The Birth of an Image, Part I

The thirty-fourth session of the General Conference convened at Battle Creek, Michigan, April 2 through April 23, 1901. This was an important General Conference session because it involved not only a major reorganization of the Church, but it was the first General Conference Ellen White had attended in 10 years.

“A feeling of exhilaration and excitement filled the air on Tuesday morning, April 2, as workers and church members began to assemble in the Battle Creek Tabernacle a little before nine o’clock,” Arthur White wrote. “This would be the largest General Conference session ever held.” Arthur L. White, The Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 70.

There were 267 delegates at the 1901 General Conference session. The Church at that time had a membership of about 75,000: four-fifths of which were in the United States. The organization of the Church in 1901 consisted of only local Conferences and a General Conference. The “General Conference had remained unchanged from 1863 to 1901.” Ibid. It was time for a change, for a reorganization of the Church structure. Shortly after the “most precious message” was given to the Church by Waggoner and Jones in 1888, Ellen White stated that there was a wrong principle of power at the head of the Church and that this principle needed to be changed.

“For years the church has been looking to man and expecting much from man, but not looking to Jesus, in whom our hopes of eternal life are centered,” Ellen White wrote. “Therefore God gave to His servants [Waggoner and Jones] a testimony that presented the truth as it is in Jesus, which is the Third Angel’s Message in clear, distinct lines.” Letter to O. A. Olsen, dated at Hobart, Tasmania, May 1, 1895; 1888 Materials, 1338.

“The result of this has been in various ways. The sacred character of the cause of God is no longer realized at the center of the work. The voice from Battle Creek, which has been regarded as authority in counseling how the work should be done, is no longer the voice of God; but it is the voice of—whom? From whence does it come, and where is its vital power? This state of things is maintained by men who should have been disconnected from the work long ago. These men do not scruple to quote the word of God as their authority, but the god who is leading them is a false god.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 17, 185, 186. [Emphasis supplied.]

“As the institutional interests in Battle Creek grew, businessmen were drawn in to head them, and a strong center developed,” Arthur White wrote. “A General Conference Executive Committee, beginning with three members in 1863, some twenty years later was increased to five.” Arthur L. White, The Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 71.

There were seven members on the General Conference Committee in 1887. Two more members were added in 1889, and two more in 1893. By the opening of the 1901 General Conference session the Executive Committee numbered thirteen. The last two had been added at the 1899 General Conference session. (See Ibid.)

Although the Church had grown in size, the number of leading men at headquarters had not kept pace with the growth. A small group of men controlled the Church at Battle Creek. The 1901 delegation was to move forward with the establishment of Union Conferences between the local State Conferences and the General Conference.

Guard Against Consolidating and Centralizing the Work

“Beginning with 1889 certain measures were strongly promoted to consolidate and centralize various features of the denominational work,” Arthur White wrote. “This would begin with the publishing interests and then reach out to the educational and medical lines.” Ibid., 72.

Although some wished to consolidate and centralize the work of the denomination, the counsel from Ellen White was against centralization. Testimony after testimony was given against centralization.

“It is not the purpose of God to centralize in this way, bringing all the interests of one branch of the work under the management of a comparatively few men,” Ellen White wrote. “In His great purpose of advancing the cause of truth in the earth, He designs that every part of His work shall blend with every other part.” Spalding and Magan Collection, 404.

“The workers are to draw together in the Spirit of Christ,” Ellen White concluded. “In their diversity, they are to preserve unity. . . . The work of direction is to be left with the great Manager, while obedience to the work of the Lord is to be the aim of His workers.” Ibid., 404.

Notice that their unity was to be in their “diversity.” No one was to rule over the other. Their unity was in Christ and the truth. Christ, not man, is the Head, “the great Manager,” of the work and the Church.

Not only were Adventists counseled not to centralize the work, it was also not God’s plan that the Advent people should centralize their homes in one place. The plan was to spread out, to take the Advent truth to all the world.

“It is not the Lord’s plan to centralize largely in any one place,” Ellen White counseled. “The time has passed when there should be any binding about of the work and confining it to a few places.” The Publishing Ministry, 146.

In 1901, the Review and Herald publishing house at Battle Creek was in dire need of a complete overhaul. The Press was involved in commercial printing and because of this policy the publishing and sale of message-filled books suffered during this period. The policy was that any material would be published that would bring a profit to the Review and Herald Publishing house.

“This included fiction, Wild West stories, Roman Catholic books, and works on sex and hypnosis,” Arthur White wrote. “When cautioned, men in positions of management at the Review office declared that they were printers and not censors.” The Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 72.

The Adventist structure is in the very same situation today. The new Seventh-day Adventist publishing house in Russia is required by the State to publish the religious books of other denominations. Like the Review and Herald Publishing house in the 1890s, this includes, Roman Catholic books, Pentecostal, Jehovah’s Witnesses, and even works of spiritualism! Not only that, but this new publishing house in Russia had to have the endorsement of Billy Graham before the Soviet government would permit the General Conference to build the publishing house. The Soviet government would also retain 51 percent of the publishing house; thus the Soviet government would have final control in any dispute.

The Cleansing Fire

“Be not deceived; God is not mocked,” the apostle Paul warned, “for whatsoever a man [or church] soweth, that shall he also reap.” Galatians 6:7. Is it any wonder that on December 30, 1902, the Lord sent His angels to torch the main building of the Review and Herald publishing plant.

“Before the fire came which swept away the Review and Herald factory, I was in distress for many days. I was in distress while the council was in session, laboring to get the right matter before the meeting, hoping, if it were a possible thing, to call our brethren to repentance, and avert calamity. It seemed to me that it was almost a life and death question. It was then that I saw the representation of danger,—a sword of fire turning this way and that way. I was in an agony of distress. The next news was that the Review and Herald building had been burned by fire, but that not one life had been lost. In this the Lord spoke mercy with judgment. The mercy of God was mingled with judgment to spare the lives of the workers, that they might do the work which they had neglected to do, and which it seemed impossible to make them see and understand.” General Conference Bulletin, April 6, 1903.

Have times changed? Will the Lord still visit His people again in judgement?

“And it shall come to pass at that time, that I will search Jerusalem [the Church] with candles, and punish the men that are settled on their lees: that say in their heart, The Lord will not do good, neither will He do evil.” Zephaniah 1:12.

“He who presides over His church and the destinies of nations is carrying forward the last work to be accomplished for this world. To His angels He gives the commission to execute His judgments.” Testimonies to Ministers, 431.

“Let the ministers awake, let them take in the situation,” Ellen White warned. “The work of judgment begins at the sanctuary.” Ibid.

“Notwithstanding the condition of things at the publishing house, a suggestion had been made to bring still more of our work to the Review Office, still more power into Battle Creek,” Ellen White continued. “This greatly alarmed me, and when the fire came, I breathed easier than I had for a long time.” General Conference Bulletin, April 6, 1903.

“We were thankful that no lives were lost,” Ellen White stated. “There was a large loss of property. Again and again the Lord had shown me that for every dollar that was accumulated by unjust means, there would be ten times as much lost.” Ibid.

Ellen White’s Concern About the 1901 General Conference

The delegates gathered at the 1901 General Conference session with apprehension. They sensed that something important would happen at this session. Ellen White would be present at this General Conference for the first time in ten years .

“All were profoundly thankful that Ellen White was to be there, and she carried a heavy burden for the meeting,” Arthur White wrote. “It was this conference with its challenges and its opportunities that had in a large part led Ellen White to close up her work in Australia and hasten back to the United States.” Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 73.

A New Constitution

At the 1901 General Conference session, a new constitution was voted by the delegates. The two most important changes in this constitution from the previous constitution was as follows:

No General Conference President

The first action established a twenty-five man General Conference Committee instead of a thirteen man committee. The constitution abolished the office of a General Conference President, and established in its place the office of a General Conference “chairman.”

Another important aspect was that no officer of the General Conference committee was to serve more than two years. This would do away with one man at the head of the Church. This was a major move away from the form of government retained by the Papacy for over six hundred years when in 533 a.d., Justinian, the Roman emperor, decreed that the Bishop of Rome was supreme over all other Bishops of the Church.

Union Conferences

The second important change established Union Conferences. The Church prior to 1901 had only local State Conferences and a General Conference. This was still not perfect, but would decentralize ecclesiastical authority to a great degree. Under Article #2 it was stated that, “The object of this Conference shall be to unify and to extend to all parts of the world, the work of promulgating the everlasting gospel.” General Conference Bulletin, vol. IV, First Quarter, April 22, 1901. Extra No. 17, 378.

The New General Conference Executive Committee

Article #4, titled, “Executive Committee,” Section 1, stated in part: The Executive Committee of this Conference shall be twenty-five in number, and shall have power to organize itself by choosing a chairman, secretary, treasurer, and auditor, whose duties shall be such as usually pertain to their respective offices. It shall also have the power to appoint all necessary agents and committees for the conduct of its work.” Ibid.

The election of officers and the time they would serve was stated under Section #2: “The Executive Committee shall be elected at the regular sessions of the Conference, and shall hold office for the term of two years, or until their successors are elected, and appear to enter upon their duties.” Ibid.

Current Objection To the 1901 Constitution

Term-limits have never been popular by those holding office. This is true, not only in church offices, but also in the political debates of the day. In his history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, Arthur White objected to this form of church government. He believed that the 1901 Constitution was “weak” on the point of a General Conference chairman versus a General Conference President, and the idea of term limits for those holding office. He wrote: “But there was one weakness in the new constitution that did not show up clearly when it was adopted,” Arthur White wrote. “It was to cause considerable concern in the months that followed. This related to the election of the officers of the General Conference.” The Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 95.

This “weakness” however, was the opinion of Arthur White. Obviously, it was not the opinion of the duly authorized delegates of the 1901 General Conference session who voted the constitution into law. Neither was it the opinion of Ellen White who was present at that General Conference session.

“I was never more astonished in my life than at the turn things have taken at this meeting. This is not our work. God has brought it about. Instruction regarding this was presented to me, but until the sum was worked out at this meeting, I could not comprehend this instruction. God’s angels have been walking up and down in this congregation. I want every one of you to remember this, and I want you to remember also that God has said that He will heal the wounds of His people.” General Conference Bulletin, April 25, 1901.

“According to the new constitution, the delegates attending a General Conference session were empowered to elect the General Conference Committee; this committee in turn was to organize itself, electing its own officers,” Arthur White wrote. “It was recognized at the time that this could mean that a man might be chairman for only one year.” Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 95.

Notice that Arthur White’s real objection to the 1901 Constitution centered on the part that “a man might be chairman for only one year,” and that a new chairman would be elected each year thereafter. This is still the objection of leadership today.

“Undoubtedly this provision came about as an overreaction to the desire to get away from any ‘kingly power’ (Letter 49, 1903),” Arthur White observed, “a point that was pushed hard by Elder A. T. Jones, a member of the committee on organization.” Ibid.

Arthur White suggested that the idea of a new General Conference chairman elected each year, “Undoubtedly…came about as an overreaction to the desire to get away from any ‘kingly power.’” Then he gives reference to a testimony from Ellen White, Letter 49, dated 1903, which was not written until two years later. If indeed there was overreaction to the “kingly power” stated in Ellen White’s testimony, then how could the delegates of 1901 overreact to a testimony that had not been given, indeed, that would not be written for two more years?

Notice also that once again Seventh-day Adventist historians, in their desire to alter history, try to attribute the responsibility or blame for an action they see as false on the shoulders of one man. Arthur White used this method when he stated that it was A. T. Jones who “pushed hard” for the idea of a new General Conference chairman elected each year, rather than a continual office of chairman that would keep one man in the office for years. Indeed, if it was A. T. Jones’ urging that caused the 267 delegates to see the wisdom that no one man should be the head of the church, and if his urging helped the delegates to vote it into the new Constitution of 1901, then A. T. Jones should be commended, not condemned. Did not Ellen White state that, “This is not our work. God has brought it about.” Are we not true Protestants? Do we still believe in a country without a king, and a church without a Pope? Are we like Israel of old, continually demanding a visible king over the Church?

“While this arrangement would clearly reduce the possibility of anyone exercising kingly power, it also greatly undercut responsible leadership,” Arthur White lamented. “It went too far, for it took out of the hands of the delegates attending the General Conference session the vital responsibility of electing the leaders of the church and instead placed this responsibility in the hands of the General Conference Executive Committee of twenty-five.” White added further that the new Constitution was “too unwieldy,” and, “There was no church leader with a mandate from the church as represented by its delegates.” Ibid.

The new Constitution did not take “out of the hands of the delegates attending the General Conference session the vital responsibility of electing the leaders of the church,” as Arthur White stated. The delegates elected the twenty-five members of the General Conference Committee. The twenty-five man Committee then chose their own “chairman,” this person to be replaced each year. Arthur White lamented the fact that the General Conference delegates could not choose who was to be the chairman of the General Conference Committee, and that this “chairman” could not serve for long periods of time. Of course, this thinking would only reestablish the old Constitution which provided for a permanent President of the General Conference.

Arthur White admitted that “this arrangement would clearly reduce the possibility of anyone exercising kingly power,” but he believed that the new Constitution “was too unwieldy.” Unfortunately, White then argued for a one-man ruler of the Church. He stated that with this new Constitution, “There was no church leader with a mandate.” That was the idea of the new Constitution, was it not? There was to be no one man at the head of the Church with a mandate from God or man. This would be establishing a Pope, an image of the Papacy!

“That some of the delegates attending the session of 1901 were not clear on this point is evidenced in the insistence that the Committee elect the chairman and announce their decision before that session closed,” White wrote. “A. G. Daniells was chosen as chairman of the General Conference Committee.” Ibid. White added further that, “He was the leader of the church and nearly all the delegates were pleased, but they did not discern at this point how he would be crippled in his work, having no tenure and no mandate.” Ibid.

Arthur White was correct in stating that Daniells was to have no “tenure or mandate.” It was the twenty-five man Executive Committee that was to have a “tenure” and a “mandate” to oversee the work. The chairman was merely to preside over the conference session. Daniells was never to be the leader of the Church; Jesus Christ is the leader of the Church. He was merely the chairman of the General Conference Committee, not the Pope of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

As stated before, the chairman was to hold this office for one year, after which a new chairman would be elected the following year. However, history reveals that Daniells assumed himself President of the General Conference and wrote a new constitution that was voted into law two years later at the 1903 General Conference session. This “new” 1903 Constitution officially established Daniells in the office of President of the General Conference, which office he held for over twenty years!

“He [Daniells] assumed the presidency of the General Conference in 1901 at a difficult period in the history of the church,” the SDA Encyclopedia states. “In 1922 he relinquished the presidency of the General Conference and held the post of secretary for four years.” Seventh-day Adventist Encyclopedia, Second Revised Edition, 1995.

“To take the position that Ellen White’s urging that there be no kings meant, as interpreted by A. T. Jones, that the church should have no General Conference president was unjustified,” Arthur White wrote. “At no time had the messages from her called for the abolition of the office of president of the General Conference; rather her messages recognized such an office in the organization of the church.” Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 95. To substantiate this claim, Arthur White directed the reader to Testimonies to Ministers, 95, 96. Again, this testimony rebuking “kingly power” was written two years after the 1901 Constitution was voted!

“An earlier statement indicated that she understood that the work devolving upon the president of the General Conference was too large for one man to carry and that others should stand by his side to assist (Testimonies to Ministers, 342, 343),” Arthur White wrote. “She did condemn the exercise of kingly power.” Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 95, 96.

Arthur White tried to establish that A. T. Jones was the only one of the 267 delegates who believed that there should be “no kings,” no General Conference president. The 1901 General Conference Bulletin states that the Constitution was “voted unanimously” by the 267 delegates. A. T. Jones did not vote the new Constitution in by himself!

White stated that the idea that “the church should have no General Conference president was unjustified,” and that at no time had Ellen White “called for the abolition of the office of president of the General Conference.” Arthur White tried to establish that Ellen White endorsed the idea of a General Conference president by quoting an “earlier” statement. (Testimonies to Ministers, 342, 343). He stated that in this earlier statement Ellen White “recognized such an office in the organization of the church.”

Just because Ellen White recognized that there was a General Conference president at an earlier time, does not prove that she endorsed the idea. Indeed, she did state that “the president of the General Conference was too large for one man to carry and that others should stand by his side to assist.” This would have been true also of a General Conference chairman. Ellen White did acknowledge the office of president while it existed, but when the office was abolished at the 1901 General Conference session she stated, “This is not our work. God has brought it about.”

“The weakness, which soon became very apparent, was corrected at the next session of the General Conference,” Arthur White concluded, “the session of 1903.” Ibid.

We must now examine the 1903 General Conference Bulletin for ourselves to find out what was “corrected” at the next session of the General Conference.

To be concluded next month

The Birth of an Image, Part II

The 1903 General Conference session convened in Oakland, California, on March 27, 1903. This would be the most important point in the reorganization of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, for at this General Conference a “new” constitution would be voted that would forever establish one man at the head of the Church!

The Chairman, Elder Arthur G. Daniells, called the thirty-fifth General Conference session to order at two-thirty, Friday afternoon, March 27, 1903. One hundred and thirty four delegates were seated at this 1903 session. (General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 1.)

“Since the last meeting of the General Conference we have organized twelve union conferences and twenty-three local conferences,” Daniells stated. “Most of these local conferences are within the territory of the union conferences.” Ibid.

It should be noted that the 134 delegates seated at this 1903 session were 133 short of the 267 delegates seated at the 1901 General Conference session. This was a curious aspect of the 1903 session. The membership of the Church was now larger than it had been two years earlier, but the number of delegates was smaller! Why?

Arthur G. Daniells, General Conference chairman, was about to introduce still another Constitution, which he had written, a Constitution that would establish him in the office of General Conference President. “The business of the conference proper began Monday morning at nine-thirty,” Arthur White stated. “After a roll call of the delegates, the chairman, Elder Daniells, gave his address.…” The Early Elmshaven Years, vol.5, 243. [All emphasis supplied unless otherwise stated.]

Notice that in this statement Arthur White admits that A.G. Daniells was “the chairman,” and not the president of the General Conference. Why was Daniells still the “chairman” after two years, when the delegates, two years prior in 1901, had voted that the office of chairman was to continue only one year?

On Monday morning, Ellen White spoke to the delegates instead of the regular business meeting. She had received a vision the night before and wished to convey the message to the church leadership. She stated in part: “Today God is watching His people. We should seek to find out what He means when He sweeps away our sanitarium and our publishing house. Let us not move along as if there were nothing wrong.…God wants us to come to our senses, He wants us to seek for the meaning of the calamities that have overtaken us, that we may not tread in the footsteps of Israel, and say, ‘The temple of the Lord, The temple of the Lord are we,’ when we are not this at all.” General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 31.

What Might Have Been

In her morning talk, Ellen White made reference to a vision she was given in regard to the past 1901 General Conference session: “The Lord has shown me what might have been had the work been done that ought to have been done. In the night season I was present in a meeting where brother was confessing to brother. Those present fell upon one another’s necks, and made heart-broken confessions. The Spirit and power of God were revealed. No one seemed too proud to bow before God in humility and contrition. Those who led in this work were the ones who had not before had the courage to confess their sins.” Ibid.

“This might have been,” Ellen White continued. “All this the Lord was waiting to do for His people. All heaven was waiting to be gracious.” Ibid.

(The complete vision Ellen White referred to is found in Testimonies for the Church, vol. 8, 104–106, under the title, “What Might Have Been.” The testimony was sent to the Battle Creek Church from St. Helena, California, January 5, 1903.)

Debate Over A New Constitution

“The second major debate of the 1903 General Conference session, which came toward the end of the meeting, was centered upon the new constitution, specifically the provision for the election of a president.” The Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 256. This was a major step backward! Two years prior, the 267 delegates had voted unanimously that there would be no president of the General Conference, but merely a new chairman to be elected each year. Now the proposed “new” Constitution would reinstate the office of president of the General Conference. “But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us.” I Samuel 8:6a.

“Two reports were filed with the session from the Committee on Plans and Constitution,” Arthur White wrote. “The majority report supported the new constitution, which would provide for the leading officers of the General Conference to be chosen by the delegates, thus giving them a mandate from the church.” Ibid.

In this “new” Constitution, Arthur White referred to the “leading officers,” but the central issue was the provision for a new General Conference President, and it was this new General Conference President who would be given “a mandate from the church.” Arthur White had stated before that A. G. Daniells, the General Conference “chairman,” did not have a mandate from the church. Today, in political circles of the United States Congress we hear much about “mandates,” and “term-limits.” The political leaders and church leaders indeed claim a “mandate” from the people that would give them complete authority to enact what they think the people should have. But what does God say about this worldly policy in the church? “Vengeance will be executed,” Ellen White warned, “against those who sit in the gates deciding what the people should have.” Manuscript 15, 1886.

Obviously, political and church leaders want a “mandate” of authority. However, neither political nor church leaders want “term-limits.” Why is this? Because “term-limits” would put them out of power and out of office in a relatively short period of time.

“Christ foresaw that the undue assumption of authority indulged by the scribes and Pharisees would not cease with the dispersion of the Jews. He had a prophetic view of the work of exalting human authority to rule the conscience, which has been so terrible a curse to the church in all ages. And His fearful denunciations of the scribes and Pharisees, and His warnings to the people not to follow these blind leaders, were placed on record as an admonition to future generations.” The Great Controversy, 596.

The Minority Report

“The minority report, signed by three men [E. J. Waggoner, David Paulson, and P. T. Magan] largely connected with institutional interests, claimed that the proposed new constitution would reverse the reformatory steps taken at the General Conference of 1901.” Arthur White wrote, “These men argued that the constitution of 1901, which provided that the General Conference Committee could choose its officers, should not be ‘annihilated’ without giving it a fair trial.” These men on the minority committee did indeed argue that “the constitution of 1901…should not be ‘annihilated’ without giving it a fair trial.” However, the 1903 General Conference Bulletin reveals that “these three men” did not object to the new plan that the delegates at large should elect the General Conference committee members. What they did object to was the establishment of a permanent General Conference “President,” instead of a temporary General Conference Chairman. They also objected to the fact that the 1901 Constitution had only been tested for two years.

Actual Words Of the Minority Report

“The minority of your Committee on Plans and Constitution beg leave to submit that the Constitution proposed by the majority of the Committee appears to us to be so subversive of the principles of organization given to us at the General Conferences of 1897 and 1901 that we can not possibly subscribe to it.

“The proposed new Constitution reverses the reformatory steps that were taken, and the principles which were given and adopted as the principles of reorganization, in the General Conferences of 1897 and 1901, and embodied in the present Constitution; and this before that Constitution or the organization according to it, has ever had adequate trial.

“We therefore recommend that the Constitution of 1901 be given a fair trial before it be annihilated.” General Conference Bulletin, 1903, 146, 147.

Notice that the major contention of the Minority Committee was that the first constitutional revision in the history of the church, that had been voted two years prior in 1901 by 267 delegates, had not been in effect long enough for a just evaluation.

The “new” Constitution proposed by the majority of the committee reinstated the office of “President” of the General Conference. The new president would serve as chairman of the Executive Committee, and would continue in office for years. (A. G. Daniells, who was elected president at this 1903 General Conference, served as president for over twenty years). The Majority Committee Report on this point was as follows:

“Article iv—Executive Committee, Section 1. At each session the Conference shall elect an Executive Committee for the carrying forward of its work between the sessions.

“The Executive Committee shall consist of the president, two vice‑presidents, the presidents of Union Conferences, the superintendents of organized Union Missions, and twelve other persons, among whom there shall be representatives of all the leading departments of conference work, including the publishing, medical, educational, Sabbath‑School, and religious liberty.

“Article ii—Executive Committee, Section 1. During the intervals between sessions of the Conference, the Executive Committee shall have full administrative power, and shall fill for the current term any vacancies that may occur in its offices, boards, committees, or agents, by death, resignation, or otherwise, except in cases where other provisions for filling such vacancies shall be made by vote of the General Conference.

“Section 2. Any five members of the Executive Committee, including the president or vice‑president, shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of such business as is in harmony with the general plans outlined by the Committee, but the concurrence of four members shall be necessary to pass any measure before the Committee.

“Section 3. Meetings of the Executive Committee may be called at any time or place, by the president or vice‑president, or upon the written request of any five members of the Committee.” Ibid.

The Majority Committee Report was signed by ten men:

H.W. Cottrell, E. T. Russell, C. W. Flaiz, W. C. White, W. T. Knox, E. H. Gates, G. E. Langdon, C. N. Woodward, Smith Sharp, S. B. Horton

The next action was that W. T. Knox made a motion for the “adoption of the majority report.” D. E Lindsey seconded the motion. (See Ibid.)

“Now, if it is the wish of the delegates, this report may be read through entirely; or, if you desire, it can be taken up one section or article at a time,” said the Chairman, H. W. Cottrell. “If this be the mind of the delegates, the secretary may read the first article.” Ibid., 147.

Percy T. Magan Speaks

“The congregation will all see that the minority report deals only with certain general vital principles, which we believe are transgressed in the proposed new constitution,” P. T. Magan stated, “and therefore, in order that that matter may be brought before the house, as it is the vital thing in the consideration of the whole subject, I move that the report of the minority be substituted now for consideration in place of the report of the majority.” Ibid. E. J. Waggoner seconded the motion.

The motion for the minority position was put, and was lost!

E.J. Waggoner Speaks

“My dissent from the report of the majority of the committee is on two lines,” Waggoner stated. “I will give those two lines as briefly and concisely as possible, and dispassionately.”

“The first objection I have to the report is that it is fundamentally and diametrically opposed to the principles of organization as set forth in the Bible,” Waggoner continued, “and as, up to the present time, adhered to in the main by this body. This being so, I regard the [majority] report as revolutionary and inconsistent.” Ibid.

Waggoner Defines the Concept of Who and What Is the Church

“I think we are all agreed in this, that the church, the local body of believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, in any place, is the unit of organization and the standard,” Waggoner stated. “Thus in any company of believers, wherever they may be, in whatever city, we have there the epitome of the whole body of believers throughout the world.”

“Now the movement, although I am sure unconscious and unintentional on the part of the brethren, toward the adoption of this [majority] report does essentially lie in the line of the adoption of a creed,” Waggoner continued, “and that, although the churches of the world and the people of the world regard as essential to organization, we who know the Scriptures and know the falling away that came in the early days and has been perpetuated until this present time, —we know is essentially disorganization.”

“The Bible organization is opposed to the exaltation of any person over others,” Waggoner said. “Now the question will arise and be presented to me: ‘Why, then, do you sign this report, which recommends that we maintain the present constitution?’”

“I am not inconsistent,” Waggoner concluded. “My second objection is to this constitution itself, which, in some of its particulars, I regard as the worst constitution ever devised among Seventh-day Adventists.” Ibid.

Percy T. Magan Speaks

“As a member of the minority of the Committee on Plans, and as a man, if I had not been on the Committee on Plans at all, I am conscientiously opposed to the proposed new constitution,” Magan stated. “I have always felt that the hardest place that any man could be put in this life is to have to stand conscientiously opposed to what the majority of his brethren believe to be right.” Ibid., 150.

“To me it has always appeared to be a much easier thing to stand in a position of opposition to the world, and even to have to face a court of justice in the world, for your faith, than to have to face your brethren for your faith,” Magan continued. “And therefore I shall say today, as briefly and modestly as I know how, what I have to say.” Ibid., 159.

“The minority report expresses in a word the feelings which actuated the minority in making the report, because we believe that the constitution proposed by the majority of the committee appears to us to be so subversive of the principles of organization given to us at the General Conferences of 1897 and 1901,” Magan continued. “Those principles were given to us by the Spirit of God. In my judgment, and in the judgment of the minority of the committee, this constitution is absolutely subversive of those principles.” Ibid., 150.

“It may be stated there is nothing in this new constitution which is not abundantly safeguarded by the provisions of it,” Magan concluded, “but I want to say to you that any man who has ever read ‘Neander’s History of the Christian Church,’ Mosheim’s, or any of the other of the great church historians,—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, and in the way in which they are brought in, are the same principles, and introduced in precisely the same way, as they were hundreds of years ago when the Papacy was made.”

“Further,” Magan emphasized, “this whole house must recognize this, before we are through with this discussion, that the proposed new constitution, whatever improvements may be claimed for it, whatever advantages it may be stated that it contains, that, in principle, as far as the head of the work is concerned, it goes back precisely where we were before the reformatory steps of two years ago.” Ibid.

“Ellen White did not enter into the debate on the question of the constitution,” Arthur White wrote. “W. C. White spoke strongly in support of the changes proposed, as did some of the other respected leaders, such as Loughborough and Butler.”

“The opinions of learned men…the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastic councils, as numerous and discordant as are the churches which they represent, the voice of the majority—not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith,” Ellen White wrote. “God will have a people upon the earth to maintain the Bible, and the Bible only, as the standard of all doctrines and the basis of all reforms.” The Great Controversy, 595.

The New Constitution Voted and Ratified

That very evening, April 9, 1903, the vote was taken. The new Constitution was ratified. The minority report was rejected. The plea by P. T. Magan that the principles of the new Constitution, “are the same principles, and introduced in precisely the same way, as they were hundreds of years ago when the Papacy was made,” was also ignored. At that very hour, an image to the Papacy was established in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. For ninety five years that image has prospered and increased until institutions of the SDA Church are merging with those of the Roman Catholic Church.

“The matter was not settled quickly,” Arthur White stated. “A vote with a three‑fourths majority was needed.” One hundred and eight delegates were present. Eighty-five voted for the new Constitution, “carrying the action by a majority of four.” Early Elmshaven Years, 257. How sad that an image to the Papacy was carried by a slim margin of only four votes.

“When men who profess to serve God ignore His parental character, and depart from honor and righteousness in dealing with their fellow‑men, Satan exults, for he has inspired them with his attributes,” Ellen White stated. “They are following in the track of Romanism.” 1888 Materials, 1435.

“We have far more to fear from within than from without. The hindrances to strength and success are far greater from the church itself than from the world.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 122.

Notice that Ellen White did not say, “We have more to fear from within.” What she said was that we have “far” more to fear from within than from without. How sad it is that “the hindrances to strength and success are far greater from the church itself than from the world.”

Daniells’ Later Confession

“In 1946, I was in the U.S.A. and the General Conference asked me to take meetings at various Camps,” George Burnside, noted Australian SDA evangelist stated . “I roomed at two camps—New Jersey and East Pennsylvania—with Pastor Meade MacGuire and we chatted much about the old days.”

“He had known A. T. Jones,” Burnside continued. “Pastor MacGuire spoke highly of Jones, especially of his knowledge of Church history.”

“His [Jones’] big concern was the trends in SDA organization,” Burnside recalled. “Jones opposed A. G. Daniells (then Gen. Conference president) on church organization as Jones felt it was drifting Romeward. Finally Daniells broke Jones, with the result that Jones finally left the church.”

“Years later, Daniells and Pastor MacGuire were attending Camps in California. They were returning to Washington D. C. by train. Pastor MacGuire said Pastor Daniells was sitting looking out of the carriage window thinking. He [Daniells] looked up and said, ‘You know, Meade, I believe Jones was right and I was wrong.’ He was referring to the question of organization.

“Pastor MacGuire said that Pastor Daniells did all he could to rectify things, but as he was then out of the presidency no one paid much attention to him,” Burnside concluded. “This is the account as I recall it.” The document was dated February 7, 1987, and signed, George Burnside, Wahroonga, N. S. W. Australia.

Testimony Given Immediately Following the 1903 General Conference

“Ellen White returned home to Elmshaven from the [1903] session some time between April 10 and 12,” Arthur White wrote. “Of the significant and far-reaching events in the early summer of 1903 she wrote: ‘My strength was severely taxed while at the conference, but the Lord sustained me through the meeting, and by His blessing, I am recovering from the strain.…’” The Early Elmshaven Years, vol. 5, 259.

One week after returning home from the 1903 General Conference session, Ellen White wrote the following testimony dated at St. Helena, California, April 21, 1903: “In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the sentence: ‘Found want­ing.’ By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged.” Testimonies, vol. 8, 247.

How does the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church in 1999 measure up to “the privile­ges and advantages that she has had”? How does the corporate church measure up to “her spiritual experience”? How does the church measure up to “the advantages that Christ…has bestowed on her”? How does the church measure up to “the blessings conferred” upon her? Has the SDA Church been faithful to the truth that would “qualify her to do the work entrusted to her”? And the most important questions of all—Has the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church already been judged? And if so, has she been found wanting?

The Struggle for Unity

Today the revival and reformation movement in Adventism is being attacked from several different directions.

  1. It is attacked by professed Adventists in the organized church structure.
  2. It is attacked by the world.
  3. It is being attacked, and will be more and more, by the powers of Babylon.

However, none of these attacks are our most serious threat. The most serious problem that the revival and reformation movement in Adventism has today is what I call the attack from within.

Zechariah 13:6 speaks about the experience which Christ went through when He was here on this earth. “And one will say to Him, ‘What are these wounds between your arms [or between your hands].’ Then He will answer, ‘Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends.’”

Where was Jesus wounded? In the house of His friends! What was the most serious attack that Jesus had to meet? Was it the Romans? No, it was not. It was the attack from within.

In The Great Controversy, 187, 188, we find a statement about the reformation in the time of Martin Luther. “The opposition of the Pope and the Emperor had not caused him so great perplexity and distress as he now experienced. From the professed friends of the reformation had risen its worst enemies.”

Where did the worst enemies of the reformation come from? From her professed friends. Where is our greatest danger today? Is it from the world, or Babylon, or is it from the structure church? No, the worst danger for the revival and reformation today is our professed friends. We are our worst enemies!

“From the professed friends of the reformation had risen its worst enemies. The very truths that had brought him so great joy and consolation were being employed to stir up strife and create confusion in the church.” Ibid.

Is there strife and confusion in the revival and reformation movement in Adventism today? Yes, it is all over the world. We are in a battle: not against human beings, but against the greatest deceiver of all times and he deceives human beings and uses them to wound the very work which they profess to be strengthening. This is why we have so much strife and confusion in our midst today.

However, look at what the Lord desires for us. In Christ’s most famous prayer He said, “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.” John 17:20–23.

Do you believe that, by the grace of God, we are going to develop unity and harmony? Are we going to learn how to get along with each other or must we just go on scrapping and fighting until the Lord takes us to heaven and works a miracle in our hearts so that, suddenly, we will be able to get along? Even if we wished that it could happen this way, we know that the Lord will not change our characters when we go to heaven. We must finish that work here, with His help.

Do we have work to do? We have much work to do if we are going to be part of the one hundred and forty-four thousand who will be perfectly united. I cannot say that I have all of the answers, but through studying the inspired writings on this subject I am trying to learn all that I can on how we can have unity. In this article, we will study just a few of the thousands of inspired quotations on this topic, as we consider character traits that we must develop or character flaws that we must overcome if we are going to have unity among us today.

Respect and Honor

As I have studied the Ten Commandments, I have come to the conclusion that every one of the Ten Commandments has to do with the concept of respect and honor. We will never have the harmony and unity that we want until we learn to respect one another.

Much is said on this topic in inspired writings. Inspiration instructs that in the home we are to cultivate honor and respect. Children should never see their father say or do something that is disrespectful to their mother. Likewise they should never see their mother say or do something that manifests a lack of honor or respect for the father. (See Child Guidance, 239.)

However, this concept is not just for the home. We must especially learn respect in our relationships with others in the church. We must have respect, not just for certain people, but for every person in the church. We need to ask ourselves, Do I respect my brother when he does something that I do not like? Or when he holds a different opinion on some issue, do I still respect him? I do not have to think the same way that every one else thinks, but I must still respect them, even though I do not agree on every point.

In 1888, Ellen White wrote a letter to Dr. John Harvey Kellogg. At the time that this testimony was written, Kellogg was trying to promote health reform in the Adventist Church almost single handedly, and was receiving opposition from other leading men in the church. And, as can easily happen when one is standing alone, he became discouraged. The following is a part of the message Sister White gave him: “We must have unity. These representative men [physicians and ministers in Battle Creek that Kellogg was having difficulty working with] must respect one another and work in harmony. You have a most responsible position, and the Lord will greatly bless you if you walk in humility before Him. But do not, my brother, expect every mind to be constituted like your own. Do not expect that your brethren will see everything in the same light, and attach the same importance to some matters that you do, for you will certainly be disappointed.” 1888 Materials, 1156.

Did you notice the two major points that Sister White made in this statement? They were that:

  1. We must have respect for all our brothers and sisters in the faith.
  2. While we must respect each other, we must not expect that everyone else is going to think just like we think on everything.

It is only when we learn these principles about respect and honor that we will be able to find true unity and harmony.

As we noted earlier, these lessons should first be learned and practiced in the home. Children need to learn it because, the fifth commandment says, “Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee.” Exodus 20:12. No one will go to heaven who has not learned to keep the fifth commandment. A young person may not agree with the way his father or mother manages the household (and he does not have to think exactly as his parents do), but he still has an obligation, written in the law of God, that he is to honor his parents.

Do we honor each other in our homes? Do we honor each other in the church? Consider for a moment how the principle of respect applies in practical situations. Take the following example: If I am going to honor you and respect you, even though you think completely different than I do on some points, will I try to prove that you are wrong and make you look like a fool in public? Will I do that? No, I will not. I may go to you privately and say, “I do not see this the way you do,” but if I truly respect you, I will not try to make you look foolish before others.

Pride and Passion

Consider this statement: “There is nothing which will weaken the strength of a church like pride and passion. If one engaged in the work of God does things in contradiction to another engaged in the same work, that is strife and variance. If we do this to be esteemed or to exalt self, it is vainglory, and death to spirituality and to Christian love and unity of action.” Review and Herald, July 5, 1887.

Pride is a very serious problem according to Malachi 4:1. “‘For behold, the day is coming, burning like an oven, and all the proud, yes all who do wickedly will be stubble. And the day which is coming shall burn them up’ says the Lord of Hosts.” Is pride a serious problem? It will send you straight to hell. And it is one of the most deeply ingrained problems in fallen, sinful, human nature.

What really is pride? Pride is a disease of the heart that you and I cannot see. So, I do not have any right to go to anyone and say, “You are proud.” Only the Lord could do that through His prophet. However, pride is one of the roots of disunity and I need to know something about the symptoms of pride so that I can check myself to see if pride is still alive in my heart.

I have found two major symptoms of pride in inspired writings. First, pride leads people to make a display. This love of display can be seen in the clothes we wear, the homes or cars we buy or in the way that we behave. In The Desire of Ages, 261, we read about the life of Christ: “ In that life no noisy disputation, no ostentatious worship, no act to gain applause, was ever witnessed. Christ was hid in God, and God was revealed in the character of His Son. To this revelation Jesus desired the minds of the people to be directed, and their homage to be given.” Christ never behaved in any way that would lead others to look to Him; He never sought the applause of others.

We need to teach this principle to our young people. I think it is wonderful when we train our young people to be musicians, but we must be careful that the motive in learning to play music is not to demonstrate skill so that we attract attention to ourselves. That is pride; the desire to make a display. And remember there is nothing that will weaken the strength of a church like pride.

The second symptom of pride is the desire for self-exaltation. When pride first developed in heaven, this is the symptom that was manifest in Lucifer. It finally led him to the point where he wanted to control the angels and possess the position that Jesus Christ alone was worthy to hold. He wanted to be in control of the government of God. He wanted to be in control of the work. Have you ever been in a church where there is one or more persons that think that they ought to control what goes on there? If you or I desire to control others or we demonstrate that we want to control the work, we still have a problem with pride. And if we get upset because someone else does not do exactly what we told them to do, it is time that we begin searching our hearts and realize how deeply pride is rooted there!

Brotherly Love

“Our strength is in our unity. We are weak when we do not love one another.” The Kress Collection, 84.

When we do not love one another, what is the problem? We are weak. We may know all the right theology. We may be able to prove all of our positions, but if we do not love one another, we are weak. Ellen White wrote many testimonies and counsels to people that needed help in this area.

I would like to quote a few lines that are pertinent to our study, from a testimony that Sister White wrote to a Seventh-day Adventist woman. She said: “You see the truth, and then you mark out how this one and that one should practice it; and if they fail to come up to the mark you set, you feel to draw off from them. [When did she begin to condemn others? When they did not come up to how she thought they should behave.] You cannot fellowship with them, and love dies out of your heart for them, when in reality they are just as near right as you are. [This is quite a warning for us!] You make yourself enemies when you might have friends. You are ardent and positive in your temperament, and when you see points of truth, you carry matters to extremes. You thus repulse persons, instead of winning and binding them to your heart.

“You look upon the objectionable features in the character of those with whom you associate, and dwell upon their seeming inconsistencies and wrongs, overlooking their redeeming traits. I was referred to this scripture: ‘Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report, if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.’” Testimonies, vol. 2, 437.

This sister was looking on the objectionable points of other’s temperaments. But do we not all have objectionable traits of character which require mercy from others. Shouldn’t we then be willing to give mercy to other people who have some objectionable traits of character, as we do? If God treated us the way we treat each other, I do not believe any of us would be here today. We serve a wonderful God of mercy; are we really His children?

“Here, dear sister, you may meditate and speculate with profit. Dwell upon the good qualities of those with whom you associate, and see as little as possible of their errors and failings.” Ibid. If we could just put this sentence in our mind and say, “Lord, help me to dwell on the good qualities of those with whom I associate.”

Did you know that there are people that you associate with who already know about some of their objectionable traits of character and they sometimes abhor themselves because of the way they are? They need a word of encouragement so that they will be encouraged to fight the battles with self and to overcome their objectionable traits of character. Just think, Is it easier for you to overcome an objectionable trait of character if someone is encouraging you or if they are condemning you?

“You possess too much of a spirit of war, and throw things into confusion and strife. You must change your life and character if you are ever classed with those who hear the words: ‘Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.’” Ibid.

“The great lesson that Christ taught by His life and example was that of unity and love among brethren. This love is the token of discipleship, the divine credentials which the Christian bears to the world. ‘By this shall all men know that ye are My disciples, if ye have love one to another.’ Love to God and man must be an inwrought principle in the soul; for there is no other way that the Christian can become a ‘partaker of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.’” Review and Herald, August 12, 1884.

Humility

“In humility and union there is strength.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 15, 357. We are never going to have unity that we must have, according to John 17, until we learn how to be humble. And friend, it does not matter how wicked the world becomes or what Babylon does, I do not believe that the Lord will return to this world until John 17 is fulfilled. And it will never be fulfilled unless we become humble people. Are we humble enough yet so that the Lord could bring in unity among us through the Holy Spirit? Are we humble enough to realize that the Lord is in charge of the work and that we do not have to get everything straightened out? Is this a lesson that we need to learn?

“Another great need of the church is humility,—the deep humility of Christ. Believers need to see the necessity of working as Christ worked. O for that devotion and humility of heart that will lead God’s people to do those things that Christ has commanded, and still in all humility and truth say, ‘We are unprofitable servants; we have done only that which it was our duty to do!’ But many, many are swelling with pride and importance, who in God’s estimation are lukewarm. Self-gratification is revealed because of a few things accomplished. Where do we hear the testimony of hearts that are broken in repentance and confession before God? Where do we see professed believers wearing the yoke of Christ? How little time is given to fervent prayer, the result of which would be the possession of a meek and quiet spirit, which in the sight of God is of great price.” Review and Herald, September 16, 1909.

Death to Self

One of the greatest reasons that we have so much strife is that self is not dead yet. The Holy Spirit wants to create unity among us, but it says in Manuscript Releases, vol. 20, 268, “Just as soon as self gains the supremacy, the Spirit of God is quenched.” When self is still ruling the hearts of those in the church, the Holy Spirit cannot work to bring unity.

When I read this statement, I wanted to know what the symptoms are of self still being alive so that I could examine my own life, and so I started studying the Spirit of Prophecy. Here are some of the symptoms that demonstrate that self is not dead and is gaining the supremacy in the human heart. They are taken from many different places in the Spirit of Prophecy.

The Basis of Unity

“The truth is one. It will take people . . . and, mingling them with other elements, soften and refine them through the truth. Teach them that in humility and union there is strength. The love of Christ and living faith would have a transforming power upon the man, upon his ideas, upon his character. The temper and the life experience will be softened and ennobled by divine truth. The influence of the truth is to take away from man that which is impetuous and rebellious, and bring him into harmony with heaven. God’s purpose is to bring all into harmony and unity on the platform of truth as it is in Jesus.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 15, 357, 358. [Emphasis supplied.]

The basis for true unity and harmony is whether or not we are willing to stand on the same platform of truth. When we talk about unity and harmony, we are not talking about it in an ecumenical sense. We are not talking about unity and harmony with all the world. We are not even talking about unity and harmony with all professed Adventists. We are talking about unity and harmony with the people that are all willing to stand on the same platform of truth. And what is that platform?

In the book Early Writings there is a chapter entitled “A Firm Platform.” In that chapter Sister White identifies the Three Angels’ Messages as an immutable platform. She also states that these three messages are infallible (this is a very strong statement if you consider what Adventists believe about the infallibility of the inspired writings), and will triumph over the whole world. A proper understanding of them will guide you to a complete chain of truth and prepare you for the Second Coming of Christ.

Many people ask, “Do you think the church is going through?” The truth is that the church which stays with the Three Angels’ Messages is going to go through and none of the rest of the churches are going through. Even if you meet in a tiny homechurch, if your church stays faithful and true to the Three Angels’ Messages, it will go through. Because, the Three Angels’ Messages, Ellen White says, will triumph. Conversely, if your church, no matter how large and respected it is, does not remain faithful and true to the Three Angels’ Messages, it will not go through. (This same principle applies to a sisterhood of churches or even a world-wide system of churches, for if these organizations apostatize from the truth, they will certainly not go through to the end, either.)

The truth is the platform on which unity is built. Do you want to be on the platform that is going through? People talk about the ship that is going through. However, contrary to popular opinion, the ship that is going through is the ship that is based on the Three Angels’ Messages. If there was only one person in the world that believed them, that person would go through and the rest of the world would go down, because these precious messages are infallible. The people that believe them, and are willing to change their ideas to come into perfect harmony with them, will triumph with them. Is this your great desire? Then diligently study the Word and ask the Lord to help you to stand faithfully on the platform of eternal truth.

If self is not dead the person:

  1. Is ready for a contest.
  2. Has an ambition to be noticed and is afraid of being in some way mistreated.
  3. Regards their judgment as the best of all.
  4. Is not willing to forgo his wishes. (He feels that he should have his own way.)
  5. Has too high an appreciation of himself and eventually he becomes “too good” to labor with his brethren unless he is in charge.
  6. Becomes self-sufficient.
  7. Feels that he can manage the work.
  8. Reveals self in his management.
  9. Is a part of many religious controversies which result.
  10. Is not tender when dealing with others.
  11. Is ready to express his own mind and will, all the time.
  12. Is strenuous to have his will regarded as the will of God.
  13. Wants rules and regulations concerning even the details of the work.
  14. Seeks for knowledge or skills that will bring him into notice.
  15. Shows exhibitions of self. (This has to do with being angry, being harsh or impatient.)
  16. Is jealous of others.

The “Star” of the New Evangelization of America

To begin, I would like to share a statement from the pen of inspiration that is most sobering and pertinent to the times in which we live: “Those who oppose the teachings of spiritualism are assailing, not men alone, but Satan and his angels. They have entered upon a contest against principalities and powers and wicked spirits in high places. Satan will not yield one inch of ground except he is driven back by the power of heavenly messengers. The people of God should be able to meet him, as did our Savior, with the words: ‘It is written.’ Satan can quote Scripture now as in the days of Christ, and he will pervert its teachings to sustain his delusions. Those who would stand in this time of peril must understand for themselves the testimony of the Scriptures.” The Great Controversy, 559. [All emphasis throughout the article is supplied.]

“Satan has long been preparing for his final effort to deceive the world. The foundation of his work was laid by the assurance given to Eve in Eden: ‘Ye shall not surely die.’ ‘In the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.’ Genesis 3:4, 5. Little by little he has prepared the way for his masterpiece of deception in the development of spiritualism. He has not yet reached the full accomplishment of his designs; but it will be reached in the last remnant of time. Says the prophet: ‘I saw three unclean spirits like frogs…they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God almighty.’ Revelation 16:13, 14. Except those who are kept by the power of God, through faith in His word, the whole world will be swept into the ranks of this delusion. The people are fast being lulled to a fatal security, to be awakened only by the outpouring of the wrath of God.” Ibid., 561, 562.

The Two Great Errors

There are two doctrinal errors that nearly all Christendom has swallowed as part of the “wine of Babylon.” The first is the false teaching that Sunday, the first day of the week, is the Lord’s day; and the second, which is more deadly, is the hellish doctrine of the natural immortality of the soul and man’s consciousness in death.

Friends, do you realize that two of the pope’s last Apostolic letters deal with these two doctrinal errors? On July 7, 1998, the Vatican released the pope’s 104-page Apostolic letter entitled Dies Domini—On Keeping the Lord’s Day Holy. Point 67 of Dies Domini actually states: “Christians will naturally strive to ensure that civil legislation respects their duty to keep Sunday holy….Sunday must be sanctified.” On the same day, The Denver Post quoted Rome as saying; “A violator should be punished as a heretic.” Has not prophecy warned us that “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 [“civil legislation”] to enforce their decrees and to sustain their institutions, then Protestant America will have formed an image to the Roman hierarchy, and the infliction of civil penalties upon dissenters [heretics] will inevitably result.” The Great Controversy, 445.

Many Seventh-day Adventists are familiar with Dies Domini, but not many are aware of the pope’s Apostolic Exhortation that he gave to the Synod of Bishops, in Mexico City, prior to his historic visit to St. Louis, in January of 1999. It is called Ecclesia [Church] in America of the Holy Father John Paul II: The Way to Conversion, Communion and Solidarity in America. At the council of Bishops in Mexico, the theme of the event was to discuss new strategies for evangelism that the church in America must attain in the third Christian millennium (which begins with the year 2000). And will the Virgin Mary be a major player in the new evangelistic efforts of the Roman Catholic Church?

The Star of the New Evangelization

While in Mexico, the pope dedicated the Americas to the Virgin Mary. From the Exhortation, we read: “With the passage of time, pastors and faithful alike have grown increasingly conscious of the role of the Virgin Mary in the evangelization of America. In the prayer of the Special Assembly for America of the Synod of Bishops, Holy Mary of Guadalupe is invoked as ‘Patroness of all America and Star of the first and new evangelization. In view of this, I welcome with joy the proposal of the Synod Fathers that the feast of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Mother and Evangelizer of America, be celebrated throughout the continent on December 12. It is my heartfelt hope that she…will by her maternal intercession guide the Church in America, obtaining the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, as she once did for the early church (cf. Acts 1:14), so that the new evangelization may yield a splendid flowering of Christian life.”

Consequently, not only in Central and South America, but in North America as well, the Virgin of Guadalupe is venerated as Queen of all America. Furthermore, the shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe near Mexico City draws 20 million visitors a year. It is regarded as the most sacred shrine outside of Europe. Mary, that is the spirit apparition of Mary, is the “Star” of the Roman Catholic Church’s new evangelization of the Americas.

Before I precede any further, I want you to know that the Catholic Church acknowledges the pagan origin of many of the shrines and statues of Mary. A Catholic publication stated the following: “Devotion to Mary began in the earliest years of Christianity, and she is revered in Christian literature as early as A.D. 150…Throughout the history of the world, sites associated with any one religion have often been re-used by its successor. To do so reinforces the new religion, but may also result in characteristics of deities of different faiths becoming intermingled. Statues of the Virgin…used to be paraded around the fields to ensure a good harvest. The moon and stars, symbols of Diana, Greco-Roman goddess of hunting were later associated with the Virgin, and Mary is frequently referred to as Stella Maria—Star of the Sea. Festivals, too, were assimilated [from paganism] into the new faith: the Festival of the Purification of the Blessed Virgin on 2 February was originally a Roman Festival of purification. And Christians often took over the pagan shrines of the ancient world’s goddesses and rededicated them to Mary. A good example is the shrine to Diana at Ephesus, which was re-established in the fourth century as a shrine to the Virgin.” Shrines of Our Lady, 6, 7.

Amazing! Rome blinds the eyes of ignorant souls worldwide, and once loyalty to their pagan statues is gained, they empty the pockets of their victims. In Acts 19:24, 25, we read: “For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made silver shrines for Diana, brought no small gain unto the craftsmen; Whom he called together with the workmen of like occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this craft we have our wealth.”

The Love of the Truth or Strong Delusion

Beloved, as a former Roman Catholic and Mary devotee, I am amazed and saddened by the lethargy of Seventh-day Adventists, who have been entrusted with the Three Angels’ Messages, and their silence on this issue! Who is sounding the trumpet? Who is warning our people that spiritualism will soon break upon us with a magnitude that may deceive the very elect! The Bible warns us that the day is near when “miracles” and “lying wonders” will deceive those that “love not the truth.” I believe the warning in 2 Thessalonians 2:10–12 is written for every professed Christian who has either not heeded or even has rejected the light sent from heaven, regardless of his church affiliation, and especially for Seventh-day Adventists.

Paul writes: “And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of His mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of His coming. Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders. And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie [including the devil’s first lie that “Ye shall not surely die” Genesis 3:4]: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.” 2 Thessalonians 2:8–12.

What denomination has been given the truth? And please notice, not only do many of the professed Christians whom Paul refers to “love not the truth,” but also they do not love it because they have “pleasure in unrighteousness.” Certainly, the majority of professed Seventh-day Adventists today are enjoying the pleasures of the world, and this is most evident by the celebration worship services they have adopted from Rome—a product of Vatican II!

And what will be the “strong delusions” that will deceive, if possible the very elect? In 1 Timothy 4:1 we read: “Now the Spirit speaketh expressly that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils.”

The Alpha and the Omega

Nearly 100 years ago, Ellen White gave the following warning: “Be not deceived; many will depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of devils. We have now before us the alpha of this danger. The omega will be of a most startling nature.…I knew that the omega would follow in a little while; and I trembled for our people.” Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 2, 16, 53. At the time she wrote this statement, Dr. John Harvey Kellogg, in his book The Living Temple, was promulgating the doctrine of [New Age] pantheism—that God is in everything in the material world—“the flower, the tree, the atmosphere, and even the sinner, and in each one of us, as virtually ‘doing away with God,’ and therefore seriously undercutting the sanctuary truth.” Manuscript Releases, 760, 1. This leaves you with an impersonal god, not one who is ministering in your behalf in the heavenly sanctuary, but one that is diffused through nature. Such teachings will lead to the worship of the creature, or to creation, rather than to the Creator. After all, is it not Satan’s ultimate goal to rob God of the homage due only Him by whatever medium he himself chooses!

Dear reader, let it be understood that pantheism, the alpha of apostasy, is a form of spiritualism! In fact, the prophet linked pantheism and spiritualism together on a number of occasions. On one occasion she wrote: “Let the world go into spiritualism, theosophy [mysticism], and pantheism, if they choose. We are to have nothing to do with this deceptive branch of Satan’s work.” Battle Creek Letters, 109. Webster’s College Dictionary gives several definitions for the word spiritualism, one of which is: “The belief that all reality is spiritual [pantheism].” Ellen White labeled Kellogg’s teachings as “fascinating, spiritualistic science of Satanic origin.” And she goes on to say: “That these beautiful representations are similar to the temptation that the enemy brought to Adam and Eve in Eden.” Ibid., 103; Sermons and Talks, vol. 1, 341.

In Eden, Satan spoke through the medium of a serpent. Pantheism teaches that God is in everything, even animals. Have not even animated, talking animals, such as Disney characters, been used as a form of spiritualism to prepare millions of innocent children to drink of the devil’s future master delusions? In fact, I just learned that a Hollywood movie, called The Sixth Sense, has been the number-one moneymaker for seven weeks in a row! It is about a young boy who is communicating with the dead. Spiritualism, just like pantheism, is a spiritualistic science of Satanic origin! In the last days, in his grand efforts to deceive, Satan will again speak through mediums, but this time expanding “familiar spirits” to include, not only human-like agencies, but also well-known deceased Christians. The world, with the help of Hollywood, is quickly being primed to accept the demon Mary and other imposters that shall appear.

I believe Ellen White saw that spiritualism and its influence upon God’s people would not cease, but, to the contrary, would culminate in the omega of apostasy: “I am instructed to speak plainly. ‘Meet it,’ is the word spoken to me. ‘Meet it firmly, and without delay’.…In the book Living Temple, there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 200. No wonder she “trembled” for our people, for Satan is determined to sweep “all into the ranks of spiritualism”!!! The Great Controversy, 588.

Spiritualism Will Imitate Nominal Christianity

Revelation 13 warns us that the United States will experience “great wonders…on the earth in the sight of men. And which will deceive them that “dwell on the earth, by the means of those miracles, which he had power to do in the sight of the beast.” Revelation 13: 13, 14. “The time is coming when Satan will work miracles right in your sight, claiming that he is Christ; and if your feet are not firmly established upon the truth of God, then you will be led away from your foundation. The only safety for you is to search for truth as for hid treasures. Dig for the truth as you would for treasures in the earth, and present the word of God, the Bible, before your heavenly Father and say, ‘Enlighten me, teach me what is truth’.…You should store the mind with the Word of God; for you may be separated, and placed where you will not have the privilege of meeting with the children of God. ” Review and Herald, April 3, 1888.

Picture the day when supernatural events, such as Mother Teresa, the Virgin Mary, or the Apostles of Christ walking on this earth, strengthen the efforts of the religious teachers who are urging Americans to obey the altered ten commandments, which include the worship of the Sunday sabbath. “As Spiritualism assimilates more closely to the nominal Christianity of the day, it has greater power to deceive and ensnare. Satan himself is converted, after the modern order of things…Through the agency of Spiritualism, miracles will be wrought, the sick will be healed, and many undeniable wonders will be performed. And as the spirits will profess faith in the Bible, and express regard for Sunday, their work will be accepted as a manifestation of divine power.” Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4, 406. This will be a time when violators will be threatened with civil fines and imprisonment if they refuse to obey the laws of the land and the words of Satan’s “familiar spirits.” What will you do then, beloved? In the exhortation given at the Synod of Bishops in Mexico City, Pope John Paul II saved his best for the last. In Article 73, entitled The Challenge of the Sects, he states: “The proselytizing activity of the sects [historic SDAs?] and new religious groups in America is a grave hindrance to the work of evangelization….The success of proselytism by sects and new religious groups in America cannot be ignored.” Indeed, the end is upon us!

Celebration 2000—The Grand Jubilee

In case you are not aware, Rome is planning a great celebration or jubilee to welcome in the third millennium—the year 2000, a Marian year—and the holy doors will be opened Christmas, December 25, 1999—the starting date of the Grand Jubilee celebration. The Vatican plans a series of masses and other celebrations to mark Christianity’s third millennium, and 20 million people are expected to flock to Rome. John Paul II has declared 2000 a jubilee year—a time of pilgrimage and celebration.

Pope John Paul II, in his new book, Celebration 2000, tells us who in the spiritual realm is in charge of leading the church to Christ in the year 2000. He states: “I entrust this responsibility of the whole church to the maternal intercession of Mary, the Mother of the Redeemer: She, the Mother of fairest love, will be for the Christians on the way to the Great Jubilee of the third millennium the star which safely guides their steps to the Lord.” Celebration 2000, 268.

Malachi Martin, author of The Keys of This Blood, said that the pope is anxiously awaiting a potent worldwide Marian Vision—“an event that will fission human history….It will be an event on public view in the skies, in the oceans, and on the continental landmasses of this planet. It will particularly involve our human sun….But on the day of this event, it will not appear as the master star of our so-called solar system. Rather, it will be seen as the circumambient glory of the Woman whom the apostle describes as ‘clothed with the sun’ and giving birth to ‘a child who will rule the nations with a scepter of iron.’” The Keys of This Blood, 639.

If you doubt this could happen, research what occurred in Fatima, Portugal, on October 13, 1917. The “Miracle of the Sun” took place. “The sun seemed to flicker on and off, first one way and then another. It shot rays in different directions and painted everything in different colors, the trees, the people, the air and the ground. The sun did not hurt the eyes. Everything was still and quiet, everyone looking upwards. At a certain moment, the sun seemed to stop and then begin to move and to dance until it seemed that it was being detached from the sky and was falling on the people. Thousands of the people present saw this phenomenon and the newspapers wrote about it.” Our Lady of Fatima Web Site.

Interestingly, Malachi Martin, ex-Jesuit, died July 27, 1999, and reports are varied on the cause of his death. The Sunday Visitor, August 22, 1999, featured an article by Greg Erlandson, Editor in Chief, in which he labeled Malachi Martin as “half brilliant, half loon, given to incredible conspiracy theories.” Perhaps, he revealed too much!

The Vision

Will the pope’s expected vision be cataclysmic and bring the normal activity of the world to a standstill? Some are praying that Mary—“the Star of the new evangelization”—will walk through the holy doors of the Vatican on Christmas 1999, the inauguration of Jubilee 2000. If the vision occurs, I believe it could be what the pope needs to exalt him as the head of the New World Order. Would world chaos and calamities precede this expected vision? Could it validate the global reign of Pope John Paul II, a Marian pope, who credits Mary with saving his life, and establish him as the spiritual judge of the planet and the Roman Catholic Church as the only true church and this pope as God’s ordained leader? Compare this thought with E.G. White’s conclusion on page 588 of The Great Controversy: “Satan determines to unite them [professed Christians and the ungodly] into one body and thus strengthen his cause by sweeping all into the ranks of spiritualism. Papists, who boast of miracles as a certain sign of the true church, will be readily deceived by this wonder-working power; and Protestants, having cast away the shield of truth [and who believe in the immortality of the soul], will also be deluded…and they will see in this union a grand movement for the conversion of the world and the ushering in of the long-expected millennium.” The Great Controversy, 588, 589. It has been said that those who are involved in the New Age movement will also accept a worldwide Marian (goddess) vision preceding the appearance of the false Christ—the lord Maitreya.

The New Age, Mother Earth, and the Goddess

In his most blasphemous book, The Armageddon Script, The Power of Prophecy and the Secret Life of Jesus, New Ager Peter Lemesurier writes enthusiastically about the worship of the “Great Mother Earth.” He writes as if he is an astronaut in a spaceship in orbit around the earth. “As they rounded the barren lunar globe for the…last time, and the resplendent half-earth once again rose behind that now familiar curved and rocky horizon, what they saw coming up to meet them was strangely familiar….A god out of the world of the archetypes. It was none other than the rounded form of the Great Mother, earth herself, clad in the same flowering robes of shining blue and white that had been those of mother-goddess of earth and sky throughout history—and not least his most recent mother-goddess, the Virgin Mary herself.” The Armageddon Script, 245, 246.

Peter Lemesurier, as a pagan worshipper, has no difficulty recognizing the truth that the worship of the Virgin Mary is ancient pagan idolatry. Therefore, non-Christian Pagans the world over will have little difficulty accepting the worship of “the Virgin Mary,” which is actually an evil spirit impersonating Mary. (See 2 Corinthians 11:13–15.)

Spiritualism and the Unification of Churches

The prophet has warned us that spiritualism is the means by which Satan will “unite the churches,” and Rome will use spiritualism to “validate” that she is the true church! I believe the demon Mary will play a critical role in the accomplishment of this goal, and not only Protestants, but also New Agers, will fall for it, because they all believe Rome’s false doctrine of the devil’s first lie—the immortality of the soul. Remember, “The whole world will be swept into the ranks of this delusion.” The Great Controversy, 562.

The world is ready and ripe for this almost overpowering deception. In fact, the December, 1996, issue of Life magazine featured, on its front cover, a picture of a statue of Mary and the caption: “Two thousand years after the Nativity, the mother of Jesus is more beloved, powerful, and controversial than ever. The Mystery of Mary.” The ending of this article was especially of interest to me. It stated: “Mary…might lead to an ecumenical reunion of Christian churches [see The Great Controversy, 445.] It might lead to a closer understanding of the teenage girl who gave birth in Bethlehem 2,000 years ago….Can we ask this simple girl to guide what has become not a cult but a huge and passionate congregation, a movement requiring a hero, a world-wide flock that has long demanded more of her? That has demanded, in some instances, that she deliver her message herself? I wonder: If Mary became merely human—if people could truly touch Mary—would Mary be enough?” After all, Rome makes the assertion that not only is the pope the Spiritual father of all Christians, but Mary is their mother! A quote from A Catechism of Christian Doctrine, 27, states: “The Blessed Virgin is our Mother also because, being the brethren of Jesus, we are the children of Mary.”

Will She Deceive the Very Elect?

And will SDAs also be overcome by this wonder-working demon? Please, study the prophecies of Ezekiel 8 and 9. Ellen White alludes to Ezekiel 9 in Volume 5 of the Testimonies in the chapter called The Seal of God, 207–216. Here she likens the destruction of apostate SDAs to the destruction by the slaughtering angels of Ezekiel 9, which begins in the sanctuary, or the church. “Here we see that the church—the Lord’s sanctuary—was the first to feel the stroke of the wrath of God. The ancient men, those to whom God had given great light and who had stood as guardians of the spiritual interest of the people, had betrayed their trust….Thus, ‘Peace and safety’ is the cry from men who will never again lift up their voice like a trumpet to show God’s people their transgressions and the house of Jacob their sins. These dumb dogs that would not bark are the ones who feel the just vengeance of an offended God. Men, maidens, and little children all perish together.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 211. And for what reason will the Lord destroy the people called by His name? Because the “abominations” in Ezekiel 8 are being practiced in the Lord’s house—His church—one of which is the worship of the “image of jealousy.” “The faithful few… lament and afflict their souls because pride, avarice, selfishness, and deception of almost every kind are in the church.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 210.

Historian Alexander Hislop tells us in his book, The Two Babylons, that the “image of jealousy” is that of the Babylonian Madonna, the “queen of heaven.” Therefore, what provokes the wrath of God today is that “the child she [Modern Babylon] holds forth to adoration is called by the name of Jesus, His son.” (The Two Babylons, 88). With “Satan himself” being “converted after the modern order of things (see The Great Controversy, 588),” the image would be that of “Babylon, The Great” [Roman Catholicism’s] Madonna, or the Virgin Mary and baby Jesus [who really would be Tammuz (see Ezekiel 8:14)], set up in the church that claims to worship the true God. The Lord commanded: “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath….Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the Lord thy God am a jealous God.” Exodus 20:4, 5. Is it any wonder why the Catholic Church removed the second commandment from the moral law?

Furthermore, Jeremiah records that God’s people obeyed not “the voice of the Lord, nor walked in His law, nor in His statutes, nor in His testimonies,” for they were burning “incense to the queen of heaven.” Jeremiah 44:23, 25. Is this another example of “the sure word of prophecy?” 2 Peter 1:19. Ellen White was shown in vision many years ago that “Modern Israel are in greater danger of forgetting God and being led into idolatry than were His ancient people.” Testimonies, vol. 1, 609.

“It is to be remembered that the greater the light bestowed, the greater the delusion and darkness of those who reject the word of God and accept fables.” Signs of the Times, November 8, 1899. After all, was it not the leaders of the Jewish nation that had Christ murdered with the aid of the Roman power! Will history be repeated? “However high any minister may have stood in the favor of God, if he neglects to follow out the light given him of God, if he refuses to be taught as a little child, he will go into darkness and satanic delusions and will lead others in the same path.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 214.

Financing God’s Last Army

Do you really want Jesus to come soon? Jesus will not return to earth again until the everlasting gospel is preached to the entire world, to every nation, kindred, language and people. (Matthew 24:15; Revelation 14:6,7.) Jesus would not have given the gospel commission if He did not have a plan to accomplish it. This plan is outlined in the Bible, but, because of the feebleness of our comprehension of God’s purposes, He has condescended to outline His plan for a finished work in much more detail in the writings of Ellen G. White.

God Has Devised Methods Of Support For All His Plans

For every plan that God has devised for the finishing of His work, He has devised methods and left instructions about how that plan is to work and how it is to be supported. For example, literature evangelists were to earn their living from the profits of the books that were sold. Physicians and nurses were to be paid from the fees paid to the sanitarium by the patients. Missionary farmers and tradesmen were to receive payment from their crops or the services rendered.

But there was one class of missionary worker that was not to receive their living from the profits of secular labor. That class of workers were those participating in the work of the gospel ministry. This includes more than just those called “ministers.” According to Ellen White the work of the gospel ministry includes the following kinds of workers: “Institutions that are God’s instruments to carry forward His work on the earth must be sustained. Churches must be erected, schools established, and publishing houses furnished with facilities for doing a great work in the publication of the truth to be sent to all parts of the world. These institutions are ordained of God and should be sustained by tithes and liberal offerings.” Testimonies, vol. 4, 464.

“I have had special instruction from the Lord that the tithe is for a special purpose, consecrated to God to sustain those who minister in the sacred work, as the Lord’s chosen to do His work not only in sermonizing, but in ministering. They should understand all that this comprehends.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 1, 187.

It is true that at times the apostle Paul supported himself by a trade to illustrate “in a practical way what might be done by consecrated laymen” (Acts of the Apostles, 355), but this is not actually God’s plan for the support of the ministry for on the next page Ellen White writes: “It is God’s design that such workers shall be freed from unnecessary anxiety, that they may have full opportunity to obey the injunction of Paul to Timothy, ‘Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them.’ 1 Timothy 4:15. While they should be careful to exercise sufficiently to keep mind and body vigorous, yet it is not God’s plan that they should be compelled to spend a large part of their time at secular employment.” Acts of the Apostles, 356.

We Are Responsible For the Use Of Our Tithe

The gospel confers individual responsibility upon each of us. In no case can this personal responsibility be avoided or transferred. If God tells us to spend the tithe for the work of the gospel only, He will not condone our using it for something else. God will not condone our using tithe for the preaching of apostasy or any use other than specified: “There are fearful woes for those who preach the truth, but are not sanctified by it, and also for those who consent to receive and maintain the unsanctified to minister to them in word and doctrine.” Testimonies, vol. 1, 261, 262.

“The churches must arouse. The members must awake out of sleep and begin to inquire, How is the money which we put into the treasury being used? The Lord desires that a close search be made. Are all satisfied with the history of the work for the past fifteen years? Where is the evidence of the co-working with God? Where has been heard throughout the churches the prayer for the help of the Holy Spirit? Dissatisfied and disheartened, we turn away from the scene.” The Kress Collection, 120.

Diversion of Tithe

One of Satan’s major goals is to divert the money that should be coming into the Lord’s treasury and thereby dry up the financial resources to finish God’s work.

“A flattering prospect may be presented to invest in patent rights or some other supposed brilliant enterprise around which Satan throws a bewitching enchantment. The prospect of getting more money, fast and easily, allures them. They reason that, although they had resolved to put this money into the treasury of God, they will use it in this instance, and will greatly increase it, and will then give a larger sum to the cause. They can see no possibility of a failure. Away goes the means out of their hands, and they soon learn, to their regret, that they have made a mistake. The brilliant prospects have faded. Their expectations are not realized. They were deceived. Satan outgeneraled them. He was more shrewd than they, and he managed to get their means into his ranks and thus deprive the cause of God of that which should have been used to sustain it in extending the truth and saving souls for whom Christ died.” Testimonies, vol. 2, 665.

We have a responsibility to be sure that our tithe and gifts to God’s cause are supporting the preaching of the truth and that the devil does not outgeneral us and secure, into the wrong storehouse, those assets that God has placed into our hands.

What is the Storehouse?

In order to ascertain a responsible and appropriate Christian decision about the use of tithe we need to understand what the storehouse is.

Only two storehouses exist in the world: “There are only two places in the world where we can deposit our treasures—in God’s storehouse or in Satan’s, and all that is not devoted to Christ’s service is counted on Satan’s side and goes to strengthen his cause.” Testimonies, vol. 6, 447.

All of our tithes and offerings are to be brought to God’s storehouse: “As did Abraham, they are to pay tithe of all they possess and all they receive. A faithful tithe is the Lord’s portion. To withhold it, is to rob God. Everyone should freely, willingly, and gladly bring tithes and offerings into the storehouse of the Lord. In so doing, he will receive a blessing. There is no safety in withholding from God His own portion.” The Kress Collection, 60.

The word “storehouse” is equivalent to the word “treasury:” (“If all tithes were brought into the storehouse, God’s treasury would not be empty.” Pacific Union Recorder, 10.)

We receive rich gifts from God’s storehouse. Eternal life is a gift which we receive from God’s storehouse and every temporal blessing which we receive is from His storehouse. In gratitude to the great giver and to develop the principle of unselfishness in our hearts, we are then to return, as the Lord has blessed us, to His storehouse: “The Lord Jesus is a never-failing storehouse from which human beings may draw strength and courage.” Faith I Live By, 341. “He to whom God has entrusted gifts, should return to the Lord’s storehouse that which he has received, by freely giving to others the benefit of his blessings.” In Heavenly Places, 221.

We lay up treasures in heaven when we give to God’s storehouse: “Very many might be laying up for themselves treasures in heaven, by keeping the Lord’s storehouse supplied with the portion He claims as His own, and with gifts and offerings.” Messages to Young People, 307.

Where is the Storehouse?

If we are going to send tithes and gifts to God’s storehouse, we need to know where it is. Some think that it is near the Tiber river in Italy. Others think that it is in Maryland and still others think that it is their local church. God’s storehouse is much bigger than any of these places. The reason for confusion is that many, if not most, do not know who and what the church is. Notice the following divine counsel:

“I have myself appropriated my tithe to the most needy cases brought to my notice. I have been instructed to do this; and as the money is not withheld from the Lord’s treasury, [the storehouse], it is not a matter that should be commented upon; for it will necessitate my making known these matters, which I do not desire to do, because it is not best. Some cases have been kept before me for years, and I have supplied their needs from the tithe, as God has instructed me to do. And if any person shall say to me, Sister White, will you appropriate my tithe where you know it is most needed, I shall say, Yes, I will; and I have done so. I commend those sisters who have placed their tithe where it is most needed to help to do a work that is being left undone; and if this matter is given publicity, it will create knowledge which would better be left as it is. I do not care to give publicity to this work which the Lord has appointed me to do, and others to do.” Spaulding Magan, 215.

When Ellen White gave tithe directly to those engaged in gospel work, she said that this money had not been withheld from the Lord’s treasury (storehouse) and then she said that the Lord had not only appointed her to do this but also others. Obviously then the storehouse must include more than one organization or group. In fact the Lord has forbidden that all monies go through one organization: “The different conferences have been led to look to the leading men at Battle Creek, feeling that no important move can be made without their approval. This tendency has been growing stronger, until it is a serious hindrance to the advancement of the work. This arrangement should never have been. The Lord would have His people under His jurisdiction. . . . The arrangement that all moneys must go through Battle Creek and under the control of the few men in that place is a wrong way of managing.” Testimonies to Ministers, 321.

“Do not worry lest some means shall go direct to those who are trying to do missionary work in a quiet and effective way. All the means is not to be handled by one agency or organization. There is much business to be done conscientiously for the cause of God. Help is to be sought from every possible source. There are men who can do the work of securing means for the cause, and when these are acting conscientiously and in harmony with the counsels of their fellow-laborers in the field which they represent, the hand of restraint is not to be laid upon them. They are surely laborers together with Him who gave His life for the salvation of souls.” Spaulding Magan, 421.

Also, in order to understand how to keep our tithe from being diverted, we need to understand what should be done with surplus tithe. Surplus tithe is not to be diverted into other areas of God’s work, other than what He has specified. It is to be sent to pay gospel workers in areas of the world where there is little or no tithe income: “There are missions to be sustained in fields where there are no churches and no tithes, and also where the believers are new and the tithe limited. If you have means that is not needed after settling with your ministers in a liberal manner, send the Lord’s money to these destitute places.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 1, 184.

Special Counsel Concerning Bible Workers

Much discussion has arisen as to whether a person should be eligible to receive tithe if not employed by the conference. This question existed in Ellen White’s day though not to the extent as today since the apostasy had not progressed to the enormous extent it has today. Ellen White did comment on this issue, however: “There are minister’s wives, Sisters Starr, Haskell, Wilson and Robinson, who have been devoted, earnest, whole-souled workers, giving Bible readings and praying with families, helping along by personal efforts just as successfully as their husbands. These women give their whole time, and are told that they receive nothing for their labors because their husbands receive their wages. I tell them to go forward and all such decisions shall be reversed. The Word says, ‘The laborer is worthy of his hire.’ When any such decision as this is made, I will in the name of the Lord, protest. I will feel it in my duty to create a fund from my tithe money, to pay these women who are accomplishing just as essential work as the ministers are doing, and this tithe I will reserve for work in the same line as that of the ministers, hunting for souls, fishing for souls. I know that the faithful women should be paid wages proportionate to the pay received by ministers. They carry the burden of souls, and should not be treated unjustly. These sisters are giving their time to educating those newly come to the faith, and hire their own work done, and pay those who work for them. All these things must be adjusted and set in order, and justice be done to all. Proof-readers in the office receive their wages, two dollars and a half and three dollars a week. this I have had to pay, and others have to pay. But ministers’ wives, who carry a tremendous responsibility, devoting their entire time, have nothing for their labor. This will give you an idea of how matters are in this conference. There are seventy-five souls organized into a church, who are paying their tithe into the conference, and as a saving plan it has been deemed essential to let these poor souls labor for nothing! But this does not trouble me, for I will not allow it to go thus.” Spaulding Magan, 117.

Obviously this same counsel would apply to full-time Bible workers today. Very few young people have trained themselves for Bible work. They have been told that there are no job openings (no tithe money) available for this! The entire time that I taught at Southwestern Adventist college, which was over seven years, I only met one person who was training to become a Bible worker! The result is that in this crisis hour when we should have thousands of young people trained and ready to go throughout Europe, Russia and China and other continents, we look about, and alas, there is a dearth of trained Bible workers all over the world. This fact alone, if you had no other information of God’s counsels for medical or publishing or ministerial work, is proof of a gigantic apostasy in Adventism today.

A truly Christian education is at the very foundation of God’s plans to finish His work. Every Christian is to have a part in finishing God’s work. God designed for us to educate not only ministers and Bible workers but physicians, literature evangelists, nurses and teachers and many other skilled persons to finish the gospel commission.

Special Need for Bible Workers

It is God’s will that we prepare thousands to do Bible work. (Testimonies, vol. 9, 126.) “In every school that God has established there will be, as never before, demand for Bible instruction.” Evangelism, 474. What is this Bible instruction to accomplish? The next sentence says, “Our students are to be educated to become Bible workers.” “In every city there should be a corps of organized, well-disciplined workers; not merely one or two, but scores should be set to work.” Christian Stewardship, 72.

This work will require money. “It almost seems as if scarcely anyone dares ask a worker to go into the cities, because of the means that would be required to carry on a strong, solid work. It is true that much means will be required in order to do our duty toward the unwarned in these places; and God desires us to lift our voices and our influence in favor of using means wisely in this special line of effort.” Evangelism, 42.

If We Fail, God’s Plan Will Succeed Through Others

If none of us feel a responsibility to fill the gap and become trained in Bible work and then help to train others, the Lord will pass us by and finish His work with others. He may use “children” as in the triumphal entry into Jerusalem or the rocks may cry out, but if that happens we will lose the blessing God wanted us to have and in the process we might lose our souls, also. If we do not feel a responsibility for all of our tithe to support the giving of the Three Angels’ Messages, God can at any time find other intelligences and other money or sources of support to finish His work, but we will be the losers. If we support apostasy with our tithe and offerings we are not hastening the Lord’s coming by getting the last message to all the world—rather we are delaying His coming and in dire danger of being accounted as an evil servant at the end. (Matthew 24:44-51).

The time will soon come when God will finish His work in a way completely different than we expect. If we oppose what God is doing because it differs from our expectations of how the work should be conducted, we will be found fighting God and will lose our souls just as surely as the unbelieving Jews. Notice the following prophecies:

“Let me tell you that the Lord will work in this last work in a manner very much out of the common order of things, and in a way that will be contrary to any human planning. There will be those among us who will always want to control the work of God, to dictate even what movements shall be made when the work goes forward under the direction of the angel who joins the third angel in the message to be given to the world. God will use ways and means by which it will be seen that He is taking the reins in His own hands. The workers will be surprised by the simple means that He will use to bring about and perfect His work of righteousness.” Testimonies to Ministers, 300.

Note to Home churches: Since the goal of all historic Adventists should be to see the final message given to the world, it is vitally important that home churches be organized so that they can use their finances to further the great commission by hiring Bible Workers or involving themselves in other types of evangelism.

If you would like more information about how to arrange financial matters in your church, call Steps to Life and we will be happy to send you a free information sheet to help you get started.

A Whole Conference Dissolved

In December, 1992, the Zambesi Conference under the Zambesi Union of Seventh-day Adventists and the SDA Association of Southern Africa, headed by president Abdulla Ahomed, was voted to be dissolved at the Annual Council of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. A General Conference representative, Elder Kenneth Mittleider, a vice-president, was sent to Zimbabwe to execute this vote. However, according to the Zambesi Conference constitution, a 75% vote of the conference constituents was required to dissolve the conference.

President Ahomed spoke with Elder Mittleider and told him that the Zambesi Conference would abide by the legal constitution and a vote would be taken by the constituents regarding dissolving the conference. When a vote was taken by the constituent members, 83% voted to retain the Zambesi Conference. It was this decisive vote, not recognized by the General Conference, that created an independent Zambesi Conference with membership at that time of 1200-1500 members.

In January, 1999, after seven years of skirmishes over properties occupied by members of the Zambesi Conference (whose members had for the most paid for them) and other legal matters associated with the Zambesi Conference, the SDA Association of Southern Africa and the Zambesi Union of SDAs took their case to court against the Zambesi Conference. During these interim years of independence, because of active evangelism and missionary work, the Zambesi Conference Sabbath school membership has grown to between six and seven thousand members and the baptized membership now stands at 4,500.

A issue centrally in this dispute is property including 26 buildings consisting of the Zambesi Conference head office complex, houses occupied by pastors and other workers, church buildings, and a large built up campsite in the Vumba mountains. The combined value is estimated at $17 million Zambesi dollars. (The US equivalent is $460,000) As per policy of the Eastern African Division of SDA, all fixed property acquired by churches and conferences must be legally registered in the name of the property holding body, namely the SDA Association of Southern Africa which is registered at the deeds office in Harare, Zimbabwe. However, according to the constitution (constitutions have now been changed for the other three conferences in the Zambesi Union), all title deeds included the proviso that property was being “held in trust” by the association but remained the property of the legal owners, the Zambesi Conference. This designation of properties being “held in trust” by the property holding body is stated in all copies of the constitutions backdated to the establishment of the Zambesi Conference, in 1929.

In the case of the churches, local congregations who raised the funds for these buildings and who underwrote loans and guaranteed financial responsibility for repayment of same, retained the right of real ownership in the event of dispute. Additionally, local church membership and the Zambesi Conference leadership accepted all liability for expenses incurred in the maintenance and operation of properties and buildings. Witnesses testifying have clearly shown that the Zambesi Conference provided the major portion of all funds required in the purchase and construction of these churches, offices and houses. Receipts and documents can be provided by the Zambesi Conference to substantiate this claim of funding. However, in some cases, limited funds were provided by the Zambesi Union and the Eastern Africa Division.

Judgment which normally takes several weeks before publication, was delivered in a few days by the presiding High Court Judge. The ruling was totally in favor of the plaintiffs—the Zambesi Union and the SDA Association of Southern Africa. April 1, 1999, when the appeal by the Zambesi Conference was dismissed, the same High Court Judge also ruled that the Zambesi Union could move into the Zambesi Conference premises.’ This is somewhat unusual, since further appeal can be made and Justice Smith’s ruling could be overturned, thereby returning properties to the Zambesi Conference.

Even before the dismissal of the appeal was communicated to the Zambesi Conference, Pastor Ahomed was asked by Zambesi Union officials to vacate his home with one weeks’ notice. This request was denied as Zimbabwe law requires three months notice of eviction from homes. Conference churches, however, were vacated in less than a week. Members, nearly as a body simply walked away from the buildings they had sacrificed to build and maintain.

At the present time, members of the churches have been meeting in tents, under trees, and in rented facilities. The Zambesi Conference plans to appeal their case to the Supreme Court which they are entitled to do. However, an appeal cannot be made until the High Court Judge places his ruling in writing and as of the end of August 1999, this had not been done.

Members of the independent Zambesi Conference are of good courage in the Lord. They are moving ahead with plans to obtain new facilities and to continue evangelism in their country. High on the priority list is to develop the new camp facilities where children can attend, Pathfinders can be encouraged, campmeetings can be held, and pastors can more effectively be prepared to preach the everlasting gospel. If you would like to have a part in the development of this project and the work in Zimbabwe, mark your gift to Steps to Life for Zimbabwe. Pray for the Lord’s work in this part of the vineyard.

Friendly Fire

Many people are unaware that friendly fire is a serious problem. We think that because of modern technology, friendly fire is a sad fact of the past. However, the statistics tell a different story. During six years of the Vietnam War, there were over 29,000 casualties due to friendly fire. In operation Desert Storm, 45% of all American casualties were due to friendly fire.* The government spends enormous amounts of money on research focused on inventing and utilizing devices that can prevent friendly fire, because, in a war, one of the most dangerous problems is not knowing who the enemy is and who he is not.

We all know what literal friendly fire is. It is when a person, or military unit is fired upon by one of his own side. It is impossible to win a war if you are wounding or killing your own men and not the enemy, thus in a war, if you are going to be victorious you must know who the enemy is and who the enemy is not.

Although this is a problem that many in the military and government are concerned about, literal friendly fire is not where my concern lies. What concerns me is that friendly fire is not isolated to the military world; spiritual friendly fire has become a problem of large magnitude in the church today.

In Galatians 4:14–16, Paul gave us an example of spiritual friendly fire. He wrote this about his experience with the Galatian Christians: “And my trial, which was in my flesh you did not despise or reject, but you received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus. What then was the blessing you enjoyed? For I bear you witness that, if possible, you would have plucked out your own eyes and given them to me. Have I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?”

Paul here is asking a very interesting question of the Galatian believers. He recounts how, when he first brought the gospel to them, they received him “as an angel of God.” If it were possible, he said, they would have even plucked out their own eyes and given them to him. However, a change took place. A change in the Galatian church, that caused them to look at Paul as their enemy instead of their beloved teacher and friend. The Galatians forgot who the real enemy was and they began using spiritual friendly fire. They turned their weapons, not only upon their brother, but upon the very one who had brought the precious truths of salvation to them. They became confused about who the enemy was and as a result became guilty of spiritual friendly fire.

Since friendly fire involves firing upon your comrade, instead of your enemy, it is imperative that we understand very clearly the true identity of the enemy. Jesus had many objectives when He came to this earth, but one of them was to reveal to us who the enemy is and who he is not. Sister White wrote, “While on earth Christ sought to sweep away the distinction that had been made by the Jews as to who was their neighbor and who was their enemy.” Home Missionary, June 1, 1897. This topic is something that we, as humans, have had a problem with for a long time. It is so easy for us to become confused about the true identity of the enemy.

The entire parable of the Good Samaritan was given to correct the erroneous belief the Jews held concerning who was their neighbor. “Among the Jews the question, ‘Who is my neighbour?’ caused endless dispute. They had no doubt as to the heathen and the Samaritans. These were strangers and enemies. But where should the distinction be made among the people of their own nation and among the different classes of society? Whom should the priest, the rabbi, the elder, regard as neighbor?” Christ’s Object Lessons, 376. The Jews were certain that the heathen and Samaritans were their enemies, but Jesus came to reveal a higher order of love. Through the teaching of this parable, He swept away the prevalent thoughts of the day about who their neighbor was and who their enemy was. And the lesson He taught the Jews then is just as applicable to us today. “He teaches us to regard every man as our neighbor who is in need of our sympathy, of our assistance and our love.” Home Missionary, June 1, 1897. Who is in need of our sympathy, our assistance and our love? That encompasses nearly every person alive today and we need to regard each one, not as our enemy, but as our neighbor.

Who is Not the Enemy?

The first group that is not the enemy are those people that are in Babylon and that do not know this precious truth that we know. Like the Jews we are inclined to think that the “heathen” are our enemies, but if we think this, we are just as wrong as they were. We can never preach the truth in love, as God desires, if we regard the people in Babylon as enemies. We must come to the realization that although they do not believe the truth from the Word of God, they are not our enemies. They are the ones most in need of our assistance, our sympathy and our love. It is our work to do everything in our power to bring them to a knowledge of the truth; that they may not just be our neighbors, but our brothers and sisters also.

The second group that is not the enemy is even more subtle than the first. This group is made up of those who believe some heresy or fanaticism. Once again, it is not difficult to develop a mindset that looks upon these people as the enemy. We must not sanction heresy or error, and there are times that discipline is essential, but those that have been deceived into accepting false doctrines are not our enemies. They are in need of our assistance to show them the truths from the Bible. They are in need of our sympathy and love. None will ever be rescued from error if they are contemptuously treated as enemies!

Paul counseled us about exactly how we should deal with cases like this. “And if any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him, that he may be ashamed. Yet count him not as an enemy, but admonish him as a brother.” II Thessalonians 3:14, 5.

The last class who are not our enemies is perhaps the most difficult for us to deal with. These are those who believe the truth, and are striving to live it, but who think or work differently than we do. Although they think, act, and work differently from us they are not our enemies. This is often very hard for us to handle because we are often brought in contact with them every day, but it is essential that we learn not to regard them as our enemies, because, if we do, we will eventually become guilty of spiritual friendly fire.

“Christ said, ‘Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves.’ Matthew 10:16. If we are to meet opposition from our enemies, who are represented as wolves, let us be careful that we do not manifest the same spirit among ourselves.” Ibid. Let us be careful that we do not become guilty of spiritual friendly fire. Are we being careful? Or have we started firing our weaponry at our brothers and sisters? Is historic Seventh-day Adventism being riddled with friendly fire because we have manifested the same spirit toward each other that our enemies manifest toward us? Are we confused about who we are fighting?

Who is the real enemy behind the error and fanaticism in the world today? Jesus said: “The enemy who sowed them is the devil.” Matthew 13:39. It is true that there are “children of the wicked one” (Matthew 13:38) in the church and in the world, but they are not the enemy. They are the very ones whom we need to love and help so that they may become “children of the kingdom.” Matthew 13:38.

How to Prevent Friendly Fire

In 1 John 4:7, 8, we read: “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love.” What must we do so that we are not guilty of spiritual friendly fire? We must learn to love one another. And, this is not something that comes naturally to us; it is contrary to our nature, and thus it is possible only through the grace of Christ combined with much effort on our part.

Jesus came to this earth, not only to die that our sins might be forgiven, but He “took the nature of humanity, in order to reveal to man a pure, unselfish love, to teach us how to love one another.” SDA Bible Commentary, vol. 5, 1126. It was one of Jesus’ special missions to teach us how to love one another, how to be free from friendly fire. Have we learned the lesson yet? Or are we still in the combat zone with one another?

Sometimes we think it is enough to have the truth, but we must not only have the truth, we must live it as well. The truth lived out in our lives is going to lead us to have deep brotherly love for one another. Speaking of the power of the word of God, Jesus said, “Sanctify them by Your truth: Your word is truth.…That they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You, that they also may be one in Us.” John 17:17, 21. If we do not have this love among ourselves, those in the world will not be attracted to the truth, instead they will be driven away. (John 13:35.)

While I was in Ghana, earlier this year, I talked with a man who was a minister from another denomination. As we were talking, I discovered that he had previously been educated and served for many years as a minister of a Sabbath-keeping church, but he had left that church and joined a Sunday-keeping church. This aroused my curiosity. Why had he abandoned the Sabbath to join another church? It was not because he no longer believed in the Sabbath truth. He still knew that the Sabbath was the day God had sanctified. He told me that he left the Sabbath-keeping church because he did not see very much love among the members and leaders, and he found a loving atmosphere in the Sunday keeping church. How many others are there like this? Are people drawn to our churches because of the brotherly love they see there or do they spurn the truth because of the friendly fire that exists?

Learning Brotherly Love

Inspired writings contain counsel on many practical ways that we can learn to love one another. However, there are three main guidelines that, if applied to our lives, will bring about a transformation in our homes and in our churches.

The first and most important of the three is found in I Corinthians 13:5. In this verse it gives the following description of love: Love “does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil.” This is the most important thing to remember in our study on how to love one another. We must think no evil of one another. Spiritual friendly fire originates in our thoughts. In the military, no one can be guilty of friendly fire by only thinking about it, but this is how spiritual friendly fire most often occurs. If we are going to overcome friendly fire, this is where we must begin. Fortunately for us, the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy give us much instruction on what steps we need to take in order to think no evil of our brothers and sisters.

In Our High Calling, 178, we read, “See how you can forgive those who trespass against you, even as you want your Father in heaven to forgive your trespasses.” Probably all of us have had a brother or sister do something to us that hurt or offended us in some way. It is important, then, that we learn to forgive, because that is one of the first steps in thinking no evil and learning to love one another. Forgiveness is a much large topic than most people realize. It must go deeper than just saying that we forgive one another—it must come “from the heart” (Matthew 18:35) and be as deep and full as the forgiveness that the Lord freely gives to us.

God freely forgave Paul, who assisted in the murder of His appointed messenger. Can we forgive the one who wrongs us that much? God’s forgiveness is not just lip service, it is full and deep. At the close of the judgment, all the sins of the truly penitent will be “blotted out.” (Acts 3:19.) Can we blot from our memory the wrongs that have been committed against us? If we are going to have the love for one another that Jesus prayed would exist, we must.

“Jesus, who died for us, loves us with a love that is infinite; and we must love one another. We must put away all selfishness, and work together in love and unity. We have loved and petted ourselves, and excused ourselves in waywardness; but we have been unmerciful toward our brethren, who may not be as faulty as ourselves. The Lord loves us, and bears with us, even when we are ungrateful to Him, forgetful of His mercies, wickedly unbelieving; but consider, brethren, how relentless we are to one another, how pitiless; how we hurt and wound one another, when we should love as Christ has loved us. Let us make a complete change.” Gospel Workers, 429. If we are going to love one another, we must put away our selfishness. We must not look on our own things, but on the things of others. (Philippians 2:4.) We have loved, petted and excused ourselves while we are unmerciful toward our brethren. All of these things originate in how we think about one another. We must consider our own deplorable condition and how God deals with us and then deal with our brethren in the same manner.

“Then let us feast upon Christ. Let us enjoy His love, and praise God for this great salvation. Then we shall come together, heart to heart. When we shall subdue our pride, when we shall pluck from the garden of the soul every fiber of the root of bitterness, our hearts will flow together as the heart of one.” General Conference Daily Bulletin, April 13, 1891. Pride must come out of our hearts. It was pride that caused the great division in heaven and pride will continue to do so here. Also every fiber of bitterness must be thoroughly uprooted. If we are harboring bitterness of any kind in our minds, we will not be loving our brethren as we must and we will be defiled. (Hebrews 12:15.)

“Then all this heart burning and distrust must cease, and in place of it, there will be love and union, courtesy, kindness, and tenderness.” Ibid.

In Our High Calling, 178, we are told, “Press together. Do not make little wedges of slight differences of opinion, and drive them in to separate heart from heart, but see how you can love one another even as Christ has loved you.” The slight differences of opinion that will inevitably arise among us can become little wedges. Just as a wedge begins by making an ever so slight crack and continually increases it until the wood is split in two, so slight differences of opinion can drive us far apart. At first they may be ever so small, but if harbored and dwelt upon, they can separate the dearest of friends.

Our natural tendency is to be lenient with our mistakes, but to be harsh on others. This also must change if we are going to stop using friendly fire. “We must be kind, forbearing, patient with one another’s errors; we must keep our sharp criticisms for ourselves, but hope all things, believe all things, of our brethren.” Gospel Workers, 429.

“Then how dare you allow one thought of opposition against one child of God? How dare you do it? We want melting mercy to fall upon us. And Jesus says it is not possible for the Father to love us if we do not love one another. It is possible to love one another. Therefore you must not make up your minds you cannot do it.” Sermons and Talks, vol. 2, 16. If we are striving to not think evil of our brethren, then we must not allow thoughts of opposition against a child of God to fester in our minds.

Speak No Evil

The second main point that we must adhere to, if we are going to cease our friendly fire, is found in 1 Peter 2:1. “Therefore, laying aside all malice, all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and all evil speaking.” If we have learned to think no evil of our brethren, the second step will be a natural result; we will speak no evil.

“How the enemy has brought his own spirit into our work! We do not love one another, as Christ has enjoined upon us, because we do not love Christ. If your track is crossed in any way, if any one differs in opinion from you, then in place of feeling humility of mind, in place of carrying your burden to Christ, and asking Him for wisdom and light to know what is truth, you draw from Him, and are tempted to present your brother’s views in a false light, that they shall not have influence.” Review and Herald, August 27, 1889.

If you have ever heard two sides of the same story, you realize the relevancy of this counsel. We always tend to present our side in the best colors possible and our brother’s side in as dark hues as we can, but this must stop. We must learn to go to Jesus for wisdom and light and leave the enemy’s spirit out of our work.

“Those who learn His meekness and lowliness learn also how to love one another as He has loved them. They reach the place where they refuse to criticize and condemn others.” Upward Look, 359. Have we come to that place yet? If we are going to learn to speak no evil of our brethren, we must reach this place.

Love Shown In Our Actions

Lastly, if we have applied the other two points, our actions will show our love to one another. Jesus spoke about this high ideal in the sermon on the mount. He said, “But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you.” Matthew 5:44. It is difficult not to think or speak evil of those with whom we do not see eye to eye. However, Jesus’ ideals are even higher than simply not thinking or speaking evil. He says that we must love, bless, do good, and pray for those with whom we have differences.

Jesus exemplified this in His life when, as the Roman soldiers drove the spikes through His hands, He said, “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” We can and must reach the point where we too can say when someone drives those figurative spikes through our hands, “Father forgive them for they do not realize what they are doing. They do not realize that I am not the enemy.”

The very top of the ladder of brotherly love is found in 1 John 3:16. “By this we know love, because He laid down His life for us. And we also ought to lay down our lives for the brethren.” Jesus demonstrated that perfect love for us by dying for us while we were yet His rebellious children, and He desires that love to be perfected in us. If we are finding it difficult to love someone, we need to go to our closet and plead with the Lord to give us love enough to die for that person. The Lord will answer that prayer if we are only willing to follow the steps that He has already walked before us.

* These statistics were taken from the following web sites: www.members.aol.com/warlibrary and www.members.aol.com/amerwar

Early Ecumenical Aspirations

The message of the second angel of Revelation 14 is that the churches of the last days have fallen. Has spiritual Babylon always been fallen? No. At some previous time these churches must have been in an unfallen condition in order to become fallen! Why have they fallen? Because in 1844 they rejected the First Angel’s Message—the truth about Christ’s work in the heavenly Sanctuary.

“The Second Angel’s Message had its initial sounding early in the summer of 1844 in the call to the Advent believers to come out of the nominal churches that had rejected the proclamation of the First Angel’s Message.” Appendix Note, Early Writings, 304. (See also, “The Final Warning,” The Great Controversy, 603–612.)

A Closer Look At Modern Babylon

The message of the fourth angel of Revelation 18, which adds power to the message of the second and third angels of Revelation 14, is that the Church of Rome and her harlot daughters have fallen, and the angel fervently calls God’s people to come out of the fallen churches of the last days. Indeed, the angel cries aloud that these churches have “become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.” Revelation 18:2b. The fourth angel comes down from heaven “having great power; and the earth is lightened with his glory.” Revelation 18:1b. Notice that this special angel “cried mightily with a strong voice.” Revelation 18:2a. This, beyond question, is a vivid description of the Latter Rain of the Advent message. Indeed, do not Seventh-day Adventists know the Latter Rain as the “Loud Cry” of the message?

“The message of the fall of Babylon, as given by the second angel, is repeated, with the additional mention of the corruptions which have been entering the churches since 1844. The work of this angel comes in at the right time to join in the last great work of the Third Angel’s Message as it swells to a loud cry. And the people of God are thus prepared to stand in the hour of temptation, which they are soon to meet. I saw a great light resting upon them, and they united to fearlessly proclaim the Third Angel’s Message.” Early Writings, 277. [All emphasis supplied throughout unless otherwise noted.]

“For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication,” the fourth angel cries aloud, “and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.” Revelation 18:3.

Habitation Of Devils

Let us more carefully analyze Revelation 18, verses 1 and 2. The fourth angel states that because the modern churches of Babylon have fallen they have “become the habitation of devils.” What does this mean? The contemporary Roman Catholic and Sunday-keeping churches are now filled with spiritualism in the form of false healing, false speaking in tongues, casting out demons, and using hypnosis in the practice of so-called “Christian psychology.” Rock music, inspired by demons, is now used in the worship service of most contemporary denominations, including the Roman Catholic Church. All of Christendom is rampant with the modern spiritualistic techniques of “Self-Esteem,” and “Neuro-Linguistic Programming,” known as NLP. This, without question, is spiritism in its most subtle and deceptive form!

“When Satan has undermined faith in the Bible, he directs men to other sources for light and power.…Criticism and speculation concerning the Scriptures have opened the way for spiritism and theosophy—those modernized forms of ancient heathenism—to gain a foothold even in the professed churches of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Desire of Ages, 258.

“History is repeating,” Ellen White warned. “With the open Bible before them, and professing to reverence its teachings, many of the religious leaders of our time are destroying faith in it as the word of God.” Ibid. Like ancient Israel, modern Babylon has accepted spiritualism into their midst. “Side by side with the preaching of the gospel, agencies are at work which are but the medium of lying spirits.” Ibid.

Three Important Concepts Of Revelation 18, Verse 3

  1. “For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication.” The nations have drunk from the wine of her false doctrine.
  2. “The kings of the earth have committed fornication with her.” The contemporary Roman Catholic and modern Evangelical churches have sought the power of the state to enforce their so-called Christian values, and to support their institutions.
  3. “The merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies.” The merchants of the earth have become rich from the sale of goods connected with the Christian faith. Christmas, Easter, Saint Valentine’s Day, All-Saints Day (Halloween), Saint Patrick’s Day, and other so-called Christian holidays reap millions in revenue for merchants and the churches.

The blasphemous movie productions, “Jesus Christ Superstar,” and the even more blasphemous “Godspell,” reaped millions and millions of dollars. Although the Bible says of Judas, “Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot” (Luke 22:3), in the production “Godspell,” Judas Iscariot is depicted as the hero. Also in this blasphemous production the disciples crawl around on the stage and bleat like sheep. Jesus is depicted as a clown. He has a contemporary “rock star” Afro hair style, a little red heart on his shirt, and eyes painted with large teardrops under them, like a circus clown.

It is sad that we have become so gospel-hardened that some of these things no longer shock us. However, we should not be surprised by these developments in the fallen churches of Babylon. Seventh-day Adventists have been warned that gross apostasy would increase in the end of time. “For, behold, the darkness shall cover the earth, and gross darkness the people: but the Lord shall arise upon thee, and His glory shall be seen upon thee.” Isaiah 60:2. But what is most astounding is that these two blasphemous movie productions were endorsed by the major denominations as tools for evangelism among the youth. (See, Bob Larson, Rock and the Church, available at most Christian book stores.)

The False Doctrines Of Modern Babylon

The wine is the false doctrine of Roman Babylon and her fallen harlot daughters are apostate Protestantism. Let us now examine the false doctrines of modern Babylon.

“This is the same message that was given by the second angel. Babylon is fallen, ‘because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication’ (Revelation 14:8.) What is that wine?—Her false doctrines. She has given to the world a false sabbath instead of the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, and has repeated the falsehood that Satan first told Eve in Eden—the natural immortality of the soul. Many kindred errors she has spread far and wide, ‘teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.’ Matthew15:9.” Selected Messages, Book 2, 118.

“The whole chapter shows that the Babylon that has fallen is the churches who will not receive the messages of warning the Lord has given in the First, Second, and Third Angel’s Messages,” Ellen White states. “They refused the truth and accepted a lie. Anyone who reads this chapter need not be deceived.” Manuscript Releases,
vol. 1, 302.

Notice that these fallen churches have “refused the truth and accepted a lie.” Are we to join hands with those who have accepted a lie?

The false leaders and teachers of modern Babylon will lead the masses of earth’s final generation to perdition. Only a few of earth’s billions will come out of Babylon. “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Matthew 7:14. From Egypt only two passed into the promised land. Only eight were saved in Noah’s day. After the flood they all apostatized into Babylon. A few followed when the Lord called Abraham. Fewer still stood at the cross. “And all His acquaintance, and the women that followed Him from Galilee, stood afar off, beholding these things.” Luke 23:49. Only one hundred and twenty in the upper room received the early rain of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost. A small company believed William Miller. Fewer still accepted the Sanctuary and Sabbath truths, the Spirit of Prophecy, and became Seventh-day Adventists. Today many are living in the broad way. However, there remains a small remnant throughout the earth. “Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh,” Jesus asked, “shall He find faith on the earth?” Luke 18:8.

A Link Between Church and State

“When the churches of our land, uniting upon such points of faith as are held by them in common,” Ellen White warned, “shall influence the State to enforce their decrees and sustain their institutions, then will Protestant America have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy.” Spiritual Gifts, vol. 4, 277.

“By this first beast is represented the Roman Church, an ecclesiastical body clothed with civil power, having authority to punish all dissenters. The image to the beast represents another religious body clothed with similar power. The formation of this image is the work of that beast whose peaceful rise and mild professions render it so striking a symbol of the United States. Here is to be found an image of the papacy.…Protestant churches that have followed in the steps of Rome by forming alliance with worldly powers have manifested a similar desire to restrict liberty of conscience.…Persecution always follows religious favoritism on the part of secular governments.” The Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4, 278.

Although God has given up on the Sunday-keeping churches of Babylon, He has not given up on the people in those denominations As in the days following the crucifixion of Christ, there was probation for the people—but there was no probation for the leadership of Israel! Jesus had declared, “Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” Matthew 23:38.

A Warning Against Fellowship With Modern Babylon

The early Christian Church apostatized in the rise of the Papal Church and her link with the secular State. The Protestant churches apostatized when they rejected the message of the first angel. Now, through the message of the second angel, and the amplified message of the special angel of Revelation 18, God is calling His people out of Babylon, out of these false churches. He warns that if they do not come out of Babylon, they shall be “partakers of her sins” and will receive of her plagues. (See Revelation 18:4.)

Again, the point cannot be over-emphasized that, the message of the second and fourth angels call people out of Babylon, and to reject the false teachings of the fallen Protestant churches of the end times. It is a message directly against the Ecumenical Movement, which champions the brotherhood of all Christian churches. We, as Seventh-day Adventists, should not turn toward the churches of Babylon, but should be calling people out of these false churches!

Why can we not have fellowship and brotherhood on all sides with these Christians of other denominations? Why cannot Seventh-day Adventists become members of the National and World Council of Churches? “There is as great a difference in our faith and that of nominal professors,” Ellen White replies. “as the heavens are higher than the earth.” Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, 300.

“The world is against us, the popular churches are against us, the laws of the land will soon be against us,” Ellen White wrote. “God has committed to us the special truths for this time to make known to the world.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 236.

How can we fellowship with the false Sunday-keeping churches of Babylon when “the popular churches are against us.” Indeed, did not Jesus Himself say, “For he that is not against us is on our part.” Mark 9:40. If the modern churches of Babylon are no longer against us, perhaps we are no longer teaching and preaching the historic Advent truth!

James White also gave some wise counsel on the subject of ecumenism and fellowship with the Sunday-keeping churches of Babylon. Notice carefully his wise counsel: “Here is a man, for instance, who does not agree with us on the subject of the second coming of Christ. He believes that we are wholly mistaken in regard to this great truth. Can we feel union with such a man, and take him into our fellowship and communion? We cannot. We can but feel that he shuts his eyes to some of the clearest light of the Scriptures, and refuses assent to their most unequivocal testimony. We cannot therefore extend to him the hand of Christian fellowship. Just so with the Sabbath. Can we fellowship with the man who violates it? We cannot. On a vital point connected with the teaching of the word of God, we are at issue; and the union that would otherwise exist between us, is of course destroyed. So with the subjects of baptism, the sleep of the dead, the destruction of the wicked, etc. Where there is not agreement in theory, there can be, in the Christian sense, no real communion of heart and fellowship of feeling.” James White, “Fifty Unanswerable Arguments,” Review and Herald, January 14, 1861.

“Where there is not agreement in theory [theology],” James White states, “there can be, in the Christian sense, no real communion of heart and fellowship of feeling.” Can anything be more plain? Pioneer Seventh-day Adventists did not believe in ecumenicalism. They did not advocate joining in mutual fellowship with the churches of Babylon, or recognizing all those who lift up Christ, though they reject the truths of these last days.

“I saw that since Jesus left the holy place of the heavenly sanctuary and entered within the second veil, the churches have been filling up with every unclean and hateful bird. I saw great iniquity and vileness in the churches, yet their members profess to be Christians. Their profession, their prayers, and their exhortations are an abomination in the sight of God. Said the angel, ‘God will not dwell in their assemblies. Selfishness, fraud, and deceit are practiced by them without the reprovings of conscience. And over all these evil traits they throw the cloak of religion.’ ” Early Writings, 274.

Notice that it is the voice of an angel that says, “God will not dwell in their assemblies.” If God does not dwell with these assemblies (National and World Council of Churches), why do we wish to “dwell” with them when God does not?

Again, is it possible to have unity with modern Babylon? Can we have dialogue and goodwill between the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the fallen churches of Babylon? Pioneer Adventists did not believe so. The Spirit of Prophecy warns against it.

“After a long and severe conflict the faithful few decided to dissolve all union with the apostate church if she still refused to free herself from falsehood and idolatry. They saw that separation was an absolute necessity if they would obey the Word of God. They dared not tolerate errors fatal to their own souls and set an example which would imperil the faith of their children and children’s children.…If unity could be secured only by the compromise of truth and righteousness, then let there be difference and even war. Well would it be for the church and the world if the principles that actuated those steadfast souls were revived in the hearts of God’s professed people.” The Story of Redemption, 324.

Notice that Ellen White described the stand of the faithful during the Dark Ages by saying, “If unity could be secured only by the compromise of truth and righteousness, then let there be difference and even war.” Then she brings it home to the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church: “Well would it be for the church and the world if the principles that actuated those steadfast souls were revived in the hearts of God’s professed people.” In the hearts of God’s professed people? That is us, is it not? It would be well if these principles were revived in the hearts of Seventh-day Adventists.

Ecumenism—Modern-Day Deception of Satan

Before we can continue our study we must first understand the concept of “ecumenism.” Today we often hear the word ecumenical. What is ecumenism? The Seventh-day Adventist Bible Student’s Source Book and SDA Bible Dictionary give a clear answer: “At its most ambitious, the ecumenical movement aspires to heal the
thousand-year-old break between Rome and the Eastern Orthodox churches on the one hand, and the later breach between these and the Protestant denominations on the other.” Editorial, “To a Greater Christian Church,” Life, 49 (December 19, 1960), 24; op. sit., Seventh-day Adventist Bible Student’s Source Book, Art. “Ecumenical Movement,” Second Revised Edition.

“But despite these deep doctrinal differences, these three chief branches of Christianity are on much friendlier terms than they used to be,” the editorial stated. “Their spokesmen are able to meet in serious dialogue without thinking of each other as antichrists; they have learned to know what they believe in common and why they disagree.” Editorial, Life, December 19, 1960.

Notice the phrases, “the ecumenical movement aspires to heal the thousand-year-old break [wound].” Does that sound familiar? “And his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.” Revelation 13:3b. “Their spokesmen are able to meet in serious dialogue without thinking of each other as antichrists.” Have you ever heard, dear reader, the phrase “beast bashing” in today’s Adventist thinking? But the most astounding fulfillment of prophecy is the phrase, “they have learned to know what they believe in common and why they disagree.”

“When the churches of our land, uniting upon such points of faith as are held by them in common,” Ellen White warned, “shall influence the State to enforce their decrees and sustain their institutions, then will Protestant America have formed an image of the Roman hierarchy.” Spirit of Prophecy, vol. 4, 278.

So Much In Common

In 1973, Bert Beverly Beach (later secretary of Public Affairs and Religious Liberty department of the General Conference) co-authored a book with Lukas Vischer, Secretary of the World Council of Churches. The title of the book was, So Much In Common, the subtitle, “Between the World Council of Churches and the Seventh-day Adventist Church.” The book was published by the World Council of Churches, Geneva, Switzerland, in 1973. The title of the book alone tells the story, “So Much In Common, Between the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the World Council of Churches.” What do Seventh-day Adventists have in common with the World Council of Churches? How did Adventists ever come to the place where they thought they had something in common with the great assembly of the churches of Babylon, the harlot daughters of Rome?

In 1977, Bert Beach was President of the Northern Europe-West Africa Division of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. At that time Beach was also serving as Secretary of the World Confessional Families, the theological branch of the World Council of Churches. On May 18, 1977, as Secretary of the World Confessional Families, meeting in Rome, Italy, Beach presented a medallion to Pope Paul VI. (See Religious News Service (RNS), Foreign Service, May 19, 1977; W.D. Eva, Adventist Review, “Book, Medallion Presented to Pope,” August 11, 1977, page 23.)

The Goal Of Ecumenism

“As long as the Catholic is Catholic and the Protestant is Protestant, there is only one way to union—the conversion of one to the views of the other. If that should
happen, either Catholicism or Protestantism would disappear. There can never be a Catholic-Protestant Church, or even a Catholic-Protestant fellowship of churches. This is the basic fact.

“The Catholic must say to the Protestant that the [Catholic] Church was substantially right, and therefore any endeavor toward reunion will be a return to her unreconstructed, unreformed unity.” Gustave Wiegel, A Catholic Primer on the Ecumenical Movement, 50, 51, 64, 66. Copyright 1957 by The Newman Press, Westminster, Md.

Ecumenism Will Triumph

“Through the two great errors, [1] the immortality of the soul and [2] Sunday sacredness, Satan will bring the people under his deceptions,” Ellen White concluded. “While the former lays the foundation of spiritualism the latter creates a bond of sympathy with Rome.” The Great Controversy, 588.

“The Protestants of the United States will be foremost in stretching their hands across the gulf to grasp the hand of spiritualism; they will reach over the abyss to clasp hands with the Roman power; and under the influence of this threefold union, this country will follow in the steps of Rome in trampling on the rights of conscience.” Ibid.

—To be continued…

Editorial – A Special Testimony, Part II

This is a continuation of the letter we started publishing excerpts from in last month’s editorial—a letter from Ellen White to two large Seventh-day Adventist churches.

“Those who have used the tithe money to supply the common necessities of the house of God, have taken the money that should go to sustain ministers in doing his work, in preparing the way for Christ’s second appearing. Just as surely as you do this work, you misapply the resources which God has told you to retain in his treasure-house, that it may be full, to be used in his service. This work is something of which all who have taken a part in should be ashamed. They have used their influence to withdraw from God’s treasury a fund that is consecrated to a sacred purpose. From those who do this, the blessing of the Lord will be removed.

“If the brethren in responsible positions would talk faith and courage to all the workers in the office, if you would talk self-denial in the church, if you would practice it in your own families, if you would bear a clean-cut testimony, which you have not yet borne, if you would all be mouthpieces for God, and present to the church the necessity for self-denial, the humiliation of the soul, praying for the Lord to forgive your pride, your foolish, senseless vanity, the Lord may pass by and leave you a blessing.

“Let your works show that you do believe your words of murmuring in the past to be wrong, that it is time now for you to cast your net on the right side of the ship, the side of faith. For the rest of your days, while probation lasts, show what can be done by a self-denying, self-sacrificing, consecrated, living church.

“A different testimony must go forth from lips touched with the live coal from off the altar. When you are in Christ, you can bear a living testimony. But throughout the churches there is selfishness and sin, dishonesty, unbelief, criticism, and faultfinding. It is high time now for you have to awake out of sleep. We read that in olden times holy men spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

“This is what we need. This is what we must have. We need money here to carry forward the work. But we have no such resources to draw upon as you have in Oakland and Battle Creek. We can not sustain ministers in the field; for there is no money in the treasury. I know from the light given me of God that there should be many workers in California. There should be workers in Michigan, and yet men are questioning in regard to using the tithe for other purposes than that which the Lord has specified. In California, in all our cities in America, in the highways and byways, men and women should go forth as consecrated workers, who will proclaim the message of warning. Why should it [the General Conference] permit its ministers to be half paid, and at the same time talk so begrudgingly of that which they do receive? When this work shall cease in our churches, a living testimony will go forth from human lips, under the operation of the Holy Ghost.

“Satan has stolen a march on us. God desires that we shall put on the whole armor of righteousness. There are exceptional cases, where poverty is so deep that, in order to secure the humblest place of worship, it may be necessary to appropriate the tithes. But that place is not Battle Creek or Oakland. Let those who assemble to worship God consider the self-denial and self-sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Let those brethren who profess to be children of God study how they can deny themselves, how they can part with some of their idols, and carefully economize in every line. In each house there should be a box for the church fund, to be used for the needs of the church.

“I have been shown case after case where men are working in the ministry, who are just as deserving of their wages as those who are employed in the publishing houses, are left without sufficient means to support their families. If they work at all for the Master, they have to depend on charity. The censure and frown of God is upon the church that will permit these things to exist. Let not those to whom are entrusted responsibilities, allow the treasury that God has appointed to sustain the ministers in the field, to be robbed to supply the expenses incurred in keeping in order and making comfortable the house of God.

“A separate fund for the purpose of defraying the expenses, which every church member should share according to his ability, should be instituted in every place where there is a church.”

Taken from Manuscript Releases, vol. 1, 183–191.

Early Ecumenical Aspirations, Part II

Editor’s Note: Last month we looked at an overview of the steps leading toward the ecumenical push in Adventism today. In the conclusion of this study we will consider where this movement is leading and what our response should be.

Early History of Ecumenical Aspirations In the SDA Church

With this background of “ecumenism” in mind, we must now consider the historical evidence that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has joined hands with the World Council of Churches in the Ecumenical Movement. How did it all begin? Why has the SDA leadership been deceived by the erroneous concept that we should seek fellowship and acceptance from the fallen churches of Babylon? That we should also seek fellowship and approval from the Papacy, the Anti-christ of the end-times, is truly astounding!

The American Sentinel’s Ecumenical Aspiration

The first hint of a desire for the acceptance of Seventh-day Adventism by the popular denominations took place in 1890. (See Manuscript Releases, No, 1033.) Ministers who were in charge of the American Sentinel, (Seventh-day Adventist Religious Liberty magazine of the day, forerunner of our contemporary Liberty magazine), met behind closed doors to contemplate dropping the name Seventh-day Adventist from the magazine. The reason given by the editorial board was to gain acceptance from the Sunday-keeping churches. Ellen White received a vision of what was taking place and gave the following testimony:

“In the night season I was present in several councils, and there I heard words repeated by influential men to the effect that if the American Sentinel would drop the words “Seventh-day Adventist” from its columns, and would say nothing about the Sabbath, the great men of the world would patronize it. It would become popular and do a larger work. This looked very pleasing. These men could not see why we could not affiliate with unbelievers and non-professors to make the American Sentinel a great success. I saw their countenances brighten, and they began to work on a policy to make the Sentinel a popular success.” Counsels to Writers and Editors, 96.

“These things have gone as far as they should without someone protesting against them in plain words,” Ellen White admonished. “The Lord’s time to set things in order has fully come.” Ibid.

Notice that these early ecumenical-minded Adventist leaders, these “influential men,” as Ellen White stated, desired that “the great men of the world would patronize” the American Sentinel magazine. They believed that if they dropped the name Seventh-day Adventist it would then “become popular and do a larger work.” However, they could not see “why we could not affiliate with unbelievers and non-professors.” Because of their false concept of ecumenical ties between Seventh-day Adventists and the Sunday-keeping churches “they began to work on a policy to make the Sentinel a popular success.” This erroneous policy was never implemented because the messenger of the Lord was alive and well. She was given a vision of the movements underfoot and gave her faithful testimony to the “influential men.” They saw their error and kept the name Seventh-day Adventist on the Sentinel magazine. Indeed, who would like to stand up against a living prophet of the Lord?

How is it today, friend? Since the living prophet has passed from the scene has the contemporary Church preserved the name “Seventh-day” on its periodicals and institutions? No, it has not! The contemporary church has dropped the name “Seventh-day” from everything, and simply employs the name “Adventist.” Adventist Book Center, Adventist Media Center, Adventist Community Center, etc. Indeed, today many churches and book centers have even dropped the name Adventist, and call themselves simply, Christian Book Center, or Community Worship Center. A Seventh-day Adventist Church in Bothell, Washington, took the name “North Creek Fellowship.” This group met in the local Conference office until funds were raised to construct a church building. The name “Seventh-day” has been dropped from hospitals and clinics. (See, “Portland Adventist Hospital,” Portland, Oregon.) Indeed, the name “Seventh-day” has been dropped from the church’s welfare system. Remember when the church’s welfare system was called SAWS, which stood for, “Seventh-day Adventist Welfare System?” What is the title of this entity today, friend? ADRA, “Adventist Development and Relief Agency.” How about the periodicals? We now have the Adventist Review. What was the name of our church paper in the days of the pioneers? Advent Review and Sabbath Herald!

Heaven gave counsel against removing the name Seventh-day Adventist from the periodicals and institutions of the church. Speaking on the subject Ellen White stated in part: “This policy is the first step in a succession of wrong steps. The principles which have been advocated in the American Sentinel are the very sum and substance of the advocacy of the Sabbath, and when men begin to talk of changing these principles, they are doing a work which it does not belong to them to do. Like Uzzah, they are attempting to steady the ark which belongs to God, and is under His special supervision.” Ibid.

“This policy is the first step in a succession of wrong steps,” Ellen White warned. Why would the “wrong steps” be successful from 1926 onward, and not in 1890 and 1905? The answer is simple. The messenger of the Lord passed from the scene in 1915! Leadership no longer had to answer to a living prophet. What has been the succession of “wrong steps” taken toward ecumenical policies since these first attempts were made in 1890 and 1905? Sadly, history reveals the answer.

The First Wrong Step Toward Ecumenism Approved In 1926

“In the desire to avoid occasion for misunderstanding or friction in the matter of relationship to the work of other societies, the following statement of principles are set forth as a guidance to our workers in mission fields in their contacts with other religious organizations,” the General Conference voted in 1926. (General Conference Executive Committee, 1926.)

“#1. We recognize every agency that lifts up Christ before man as a part of the divine plan for the evangelization of the world, and we hold in high esteem the Christian men and women in other communions who are engaged in winning souls to Christ.” “Relationship To Other Societies,” General Conference Executive Committee, 1926.

Notice that the leadership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church “recognize every agency that lifts up Christ.” This would include the Roman Catholic and apostate Protestant churches and unholy- spirit-filled Pentecostal churches. SDA leadership also recognizes these fallen churches of Babylon “as a part of the divine plan for the evangelization of the world.” That is not what my Bible says! Neither can this premise be found in the Spirit of Prophecy. “There is as great a difference in our faith and that of nominal professors, as the heavens are higher than the earth.” Spiritual Gifts, vol. 2, 300.

This statement is the last sentence in an important testimony. Let us consider the complete testimony in context: “Those who engage in the solemn work of bearing the Third Angel’s Message, must move out decidedly, and in the Spirit and power of God, fearlessly preach the truth, and let it cut. They should elevate the standard of truth, and urge the people to come up to it. It has been lowered down to meet the people in their condition of darkness and sin. It is the pointed testimony that will bring up the people to decide. A peaceful testimony will not do this. The people have the privilege of listening to this kind of teaching from the pulpits of the day. But God has servants to whom He has entrusted a solemn, fearful message, to bring out and fit up a people for the coming of Christ. There is as great a difference in our faith and that of nominal professors, as the heavens are higher than the earth.” Ibid., 299, 300.

“God has committed to us the special truths for this time to make known to the world.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 236. In these last hours, “God has given to us,” Seventh-day Adventists, “the special truths for this time to make known to the world.” He has not given this message to the Sunday-keeping churches of Babylon. Our commission is to call the people out of Babylon, not to join hands with Babylon! We are not to please the churches of the world by emphasizing doctrines the SDA leadership alleges we hold in common with them. “The world is against us, the popular churches are against us, the laws of the land will soon be against us.” Testimonies, vol. 5, 236.

How can we “recognize” the “popular churches” that are “against us” as being “a part of the divine plan for the evangelization of the world?” Notice also that the contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church holds “in high esteem the Christian men and women” who teach the false doctrines of the Protestant churches, the churches that the Scripture calls the harlot daughters of Babylon.

“And the Roman Catholic Church was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her false doctrine, and upon her forehead was a name written, mystery, Babylon the great, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth.” Revelation 17:4, 5, paraphrase.

“In our day. . .are not religious teachers turning men away from the plain requirements of the word of God? Instead of educating them in obedience to God’s law, are they not educating them in transgression? From many of the pulpits of the churches the people are taught that the law of God is not binding upon them.” Christ’s Object Lessons, 305.

“The Protestants have accepted the spurious Sabbath, the child of the papacy, and have exalted it above God’s holy sanctified day,” Ellen White stated, “and our institutions of learning have been established for the express purpose of counteracting the influence of those who do not follow the word of God.” Fundamentals of Christian Education, 288.

Does this sound like Ellen White would approve of any idea of ecumenism? How can we “recognize” the Sunday-keeping churches of Babylon as a part of the divine plan for the evangelization of the world” and still be “counteracting the influence” of those churches “who do not follow the word of God?” How can we “recognize” those churches who have “accepted the spurious Sabbath, the child of the papacy, and have exalted it above God’s holy sanctified day?”

Ellen White stated that in the Sunday-keeping churches of Babylon “the doctrine is now largely taught that the gospel of Christ has made the law of God of no effect; that by ‘believing’ we are released from the necessity of being doers of the word.” Signs of the Times, February 25, 1897. She stated further that this teaching “is the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which Christ so unsparingly condemned.”

Have the Sunday-keeping churches become more “Adventist” since the death of Ellen White? What was Ellen White’s position on the recognition of the Sunday-keeping churches of Babylon? What would she say if she were alive today? She would give the same testimony she gave from the beginning. Truth does not change.

“I saw that since Jesus left the holy place of the heavenly sanctuary and entered within the second veil, the churches have been filling up with every unclean and hateful bird. I saw great iniquity and vileness in the churches, yet their members profess to be Christians. Their profession, their prayers, and their exhortations are an abomination in the sight of God. Said the angel, ‘God will not dwell in their assemblies. Selfishness, fraud, and deceit are practiced by them without the reprovings of conscience. And over all these evil traits they throw the cloak of religion.’” Early Writings, 274.

Ellen White’s position on the other denominations was that the members of these churches of Babylon “profess to be Christians.” The contemporary Seventh-day Adventist Church concurs with these false churches by stating that “we hold in high esteem the Christian men and women in other communions who are engaged in winning souls to Christ.” GC Executive Committee, 1926.

Because we recognize the fallen churches of Babylon, does this mean that they will always love and recognize Seventh-day Adventists as Christian brethren? No, they will not.

“When we reach the standard that the Lord would have us reach,” Ellen White warned, “worldlings will regard Seventh-day Adventists as odd, singular, strait-laced extremists.” Fundamentals of Christian Education, 289.

We now have the answer to two important questions.

  1. Why were the attempted moves toward ecumenism by “influential men” not successful in 1890 and 1905?
  2. Why would the “wrong steps” toward ecumenism be successful after the year 1926 and onward? Again, the answer is simple. The messenger of the Lord passed from the scene in 1915—and the written Testimonies of the Lord have been made of non-effect!