THE 1910 WORLD MISSIONARY CONFERENCE AND ITS AFTERMATH FOR THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH

• LUKEWARM RESPONSE TO INVITATION DESCENDS INTO ENTHUSIASTIC COLLABORATION

• CONSEQUENCES OF SPURNING FAITH IN THE PROMISE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AND IGNORING INSPIRED WARNINGS

• ENTHUSIASTIC COLLABORATION THE CONSEQUENCE OF REPUDIATION OF THE UNIQUE  GREAT SECOND ADVENT MOVEMENT

• DESCENT TO THE DEPTHS OF APOSTASY BY CLASPING HANDS WITH THE "MAN OF SIN"

• CLOSE OF PROBATION FOR ALL CORPORATE BODIES OF THE WORLD

• NEW IDENTITY OF "ONCE FAITHFUL CITY" WHICH HAS REPUDIATED THE GOSPEL OF ADVENTISM

• A CHURCH DEVOID OF SPIRITUAL POWER SEEKS IN VAIN FOR GROWTH IN THE SPIRIT NOW DEPARTED

• SIGNIFICANCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL APOSTASY IN THE HISTORY OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH

• SPIRITUAL BLINDNESS FOLLOWS APOSTASY IN PROPHETIC INTERPRETATION\

• GOD SENT WARNINGS TO THE CHURCH SPECIFICALLY BY HIS APPOINTED MESSENGER

• THE ATONING WORK OF JESUS CHRIST IN THE HEAVENLY SANCTUARY AS REVEALED IN THE BIBLE

• CLEAR EXPOSITIONS OF THE BIBLE'S PROMISE OF PERFECTION AS THE RESULT OF THE FINAL ATONEMENT

LUKEWARM RESPONSE TO INVITATION DESCENDS INTO ENTHUSIASTIC COLLABORATION

The following essay on the 1910 World Missionary Conference by Borge Schantz, PhD, adjunct professor at Loma Linda University, begins as an apparent recitation of historical fact, although this sentence early in the historical narrative raises a suspicion: "Perhaps the General Conference was using Edinburgh as a “trial marriage” on possible areas where at least some cooperation with other mission societies could be a reality?" It can reasonably be presumed that such an idea was highly unlikely. Glorious years of Seventh-day Adventist evangelism ensued in the succeeding years, solidly based on the platform of Truth established by the Great Second Advent Movement. This kind of evangelism was increasingly muted after the end of the 1950s, and has now faded into oblivion on the essential doctrines. Thus, it is no surprise that by the conclusion of the Schantz essay it is clear that the author favors increased collaboration with non-Adventists in the propagation of the gospel. This is contemporary Adventism, but it is clear that this was never contemplated in 1910 when Ellen G. White was still alive. The author writes the following passage after naming the Seventh-day Adventist delegates to the Conference:

However, their presence at the Edinburgh conference remained somewhat in the shade. The 33 boxes with the official archives from the 1910 conference stored at the Burkes Library (Columbia University) do not at all indicate that the Adventist delegates were serving on any of the main committees or subcommittees.

It is also worth observing that the Adventist Church itself gave its participation in the 1910 Mission Conference minimum publicity. It was not officially reported to the various churches or commented on by Adventist leaders.4 Neither do we find official reports on Edinburgh in Adventist magazines. E.G. White was likewise silent on the event.

This confirms that collaboration was not in contemplation. The full Schantz essay is as follows (with highlighting and underscoring):

(Underscored emphasis added.)

Tragically, the Schantz essay includes, and emphasizes in the margin, the following passage as seen above:

A growing number of Adventist pastors and members feel it is time to open up for positive relationships with other Christians and churches. The task of bringing Christ to two-thirds of the world's population needs as many voices as possible. Adventists cannot do it alone. And as we have so much in common with most missionary-minded evangelicals, it would be spiritual arrogance to continue.(Underscored emphasis added.)

When did God ever intend that Adventists would "do it alone." How in the world could any Seventh-day Adventist think that preaching the gospel to the world is the work of man and not of the Holy Spirit?

CONSEQUENCES OF SPURNING FAITH IN THE PROMISE OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AND IGNORING INSPIRED WARNINGS

The concept of a universal "Christian" world is nowhere to be found in the Bible; but to the contrary Jesus Himself repeatedly spoke of the "few." He addressed comfort to the "little flock" (Luke 12:32.) Jesus said, "My kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36, first part.) The notion of the entire world being won for "Christianity" is purely a Roman Catholic concept. Rome's purpose in the Christian era has ever been to blend imperial power with Christianity. This can never be! Above all, the preaching of the gospel in the early Christian Church was directed, controlled, and empowered by the Holy Spirit:

ANOTHER COMFORTER (Part One)

The book of Acts could well be called the Acts of the Holy Spirit. In this book, the Holy Spirit is presented as One in full command of the Church, and its spokesmen, and as One functioning as the Vicegerent of the Lord Jesus Christ. The very introduction sets forth the role of the Spirit as the Vicegerent. After Jesus was taken up into heaven, "He through the Spirit" continued to give "commandments unto the apostles." (Acts 1:2) These apostles and others as "spokesmen" were "full of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:4; 4:8, 31; 7:55; 11:24; 13:9)

The Book of Acts presents the Spirit as in full command of the Church and its spokesmen. He speaks to Philip - "Go near and join thyself to this chariot." (Acts 8:29) Philip obeys, and another witness is born into the kingdom of God, the Ethiopian eunuch. Then the Spirit transports Philip to another place. (8:39) To Peter, as he meditated on the unusual vision he had received, the Spirit said, "Behold three men seek thee ... I have sent them." (10:19-20) To the leaders of the church in Antioch, the same Holy Spirit said - "Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." (13:2) And Paul on his second missionary tour desired to go to certain areas to preach the gospel, but was "forbidden of the Holy Spirit." (16:6-7) Thus, the Spirit is pictured as functioning in His own right, as a Person directing the Church of the Living God.(Underscored emphasis added.)

As Ellen G. White wrote in the Testimony "Shall We Be Found Wanting":

Shall We Be Found Wanting?

One who sees beneath the surface, who reads the hearts of all men, says of those who have had great light: "They are not afflicted and astonished because of their moral and spiritual condition." Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations. I also will choose their delusions, and will bring their fears upon them; because when I called, none did answer; when I spake, they did not hear: but they did evil before Mine eyes, and chose that in which I delighted not." "God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie," because "they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved," "but had pleasure in unrighteousness." Isaiah 66:3, 4; 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 10, 12.

The heavenly Teacher inquired: "What stronger delusion can beguile the mind than the pretense that you are building on the right foundation and that God accepts your works, when in reality you are working out many things according to worldly policy and are sinning against Jehovah? Oh, it is a great deception, a fascinating delusion, that takes possession of minds when men who have once known the truth, mistake the form of godliness for the spirit and power thereof; when they suppose that they are rich and increased with goods and in need of nothing, while in reality they are in need of everything." . . .

Who can truthfully say: "Our gold is tried in the fire; our garments are unspotted by the world"? I saw our Instructor pointing to the garments of so-called righteousness. Stripping them off, He laid bare the defilement beneath. Then He said to me: "Can you not see how they have pretentiously covered up their defilement and rottenness of character? 'How is the faithful city become an harlot!' My Father's house is made a house of merchandise, a place whence the divine presence and glory have departed! For this cause there is weakness, and strength is lacking." (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 8, Pp. 249-250.)(Underscored emphasis added.)

Ellen G. White repeatedly warned against compromise of the distinctive doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The following are some of these warnings (with highlighting and underscoring):

Counsels to Writers and Editors, Chapter 6—Integrity of the Message

(Underscored emphasis added.)

The loss of the power and influence of the Holy Spirit was both the end of the beginning of the full manifestation of the Great Apostasy AND the beginning of the hopelessly deluded, fallen state of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This hopelessly deluded, fallen state is revealed in the history of the Church in the century following the 1910 World Missionary Conference.

ENTHUSIASTIC COLLABORATION THE CONSEQUENCE OF REPUDIATION OF THE UNIQUE  GREAT SECOND ADVENT MOVEMENT

In June, 2010. the centennial of the 1910 World Missionary Conference was marked by a 2010 World Missionary Conference which was also included in the Schantz essay. Whereas Schantz honestly disclosed that the records of the 1910 Conference revealed "misgivings and somewhat lukewarm attendance" of the Adventists, the following report (with highlighting and underscoring,) of the 2010 Conference implies a degree of involvement in 1910 that is a fraudulent distortion of the facts (with highlighting and underscoring):

The following description of the 2010 event reeks of collaboration and compromise, which is the antithesis of the gospel commission given to the Seventh-day Adventist Church and the counsel of Ellen G. White's testimonies:

The 2010 delegation included Ganoune Diop, General Conference Global Mission Study Centers director; Cheryl Doss, General Conference Institute of World Mission director; and John McVay, Walla Walla University president. Diop functioned on the organizing committee before, during, and after the conference. At the final meeting in the Assembly Hall he was master of ceremonies. (Underscored emphasis added.)

It is obvious that the Seventh-day Adventists, long divorced from the Great Second Advent Movement of Ellen G. White's time, were deeply involved in the 2010 Edinburgh World Missionary Conference. The extent of the apostasy from the foundational interpretations of Bible prophecies and the unique doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist faith has grown to staggering proportions. The 1980 General Conference marked the official adoption of doctrinal changes which set the seal on the apostasy, and identified the Church with apostate Protestant and Roman Catholic heresies.

DESCENT TO THE DEPTHS OF APOSTASY BY CLASPING HANDS WITH THE "MAN OF SIN"

Ganoune Diop grasps the hand of Pope Francis during his first encounter with Pope Francis ["the man of sin"] in Rome, Italy on October 12, 2016

Elder Wm. H. Grotheer, founder of Adventist laymen's Foundation and Editor of its publication "Watchman What of the Night?" until his death in 2009, has written expansively and with heavy documentation about the course of the Seventh-day Adventist Church's apostasy. The following titles and quotations are but a sampling:

NEW FUNDAMENTAL STATEMENT OF BELIEFS PREPARES THE WAY FOR JOINING WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES

At the Fifteenth and final meeting of the Fifty-third General Conference Session in Dallas, Texas, on April 25, the delegates voted "overwhelmingly" but not unanimously to accept a Statement of Beliefs which contained phrases and clauses which have never appeared in any previously formulated statement of doctrines. Certain phraseology and concepts are copied directly from the Constitution of the World Council of Churches, and prepares the way for the hierarchy to move in that direction when they feel it advantageous to do so.

Article #2 - The Trinity - from the new Statement of Beliefs reads:

There is one God:  Father, Son and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-eternal persons. (General Conference Bulletin # 9, p. 23)

Article #11 - The Church - reads: 

The church is the community of believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour. (Ibid., p. 25)

The Constitution of the World Council of Churches requires that only those churches which express such doctrinal concepts "shall be eligible for membership" in that body. Here are the first two articles from the Constitution.

A. The Constitution

I.   Basis

The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfil together their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

II.   Membership

Those churches shall be eligible for membership in the World Council of Churches which express their agreement with the Basis upon which this Council is founded and satisfy such criteria as the Assembly or the Central Committee may prescribe. (So Much in Common, p. 33)

When Article #2 was presented at the Seventh business meeting, there was discussion over its phraseology. Elder H. J. Harris, president of the Oregon Conference, wished it amended, but both Dr. Richard Hamill and Dr. W. R. Lesher spoke in support of its retention as written. These two men served as "floor leaders" in getting the Statement thru the Session, and were on the editing committee with Hammill as its chairman. In fact, Dr. Lesher, who heads the General Conference Biblical Research Committee commented - "It is much more in harmony with the mystery of God to simply say there is one God - Father, Son, and Holy Spirit." (See GC Bulletin, #5, pp. 11, 14)

Throughout the discussion of the Statement of Beliefs, the stock answer to many of the objections was to use the words of Dr. Hamill - "When we framed this statement we tried to use Biblical phrases as much as we could." (Ibid., p. 11) But where in the authentic text of the Bible can one find the expression as copied from the Constitution of the World Council of Churches in regard to God? One might point to I John 5:7, but this text can be found "in no Greek manuscript earlier than the 15th and 16th centuries." (SDA Bible Commentary Vol. 7,p.675). It is a gloss which crept into the Scriptures to support the doctrine of the Trinity - a term found in neither the Bible nor the Spirit of Prophecy.

The "evolution" of the second statement defining the Church is also very interesting. In the Statement of Beliefs as voted by the 1979 Annual Council to be recommended to the General Conference in session; it read - "That the Church is the company of believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour."(p. 9, Adventist Review, Feb. 21, 1980) However, this statement was never presented to the General Conference session. A completely new statement was prepared just prior to the session and presented to the delegates. In this second statement, the article on the Church was re-written to read - "The Church is the community of Christian believers who confess that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God, and claim Him as their Saviour and Lord." (GC Bulletin, #6, p. 25) In this the distinct wording of the WCC Constitution is lost. However, in the discussion of this particular article, Dr. Lawrence Geraty of Andrews University commented that the Statement of Beliefs that had appeared in the Adventist Review (Feb. 21, 1980) contained "cohesion and balance." (GC Bulletin #6, p. 23) Elder Neal C. Wilson asked that the committee take a look at re-editing the revised article, and when it did come for the final vote, it contained the wording of the WCC Constitution. We need to keep in mind that the original Statement of Beliefs as voted by the 1979 Annual Council was formulated by a Committee which was "assisted by a group of scholars at the SDA Theological Seminary," (Review, Feb. 21, 1980, p. 8) and one of those scholars is Dr. R. F. Dederen, who serves on the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches. . .

Another comparison which needs to be considered as to whether the historic position of the Church was changed or not is to compare what was said in both the White and Smith statements with the 1931 Statement and the voted 1980 Statement in regard to the incarnation of Christ. The White and Smith formulations read:

There is one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Eternal Father, the one by whom He created all things, and by whom they do consist; that He took on Him the nature of the seed of Abraham for the redemption of the fallen race; ... (See "Watchman, What of the Night?" June, 1980, 3, Article 2)

There is no question here as to meaning. The Church believed with "entire unanimity" that Christ when He became man took upon Himself the fallen nature of Adam - coming through the seed of Abraham. Now if the committee appointed by Wilson felt the text in Hebrew 2:16 was open to textual criticism, and desiring to use the phraseology of Scripture, they needed only to use Romans 1:3 - "Concerning His Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh." But what was voted?

Forever truly God, He became also truly man, Jesus the Christ. He was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the virgin Mary. He lived and experienced temptation as a human being, but perfectly exemplified the righteousness and love of God. (GC Bulletin #9, p. 23)

Though technically correct, the question is left open - Did Jesus take the nature of Adam before the Fall, or the nature of Adam after the Fal1? - Adam was truly man both prior to and following the Fall. Thus the historic position of Adventism is glossed over, and Wilson's explanatory statement that no attempt was considered to alter our historic faith creates a credibility gap as to his own theological posture. However, it must be remembered that Neal C. Wilson placed his "nihil obstat" on the book, Movement of Destiny, which clearly taught that Christ took the nature of Adam prior to the Fall. (See Movement of Destiny, pp. 15-16, 497.)(Underscored emphasis added.)

No quotation from the next article can do justice to Grotheer's clear exposition on the book Questions on Doctrine and its impact on the fundamental doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Please read the entire article. The following is confined to the closing paragraphs of the document: 

THE HERESY OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST EVANGELICAL CONFERENCES CONFIRMED BY THE ACTION OF THE 1980 GENERAL CONFERENCE SESSION

We were warned in regard to the Alpha apostasy at the turn of the century that -

The track of truth lies close beside the track of error, and both tracks may seem to be one to minds which are not worked by the Holy Spirit, and which, therefore, are not quick to discern the differ­ence between truth and error. (Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 2, p. 52)

What was true concerning the Alpha Apostasy is equally, if not more so, true con­cerning the Omega Apostasy. While the delegates to the 1980 Session sought to avoid the use of the words - "completed atonement" - in referring to the sacrifice on the Cross, and deleted from the Statement given to them at the beginning of the session, the phrase - "This act of atonement" [WWN (XIII-10), p. 8] - they still accepted phraseology in another section which means the same thing as that which was deleted in a previous section. The cross is noted as "this perfect atonement" with its benefits merely made "available to the believers" through Christ's heavenly ministry.  Yet there are those who believe that a great victory was obtained in Dallas, Texas, simply because some not so subtle heresies were deleted from the recommended Statement issued at the 1979. Thus is confirmed as declared in Questions on Doc­trine, that Christ returned to heaven "not with the hope of obtaining something for us," for "He had already obtained it for us on the cross." Annual Council. But instead of restoring the historic faith which had been committed to our trust, the guardians of the spiritual interests of the people, led by the president of the General Conference himself voted to confirm the sell-out perpetrated in the Seventh-day Adventist Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956. How deceived can we become!

To top this deception, many are now rejoicing in what was voted in regard to Dr. Desmond Ford, thinking that this has now purified our faith, when in reality we confirmed at Dallas some of the very doctrine which Dr. Ford had merely carried to its ultimate conclusion. For if the atonement of Christ was once for all on the Cross, then is not Dr. Ford correct in maintaining that there is no heavenly significance to 1844? Why condemn him for teaching what was voted as "the voice of God" in Dallas. So long as anyone subscribes to the apostasy of Dallas, they are as much a partaker in heresy as Dr. Ford is. They should join forces with him. This includes the Editor of the Adventist Review who believed in 1968 ­and to my knowledge I have not read a confession of repentance, nor a retraction - that Questions on Doctrine sets forth our fundamental beliefs "more clearly than any other publication that has been issued from our presses in many a year." So he believes with Ford that Christ obtains nothing for us in the Sanctuary, for He obtained it all on the Cross. It is true that one can find from his pen as Editor attacks on Ford's position - this only compounds the deception. It is simply the blind leading the blind. May God help us to awaken to actually what has taken place. The Omega of apostasy has come to full fruition. What was begun in 1955-1956 has now been officially adopted in 1980.(Underscored emphasis added.)

The following issue of "Watchman, What of the Night" is also best read as a whole. The quotations that follow are taken from three sections:

"WATCHMAN, WHAT OF THE NIGHT?" AUGUST, 1999
HISTORICAL DATA REVIEWED -3-

The initiative which resulted in the 1980 Statements of Belief was made in 1965. Bernard E. Seton, secretary of the Southern European Division wrote from Berne, Switzerland, to the General Conference administration expressing his conviction that the 1931 Statement "needed revision both from a theological and literary point of view." The response was negative, and temporarily dropped.

In 1965, as a result of contacts made, at Vatican II, an informal meeting consisting of Seventh-day Adventists, and representatives of the World Council of Churches (WCC) was held. Those chosen to attend were selected by the organizers of this informal meeting; for the Adventists by Dr. B. B. Beach, and for the WCC by Dr. Lukas Vischer, of the Faith and Order, Secretariat. In reporting this event in So Much in Common, Beach indicates that subsequent meetings held annually were authorized by the three European Divisions of the Church (p. 98). While the indications suggest that Bernard Seton was one of the Adventists chosen by Beach for the first informal meeting, attempts to verify this fact have been met with silence, neither affirmation nor denial. The question then arises, why would Bernard Seton make the initial request for a revision of the 1931 Statement the same year of the informal meeting?

Whether there was a record kept of what was discussed at the first informal meeting, is not known; but it would be obvious that the purpose and objectives of the WCC would be included in any initial discussion as well as what Adventists believe. The first problem arises from the requirement stated in the WCC Constitution. Eligibility for membership is based on the individual church's expression of "agreement of the basis upon which the Council is founded." This basis reads:

The World Council of Churches is a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfil together their common calling to the glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit. (ibid., p. 40)

The 1931 Statement of the Adventist Church does not state the doctrine of the Trinity in the terms of the Nicene Creed as is required by the WCC Constitution. Was this a factor in Seton's request? This we do not know, but events which followed do verify that the subject of Adventist membership in the WCC was at the top of the list of' items discussed and that the Adventist conferees did not negate this possibility. Neither did Seton forget his original suggestion made in 1965.

In 1970, he was elected as an associate secretary of the General Conference and as one of his duties served as secretary of the Church Manual Committee. In this capacity, he pressed for revisions in the Church Manual. Due to an action taken at the 1946 General Conference which stated that no change could be made in the Church Manual except as would be authorized by the General Conference in session, there was "Official reluctance to change a jot or tittle." Because of this attitude, Seton refrained from including the 1931 Statement in the initial suggested editorial changes.

After the 1975 General Conference session, Seton believed "the time seemed ripe for attention to the Fundamentals," however he found that the Fundamentals were "surrounded with an aura of untouchability," and that he was the only one on the committee "convinced of the need for revision." He prepared a one-man revision of the 1931 Statement, and presented it to the chairman who in turn appointed a subcommittee to prepare a revision. The outcome was that in 1978 an ad hoc committee was given the responsibility of preparing a statement for presentation to the 1980 GC Session with "minimal revisions in deference to the generally held idea of the sacrosanct nature of the Manual and the sensitivities of the church membership respecting any change that might appear to touch the. doctrinal beliefs of the Church."

When in mid-1979 a preliminary draft was completed Seton suggested that this document be sent to the theologians at Andrews University for their input, rather than wait for their challenges at the 1980 Session. This was done, and the result was that the University prepared its own set of Fundamentals which were presented to the 1979 Annual Council for adoption at the 1980 General Conference.

A word might be of interest in regard to the draft of the ad hoc committee. It was sent under a cover letter by the chairman to the General Conference officers, division presidents and union presidents of North America. The chairman noted "that formal and substantive changes in the 1931 statement had been made." The substantive changes, besides the added sections, was that "the sections on the Trinity had been expanded from two paragraphs to four." This enlargement continued in all subsequent revisions and modifications of the document as well as the final draft as voted at Dallas. And in all the prepared Statements available to us, the Statement as approved by the 1979 Annual Council, the revised Statement given to the delegates upon their arrival it the Dallas Session, and the affirmed Statement voted at the Session all contained the definition of the Trinity as stated in the WCC Constitution in contrast to the 1931 Statement, in other words, the Nicene Creed.

Our knowledge of how the ad hoc committee's Statement read on various concepts is limited to evaluations of this Statement in a secondary source (Spectrum, Vol. 1, # 1, pp. 3, 4), as we do not have a copy of the original in the Library. One point noted in Spectrum would lead us to believe that the Nicene Creed was being closely followed in the section on the Trinity. Speaking of Jesus, it stated that He was born of the Virgin Mary," capital "V" the same as in the Nicene Creed. (Creeds of Christendom, Vol. II, p. 59) . . .

Additions and Omissions

The 1872 Statement and the Statement which had been published in the Yearbook till 1914 both defined the papacy as "the man of sin." (#13). The 1980 Statement of Fundamental Belief as well as the 1931 Statement omitted any reference to the papacy. Yet all the Statements set forth the necessity of the proclamation of the messages "symbolized by the three angels of Revelation 14." It is impossible to proclaim the Third Angel's Message without reference to the papacy as "the man of sin."

Further, the 1980 Statement added a paragraph not found in any previous statement on "The Church." Not only does the Constitution of the World Council of Churches [state] a "belief" in God according to the Nicene Creed, but also an acknowledgment of the WCC as "a fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus as God and Saviour according to the Scriptures." (So Much in Common, p. 40) Dutifully, this concept was written into the 1980 Statement declaring " the church is a community of believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour." (#11). In #12 a distinction is made between this "universal church" and a remnant whose commission was to proclaim the Three Angel's Messages of Revelation 14. What does the Second Angel's Message mean? Is not Babylon composed of those who make profession of Christ, and yet have rejected the First Angel's Message? Is this position which made Adventism unique no longer valid?

First, we compromise in the 1955-1956 conferences with the Evangelicals our doctrinal positions on the Incarnation and the Atonement, and modify our concept of the "remnant" and redefine, "Babylon" so as to exclude the Evangelicals. (See Questions on Doctrine, pp. 188-189, 201) Then as a result of conversations with representatives of the World Council of Churches we adopt an ancient creed, and enlarge our concept of 'church" so as to permit a working fellowship with "the man of sin." This may be perceived as an unwarranted conclusion, but consider the following data:

In a section of the joint publication, So Much in Common, B. B. Beach has listed the results obtained from the contacts with the WCC. He wrote:

Since 1968 the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has been actively represented at the annual meeting of "Secretaries of the World Confessional Families." This participation is largely the result of the WCC/SDA Conversations and contacts made at the time of the Uppsala Assembly [of the WCC]. (p. 100)

Actually the Secretaries of these various church bodies have been meeting together annually since 1957. Though not directly connected with the WCC, they are recognized as a vital link of the ecumenical chain. In the World Council of Churches Yearbook 1995, the, various communions whose secretaries meet together annually are given. In this listing is not only the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists (p. 54), but also the, Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity of the Roman Catholic Church (p. 55). The Adventist Church sits in council with "the man of sin"! It was through this organizational means that B. B. Beach was able to place in the hands of Pope Paul VI, the gold medallion, as a symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

We could continue to contrast the Statements of Belief from 1872 to 1980, but sufficient evidence has been given above to establish the fact that the Second Angel's Message is no longer believed in practice even though lip service is given to it. By setting aside its significance, the church is not prepared to give the Third Angel's Message which in its simple essence of truth, pure and unadulterated, will declare that an image has been formed to "the man of sin." God knows this, and this is why He acted in permitting the prophecy of Jesus in Luke, 21:24 to be fulfilled. That is what Luke 21:24 is all about.

Again, there is a "parallel" between ancient literal Israel, and modern spiritual Israel. "The, Jewish people cherished the idea that they were the favorites of heaven, and that they were always to be exalted as the church of God. They were the children of Abraham, they declared, and so firm did the foundation of their prosperity seem to them that they defied earth and heaven to dispossess them of their rights. But by lives of unfaithfulness they were preparing for the condemnation of heaven and for separation from God." (Christ's Object Lessons, p. 294) . . .(Underscored emphasis added.)

The last chapter of Special Testimonies, Series 8, No. 2, entitled, "The Foundation of Our Faith," reveals what would have been, had the Alpha of apostasy been accepted. (pp. 54-55) It is also interesting to observe that the advocates of the apostasy referred to their objectives as a "reformation." The messenger of the Lord asked - "Were this reformation to take place, what would result?" Then follows a list of ten things that would occur:

1) "The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded."

2) "Our religion would be changed."

3) "The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error."

4) "A new organization would be established."

5) "Books of a new order would be written."

6) "A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced."

7) "The Sabbath, of course, would be lightly regarded, as also the God who created it."

8) "Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement."

9) "The leaders would teach that virtue is better than vice."

10) "They would place their dependence on human power."

These things did not take place in the time of the Alpha, however, it is written - "The omega will follow, and will be receivedby those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given." (Ibid., p.50) Thus the very things which the enemy sought to introduce in the time of the Alpha at the turn of the Century will be realized in the Omega. The evidence is clear that with the introduction of "books of a new order" following the Seventh-day Adventist - Evangelical Conferences in 1955-1956 (See Facsimile Documents on this Conference), the Omega of Apostasy settled down upon the Church. (For full presentation of this evidence obtain Cassette Tape - "The Alpha & Omega of Apostasy.") Now we are beginning to see the fulfillment of the "bottom line" resulting from the acceptance of this apostasy - "Their foundation would be built on the sand, and storm and tempest would sweep away the structure." (Spec. Test. Series a, No. 2, p. 55)

There is another descriptive prophecy in connection with the time when "Jesus is about to leave the mercy seat of the heavenly sanctuary, to put on garments of vengeance,. . ." (5T:207-208) Faithful ones were sighing and crying over the departure from the historic faith which took place as a result of the compromises made with the Evangelicals, and the fraternizing with leaders in the World Council of Churches. . .(Underscored emphasis added.)

The foregoing provides overwhelming evidence that the omega of apostasy came into full manifestation in 1980.

CLOSE OF PROBATION FOR ALL CORPORATE BODIES OF THE WORLD

The facts of the omega of apostasy are indisputable, and are directly linked to the fulfillment of a great prophecy of Jesus Christ Himself - a prophecy pinpointing the termination of the commission to preach the gospel to all the world and the close of probation for all corporate bodies, including the Seventh-day Adventist Church:

"Jerusalem in Prophecy"

In 1947, the Church took the position that it was absolutely impossible for a Jewish state to ever be re-established in Palestine. One year later, in 1948, the Jewish state became a reality.

In 1948, 1 became pastor of the First church in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The Sabbath following the establishment of the Jewish state, I prepared a sermon to shore up confidence in the church's position. I told the congregation - "Don't get too disturbed. Do not become overly alarmed. There are still more Jews in New York City than can possibly get settled in the small area of Palestine." I had no other answer. What was I to say? In other words, as a result of then current events, it became obvious that we as a Church were fallible in our prophetic interpretations, and that there needed to be some re-thinking. By 1952, the Church returned to a position as had been set forth by James Edson White, and faced up to the

Page 2

reality of the prophecy Jesus had given in Luke 21:24 - "... and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." First, in considering this prophecy of Jesus, one must recognize what Jesus did not say. He did not tie this prophecy to the time of the restoration of the Jewish State. Therefore, in 1948, when Israel again became a nation, this event in and of itself was not a fulfillment of prophecy. Jesus did not talk about a Jewish state, nor Palestine, but a city - "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." Further, Jesus did not associate this prophecy with the restoration of the temple or its services. A few hours prior to His giving this prophecy to the disciples, He told the Jewish leadership as He left the temple for the last time - "Behold, your house is left unto you desolate." (Matt. 23:38) This prophecy was tied solely to the control and government of just one city, and that city was Jerusalem! In 1952, the Church conducted a world-wide Bible Conference. It was held in the Sligo Seventh-day Adventist Church. Elder Arthur Maxwell, then editor of the Signs of the Times, presented a paper on "The Imminence of Christ's Second Coming," in which he directed the attention of the ministry of the Church to Jesus' prophecy in Luke 21:24. He said:

The recent dramatic restoration of the nation of Israel has focused the attention of mankind once more on Palestine. Many Christians have mistakenly permitted themselves to believe that the return of thousands of unconverted Jews to their native land is in fulfillment of the promises to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, not realizing that, since the death of the Son of God on Calvary, there is no salvation, nor any eternal homeland, except for those who believe in Him and accept His sacrifice. However, there is one prophecy concerning Palestine that we should all be watching with special care. Said Jesus, "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." (Luke 21:24). (Our Firm Foundation, II, p. 230)

The ministers of the Church from around the world were directed to this neglected prophecy of Jesus by Maxwell. Then he observed that a principle God applied to the Amorites might well apply in this instance, only on a wider scale. He stated:

Centuries ago Israel was not permitted to enter Palestine for a certain time because "the iniquity of the Amorites" was "not yet full" (Gen. 15:16); that is, not until the probationary time allotted to the Amorites had run out. It may well be that the same principle applies today, on a wider scale. If so, then Jerusalem is to remain trodden down by Gentiles till the probationary time of all Gentiles has run out. If this be correct, how much hinges upon the fate of this ancient city and the power that occupies it! (Ibid., pp. 230-231)

Page 3

As noted above, in taking this position, Maxwell reverted back to the position taken by James Edson White in his book - The Coming King. White wrote:

We also read that "Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." (Luke 21:24). Jerusalem has never again come into the possession of the Jews and will not until "the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." This will be when the work of the gospel is finished. (1898 ed., p. 98)

Up until 1947, in our evangelistic publications, we taught that there would never be again a Jewish State. Then in 1948, we were shocked into reality because a Jewish State - Israel - did come into existence short of Jerusalem. Maxwell at the 1952 Bible Conference said that "as by an unseen hand" the Jewish forces were "mysteriously ... held back from achieving this most cherished goal" of retaking Jerusalem. Then he asked, "What could be the reason?" and answered his own question - "Only that the times of the Gentiles are not yet fulfilled." That was In 1952.

Now we are faced with certain other realities with which we must be concerned. In 1967, in the Six-Day War, Israeli military forces took Jerusalem, thus restoring to Jewish control the city. However, the Capital of the State of Israel remained in Tel Aviv. Then in 1980, the entire Jewish government - The Supreme Court, the Knesset, the office of both the President and Prime Minister - was moved to Jerusalem. The prophecy of Jesus had met its complete fulfillment. And yet, here we are still in time. Again, it is obvious that this prophetic interpretation has failed us. How are we to relate to this fulfilled prophecy? Ignore it? We dare not - it was a prophecy Jesus gave!

You ask, why two dates? In 1967, Jerusalem was captured but not until 13 years later in 1980 was the government moved to Jerusalem, thus occupying the city and bringing it once more under full control of the State of Israel. Let us consider this question.

Luke, in both his Gospel and the book of Acts, uses twenty times the word translated, "until" (acri). But three different times, he combined with the preposition a relative, making it an idiomatic expression - achri hou (acri 'ou). One of these times was in Luke 21:24. The other two times are in the book of Acts. It is the last use in Acts which helps us to understand best the meaning of this idiomatic expression.

Take your Bible and turn to Acts 27. Paul, as a prisoner,

Page 4

was on his way to Rome. The ship in the midst of storm was in trouble. All aboard had fasted for fourteen days. Then the record reads - "and while the day was coming on, Paul besought them all to take food." (ver. 33 KJV) The word, "While" is a translation of the words, achri hou. What does it mean -"while the day was coming on"? This morning as I left the library to go home for breakfast, in the east were the first glimmers of light. In a brief period of time, the sun arose above the horizon and all the shades of night disappeared. The day was coming on. To describe that brief but definite span of time, Luke used the idiomatic Greek expression - achri hou. The "times of the Gentiles" ended in a brief period of time marked by an event in the history of Jerusalem both at its beginning in 1967, and its ending in 1980.

You may now ask another question: "Are we not introducing something new in prophetic interpretation which is without precedent?" No! Let me give you an illustration. In 533 A.D., Justinian issued a decree establishing the Bishop of Rome the supreme ruler in the West. However, it was not until 538 A.D., that Belisarius, Justinian's general, with force of arms put into effect the decree. We begin the prophecy of the 1260 years not with 533, but with 538. "The times of the Gentiles" closes not with 1967, but with 1980, although the event in 1967 alerted us to what was about to take place had we had eyes to see and ears to hear. . .

In the Review & Herald (Nov. 22,1892) Ellen G. White had written:

Page 5

The time of test is just upon us, for the loud cry of the third ahgel has already begun in the revelation of the righteousness of Christ, the sin-pardoning Redeemer. This is the beginning of the light of the angel whose glory shall fill the whole earth.

Why was "The time of test ... just upon us"? In August of 1892, a National Sunday Law had been attached as a rider to an appropriation bill and signed into law by President Harrison. It was a period of pronounced Sunday law agitation. In the closing years of the previous decade, Ellen White had noted a National Sunday Law as a sign for God's people. (Keep in mind "time and place.") Now I ask you a further question. Can you show me a single reference in the Writings - and I have asked many; I cannot find it - that after 1901, Ellen White ever referred to a National Sunday Law as a "sign" for God's people? Three weeks later, she did write about the "false Sabbath" being "enforced by an oppressive law" but does not note it as a "National Sunday Law," but as an event to occur "after the truth has been proclaimed as a witness to all nations." (R&H, Dec. 13, 1892) Something went wrong, which caused the warning that "we may have to remain here ... many more years."

However, in the very year that this warning was given - 1901 - Ellen White directed attention to another "sign" by which we would know the end was indeed "upon us." She wrote:

In the twenty-first chapter of Luke, Christ foretold what was to come upon Jerusalem, and with it He connected the scenes which were to take place in the historyof this world just prior to the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. (Letter 20, 1901; Counsels to Writers, pp. 23-24)

I ask you - In 1901, when Ellen White indicated that "we may have to remain here ... many more years" with what events had she that very year connected the end? A National Sunday Law? No! She connected it with events in Jerusalem and said study Luke 21. Now what is in Luke 21, that one does not find in Mark 13 or Matthew 24? Only one thing - "And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." This event would signal "the scenes which were to take place just prior to the coming of the Son of man" the second time. What then does the fulfillment of Luke 21:24 in 1980 tell us, if anything? It shouts loud and clear that we have reached the end of time. We are at the very end of human history as we know it today. We stand at the very border of the eternal kingdom and we need to recognize that fact. . .

The parallel between the fulfillment of the times of the

Page 12

nations (Gentiles) and our own ch urch history is remarkable and dare not be overlooked. We need to recognize that we cannot divorce ourselves from the fact that the Three Angels' Messages which was committed to the Church in sacred trust involves the nations. The very prelude to these messages reads:

And I saw. another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, ... (Rev. 14:6)

When the times allotted to the nations is fulfilled, the giving of "'the everlasting gospel" to the nations is also affected. The two cannot be divorced. Furthermore, we are told:

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 for the Church, Vol. 8, p. 247)

As Ellen G. White was writing this intent of God following the 1903 General Conference Session, she noted the only condition whereby the judgment of "found wanting" could be averted. It reads:

Unless the church, which is now [1903] being leavened with her own backsliding, shall repent and be converted, she will eat the fruit of her own doing, until she shall abhor herself. (Ibid., p. 250)

This is not a call to individual repentance but to corporate repentance. In the light radiating from the agenda of the sanctuary as revealed in the type with the fulfilling of the time of the Gentiles - nations as corporate bodies - we should now understand the weighing of the Church in the same balance, and the decision that was rendered. Follow closely now the parallel as diagramed. (p. 14-15)

In the lefthand column, we have the significant dates in the history of the State of Israel. Let us review them. In 1948, the State of Israel was re-established. The event itself did not fulfill any prophecy. However, coming events were casting their shadows before. Jerusalem still remained in Jordanian control, trodden down of the Gentiles.

In 1967, in the Six-Day War (June 5-10), Jerusalem was captured, and a government under the control of Israel was set up. It was the beginning of the end. It constituted a warning to the Church of the corporate judgment she faced. In 1980, the entire government of Israel, was

Page 13

transferred from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The prophecy of Jesus had reached complete fulfillment. This was done on July 30 of 1980.

In the righthand column is a review of our own Church historyin parallel with the events which fulfilled the prophecy of Jesus. ln 1949, Bible Readings for the Home Circle was revised. In the study on "The Sinless Life," the paragraphs defining the human nature Christ took upon Himself were altered. ln 1950, Elders Wieland and Short presented a restudy of 1888 to the leadership of the Church and called for a "denominational repentance" - corporate repentance. While these young men did not perceive the connection of the message of 1888 with the General Conference session in 1903 - and still do not understand it - they did answer the call of God in giving to the Church, the only remedy which could avert it being "spewed out" by Christ. (See Rev. 3:16)

In 1952, a Bible Conference in the Sligo Park Church called the ministry's attention to the prophecy of Jesus in Luke 21:24, noting "that we should all be watching [it] with special care." Then came the SDA-Evangelical Conferences of 1955-56, in which we compromised our basic teachings on the incarnation and the atonement. Instead of repentance, we were continuing to betray the sacred trust making it virtually impossible to give the "ever-lasting gospel" message in its purity.

Then came the fateful year - 1967. In the very month that Jerusalem was retaken, a committee appointed by the General Conference rejected Wieland and Short's call for denominational repentance for the third and final time. In July, Dr. Earle Hilgert then of Andrews University took his place as a voted member on the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches. In October, the Annual Council gave its approval to the Association of Adventist Forums from whose podium at PUC in 1979, Dr. Desmond Ford was to attack the sanctuary doctrine of the Church. Between 1967 and 1980, in 1977, Dr. B. B. Beach would place in the hands of the reigning pope, Paul VI, "a gold-covered symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." (Review & Herald, August 11, 1977, p. 23)

Then came 1980. At the General Conference session in Dallas, Texas, the Church voted a new Statement of Beliefs, and included in them language from the Constitution of the World Council of Churches, and confirmed the compromises on the atonement and incarnation made at the SDA-Evangelical Conferences of 1955-56. Within three months God permitted Jesus' prophecy to reach its complete fulfillment. Corporate judgment was then completed in the Heavenly Sanctuary.

Page 14

(Underscored emphasis added to text.)

All of the sacred Truths of the Bible, and specifically the sacred Truth of the Three Angels' Messages, were committed to the Seventh-day Adventist Church and no other. The Church could draw from historical Protestantism and maintain the advancing Truth with increasing light from the throne of God; but the Great Advent Movement had nothing to learn from Apostate Protestantism. There was bound to be a negative reaction from our offended God. That dreadful reaction came came as the close of probation for all corporate bodies , including the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

NEW IDENTITY OF "ONCE FAITHFUL CITY" WHICH HAS REPUDIATED THE GOSPEL OF ADVENTISM

The following "Watchman, What of the Night?" artictle exposes the new identity of the "Remnant Church" as envisioned by the corporate leadership. It is a portrait of complete intermingling with a crowded world of rebellion, churches and nations alike:

AN EVANGELICAL ADVENTIST

In the North American edition of the Adventist Review for April, 1997, the center spread was devoted to an article by the General Conference President, Robert S. Folkenberg. It was given the title, "Will the Real Evangelical Please Stand Up." Whether Folkenberg chose the title, or whether it was an editorial choice, the article closed with the summation, "That's the essence of true 'evangelical Adventism.' It is the only kind there ought to be." (p.19)

Apart from the "Trade Mark" controversy over the use of the name, Seventh-day Adventist, with its legal ramifications, the article raises the question as to the true designation of an inheritor of the faith growing out of the 1844 Movement. The fact is that there was no such thing as an "Evangelical Adventist" prior to the 1955-56 conferences between Seventh-day Adventist Church leaders and the evangelicals, Barnhouse and Martin, which compromised basic doctrines of the Church. The fact also remains that since those infamous dialogues, there has been continuous doctrinal turmoil in the Church resulting in multiple schisms. Beyond this, is also the fact that many of the schismatics, dissidents, or whatever name describes their action in relationship to the "mother" church, have chosen to refer to themselves as "historic" Adventists.

If the facts noted in the above paragraph are not confusing enough, the title given to Folkenberg's article notes the designation as "Evangelical Adventist," while Folkenberg writes - "evangelical Adventists" - as the designation used by those who see a tension between the gospel and Adventism. (p.17) There is a difference, but the difference is hard to define. There is no Evangelical Church organization as there is a Seventh-day Adventist Church. For example, Barnhouse was a Presbyterian pastor, while Martin was an ordained Baptist minister, yet both were "evangelicals," and in association with "evangelicals" of other church affiliations. Evangelicals profess to be teaching the "true gospel" and set certain concepts as basic, apart from which one is considered a cultist. The bottom line is that the term, "evangelical," involves doctrinal concepts. This brings us back to "square one," to the point where the major doctrinal changes resulting from the SDA-Evangelical Conferences fractured the community of Adventism.

The doctrinal compromises with the "Evangelicals" were published in the book, Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine [QonD]. Two primary teachings were involved: the Incarnation and the Atonement. On these two points, the new position, as stated in the book, read:

Although born in the flesh, He {Jesus} was nevertheless God, and was exempt from the inherited passions and pollutions that corrupt the natural descendants of Adam. (p.383)

Adventists do not hold any theory of a dual atonement. "Christ has redeemed us" ..."once for all." (p.390)

How glorious is the thought that the King, who occupies the throne, is also our representative at the court of heaven! This becomes all the more meaningful when we realize that Jesus our surety entered the "holy places," and appeared in the presence of God for us. But it was not with the hope of obtaining something for us at that time, or at some future time. No! He had already obtained it for us on the cross. And now as our High Priest, He ministers the virtues of His atoning sacrifice to us. (p. 381; [emphasis italicized here was underscored in the original])

A comment is in order before continuing the historical record. In regard to the new position on the Incarnation as stated in QonD, p.383, the word, "exempt," has theological connotations. This term is used in defining the Roman Catholic Dogma of the Immaculate Conception. Referring to Mary, this dogma is explained - "She alone was exempt from the original taint [of sin]." (See James Cardinal Gibbons, The Faith of Our Fathers, p. 171, 88th ed.) In other words, Mary was free from "the inherited passions and pollutions that corrupt the natural descendants of Adam." The "new theology" in Adventism presupposes a similar divine intervention in the birth of Jesus as the Roman Catholic Church presupposes for Mary. There is only a "generation gap" in the new Adventist theology.

As for "the theory of a dual atonement," the typical service of the sanctuary taught two atonements; one at the Altar of the Court (Lev. 4:35), and the second on the Day of Atonement (16:30). The "new" evangelical theology simply denies the second or final atonement, and teaches that all was finished on the cross. While Folkenberg gives lip-service to the sanctuary in his call for the true evangelical Adventist to stand up, he limits the final atonement to a mere repeat of the atonement of forgiveness. He calls this "a pure gospel message" and not "new theology teaching."

The alterations in Adventist theological teaching resultant from the compromises with the Evangelicals have never been repudiated. The 1980 Statement of Beliefs voted at Dallas, Texas, incorporated the major compromises as noted above with an added alteration as a "sop" to the Adventist "religious right." This added position had never appeared in any previous Statement of Beliefs.(Underscored emphasis added.)

In all of the historical facts exposed by Elder Grotheer can be seen the consequences of an astonishing policy: seeking the favor of men in place of loyal adherence to the sacred truths committed to the Church by the God of Heaven. It should come as no surprise to anyone that compromise of the Truth inevitably brings tragic consequences.

The Lord God gave us this assurance by His prophet Amos: "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets" (Amos 3:7.) Were this not so, His people would more easily be deceived by the wiles of Satan. Thus there were warnings by His Messenger Ellen G. White specific to the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The Testimony published in Selected Messages Book 1, Chapter 25, under the title "The Foundation of Our Faith" is particularly relevant to the ambitions of the Church in allying herself with the world missionary movement:

The Foundation of Our Faith

The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganization. Were this reformation to take place, what would result?The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath of course, would be lightly regarded, as also the God who created it. Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement. The leaders would teach that virtue is better than vice, but God being removed, they would place their dependence on human power, which, without God, is worthless. Their foundation would be built on the sand, and storm and tempest would sweep away the structure. (1SM, 204.2)

Who has authority to begin such a movement? We have our Bibles. We have our experience, attested to by the miraculous working of the Holy Spirit. We have a truth that admits of no compromise. Shall we not repudiate everything that is not in harmony with this truth? (1SM, 205.1)(Underscored emphasis added.)

All of the details of this prophecy have been fulfilled! Men deceive themselves when they think that God will not be offended by the rejection of His Word. The leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church of necessity ignored warnings in the Bible generally, and particularly in the prophetic Writings of Ellen G. White which refer specifically to the Denomination. The rejection of such warnings is the epitome of rebellion. The inevitable result of such rejection was that the divine presence and glory departed from the corporate body of the Church.

A CHURCH DEVOID OF SPIRITUAL POWER SEEKS IN VAIN FOR GROWTH IN THE SPIRIT NOW DEPARTED

Bereft of the power of the of the Holy Spirit Who converted thousands on the one Day of Pentecost, the leaders sought in vain for spiritual power to increase the membership of the Church. Opening the doors of the Church to a mixed multitude was the ultimate choice. No longer was it seen as essential to provide baptismal candidates with a sound doctrinal foundation to stand the tests of faith that always follow. Thus a "numbers game" was devised. One recalls the worst example experienced: in a sermon by a Local Conference officer, he presented a mathematical formula by which church membership could be increased.

A specific date can be assigned to a "numbers game" plan which was conceived to increase the membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church:

"Watchman, What of the Night?" March, 1991 (From paragraph titled "Geopolitics Within Seventh-day Adventism")

In the final issue of "The Christian CENTURY" for 1990 (December 19-26, pp. 1197-1203), the editors published an article on "Geopolitics Within Seventh-day Adventism." Written by Ronald Larson, a teacher in sociology at Queens College connected with the City University of New York, the main thrust of the analysis was to show the growing tension within Adventism between the home base in North America, and the growing membership in Latin America, sub-Saharan Africa, and the Pacific islands.

Lawson highlighted his analysis by noting that in 1890, 91% of the membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church came from North America, but by 1989, only 12%. In a one man, one vote mentality, the home base is out voted. However, the North American Division supplies 97% of all the tithe received by the General Conference. Based on actual support of the Church, the voice of the constituency outside of North America would be but a whisper. But this is not the reality of the situation. The representatives of the two largest divisions, both Latin American, were the largest block on the 1990 General Conference nominating committee. While they could not of themselves topple Wilson, their power did influence the selection of a successor. Instead of the Spirit of God at work, it was power politics in the election process. . .

The present "numbers" game began in earnest at the 1950 General Conference in the election of W. H. Branson to the presidency. He called for the doubling of the Church membership in four years. At the 1952 Bible Conference, Branson declared:

We are engaged in an effort to double our church membership in a four-year period from January 1, 1950, to December 31, 1953. Some have reckoned such a goal to be preposterous. But is it? When the first Pentecost came the church doubled its members in one day. The reception of the righteousness of Christ by the church today will bring a second Pentecost. Revelation 18:1-3 will be fulfilled. Thousands will be converted in a day as the message of salvation through Christ swells to a loud and mighty cry. (Our Firm Foundation, Vol. II. p. 617)

Prior to this, Branson had rationalized that "the message of righteousness by faith given in the 1888 Conference has been repeated here" (meaning the 1952 Bible Conference) with much greater power than at the 1888 session because of the added light cast upon the subject in the Writings. (p. 616)

It is true that a review of the messages given at the 1952 Bible Conference contained the theory of the truth. One discordant note was Heppenstall's presentation. How much and what was edited from his presentation when it appeared in the two volume report of the Bible Conference would be a research paper in itself. It is a verified fact that a questionnaire sent to pastors and church leaders prior to the conference probing their belief in the nearness of Christ's return was deleted from another presentation. It revealed that "the blessed hope" was growing dim in the hearts of the church's ministers.

Two years prior to the Bible Conference Wieland and Short called for a "denominational repentance" as the answer to the Church's need for revival. It went unheeded; the Bible Conference was used as a facade to cover the rejection of the call to such a repentance. The substituted "numbers game" began in earnest. It has not ceased. But into this picture must be programmed several important factors.

Large scale evangelism was carried forward during the 1950s in the cities of America and overseas. Big name evangelists in Adventism mark the period. These men in the long series of meetings they held proclaimed the basic truths. The weak link was the preparation given those who accepted the message prior to their baptism. One of these evangelists with whom I worked actually accepted as a fact that 20% of those baptized would apostatize, but it was the total number baptized which counted. Gradually into this picture came the doctrinal apostasy resulting from the SDA-Evangelical Conferences of 1955-1956. The teaching of the sanctuary truth was muted and now practically abandoned. This same deemphasis marked the training of the ministerial students in the colleges and seminary. Enough decades have now passed so that very few people in the pew know what the truth committed to the Advent Movement really was. They know little or nothing of our church history, or what has taken place since 1950. The younger ministers due to their training cannot now preach "the faith once delivered unto the saints" - they don't know it!

Now we have apostasy accepted as orthodoxy; we have disunity unified under a central command system; and we have dissident voices mouthing every wind of doctrine. Yet the "numbers" game goes on. We try to shake the tree instead of hand-picking the fruit. As a result bruised fruit which soon turns rotten becomes a part of the boxes (churches) of fruit. Issues arise within the Church exactly like the issues the other churches of the world face because we have made converts after the manner of the world leaving in these new adherents to the Church, the same philosophies which they had in the churches from which they came. They are not converted. Instilled in those who aspire to be future ministers of the Church, are the same social agendas which the seminaries of the churches of the world teach their ministerial graduates. Instead of being in the world, but not of the world, we are both in the world and of the world.

If we would have taken the Bible and its message for this time, and would have modelled our social agenda around the counsels of the Writings, the picture today would have been different and the "geopolitics" within Adventism would not be as described in the article in "The Christian CENTURY". (Underscored emphasis added.)

The "numbers game" has induced a delusionary conviction that growth in Church membership after the doctrinal and organizational changes is a mark of approval by God. This study, Adventist Church Growth and Mission Since 1863: An Historical–Statistical Analysis, blithely ignores the apostasy. It defies logic to think that a Church in deep apostasy, doctrinally and organizationally, could by any stretch of the imagination still be the vessel chosen by God to preach the true Gospel to the world.

SIGNIFICANCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL APOSTASY IN THE HISTORY OF THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH 

For the Seventh-day Adventist unfamiliar with the Church's history, the organizational apostasy began during the lifetime of Ellen G. White:

WHERE IS THE AUTHORITY OF GOD INVESTED? IN THE GC?

The 1903 Session

The 1903 General Conference session convened in Oakland, California, March 27, with the least number of delegates present from the world field since 1893, and only slightly more than half the number present at the 1901 session in Battle Creek when the call for reorganization resulted in a new Constitution with the office of General Conference president eliminated. Near the close of the session the Committee on Plans and Constitution brought in two reports - a Majority and a Minority Report. The Majority Report called for a new Constitution which would restore the office of President. Elder P. T. Magan, one of three who signed the Minority Report which called for the preservation of the reformatory Constitution of 1901, stated during the floor discussion:

It may be stated there is nothing in this new constitution which is not abundantly safeguarded by the provisions of it; 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 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: 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. (1903 GC Bulletin, p. 150)

Within eight days from the time of the adjournment of the 1903 Session in Oakland, Ellen G. White penned a prophetic warning to the Church, asking "Shall We Be Found Wanting?' She wrote:

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, p. 247)

This statement is in the future tense. Those who would hold that the church was weighed in the balances in 1903 show their ignorance of the English language and totally disqualify themselves to speak on the subject of organization. There is no doubt expressed as to the fact that the Seventh-day Adventist church "is to be weighed" in the balances of the sanctuary. The "if" part of the prophecy concerns the actions of the church upon which the judgment will be rendered.

A Key Prophecy

This prophecy is the key to the present crisis and dilemma. If the church has not been weighed as yet in the balances of the sanctuary, or having been weighed found not to be wanting, then verily, the Church is the highest visible authority under God on earth for the Holy Spirit speaks through her in the actions which the church in General Sessions vote. However, if the church has been weighed in the balances of the sanctuary, and has been found to be "wanting," the whole picture changes. No longer is the Spirit of God speaking through the church; no longer are her actions clothed in the authority of Heaven.

In this prophecy, "the heavenly Teacher" is quoted as declaring:

"What stronger delusion can beguile the mind than the pretense that you are building on the right foundation, and that God accepts your works, when in reality you are working out many things according to worldly policy, and are sinning against Jehovah? 0, it is a great deception, a fascinating delusion, that takes possession of minds when men who have once known the truth, mistake the form of godliness for the spirit and power thereof; when they suppose that they are rich, and increased with goods, and in need of nothing, while in reality they are in need of everything." (Ibid., Pp. 249-250)

This divine "Instructor" asks a question - "How is the faithful city become an harlot? - and declares that should this condition prevail, the church becomes "a place whence the divine presence and glory have departed!" (Ibid., p. 250)

In the call to corporate repentance at the close of this prophetic testimony, the Messenger of the Lord indicated that "now" - in 1903 - the church was being "leavened with her own backsliding." (Ibid.) Magan had sounded the warning that should the new Constitution be adopted - and-it was - papalism would finally be set up within the Seventh-day Adventist church. This has happened, even though there has been an attempt to cover the fact with a troika executive concept carrying out the actions of an all supreme committee.

In another testimony given years before the 1903 Session, but timed to the period when "Jesus is about to leave the heavenly sanctuary" (V: 207), the same picture emerges. Using the symbol of Israel for the church, Ellen White wrote - "The glory of the Lord had departed from Israel; although many still continued the forms of religion, His power and presence were lacking." (V: 210)

Now we may give lip service to the messages which were sent to the church in 1888 which would have preserved the church from the present crisis; but to fail to recognize these testimonies which give God's intent and reaction under certain conditions is to put one's head in the sand and invite eternal condemnation. The message of warning calling the church to repentance was sounded in 1950. The reaction of the church to this warning is a known fact and cannot be disputed. Now at this late hour, we must determine God's response to the rejection of His call to repentance. Let it be clearly understood that any repentance after God has weighed the church in the balances of the sanctuary and found it to be wanting will only be a repentance comparable to the repentance of Esau and Judas.

The bottom line returns to the all important key question - "Has the church been weighed in the balances of the sanctuary, and was the decision of Heaven - 'Found wanting?'" All other questions pale into insignificance in the face of the gravity of this question. At stake is the destiny of "men, maidens, and little children." (V: 211) How can we blissfully go on saying that there is nothing negative about Laodicea, and that she will triumph, even if "the divine presence and glory have departed?" Should there be an apparent triumph, whose power would be thus manifest in a false "latter rain" experience? Whose messenger would such a messenger be? Is it not time to stop and reconsider where we are in the stream of time, and order our messages in harmony with the decisions of the Heavenly Sanctuary?

The True Voice of God on Earth

When Jesus walked among men on the earth, He was the voice of God on earth. Of Him, God declared - "This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him." (Matt. 17: 5) When Jesus was about to leave the disciples - those who would constitute His church on earth - He told them He would send "another Comforter," even the Spirit of truth who would abide with them to the end. (John 14:16; 16:13) This Holy Spirit is the voice of God on earth until withdrawn. He has and does speak through men and human organizations. The decision of the first General Conference session in Jerusalem was confirmed in the name of the Holy Spirit. The written decision read - "For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us..." (Acts 15:28)

So long as a person and/or an organization remains true to the trust committed to them, the Holy Spirit abides with them, but should a person and/or an organization be found by the balances of the sanctuary to have betrayed that trust, the Spirit of God no longer uses that person and/or organization. It is declared to have been - "Found wanting." This is the issue today, and the only question to be answered at the present time - for all else hinges on the answer! If the answer is not determined beyond shadow of doubt, those on the wrong side of the answer will find themselves ultimately to have been false prophets, and the people who listen to them will be deceived with eternal consequences at stake. The true voice of God must be discerned and followed. This is not an issue over which we can play "tiddly-winks." To say that we believe what Ellen G. White had to say about the message and messengers God sent in 1888, yet refuse to take heed to what she wrote in prophecy following the 1903 General Conference session is to nullify our profession of belief in the gift of prophecy. (Underscored emphasis added.)

SPIRITUAL BLINDNESS FOLLOWS APOSTASY IN PROPHETIC INTERPRETATION

The apostasy has advanced on a broad front. The departure from the fundamental doctrines of the Church has been documented in this paper. Some specifics of the apostasy in prophetic interpretation are worthy of note:

APOSTASY IN PROPHETIC INTERPRETATION