John Grosboll is Director of Steps to Life and pastors the Prairie Meadows Church in Wichita, Kansas. He may be contacted by e-mail at: historic@stepstolife.org, or by telephone at: (316) 788-5559.

Bible Study Guides – The Extent and Implications of a Modern Captivity

by

August 22, 2010 – August 28, 2010

Key Text

“Each of the ancient prophets spoke less for their own time than for ours. … their prophesying is in force for us. … Daniel, Isaiah, and Ezekiel … spoke of things that … reached down to the future, and to what should occur in these last days.” Selected Messages, Book 3, 338, 419, 420.

Introduction

In our last lesson we viewed a prophetic landscape of potential devastation for modern Israel. In this lesson we continue to examine in more detail whether or not these prophecies fit modern Israel, how they fit, and the extent to which they fit.

1 If this has really been happening in the Seventh-day Adventist church; if the same sins that led to earlier captivities have been practiced with persistence, should we expect a different result? Should we expect that the SDA organization is about to be cleaned up, or expect to find it in a captivity that leads to its destruction?

Recall that in Christ’s day, the church could not be refurbished! The true Gospel, like new wine, had to be put into new wine bottles; the true gospel in new believers—a new church.

Apply It:

“Do not trust in these lying words, saying, ‘The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord.’ … For if you thoroughly amend your ways … then I will cause you to dwell in this place … you trust in lying words … Will you … walk after other gods … and then come and stand before Me in this house which is called by My name, and say, ‘We are delivered to do all these abominations’? … But go now to … Shiloh, where I set My name at the first, and see what I did to it because of the wickedness of My people.” Jeremiah 7:4, 5, 7––10, 12.

“O town full of commotion … All your leaders have fled together; They have been captured. … Do not try to console me over the destruction of my people. The Lord, the Lord Almighty, has a day of tumult and trampling … City of David had many breaches in its defenses; … You counted the buildings in Jerusalem And tore down houses To strengthen the wall. … But you did not look to the One who made it, … The Lord, the Lord Almighty, Called you on that day to weep and to wail, To tear out your hair and put on sackcloth. But see, there is joy and revelry. … The Lord Almighty has revealed this in my hearing: ‘Till your dying day this sin will not be atoned for,’ says the Lord, the Lord Almighty.” Isaiah 22:2—-–4, 9–12, 14. [Emphasis supplied.]

“… a sword is sharpened … polished … to make a dreadful slaughter. … Should we then make mirth?” Ezekiel 21:9, 10.

“The Lord Jesus will always have a chosen people to serve Him. When the Jewish people rejected Christ, the Prince of life, He took from them the kingdom of God and gave it unto the Gentiles. God will continue to work on this principle with every branch of His work. When a church proves unfaithful to the word of the Lord, whatever their position may be, however high and sacred their calling, the Lord can no longer work with them. Others are then chosen to bear important responsibilities.” The Upward Look, 131.

“Thus says the Lord concerning the prophets Who make my people stray; Who chant ‘All is well’ … But who prepare war against him who puts nothing into their mouths: Therefore you shall have night without vision. … The sun shall go down on prophetic revelation … Now hear this, You rulers of the house of Israel [whose work is driven by money]. … They lean on the Lord, and say, ‘Is not the Lord among us? No harm can come upon us.’ Therefore Zion shall be plowed like a field, Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins.” Micah 3:5, 6, 9, 11, 12.

Note:

Contemplate the duplicate warning found in Jeremiah 6:13–15 and 8:10–13.

“… prophets and priests alike, All practice deceit. They dress the wound of My people as though it were not serious. ‘Peace, peace!’ they say. When there is no peace. Are they ashamed of their loathsome conduct? No! They have no shame at all; They do not even know how to blush. So they will fall among the fallen; They will be brought down when they are punished, says the Lord. ‘I will take away their harvest,’ declares the Lord. ‘There will be no grapes on the vine. There will be no figs on the tree, And their leaves will wither. What I have given them will be taken from them.’ ”

2 If God’s people are in what seems like a captivity, has it been acknowledged, recognized, prayed about, and acted on?

3 If the Seventh-day Adventist church continued to follow the history of ancient Israel, what might be the next sign of their demise?

For ancient Israel, their last warnings came from Jesus (Matthew 23), the Apostles (Acts 2) and Stephen (Acts 7). Their final demise was not apparent to many Jews until years later when it actually happened; when the Roman armies destroyed their city and church.

In the meantime and without any comprehension by ancient Israel, God’s true church, His new Israel had already carried the gospel to “every creature under heaven” (Colossians 1:23). Since the destruction of Jerusalem is a picture in miniature of the destruction of the world—does it not seem plausible that the Three Angels’ Messages could be completed while many Seventh-day Adventists are oblivious to the happening?

4 What about the promises of the glory and redemption of Israel?

The prophetic warnings of complete destruction for God’s professed people are stark, and have been presented in the straightforward bleakness that Scripture presents them. The reader may ask, What of the promised glory of Israel; aren’t these texts to be balanced with promises of restoration? What about those promises of restoration that are hiding in some of the ellipses above?

Note:

The prophet Jeremiah phrased this same question:

Then I said, “Ah, Lord God! Surely You have greatly deceived this people and Jerusalem, Saying, ‘You shall have peace,’ Whereas the sword reaches to the heart.” Jeremiah 4:10.

There are indeed precious promises of restoration for Israel. But; question: how does one balance a prophetic warning of utter destruction if certain conditions are met with anything? We will continue to examine this paradox as we move through this study on captivity. For now, the student is left with this reminder from our study on the captivity of Israel in Christ’s time:

An understanding of the parallel mingling of triumph/tragedy for the professed Jewish church and tragedy/triumph of the Christian church is critical to an understanding of Old Testament prophecy. The Old Testament prophecies themselves are, on a large scale, a grand parallel mingling of stunning triumph in the face of disaster and monumental defeat in the face of misplaced confidence. This history of the church in Christ’s time gives us the tools to understand how these seemingly contradictory prophecies can be fulfilled simultaneously. [Emphasis supplied.]

5 What about historic Seventh-day Adventists?

Well, what about them? Who are they exactly? Perhaps these have skillfully evaded the effects of captivity. Let’s review our position as historic Seventh-day Adventists:

Review and Discuss:

  • There is almost no collective intelligence and action (in Ezra’s day, they rose up as “one man” to build).
  • There are almost no shepherds (where are the Pastors?)
  • Could the flocks be any more scattered?
  • There are multiple winds of doctrine, with no unified defense.
  • They possess multiple, disputed names.
  • There is no temple (no organized church and few buildings).
  • Despite many SDA schools, there are essentially none for God’s true remnant.
  • The captivity-like dilemma has not been recognized for what it is.
  • As in Jeremiah’s day, false prophesies abound.
  • We do not see “eye-to-eye” (see Isaiah 52:8).
  • As in Haggai’s time, we have left off building, turning our attention primarily to our country homes and gardens.

Apply It:

Let’s examine a few of these points:

Collective Intelligence:

God has appointed both individual and collective will to humans, and both are important. As historic Seventh-day Adventists, we have long exercised our muscle of individual will and action, while our muscle of collective will, intelligence, and action has nigh atrophied. In Heaven, the collective will to action is critical to success in the Great Controversy! What about our collective action? If we are to build, as God would have us build, we must have collective action and collective intelligence.

Let’s illustrate the importance of collective intelligence and action for God’s remnant by comparing our needs to evangelize and educate (rebuild the temple and the wall) with large scale projects in the secular world. There are millions of very talented, intelligent and industrious people in our world, but not a single one of them knows in full how to create and manage a major infrastructure project, build a jet plane or computer, or manage a monetary system. Nor can one person simply assign a specified amount of physical and mental energy to be expended by a group of people working separately and accomplish any of these projects. All of these projects require collective intelligence and action. If the secular world we live in was managed like our gospel work has been, we would all be hungry, tool-poor barterers the world over! The children of darkness are indeed wiser in their generation than the children of light on this point (Luke 16:8, 9).

God, in His infinite wisdom, has given to His church collective tasks in evangelism and education that simply cannot be met exclusively by exercising our talents individually! There are parts of our individual characters that simply cannot be properly developed unless we are at least attempting to work collectively. Unfortunately, many of us have been assuming otherwise. It is a key responsibility of each person in the church with secular employment to be a part of the collective intelligence and will to action that is needed so that gospel workers can be trained and hired!

Winds of Doctrine:

Let’s just focus on one area where the winds of false doctrine have been blowing: false prophesies; which are often coupled with nearly unbridled accusations against our governments.

Conservative Adventism, in general, is indeed ripe with prophesying today. Some truly have rushed in, where angels fear to tread. For example, we’ve been subjected to prophesying of dates for financial collapse, new money, martial law, and terrorism. Many within Adventism have thrown around specific prophetic predictions tied to years (and sometimes to specific dates) such as: 1979, 1981, 1987, 1994, 1995, 2000, 2004, 2008 and 2009. At times we name drop worldly leaders to bolster the accuracy of our claims.

But when these prophecies are left unfulfilled—when Atlanta still stands, where is the repentance, the humility, and the apologies! As each predicted event passes its time unfulfilled, new predictions take their place! The writings of the prophets do indeed tell us with certainty that disaster, of unimaginable proportion, looms. And we have already begun to see the omens of the complete fulfillment of this. But where are the dates? Ellen White tells us that after 1844 we have “no more message based on time.” When will we believe and act on what is said? (Note, for example, that Ellen White foresaw both the great San Francisco earthquake and the destruction of very tall buildings in New York City—but did not tie dates to either event!)

But even worse yet is the fact that some have even dared to tie together the most solemn, life and death issues of the Three Angels’ Messages with these predictions! How can we possibly convince the world of the unerring nature of God’s law, when we publish it side-by-side with political gossip, especially when these conjectures are subsequently found to be in error! And how can we hope to educate political leaders about the great controversy when our time is consumed in criticizing all that is done or attempted by them? We do not have capital to both endlessly criticize and educate; we will often have to choose! Please see Testimonies, vol. 6, 394–397 on this point.

This lesson series is not devoted to studying winds of false doctrine. Had it been, the above example could have been followed by an examination of false doctrines that challenge the divinity of Jesus, the sanctuary, the Holy Spirit and a host of others.

Identity:

Historic Seventh-day Adventists today have no unified identity.

Seeing Eye to Eye:

Note that Isaiah prophesied in chapter 52 that God’s people would see eye to eye when they were free from their captivity! Has that happened? Would this fact, alone, not indicate that we are in captivity?

Country Homes Come Before Church Building:

In Haggai’s time, God’s people had been called to return to re-build the temple. It was also their privilege to build their own homes, and cultivate their fields. But they had made their personal building and planting a greater priority than building the temple, and were severely rebuked for this. Their crops were cursed. We even find that God temporarily disowned them for this neglect. Today, I fear that many have placed the importance of preparing their property and gardens for the time of trouble ahead of plans to finish building the temple. This is not to say that this preparation is unimportant, but simply to say that we must understand the relative importance of these activities.

This is the message of the prophet Haggai: God’s people could have no success while the church was not complete, and they were not trying to do anything about it! God said that because of their slackness, they would continue to fail to receive rain and fail to produce fruit.

Summary:

While we certainly hope that it is accurate to state that, in general, historic Seventh-day Adventists have not been party to the basest sins, the fact remains that the effects of a seeming captivity are felt far and wide. All of God’s people seem to be profoundly affected. And if it is not a captivity that we are experiencing, it certainly carries many of the same features.

Studies prepared by John T. Grosboll, PE. John T. is a mechanical engineer living near Vancouver, Washington. His secular employment includes several years of experience in primary metals and transportation-related industries. He, along with his wife Teresa, is actively involved in the work of the Historic Message Church in Portland, Oregon. He may be reached at: grosbolls@yahoo.com.

Bible Study Guides – A Modern Captivity

by

August 15, 2010 – August 21, 2010

Key Text

“Each of the ancient prophets spoke less for their own time than for ours. … their prophesying is in force for us. … Daniel, Isaiah, and Ezekiel … spoke of things that … reached down to the future, and to what should occur in these last days.” Selected Messages, Book 3, 338, 419, 420.

Introduction

In our last lesson, we saw clearly that the failure of ancient Israel to promptly see the temple through to completion, would be repeated by Modern Israel. In this lesson we investigate the implications should this situation be protracted. We conclude by drawing from the history of the church in Christ’s day to see where our current situation could lead.

1 Could God’s professed people return to captivity, as happened with the Jewish church in Christ’s time? How could it end?

Apply It:

The Scriptures that could be brought to bear on such large questions are indeed extensive. Below are Scripture excerpts, largely from Isaiah and Jeremiah, which provide a sampling of potential answers to these questions.

“… O My people! Those who lead you cause you to err … The Lord will enter into judgment With the elders of His people. … ‘For you have eaten up the vineyard’ … and she [Zion] being desolate shall sit on the ground.” Isaiah 3:12, 14, 26.

“What more could have been done to My vineyard That I have not done in it? Why then … Did it bring forth wild grapes? I will take away its hedge, and it shall be burned; And break down its wall … I will lay it waste; It shall not be pruned … I will also command the clouds That they rain no rain on it. For the vineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel. …Therefore my people have gone into captivity, Because they have no knowledge … Therefore as … the flame consumes the chaff, So … their blossom will ascend like dust.” Isaiah 5:4-–-7, 13, 24.

“… you have polluted the land With your harlotries … Therefore … there has been no latter rain. … Surely, as a wife treacherously departs from her husband, So have you dealt treacherously with Me, O house of Israel,” says the Lord.” Jeremiah 3:2, 3, 20.

“ ‘Just as you have forsaken Me and served foreign gods in your land, so you shall serve aliens in a land that is not yours. Declare this in the house of Jacob … among My people are found wicked men; As a cage is full of birds … Shall I not punish them for these things?’ says the Lord. ‘ Shall I not avenge Myself on such a nation as this?’ … The prophets prophesy falsely … And My people love to have it so. But what will you do in the end?” Jeremiah 5:19, 20, 26, 27, 29, 31.

“My people do not know the judgment of the Lord … For a voice of wailing is heard from Zion: ‘How we are plundered!’ “Jeremiah 8:17; 9:19.

“I have forsaken My house, I have left My heritage; I have given the dearly beloved of My soul into the hand of her enemies. … Many pastors have destroyed My vineyard … They have made My pleasant portion a desolate wilderness. … No flesh shall have peace … be ashamed of your harvest.” Jeremiah 12:7, 10, 12, 13.

“Give glory to the Lord … Before He causes darkness. … If you will not hear it, My soul will weep … Because the Lord’s flock has been taken captive.” Jeremiah 13:16, 17.

“I will bereave them [this people] of children; I will destroy My people, Since they do not return from their ways. … And the remnant of them I will deliver to the sword.” Jeremiah 15:7, 9.

“Woe to you who are at ease in Zion … who put far off the day of doom … the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste. … Israel shall surely be led away captive. … The end has come upon My people. … They shall wander … seeking the word of the Lord, but shall not find it.” Amos 6:1, 3; 7:9, 11; 8:2, 12.

“And many among them [both houses of Israel] shall … be snared and captured. … They will be driven into darkness.” Isaiah 8:15, 22.

“O daughter of Zion … you will go to Babylon.” Micah 4:10.

“In all the vineyards there shall be wailing … I do not savor your sacred assemblies … Take away from Me the noise of your songs … therefore I will send you into captivity.” Amos 5.

2 Based on history, what could the start of captivity look like? Should we expect the captivity to be widely recognized?

3 Has a return to captivity already commenced? How would you determine whether or not God’s professed people are in captivity?

4 Has the Seventh-day Adventist church participated in the sins that called for the ancient captivity of God’s people? Should SDAs expect to repeat these sins with different, more positive results?

Apply It:

  • It is united with the world formally and informally.
  • Its people are without knowledge because …
  • The prophets have been despised.
  • It is led by false shepherds, crying peace and safety while the judgment closes.
  • They have united with the state to persecute other Christians through courts of law.
  • Sins such as idolatry and Sabbath breaking are common, and unrebuked.

The full investigation and explanation of the above claims is left to the student. But as a guide to some of these claims, here are some facts that may be investigated.

  • 1 At least one of the official outreach entities of the SDA church is united legally in business under the auspices of a Roman Catholic institution.
  • 2 As with other corrupt religious institutions, the SDA organization has for years used legal and/or physical force in many parts of the world to further its plans.
  • 3 The SDA church has, in various places and at various times, formally and informally united with and supported a cacophony of religious organizations.
  • 4 In practice, the Elijah prophet (Ellen G. White) has been rejected, and the resulting ignorance has seen confusion enter on every biblical point, from the Creation story to the Mark of the Beast.
  • 5 In general, many churches have for years left unchecked open sins within their borders.
  • 6 In general, a message of peace and safety has been preached to heal slightly the wounded consciences of God’s professed people.

5 Does the Seventh-day Adventist church bear the hallmark characteristics of the captivity of the Jewish church in Christ’s day?

  • Does the SDA church, as the Jewish church in Christ’s day, continue to function, maintain real property, pursue converts, and maintain a system of education—despite the deep divisions of a conservative and liberal class?
  • Are there many pastors, and yet—are the sheep as without a shepherd?
  • Are there many schools, and yet—are there none where the child Jesus could attend?
  • As in Christ’s day, is the work of those outside the official recognition of the organization automatically viewed with suspicion, or even opposed?
  • As in Christ’s day, are people taught to place their trust in the temple (church organization) and that to be put out of the synagogue (disfellowshipped from a church body under the auspices of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists) is to be put out of the saving fold of Christ?

6 How does Ellen White compare the condition and outcome of modern Israel, Seventh-day Adventists, with ancient Israel, and the Jews in Christ’s time?

Apply It:

“In His word the Lord declared what He would do for Israel if they would obey His voice. But the leaders of the people yielded to the temptations of Satan, and God could not give them the blessings He designed them to have, because they did not obey His voice but listened to the voice and policy of Lucifer. This experience will be repeated in the last years of the history of the people of God, who have been established by His grace and power. Men whom He has greatly honored will in the closing scenes of this earth’s history pattern after ancient Israel.” Manuscript Releases, 13, 379. [Emphasis supplied.]

“Modern Israel are in greater danger of forgetting God and being led into idolatry than were His ancient people. Many idols are worshiped, even by professed Sabbathkeepers. … A blessing or a curse is now before the people of God. … The sins and iniquities of rebellious Israel are recorded and the picture presented before us as a warning that if we imitate their example of transgression and depart from God we shall fall as surely as did they.” Testimonies, vol. 1, 609. [Emphasis supplied.]

“The alliances made by the Israelites with their heathen neighbors resulted in the loss of their identity as God’s peculiar people. … No semblance of nearness to God, no assertion of connection with Him, will be accepted from those who persist in dishonoring Him by leaning upon the arm of worldly power.” “Ellen G. White Comments,” The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 4, 1155, 1156. [Emphasis supplied.]

“My heart aches day after day and night after night for our churches. Many are progressing, but in the back track … They must face square about. I know what I say. Unless they shall become Christians indeed, they will go from weakness to weakness, divisions will increase, and many souls will be led to perdition … 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, 93, 94. [Emphasis supplied.]

“The same danger [reference to Jeremiah’s time] exists today among that people who profess to be the repository of God’s law. … They refuse to be reproved of evil, and blame God’s servants with being too zealous in putting sin out of the camp. A sin-hating God calls upon those who profess to keep his law to depart from all iniquity. Neglect to repent and obey his word will bring as serious consequences upon God’s people today, as did the same sin upon ancient Israel. There is a limit beyond which he will no longer delay his judgments. The correction of God through his chosen instruments cannot be disregarded with impunity. The desolation of Jerusalem stands as a solemn warning before the eyes of modern Israel.” The Signs of the Times, February 12, 1880. [Emphasis supplied.]

“The Lord sorely chastised his people Israel, revealing their hypocrisy and rebuking their presumption, and thus left upon the pages of history the testimony for all future ages, that the iniquities of his professed people will not go unpunished. The greater the knowledge of God’s will, the greater the sin of those who disregard it. God is not dependent upon men to cause his name to be feared and honored in the earth. He accepts the labors of those who walk in faithfulness and humility before him, but he will reject all who profess to serve him, and yet follow in the course of the unrighteous. God can carry forward his work in the earth without the co-operation of those who would pervert or disgrace it.” Ibid., December 22, 1881. [Emphasis supplied.]

“There is a deplorable lack of spirituality among our people. … I have seen that self-glorification was becoming common among Seventh-day Adventists and that unless the pride of man should be abased and Christ exalted we should, as a people, be in no better condition to receive Christ at His second advent than were the Jewish people to receive Him at His first advent. … Their history should be a solemn warning to us.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 727, 728. [Emphasis supplied.]

“I have been shown that unbelief in the testimonies of warning, encouragement, and reproof is shutting away the light from God’s people. Unbelief is closing their eyes so that they are ignorant of their true condition.

“I saw that the reason why visions had not been more frequent of late is, they have not been appreciated by the church. The church have nearly lost their spirituality and faith, and the reproofs and warnings have had but little effect upon them. Many of those who have professed faith in them have not heeded them.” Ibid., 674.

“Please read the third chapter [of Jeremiah]. This chapter is a lesson for modern Israel. Let all who claim to be children of God understand that He will not serve with their sins any more than He would with the sins of ancient Israel.” “Ellen G. White Comments,” The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. 4, 1154. [Emphasis supplied.]

Studies prepared by John T. Grosboll, PE. John T. is a mechanical engineer living near Vancouver, Washington. His secular employment includes several years of experience in primary metals and transportation-related industries. He, along with his wife Teresa, is actively involved in the work of the Historic Message Church in Portland, Oregon. He may be reached at: grosbolls@yahoo.com.

Bible Study Guides – Seventh-day Adventists and the Work of Rebuilding the Church and the Wall

by

August 8, 2010 – August 14, 2010

Key Text

“Each of the ancient prophets spoke less for their own time than for ours. … their prophesying is in force for us. … Daniel, Isaiah, and Ezekiel … spoke of things that … reached down to the future, and to what should occur in these last days.” Selected Messages, Book 3, 338, 419, 420.

Introduction

Let’s summarize what we have seen thus far in our study of the history of the captivity of God’s people.

In last month’s lessons we have seen:

1 The purpose of God’s church on earth to bear His identity, be a refuge, and gain coverts.

2 The purpose of God’s church as described by trees and vines that bear fruit, and a married woman who bears children.

3 That this fruit of the tree and of the womb are symbols of purified character and converts intertwined.

4 That failure in God’s church is described by barren trees, vineyards, wombs and failed marriage.

5 The reasons for the original Babylonian captivity: union with foreigners, rejection of prophets and the requisite ignorance that follows, Sabbath breaking and the leadership of unfaithful pastors.

6 That Israel refused to acknowledge their captivity (Jeremiah 26–28, 42)!

7 Because of this rebellion, this physical captivity became much more extensive and severe than God intended, and led to the complete physical destruction of the church, wall, and city.

8 That the secular government opened the way for the church to be rebuilt after 70 years of captivity, but that few of God’s professed people heeded the call to return and rebuild.

9 That the first priority of Israel was to rebuild the church, and then the wall, and that God’s people were disowned when they did not make church restoration the first priority.

10 Specific reasons these tasks were successful (such as collective action), and reasons that they clearly were not (such as marriage with foreigners).

11 That in the time of Christ, God’s people were in captivity again. We focused on the spiritual nature of the captivity of the Jewish church, but saw that this captivity was both physical and spiritual in nature (John 18:31; 8:34–44).

12 That even though churches, schools and pastors were many in Christ’s day—that it was as though they had been destroyed. They effectively didn’t exist (Mark 6:34; John 9:34–39).

13 That once again, Israel refused to acknowledge this captivity (John 8:33).

14 That once again, because of this refusal to acknowledge their captivity, God’s professed people were led to the complete physical destruction of church, wall, and city.

15 The blossoming of a new and pure church along-side, but separate from the legacy church in rebellion (Luke 5:37–39).

16 That both of these churches, new and old, claimed the name of Israel.

17 That parallel promises of glory and destruction were fulfilled together to two different groups bearing the name Israel (Romans 9:6–8; 24–33).

18 That the final destruction of Jerusalem, the old church of Israel, happened after the gospel had already been taken to the entire world by the new Israel in the 1st century!

In the previous lesson, we have seen:

1 That the largest part of the Christian church, in name, returned to a Babylonian captivity during the Dark Ages.

2 That this captivity had broad physical and spiritual effects.

3 That once again, the church did not in general recognize the broad extent of the captivity.

4 That the rebuilding of God’s decimated church began in earnest with the Protestant reformation.

5 That the rebuilding work was halted (Revelation 3:1–6).

6 That through the religious liberty proffered by the civil government of the United States of America, the way was paved for church rebuilding to continue.

7 That the Protestants ultimately rejected their assignment to rebuild God’s church (Revelation 14:8).

8 That Seventh-day Adventists received the assignment to finish rebuilding the church and restore the wall, a symbol of God’s Law (Isaiah 58:12–14).

From here we pick up the story:

Notes:

From this point forward, the student should lean heavily on three groups of themes that have been explored extensively in the previous lessons:

  1. The terminology for the purposes of God’s church examined so closely in lesson one and referenced above (trees, vines, fruit, marriage, children, and offspring).
  2. The identifying characteristics of captivity, and the task of God’s people to rebuild His church following its destruction; as we studied in lessons 3, 4, and 5.
  3. The extension of the application of intertwining parallel prophecies of triumph and disaster that applied to two groups of people identified as Israel at the same time. This was the focus of our study in lesson five.

The author has made generous use of ellipses in these lessons. These perform two functions: they draw related thoughts together, and conserve time and space. The author believes that appropriate use of ellipses have been made, even at times over large spans of text, but invites the reader to examine the appropriateness of the editing for himself.

1 Has the Seventh-day Adventist denomination completed the rebuilding of God’s church?

In order to start to answer this question, we would have to have some sort of understanding of what the rebuilt church should look like, else how could we recognize its completion? There are many Scriptures to which we could refer. Here is a small sampling of verses to guide your thoughts and discussion:

John 17:19–23; Ephesians 2:18–22; Isaiah 52:8; Ephesians 5:25–27; John 13:35; 1 Timothy 3:15.

2 Has the Seventh-day Adventist denomination completed the rebuilding of the wall (repairing the breach made in God’s law)?

The reader is asked to consider this question in the context of the rest of the lesson.

3 Has there been a work stoppage?

Let’s now start to take an extensive look at what the prophets have to say about our situation, starting with Haggai’s time, chapter 1, verse 2. This chapter deals with the work stoppage on the temple. Of it, Ellen White says:

“The expression, ‘This people say,’ is significant. … Prompt obedience is expected of those whom the Lord chooses and leads. Pleas for delay are a dishonor to God. … Thus the Israelites declared that they … were broken off in their work because of the hindrances. … This is why, in a communication through his prophet, he referred to them not as ‘my people,’ but as ‘this people.’

“The Israelites had no real excuse for leaving their work on the temple. The time when the most serious objections were raised, was the time for them to persevere in building. But they were actuated by a selfish dislike to encounter danger by arousing the opposition of their enemies. … They hesitated to move forward by faith in the opening providences of God, because they could not see the end from the beginning. When difficulties arose, they were easily turned from the work.

“This history will be repeated. There will be religious failures because men do not have faith. When they look at the things that are seen, impossibilities appear; but God can lead them step by step in the course he desires them to take. His work will advance only as his servants move forward by faith.” The Review and Herald, December 5, 1907. [Emphasis supplied.]

Apply It:

Ellen White, writing in 1907, said that the history of work stoppage on the rebuilding church would yet be repeated. What exactly would a work stoppage on the temple look like? How would we know? What sign should we wait for to indicate a cessation of work has commenced? Does that mean that the Seventh-day Adventist church would run out of money to complete construction projects? Does it mean that Maranatha volunteers would cease volunteering? Or that evangelism projects would cease? Does it mean that fire or financial collapse would cripple institutions? Does it mean that individual work would completely stop, or collective work, or both? Does it mean that the organization of divisions, unions, and conferences would fall apart?

Or would the situation be more likely to appear as it did in Christ’s day? An organized church of Israel functions, despite deep divisions of conservatives and liberals. An imposing edifice (temple) on the outside, decaying on the inside (Matthew 23:27). While a motley group of disciples, at first unable to grasp the full significance of the church that Christ had founded and was raising up, and unable at times to collectively realize the full potential of unified action, forms the genesis of a modern Israel that took the gospel to the world—while the forms of the ancient church of Israel carried on.

“O Israel … You have not gone up into the gaps to build a wall for the house of Israel.” Ezekiel 13:4, 5.

“So I sought for a man among them who would make a wall, and stand in the gap before Me on behalf of the land, that I should not destroy it; but I found no one.” Ezekiel 22:30. [Emphasis supplied.]

Studies prepared by John T. Grosboll, PE. John T. is a mechanical engineer living near Vancouver, Washington. His secular employment includes several years of experience in primary metals and transportation-related industries. He, along with his wife Teresa, is actively involved in the work of the Historic Message Church in Portland, Oregon. He may be reached at: grosbolls@yahoo.com.

Call to Prayer – Why is there a Historic Adventist Movement Today

by

Some may not even know that there is such a movement. Still others may have heard of it, but do not know what or why it exists. In this brief article, we would like to share with you what could be a life saving history of our church and where it is today.

Early in the church’s history, and after the Great Disappointment in 1844, several of the people and many “Millerites” (followers of the teachings of William Miller) were convinced that “the mistake had not been in the reckoning of the prophetic periods, but in the event to take place at the end of the 2300 days [Daniel 8:14].” The Great Controversy, 425. Their study of the prophecies was correct, but the event was wrong. It was during this time that Ellen G. White discovered that the event “pointed to Christ’s ministration in the most holy place, to the investigative judgment, and not to the coming of Christ for the redemption of His people and the destruction of the wicked.” Ibid.

It was also during this time that, through prayer, study, and visions, the fundamental doctrines of the second-advent movement were further developed. The Sabbath, the heavenly sanctuary revealing the spiritual condition necessary to be ready for the second coming of Christ and many other subjects including the state of the dead, the health reform, the gift of prophecy in the remnant church, etc., were brought forward and adopted. So why is there such confusion in the church today about these and other subjects? Have we forgotten the way we were led into truth?

Historic Adventist is an informal designation for conservative individuals and organizations that seek to preserve certain fundamental beliefs and practices of the church. As a general rule, Historic Adventists feel that the church leadership has shifted or departed from key doctrinal “pillars” ever since the middle of the 20th century. Historic Adventists have tended to promote the message through independent ministries, some of which have a strained relationship with the official church.

Historic Adventist theology differs from mainstream Adventist theology in the areas of sin, salvation and end times. Mainstream Adventist theology often uses the term “new theology” as a pejorative term for perceived doctrinal shifts in the church. Much of the confusion started with a misunderstanding of Righteousness by Faith and the belief that we can be saved in our sins. Instead of preaching the Three Angels’ Messages, the Sanctuary message, and overcoming sin, the church has fallen into the popular topics of the day.

In the late years of the 1980s and early part of the 1990s, several ministers had been studying and preaching the gospel as it was understood at the inception of the church. The Reformation and Revival message of the time of the end and the fact that there will be a people living without sin just before Jesus comes are salvational messages. As their reward, many such ministers and laity were disfellowshiped from organized conference churches for doing what the Bible tells us to do—preach the Word.

Pastor Marshall Grosboll, founder of Steps to Life; Elder Ron Spear, founder of Hope International; Dr. Ralph Larson, evangelist, teacher and college administrator; and others were instrumental in forming a network of independent historic ministries and home churches. Unity meetings were held during the 1990s in an attempt to draw the work of the historic churches and ministries together.

Today, many of the historic churches and ministries have joined together in the International Association of Free Seventh-day Adventists. This movement is an international body consisting of a multiracial network of Seventh-day Adventist believers who desire to maintain and advance the original beliefs of the Seventh-day Adventist faith at a time when many of the original beliefs, worship style, and practices are being compromised by the established Seventh-day Adventist Church.

The Bible sums it up best in Ephesians 5:23–27: “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it; That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.”

Let us pray together for God to prepare His people for the events that are just before us. Teachings on Christian perfection and personal holiness were present in the religious revival of the Great Awakening in America and were evident in early Adventist movements. Pray that these teachings be brought back to life and sin is separated from sinners. As we are told in the Bible, “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.” Matthew 5:48.

Jän C. Schultz is an elder of Renaissance Church of Free Seventh-day Adventists, Sedalia, Colorado. He may be contacted at: RenChurch@aol.com.

Reporting from Illinois, USA – By God ’s Grace

by

I’m a fifth generation SDA, but I fell in love with dear Jesus when I was eighteen years old. My first craving was to learn more of Him. My heavy college load of pre-med at a public college sank into nothingness as I read books like Desire of Ages. I got a D in French, a D in History, and an F in Algebra. My dear mother thought I was ruined. But God did not let those grades hurt me one bit because I had done what he wanted me to do. I had gotten to know Him. For the next 6 ½ years my grades were fine.

My second craving was to share this lovely Jesus with as many as I could, and I prayed that He would help me do it. Although I did not realize then, that is just the kind of prayer that God delights to answer. That craving led me to read Great Controversy, give Bible studies, start an SDA gospel ministry, and write the book National Sunday Law as a soul-winning tool to reach the modern TV minds of today with God’s Three Angel’s Messages. Our kind Father has pushed them out around the world with 8.6 million in print. God gets all the credit. He gets all the praise, for we can do nothing. It just gives us a lot of joy. Why not pray that God will use you to reach many souls for Him? Then He will use you to inspire others. I dare you to pray it. He will answer that prayer!

I used to look in church basements to try to find a soul-winning tool that could grab people’s curiosity, lead them to Jesus, to the cross, His love, His law, His Sabbath, and give them the warning against the mark of the beast, and the Three Angel’s Messages, all in one simple setting. This tool would need to penetrate the modern TV minds, be small enough for busy people, and be wrapped up in Jesus, yet give them God’s last warning message. I could not find such a thing.

Since I finally found such a book, I am using it along with many SDA people. National Sunday Law is calculated to arouse their curiosity to read Great Controversy, which most TV minds will not read today. Now we get orders for hundreds of the Great Controversy. After they receive it, we enroll them in the Bible course through the mail. We have over 100 now taking Bible studies that way.

Then, there’s the satellite TV program once a week, on which we are going through the book of Revelation, and through the life of the lovely Jesus. We also send this program on video to hundreds each month who have no satellite dish.

I speak in many SDA churches in the USA and other countries. The dear SDA people need to learn how to be true historic Seventh-day Adventists. If you or I don’t teach them, who will? Their pastors? They need to be awakened out of a stupor to see that Rome is attacking God’s church and trying to turn it into a Roman Catholic clone. They also need to wake up to really know dear Jesus, and to know their duty to reach the world with the very message that God told us to give.

I have a special video series exposing Rome’s attack. I make it plain that as an ordained SDA minister, I’m standing in loyal defense of God’s SDA church against that attack.

At our church, we have SDA campmeetings once per year, and a one week soul-winning school every two months. It lasts one week so that those who work can take a weeks vacation and come to it without losing their jobs.

God has also provided a beautiful large building, which by God’s grace will be used as a “health resort” with health classes, and a health restaurant, to help save souls by way of medical missionary work. Our work in the building is not finished yet, but we appreciate your prayers that our kind Father will help us, and will bless.

May God richly bless you as we all work together with Him for souls, so that they, with us, can soon be home in that wonderful land where Jesus is.

The End

James White and Church Organization

by

It was the year of 1863. The United States of America was in the deadly embrace of a civil war. The eyes of the world were directed towards this nation. Could Protestantism and Republicanism stand? Even in 1863, this nation had already fallen far from what she once was. That very year the prophet wrote, “The people of this nation have forsaken and forgotten God. They have chosen other gods and followed their own corrupt ways until God has turned from them. The inhabitants of the earth have trampled upon the law of God and broken His everlasting covenant.” Testimonies, vol. 1, 355, 356. But while the nations of this earth looked on with disgust and indignation at the atrocities of the civil war, the most important battle of the day was little known.

This battle was being fought and won in humble homes and churches, in little known offices and most of all in the hearts of men. By the year 1863 many major victories had already been won in this battle of establishing a people in the third angel’s message. The Bible doctrines that were her foundation were in place. Each belief had been dug from the Scriptures. Each had the living testimony of the messenger of the Lord in its support. In various states, conferences were being formed to stabilize the work and guard against fanaticism. But in this year, there were new heights to be scaled and new victories to be won.

On June 6, 1863, the “health vision” was given. In and of itself the message of God on health reform marks 1863 as a never to be forgotten year. Health reform is the right arm of the message. “It is as closely connected with the third angel’s message as the hand is with the body.” Counsels on Diet and Foods, 69. For a people preparing for translation, the health reform was mandatory. “It is impossible for those who indulge in appetite to attain to Christian perfection.” Ibid., 22.

Yoked up with health reform was the vital matter of church organization which was finalized just two weeks before the vision on health. On May 20–23, 1863, the state conferences met and formed a general conference. John Byington served as chairman after the refusal of James of White. But that should deceive no one as to who was the driving force causing the formation of the General Conference. “Without James White’s dynamic leadership there would have been no organization of the Adventist Church in the 1860’s. For week after week, month by month, year after year, through the columns of the Review and Herald, he presented the importance of gospel order and led the members forward step by step toward his goal. A problem that he had to face was that he could see farther ahead than most of his brethren. And, of course, he was married to Ellen White, through whom God spoke directly to him on many occasions, counseling, encouraging, and stimulating his thinking.” James White, 164, by Virgil Robinson.

This man, James White, who brought about many victories for God’s cause: just what kind of a man was he? In our time we can only rely on pen pictures, as no one living was his personal acquaintance. This man, like Jesus’ disciples, had many natural abilities. However, as important as that is, we could never ascribe his success to that alone. Alexander the great, Napoleon and Nebuchadnazzer, all had many natural abilities, but James White’s abilities were surrendered to the use of God’s cause on earth. His wife, God’s prophet, “recognized the special talents God had given her husband. She wrote to him: ‘God has given you a good intellect—I might say a giant intellect . . . The cause of God cannot spare you without experiencing a great loss.’ ” Ibid. Later she wrote to her son, “Your father does the work of three men at all these meetings. I never saw a man work so energetically, so constantly as your father. God does give him more than mortal energy. If there is any place that is hard your father takes it.” Ibid.

In the 1990’s we are (or should be) well acquainted with the writings of Ellen White, the Lord’s special messenger. We know that those who read and study the testimonies from her pen become settled into the third angel’s message. But we are often unaware of the role James White played in the establishment of the remnant church. He ever had a great mission in mind, and was ever planning for its accomplishment. His mission was to cause the triumph of the third angel’s message over the powers of evil. His life was bound up in its welfare. When it prospered, he was comforted. But, when it languished, he sorrowed and went to work to heal it. He knew that for its final triumph, it must be a united body moving in perfect order against the powers of evil. For this cause, under God, he bent the powers of his “giant intellect.” Few men in God’s remnant church have ever had such a wonderful blend of executive ability combined with a profound theological knowledge of Biblical truth. But God saw that is what it would take to organize His church on earth.

With all that said, one would think those around him would see and appreciate his abilities. But history proves that this is seldom the case with anyone. We have only to remind ourselves of Paul, John the Baptist, Elijah, and Joseph to mention a few. The one, who with keen vision looks down the path and sees what course is needed, is usually derided by his contemporaries. It proved thus for James White. We should not be surprised, for our Lord and Master was scorned, and He was perfect. It was through His cruel humiliation that we were brought the blessing of salvation. And once again in the life experience of James White, we will see how the Lord turned scorn and derision into large blessings for his people.

This scorn and evil speaking played its role in bringing about the first General Conference meeting in May of 1863. When going through some bad experience we seldom grasp the full meaning of the promise, “For we can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.” 2 Corinthians 13:8. But, the historian of later years can look back and be amazed at the reality of the promise. As we will see by the story below, this is what happened with the rumors started against James White.

In 1862 and 1863, the work in Wisconsin was suffering from fanaticism. One of the leaders who was caught up in it was a Mr. T.M. Steward and his wife. They were claiming that Mrs. Steward had received visions. Because of this many sincere believers threw out all visions—including Ellen White’s. Others, in leadership positions, wanted to deny fellowship to new converts to the three angels’ messages until they had a chance to evaluate the prophetic gift and who consequently would not instantly state their belief in Ellen White’s visions. The Lord sent counsel to His people about the course to follow in this situation in Testimonies, vol. 1, 326–340 and 382–384.

Mr. Steward also opposed and criticized the idea of the organization of the believers. As is often the case, instead of attacking the message which cut across his ideas, he attacked the messenger—James White. The story is recorded in Ellen White: The Progressive Years, by Arthur White. It will be quoted here at length.

One way the great adversary sought to cripple the work of James White was in the circulation of rumors and falsehoods regarding his business integrity and honesty. Such criticism centered in northern Wisconsin, influenced by T.M. Steward. (See Testimonies, vol. 1, 311–323.) But criticisms were being heard from other areas where organization had been resisted. In early 1863 the Battle Creek church took steps to halt the malicious criticism. They recognized that James White’s reputation was not only of great value to him but also to “those who may be connected with the cause.” At a business meeting convened on Sunday, March 29, actions were taken to clear his name:

Resolved: That we, the church of Seventh-day Adventists of Battle Creek, deem it our duty to take measures to ascertain the grounds of the charges, complaints, and murmurs that are in circulation, that they may be sustained, and action taken accordingly, or may be proved to be groundless, and the envenomed mouth of calumny and slander be effectually stopped.

Resolved: That we appoint Brethren U. Smith, G.W. Amadon, and E.S. Walker, a committee to take this matter in charge.— RH, March 31, 1863.

The breadth of the proposed investigation is seen in the next action taken by the church:

Resolved: That we hereby earnestly request all those far and near who think they have any grounds of complaint against Elder White, all who have handed to him means that he has not appropriated as directed, all who think that he has wronged the aged, the widow, and the fatherless, or that he has not in all his dealings in temporal matters manifested the strictest integrity, probity, and uprightness, to immediately report their grievances, and the grounds upon which they base them, to Uriah Smith, chairman of the above named committee, that they may be received previous to the middle of May next.—Ibid.

Testimonials were solicited from all who had had dealings with James White since the beginning of his public ministry. These were to be laid before the coming General Conference session, called for late May.

In a last-page note in the next issue of the Review, White called attention to the action of the Battle Creek church. He stated:

The church deemed it necessary, for the good of the cause that there should be an investigation of our business career connected with the cause, and a printed report made. If flying reports be true, we should be separated from the cause. If an open and critical investigation proves them false, a printed report in the hands of the friends of the cause with which we have been connected may, in some instances at least, paralyze the tongue of slander.—Ibid., April 7, 1863.

He urged a prompt response “for the sake of the cause.”

The Call For A General Conference

The same issue of the Review carried the call for a meeting of the General Conference, at which it was hoped that church organization could be rounded out by binding the State conferences together in a unified body of believers across the land. The delegates were called to meet on Wednesday, May 20. The notice stated:

The several conference committees in the different States are requested to send delegates, or letters at their discretion. The brethren in those localities where there is no State conference can also be represented in the conference by delegates or letters.—Ibid.

On Wednesday afternoon, May 20, twenty ministers and laymen assembled in Battle Creek were ready to present their credentials. The conference moved into its work, in organizing the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, as noted elsewhere. (See Ellen G. White: The Early Years, 479–481.) The conference elected John Byington as president; Uriah Smith , secretary; and E.S. Walker, treasurer. James White was first unanimously elected to the presidency, but he thought it best to let another carry that responsibility. Byington would be joined by J.N. Andrews and G.W. Amadon, making an executive committee of three. The main thrust of the conference related to organization in both the State conferences and the General Conference.

Further Business of The Conference

The wording was brief, but the results were far-reaching. Actions were taken relating to the publication of charts for use in public proclamation of the message: a new prophetic chart, and one on the Ten Commandments (RH, May 26, 1863).

The General Conference took action regarding the survey of James White’s business integrity:

As no one had reported any grievances pertaining to the subject in hand, according to the request in the Review, the committee could only report that fact to the conference, and place in its hands the more than threescore and ten fervent testimonials which have been received on the other side, with the recommendation that, as it seemed that no one dared appear, to sustain the aforesaid reports, some action be taken by this conference to show the falsity of these reports, and vindicate before the world the character and course of Brother White. . . .

Resolved, That the committee employed by the Battle Creek church be empowered to act further in this matter in behalf of this conference, and prepare for publication a record of the action of the Battle Creek church relative to the accusations against Brother James White, and the substance of the responses received.—Ibid.

It was thought well to hold open the time for reports on White for another two months. The report finally appeared in the form of a forty-page pamphlet, which was circulated under the title “Vindication of the Business Career of Elder James White.” The introduction to the pamphlet, signed by the committee of three, declared that “no one has reported himself aggrieved.” It added:

His enemies have thus betrayed their utter want of confidence in the work they have been doing. Their silence has sealed their ignominy. Hereafter, in view of this fact, none will be willing to place themselves in the contemptible position of circulating such reports, except those whose enmity and prejudice overcome their convictions of right and reason,—Vindication of the Business Career of Elder James White, 3, 4.

The “Vindication” pamphlet consists of the signed statements of some seventy individuals who were well acquainted with White; many of these had had business dealings with him.

The conference was the first official General Conference session. It marked the completion of the organizational structure among Seventh-day Adventists. Attendance was such that meetings were held in the tent on the green across the street from the Review office. Uriah Smith, in his editorial report, declared:

Taking general view of this meeting as a religious gathering we hardly know what feature of the joyful occasion to notice first. We can say to the readers of the Review, think of everything good that has been written of every previous meeting, and apply it to this. All this would be true, and more than this.

Perhaps no previous meeting that we have ever enjoyed was characterized by such unity of feeling and harmony of sentiment. In all the important steps taken at this conference, in the organization of a General Conference, and the further perfecting of State conferences, defining the authority of each, and the important duties belonging to their various officers, there was not a dissenting voice, and we may reasonably doubt if there was even a dissenting thought. Such union, on such points, affords the strongest grounds of hope for the immediate advancement of the cause, and its future glorious prosperity and triumph.—RH, May 26, 1863.

This step in organization brought the church into a unified denominational structure in time to meet the emergencies of the military draft, and prepared to make advance steps as the health message came, through vision, two weeks after the session.

Taken from Ellen White: The Progressive Years, 30–33.

God turned the charges against James White into a blessing. This very situation showed the need for just such a conference. It seems that whenever the cause of God is marked with the promise of progress, the enemy of truth is on the ground to contend every inch of advance. Thus it was in the days of Moses, Jesus, Paul and Martin Luther.

Today the Lord can turn the apparent troubles in God’s work into blessings if we stay humble and obedient. We must watch and pray and keep our garments unspotted from the prevailing iniquity around us. Our lips must be firmly sealed against idle words and evil speaking. Otherwise, we could innocently fall into Satan’s snares and unknowingly be carrying out his plans. Thus it was with the disciples of John the Baptist.

John the Baptist lived a very austere life. The Pharisees secretly hated him. They “had not accepted the mission of the Baptist. They had pointed in scorn to his abstemious life, his simple habits, his coarse garments, and had declared him a fanatic. Because he denounced their hypocrisy, they had resisted his words, and had tried to stir up the people against him. The Spirit of God moved upon the hearts of these scorners, convicting them of sin; but they had rejected the counsel of God, and had declared that John was possessed of a devil . . . Although they had opposed the mission of the Baptist, they were now ready to court the friendship of his disciples, hoping to secure their co-operation against Jesus . . . They contrasted the austere piety of the Baptist with the course of Jesus in feasting with publicans and sinners . . . The disciples of John had not a clear understanding of Christ’s work; they thought there might be some foundation for the charges of the Pharisees.” Desire of Ages, 275, 276.

These poor men, without knowing what they were doing played into the hands of the Pharisees, who were Christ’s bitterest enemies. And they came and questioned Jesus about why He and His disciples did not fast as often as they and the Pharisees did. You can read the whole story in Desire of Ages, 272–280.

This accusing spirit repeats itself over and over again in the work of God. James White contended with it all his life, not only from his enemies, but often from his “best” of friends. Rumors are still floating around today of what a hard man he was. One wonders how many of those are founded upon even a shred of truth! But we can be sure, whatever is said about him, that God accepted his labors. Ellen White was shown in vision that he will be saved. We know that God’s grace was sufficient for him and that his weakness was submitted to God’s strength. “For consider Him that endured such contradiction of sinners against Himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.” Hebrews 12:3.

The End

by Gwen Reeves