The Next Steps, Moving Forward

Dear friend of Christ or Culture,

Thank you to you and the nearly 8,000 others who signed the www.christorculture.com petition. Your bold participation has made a decisive difference. We absolutely believe this website, along with insightful comments from Elder Wilson and the General Conference (GC) representatives, helped tip the scale in the right direction at the recent Pacific Union Conference (PUC) constituency meeting. The most important vote was won by the narrowest possible margin!  Praise be to God!

Remember, the principle purpose of this special constituency meeting was to change the union’s bylaws to allow the PUC executive committee freedom to digress from North American Division and GC policies. This motion was defeated.

While the PUC meeting has been trumpeted as a victory by advocates of the women’s ordination movement, in reality, the second motion to ordain without regard to gender had no teeth. All the delegates had papers in their hands explaining that this was simply to communicate the voice of the delegates. The union has been out of harmony with the world church on this issue for years. The second motion did nothing new.

Thank you for helping the www.christorculture.com website educate many sincere people regarding these important issues.

What Can We Do Now?

  1. Pray – Continue to pray for revival in the Remnant Church and our faithful leaders.
  2. Correspond – Call or email your conference leaders and express your concerns.
  3. Give – Every member has some freedom with their discretionary giving. You can still vote with your wallet to support those conferences and ministries that uphold the biblical Seventh-day Adventist truths.

Even though the PUC vote is behind us, we will be leaving the Christ or Culture website up because this battle is far from over. Yes, it is still helpful to sign the petition!

The www.christorculture.com site has become a very important gathering place for news regarding the ordination issue, where loyal Adventists can come to be informed and share information and opinions. In addition, this site will provide a tremendous and growing body of valuable material as a resource on these significant issues.

Blessings as we move forward,
Christ or Culture developers

  ‹  Back to Previous Page

  • BPSO

    Satan has a strong hold on the church, and he will not simply walk out the door in the face of conflict. Unless we “press the battle to the gate” we will not accomplish all that God desires of His people in defense of His word and the truth as it is in Jesus.
    The work has just begun and there is no easy road ahead of us. The Sabbath/Sunday issue is just around the corner in the church. We can not win the final victory unless we win the daily victories day by day in opposition to the works of darkness.
    Keep the faith and defend it.
    Bill Sorensen

    • icls

      Hi Brother Bill,

      “The Sabbath/Sunday issue is just around the corner in the church”

      Sadly your statement has turned the corner and VERY MUCH is in this Church. I am not sure whether you know what happening in the South Pacific?

      Our brethren in Samoa, because of the change with the International Date Line on Decemeber 29th 2011 are now facing a Sabbath/Sunday issue.

      From what I understand the local Mission and the SPD have advised that people keep the Sabbath on a Sunday because of the date line change so, in essence SDA believers are keeping Sabbath on a Sunday along with Sunday keepers…as bizarre as this sounds it is true!

      You can read about the challenges some, who wish to observe the Saturday Sabbath are facing from the “Sabbath-Sunday keepers”

      I do not think this situation is receiving as much attention as it should from Brothers and Sisters around the world.

      The issue of worship is alive and klcking in Samoa and Tonga, the corner has been turned…this situation needs URGENT attention.

      May God Help.

      Read here for more information

      http://sabbathissues.org/2012/07/endorsement-samoa-church-sunday-worship/#comment-650

      • Ron Stone M.D.

        Has there been a good objective article explaining this problem anywhere? I have heard a few comments, etc. but really don’t understand what is going on. Can anyone help me? Or send me a source to really understand this dilemma?

        • icls

          Hi Brother,

          I am posting information from the South Pacific Division Website.

          http://adventist.org.au/samoa-dateline-change-2011

          The following are my reasons for keeping the Saturday Sabbath.

          SDA Fundamental Beliefs: Sabbath -”The Observance of the Sabbath” states “The Sabbath begins at sunset on Friday evening and endss at sunset Saturday evening (see Gen 1:5, cf Mark 1:32″ page 263 Seventh day Adventist Believe ..27 A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Doctrines

          It would be very strange if the Lord God of heaven should set apart a day for people to observe,
          and bless and sanctify that day, and give it to man and enjoin upon man
          that it be kept holy unto the Lord as a memorial that He made the world
          in six days and rested upon the seventh day and blessed the Sabbath
          day, and yet that day become so uncertain the world cannot tell definitely when the seventh day comes to us. {10MR 342.2}

          Roman Catholics acknowledge that the change of the Sabbath was made by their church, and declare that Protestants by observing the Sunday are recognizing her power. In the Catholic Catechism of Christian Religion,
          in answer to a question as to the day to be observed in obedience to
          the fourth commandment, this statement is made: “During the old law, Saturday was the day sanctified; but the church, instructed by Jesus Christ, and directed by the Spirit of God, has substituted Sunday for Saturday;
          so now we sanctify the first, not the seventh day. Sunday means, and
          now is, the day of the Lord.” {GC 447.4}

          To
          Stand Fast by Our Colors.–My sister, let not your faith fail. We are
          to stand fast by our colors, the commandments of God and the faith of
          Jesus. All those who hold the beginning of their confidence firm unto
          the end will keep the seventh-day Sabbath, which comes to us as marked by the sun. The fallacy of the day line is a trap of Satan to discourage. I know what I am speaking about. Have faith in God. Shine where you are, as a living stone in God’s building. {3SM 318.5}

          Q. Which is the Sabbath day?
          A. Saturday is the Sabbath day.

          Q. Why do we observe Sunday
          instead of
          Saturday?
          A.
          We
          observe Sunday instead of Saturday because the Catholic Church transferred the
          solemnity from Saturday to Sunday.

          Q. Why did the Catholic
          Church substitute Sunday for Saturday?

          A. The
          Church substituted Sunday for Saturday, because Christ rose from the dead on a
          Sunday and the Holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles on a Sunday.
          The Convert’s Catechism of Catholic Doctrine By Rev. Peter Geiermann, C.
          SS. R.B. Herder Book Co.Saint Louis, Mo. 1946

          Do we now need to amend the SDA fundamental beliefs on Sabbath Observance depending on which part of the world one is residing in?

          What do we do with portions of the Spirit of Prophecy that make reference to Preparation day being Friday and Sabbath as Saturday?

          May the Lord Help us

          • Ron Stone M.D.

            Thanks for your help! I’ll check it out.

      • Keith Parris

        As I understand it, the government of Samoa changed the nation’s official relationship with respect to the International Date Line. The SDA Churches on Samoa decided to continue worshiping on the same 7-day weekly cycle as they had since the early days. The Sunday-keeping churches changed their weekly cycle and now worship on the same day as the SDA churches, which the government now calls Sunday. It’s not an easy situation and my sympathies, thoughts, and prayers are with those there who have had to make a difficult decision.

        • icls

          With all due respect Brother Keith,

          I am not entirely sure that you have the correct understanding of the situation.

          I am posting 2 letters for your consideration. I will have to post in segments due to the length of both.

          =====

          The first is from the President of the SPD:

          October 16, 2012
          A Pastoral Letter to Samoan Congregations in the South Pacific Division
          Mo le aufaigaluega pele a le Atua, Talofa lava,

          I greet you in the name of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. I am writing out of my deep respect for you as
          the people of God and as members of the Church of God with its special identity and purpose in the last days
          of earth’s history. I am thankful to God for the commitment and missionary zeal of the members of the Church
          family who are of Samoan heritage in the South Pacific Division. You are in my prayers constantly.
          For some time I have been considering writing a pastoral letter to you with respect to issues for the Seventhday
          Adventist Church that have arisen subsequent to the decision of the Samoan Government to alter the
          position of the date line. I know many of you have been deeply affected in some way by what has happened. I
          know that in many cases healing is needed so that the Church can move forward in harmony and unity.
          I am now writing the letter as a pastor of this Church and as one who has special responsibilities as the
          President of the South Pacific Division. Thus, while the letter is written from my heart as a pastor, it also
          carries with it the authority of our wider Church. The South Pacific Division, through its duly appointed
          Executive Committee and those who have been elected to positions of administration, are designated by the
          General Conference with the responsibility for the work of the Church in this part of the world. This letter
          which you now have is intended to be read by all Seventh-day Adventist churches and members of Samoan
          heritage. It is written in English, but I hope that it will be translated into Samoan. I am praying that the same
          spirit of respect and trust will be conveyed in translation as is intended in the English version.

          For at least seven years this issue has been studied. The study was accompanied by a great deal of prayer. In
          fact, the Church was praying and studying the issue as it affected other nations before it emerged in Samoa
          last year. The principles were very thoroughly canvassed. I would hope that all who seem to be so forthright
          in their opinions have taken the same prayerful care and time to become as familiar with all aspects of the
          case as have the members of the Executive Committee of the Samoa Tokelau Mission and the members of the
          Biblical Research Committee of the South Pacific Division. Unfortunately, I have observed that many have
          spoken who have an exceedingly superficial understanding of the breadth of the issue. That has not been
          helpful. On the other hand, there have been those who have spoken considering the issue from many
          perspectives, and who have shown a great deal of wisdom and a love for the Church.

          It is important to affirm that the Church does not have many “Sabbaths”. It observes just one Sabbath. That
          Sabbath is the one that was given as a special gift to the human family in Eden and which all are called to
          “remember” in the fourth of the Ten Commandments. The fact that God’s people are specially called to
          “remember the Sabbath day” indicates that God anticipated there would be challenges to the integrity of the
          Sabbath as the “seventh day”: the special period of 24-hour time which God “sanctified” and “blessed”. The
          history of the world has demonstrated that such is exactly what has occurred over and over again. And now
          we are faced with what may well be, at the present time, the most difficult and unique test in the global
          Church family. In the face of this challenge it is our privilege and responsibility to “remember” the seventh day
          as the “Sabbath of the Lord”.

          The Church respects the right of governments to determine the positioning of the date line relative to their
          particular country. It understands that governments can and do make changes which impact on the
          sequencing, numbering and naming of the days of the week. However, the Seventh-day Adventist Church
          believes that when it comes to Sabbath observance, it is not the role of any government or secular agency to
          determine when and how the members of the Seventh-day Adventist church will observe the Sabbath. That is
          an ecclesiastical matter based on the Church’s understanding of Scripture. The Sabbath as the seventh day of
          the week is vitally important to all Seventh-day Adventists, and insofar as God set aside the Sabbath as holy
          and sanctified time, Seventh-day Adventists are particular about the sacredness and timing of the Sabbath.

          • icls

            Part 2 continued:

            With respect to Sabbath observance around a changing date line, very earnest study has taken place and there
            have been good collegial interchanges on many occasions. As a result of those interchanges, greater clarity
            has been achieved. However, some still have questions about some aspects of our practice. To assist those
            who wish to study more deeply into the subject, the South Pacific Division has placed on its website a number
            of responses to questions and observations that have been made about the change that has occurred in
            Samoa. There are also references to the situation in other nations that are close by Samoa. Those responses
            can be found at http://www.adventist.org.au On the web page you will find a heading: “Supporting the Church in
            Samoa”. Under that heading you will be able to click on a number of papers. As I write this letter (October 16,
            2012) there are twelve short papers which address specific issues.

            They are as follows:
            1. Why the Church Decided As It Did
            2. The Background to the Change
            3. The Seventh Day
            4. Theological Aspects of Sabbath Observance
            5. The Time of the Sabbath Determined by the Sun on the Land, Not by the Movements of Any
            Individual Person
            6. An Overview of the Reasons for the Practice of Sabbath Observance as Adopted in Samoa,
            Tonga, Wallis and Futuna and the Eastern Islands of Kiribati
            7. The Sabbath: Variable or Absolute
            8. The Role of the Church in Determination of Matters of Theology and Practice
            9. Sabbath Observance and the Church Manual
            10. Some Biblical Perspectives on the Mark of the Beast and the Seal of God and a Changing Date
            Line
            11. A Letter from a Lay Person Living in Samoa
            12. A Map of the Pacific showing the Position of the Countries around the 180th Meridian.
            The longer papers which are on the web page at the present time are as follows:
            1. The Change of Day in Samoa – Pastor David Hay
            2. Merritt Kellogg – Pastor David Hay
            3. The Seventh Day in Samoa – Pastor Ray Coombe

            In addition, the report of the Biblical Research Committee, accepted by the South Pacific Division Executive
            Committee approximately five years ago and presented to the Biblical Research Institute of the General
            Conference shortly thereafter, can also be found.
            We will continue to add papers to this list. These papers will support the decision of the Church and our
            people in Samoa who are coping with this issue.

            We are calling all our Samoan congregations and churches to be united in accepting the decision that has been
            made and move forward. Yes, it does indeed feel very strange to be worshipping on the day now called
            Sunday in Samoa. We wish circumstances were different. But it is absolutely vital that we:
            Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Six days shalt thou labour and do all thy work but
            the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God.

            Broadly speaking, there are two factors which compel us to call on all to unite together. First, because in
            making the decision, the members of the Executive Committee of the Samoa Tokelau Mission studied and
            believed that the decision they made is the correct decision. Second, the decision was made through the due
            processes of the Seventh-day Adventist Church by the executive body which is assigned by the Church the
            responsibility to make such decisions. Let me explain a little more.

          • icls

            Part 3 continued:

            1. The Correct Decision
            The Executive Committee of the Samoa Tokelau Mission spent a considerable amount of time working
            through the issue, and after much prayer and considerable study made a decision. The committee
            made the decision that the Church in Samoa would continue to observe the Sabbath on exactly the
            same physical period of 24 hours on which the Church had been worshipping since the arrival of the
            Seventh-day Adventist Church in Samoa—the seventh day Sabbath. That 24-hour period as
            determined by the sequence of sunsets had been and continued to be sacred for the people of God.
            They believed that God had historically directed the Church to worship on the day that was in fact the
            seventh day, and that in the continuing providence of God they would continue to observe that same
            day as the Sabbath. They believed that the 24-hour period of time which had always been sacred to
            their forebears and the pioneers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Samoa should continue to be
            held sacred, even though the earthly name of that 24-hour period of time had changed and was now
            called Sunday. They did not accept that having worshipped on one Sabbath, it was appropriate to
            count only six days and then call that day Sabbath. They believed that the essential character as
            determined by the rotation of the earth could not change. Summarised, (as recently expressed by
            one of the leading lay persons in Samoa in a letter to myself): “The Church should keep the seventh
            day Sabbath at all times according to the 4th Commandment. It is NOT the Saturday Sabbath as many
            have argued NOR is it Sunday Sabbath, but the Seventh Day Sabbath.

            The decision of the Executive Committee of the Samoa Tokelau Mission is supported by the study of
            the Biblical Research Committee of the South Pacific Division. That study was done with reference
            particularly to the practice of Sabbath observance in Tonga where our people have had to grapple for
            over 100 years with issues very much the same as those now in Samoa.

            2. The Correct Process
            The Executive Committee of the Samoa Tokelau Mission is the body elected by the Church in Samoa
            to make decisions with respect to the governance of the Church and its affairs in Samoa. It does so in
            consultation with the Trans-Pacific Union Mission. The working policy of the South Pacific Division of
            the Seventh-day Adventist Church states:

            Between sessions of the mission, the executive committee shall have administrative
            power to manage the affairs of the mission, with authority to employ personnel as
            may be necessary to execute its work effectively, to grant and withdraw licences or
            credentials as are within its power, and may remove, for cause any person elected or
            appointed at a mission session or by the executive committee.

            It is the Executive Committee which is empowered to make decisions with respect to the practices of
            the Church in Samoa. This is exactly what happened in this case. In doing so it consulted with the
            Trans-Pacific Union Mission and the South Pacific Division and that is entirely appropriate. A decision
            such as this cannot be made by other individual members who are not part of the executive
            committee, and it certainly cannot be made by persons who do not have their membership in Samoa.
            If church leaders were to permit this ecclesiastical rule of the Church to be broken, the Church would
            soon find itself in total confusion, with no one knowing by whose authority decisions are made. The
            lines of authority are clear in the Church. The decisions of the session in establishing the executive
            committee are to be upheld. The Church cannot allow a small minority who may not agree with a
            decision to think it can override due process. And it cannot allow pressure from elsewhere to
            overturn due process.

          • icls

            Part 4 continued:

            I have spoken very plainly here. But those who would seek to diminish the work of the executive
            committee or think that they as individuals have all the truth on this matter, need to know that they
            do not speak for the Church and do not have the support of the Church if this is how they choose to
            conduct themselves.

            While I recognise that there may be some who continue to grapple with the issue and may still need to find
            resolution in their own mind, I am now writing to you, after much thought and prayer, to request your support
            of the decision of the Executive Committee of the Samoa Mission with respect to the practice of Sabbath
            observance in Samoa. In Jesus’ name I ask any who may be struggling, do not separate yourself from your
            Church family but come together in worship of our God. Please continue to study and to read. I refer you
            again to the material that has been placed on the South Pacific Division website. The office of the Field
            Secretary of the South Pacific Division is committed to work to assist those who are still working through the
            issues in their mind. A Bible Conference on the biblical and practical aspects of the issue is planned and we are
            working towards an appropriate process of reconciliation where there have been differences. Now I am asking
            that those who have another view demonstrate your allegiance to God and the Church we love and do not
            continue to destabilise the Church by indiscriminately circulating viewpoints that do not represent the position
            of the Church.

            We have continued discussion for almost a year now. It is time to move forward. This decision, though a
            difficult one, has the support of the wider Church. I have spoken with the President and the Officers of the
            General Conference. They concur with us that this is a difficult matter. But they are very clear that this is a
            matter which the due processes in the entities in the South Pacific Division must resolve. We have their
            support as they have our support.

          • icls

            Part 5 continued

            Let me in conclusion clearly summarise what I have said.

            1. The global Seventh-day Adventist Church upholds and supports the decision of the Samoa Tokelau
            Executive Committee to continue to worship on the day which in the sequence of the days of the
            week according to the setting and rising of the sun over Samoa has been, and is, the seventh day,
            even though that day is for the time being called Sunday.

            2. I call all members to cease using the term Saturday Sabbath in Samoa as if in some way those who
            observe Saturday as the Sabbath in Samoa have the truth and all others are in error. That line of
            reasoning is not supported by the Bible, by the Church, and those who use that terminology are not
            supported by the Church.

            3. I invite those with questions on specific aspects of the issue to consult the web page of the South
            Pacific Division at http://www.adventist.org.au If there are specific issues that are not addressed there,
            suggestions may be made to the Field Secretary of the Division.

            4. I pray that we will be able to move forward together having determined that we are not going to let
            anything destroy our commitment to our God and His truth, nor divert us from the great commission
            given by Christ Himself.

            In the name of our Lord and Saviour.
            Pastor Barry D Oliver
            President

          • icls

            In response to the above letter: Part 1:

            AN OPEN LETTER TO DR BARRY OLIVER
            24 October 2012

            Dear Brother Oliver,
            We have received a copy of your letter to Samoan Congregations in the South Pacific Division dated October
            16, 2012.

            We make the following observations:
            We appreciate your pastoral concern for the Samoan congregations and we share that concern.

            A Parable
            Seven boys, Adam, Billy, Kaleb, Colin, Gavin, Hugh & Ian, were playing hopscotch, each taking his turn in
            that sequence. Hugh had to leave the game briefly, so Ian took his next turn, continuing the sequence with six
            boys. When Hugh came back, he took his turn after Gavin and before Ian, the same as before, and the game
            continued in the original sequence.

            Q. Because Ian took Hugh’s turn when he was absent, did any of the boys’ names change?
            A. Our answer is no, but we are sure you would agree.

            Since Saturday took Friday’s turn after the dateline realignment, then Friday resumed it’s place in the
            sequence after Thursday the following week, how could any of the day names have changed?
            A. They didn’t (To share the answers in this comprehension test is not cheating, its brotherhood).

            A Global Issue
            The Sabbath in the Pacific is a far wider problem than just the Samoan congregations you address. It affects
            the world-wide SDA Church in its effort to preach present truth. The conflict among Seventh-day Adventists
            in the Pacific is because two different days are being called the seventh-day Sabbath and both groups
            practice accordingly.

          • icls

            Part 2 continued:

            Withstanding Authority
            Your October 16 letter says nothing new but only confirms the presuppositions and false premises on which
            the SPD have based their recommendation to worship on Sunday, known officially as the first day of the
            week (not the seventh) by the Samoan government. Three times you assert that the name of a day has been
            changed in Samoa. Therefore we are duty bound to continue to expose the fallacies in those statements.
            We are loyal supporters of the organized Seventh-day Adventist Church by way of regular attendance and
            stewardship, supporting the church at all levels. However it has become necessary to withstand the executive
            authority of your administration, because of the above recommendation, in the same way that Azariah the
            priest and eighty others withstood the executive authority of Uzziah, the king (2 Chr 26:1-18). Jesus also
            often withstood the executive authority of the church in His time. We want to do this respectfully, but
            decisively.

            The Seventh-day Sabbath
            The commandment which Seventh-day Adventists believe signifies the worship of the Creator says,
            “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy,” not “remember the one-in-seven-day-sequence to keep it holy.”
            The one-in-seven-day-sequence could be observed by remembering any one of the seven days, therefore any
            day of the week could be the seventh day if it was determined by the one-in-seven-day-sequence formula.
            This is what your people in Samoa have done. The seventh-day Sabbath precedes the seven-day-sequence
            because it completes it. It is the seventh-day Sabbath that determines the one-in-seven-day-sequence, not the
            one-in-seven-day-sequence that determines the seventh-day Sabbath. This may seem to be only a semantic
            difference but it is a vital difference because we are experiencing the two different outcomes in Samoa as a
            result.

            For the purpose of our discussion “the seventh day” is the personal name of the day. That is like the surname
            on its “birth certificate” and “passport.” Of course it is known by another name, Saturday in English. That
            gives the day dignity and traceability in such circumstances as a dateline realignment. This is the day God
            blessed and sanctified. The day He told us to remember. There is no record of God blessing and sanctifying
            the one-in-seven-day-sequence.

          • icls

            Evidence that the sacredness of the seventh-day Sabbath is different from that of the one-in-seven-daysequence
            is that we have two groups in Samoa. One group won’t break the seventh-day Sabbath because they
            know it by its name. The other group have broken away from the seventh-day Sabbath in order to keep the
            one-in-seven-day-sequence because they don’t know either day by their names. There are seventh-day and
            first-day Sabbath-keepers who know their Sabbaths by name and both accept the effect of a realignment of
            the dateline, whereas your group of people won’t accept that effect because they hold more sacred a one-inseven-day-sequence.

            The Samoan government say that Sunday is the name of the first day of the week in their nation, but you say
            that Sunday is the “earthly name” of the seventh day. This is one of the many fallacies that have been devised
            to support the recommendation and practise of Sunday-keeping by Seventh-day Adventists in the Pacific.

            Prayer
            You quote prayer-life as a guarantor of the SPD position. What right have you to cast a shadow of doubt on
            the prayer-life of those who oppose the SPD view? With the greatest respect, the truthfulness and objectivity
            of your answers should reflect prayer-life, rather than using prayer-life to establish the truthfulness and
            objectivity of your answers.

            The fallacies that SPD keep repeating are disgraceful and should be disassociated from prayer-life.

            For example, you said:
            “It is important to affirm that the Church does not have many “Sabbaths”. It observes just one Sabbath.”
            This statement is deceptive because the dispute is not about “many Sabbaths,” it is a conflict between
            only two Sabbaths, the true Sabbath and the false Sabbath (Saturday and Sunday in English).

            You assert that:
            “the earthly name of that 24-hour period of time had changed and was now called Sunday”
            Who changed it and how did it change? It didn’t change itself. The Samoan government didn’t do it as
            previously claimed by the SPD. We maintain that the “earthly” name of the 24-hour period of time
            held sacred by the pioneers and forebears of Seventh-day Adventists in Samoa has not changed and is
            still called Saturday.

          • icls

            You said:
            “. . .with respect to Sabbath observance around a changing date line”

            This statement is deceptive because it asserts that the dateline is continually changing making it
            unreliable in determining the Sabbath. We are not discussing a changing dateline, we are talking about
            a changed dateline, and we must only deal with the facts of today. Today is a gift, that is why it is called
            the present. There is no room to determine the Sabbath of today by speculating on what might happen
            in the future.

            You said:
            “I know many of you have been deeply affected in some way by what has happened. I know that in many
            cases healing is needed so that the Church can move forward in harmony and unity.”

            Another deceptive statement, when you know full well that the church can only move forward in
            harmony and unity when we are all worshipping on the same day, but you expect this to be on Sunday
            in Samoa and other Pacific nations, on the basis of an unbiblical, arbitrary decision by the SPD. We
            see no sympathy or compassion in the statement above because of the content of the rest of your letter
            which rules out Saturday as the day of worship.

            You said:
            “Thus, while the letter is written from my heart as a pastor, it also carries with it the authority of our wider
            Church.

            The authority to worship on Sunday is not yours to give. It is outside the scope of being a pastor or a
            president of the Seventh-day Adventist Church because it is contrary to our belief and practise worldwide.

            You said:
            “This letter which you now have is intended to be read by all Seventh-day Adventist churches and members
            of Samoan heritage.”

            The keeping of the seventh-day Sabbath amongst Seventh-day Adventists doesn’t carry with it an
            ethnic option to worship on Sunday, the first day of the week.

            You said:
            “The fact that God’s people are specially called to “remember the Sabbath day” indicates that God
            anticipated there would be challenges to the integrity of the Sabbath as the “seventh day”: the special period
            of 24-hour time which God “sanctified” and “blessed”. The history of the world has demonstrated that such
            is exactly what has occurred over and over again. And now we are faced with what may well be, at the
            present time, the most difficult and unique test in the global Church family. In the face of this challenge it is
            our privilege and responsibility to “remember” the seventh day as the “Sabbath of the Lord””.

            This statement shows your readers that you clearly understand the problem facing the church, then
            you exploit the confidence of your readers in yourself to recommend the first-day Sabbath to our
            people in Samoa as though you had faithfully taken all factors into consideration. We insist that,
            though you may have considered it, you have not accepted the fact that the Samoan government did
            not change the names of any of the days of the week.

          • icls

            Part 5 continued:

            You said:
            “The Church respects the right of governments to determine the positioning of the date line relative to their
            particular country. It understands that governments can and do make changes which impact on the
            sequencing, numbering and naming of the days of the week. However, the Seventh-day Adventist Church
            believes that when it comes to Sabbath observance, it is not the role of any government or secular agency to
            determine when and how the members of the Seventh-day Adventist church will observe the Sabbath. That is
            an ecclesiastical matter based on the Church’s understanding of Scripture. The Sabbath as the seventh day of
            the week is vitally important to all Seventh-day Adventists, and insofar as God set aside the Sabbath as holy
            and sanctified time, Seventh-day Adventists are particular about the sacredness and timing of the Sabbath.”

            The Church respects the right of governments to determine the positioning of the dateline relative to
            their particular country, so why does the South Pacific Division, contrary to the Church, reject the
            effect of the realignment in the case of Samoa? How can you speak for the church and say that,
            “governments can and do make changes that impact on the sequencing, numbering and naming of the
            days of the week,” when the opposite is true? The Samoan government, in the process of redrawing the
            dateline, carefully disassociated itself from any interference in religious practise. The South Pacific
            Division and Adventists in Samoa who, of their own free will, worship on Sunday, are the only ones to
            make these statements. Seventh-day Adventists who worship on Saturday are content with the
            government’s action and non-interference in their worship arrangements. So are Sunday-keepers of
            other faiths.

            You said:
            “Yes, it does indeed feel very strange to be worshipping on the day now called Sunday in Samoa.”
            This strange feeling is felt by the world-wide membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. It not
            only feels very strange but is unacceptable. It would have felt less strange for the people affected to
            have accepted the skipping the 30 December 2011 and continue to worship on Saturday, the seventhday
            Sabbath. Sunday has never been called anything else but Sunday and it has not transformed itself
            into Saturday in Samoa, Tonga, Kiribati, Wallis & Futuna.

          • icls

            Part 6 continued:

            You said:
            “They believed that God had historically directed the Church to worship on the day that was in fact the
            seventh day, and that in the continuing providence of God they would continue to observe that same day as
            the Sabbath. They believed that the 24-hour period of time which had always been sacred to their forebears
            and the pioneers of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in Samoa should continue to be held sacred, even
            though the earthly name of that 24-hour period of time had changed and was now called Sunday. They did
            not accept that having worshipped on one Sabbath, it was appropriate to count only six days and then call
            that day Sabbath. They believed that the essential character as determined by the rotation of the earth could
            not change.”

            It is inappropriate for you to speak for the pioneers, or put words in their mouths, when they are not
            dealing with our present-day situation. We could well speculate that they would have accepted the
            realignment, as some of our members in Samoa have. The pioneers did what was correct in their day,
            let’s do what is correct in our day. We both have the same ancestry.

            Our faith in God and loyalty to the Seventh-day Adventist Church are only strengthened by the faulty
            reasoning given by our SPD leaders for Sunday worship by Seventh-day Adventists. Laodicea, as prophesied,
            is truly wretched, poor, blind and naked. This is a most graphic fulfilment. However the bottom line is still
            that the church needs to repent and return to the God who loves us.

            Your adding documents to the library on the SPD website may keep people occupied, but it will not help
            them appreciate or accept a dateline realignment, when all the documents are based on the fallacy of calendar
            change and renaming of days. It certainly won’t help unify the Church.

            We will continue, as we see the need, to help people accept the realignment, by way of further writing, as
            time and material become available. We also want to encourage those in Samoa who are worshipping, with
            no support from the Church, on the universally accepted seventh-day Sabbath, Saturday.
            Yours faithfully,
            Robert Vincent – Dargaville
            John Wallace – Whangarei
            NNZ

            http://sabbathissues.org/

          • icls

            I have some comments in response to the first letter I posted:

            quoting from the President of the South Pacific Division:

            “2. I call all members to cease using the term Saturday Sabbath in Samoa as if in some way those who observe Saturday as the Sabbath in Samoa have the truth and all others are in error. That line of reasoning is not supported by the Bible, by the Church, and those who use that terminology are not supported by the Church.”
            ============================

            Apparently, “that line of reasoning” IS supported by the Church:

            SDA Fundamental Beliefs: Sabbath -”The Observance of the Sabbath” states “The Sabbath begins at sunset on Friday evening and ends at sunset Saturday evening (see Gen 1:5, cf Mark 1:32″ page 263 Seventh day Adventist Believe ..27 A Biblical Exposition of Fundamental Doctrines

            ” I call all members to cease using the term Saturday Sabbath in Samoa as if in some way those who observe Saturday as the Sabbath in Samoa have the truth and all others are in error” -

            Again, referring to Pastor Oliver’s quote it would appear that either:

            “truth” is relative,

            or,

            that the “true” Seventh day Sabbath can not be discovered.

            Let us consider the following quotes from the Spirit of Prophecy:

            Elder Bates was resting upon Saturday, the seventh day of the week, and he urged it upon our attention as the true Sabbath.
            I did not feel its importance, and thought that he erred in dwelling
            upon the fourth commandment more than upon the other nine. {Christian Experience and Teachings of Ellen White 85.3}

            But
            the Lord gave me a view of the heavenly sanctuary. The temple of God
            was open in heaven, and I was shown the ark of God covered with the
            mercy seat. Two angels stood one at either end of the ark, with their
            wings spread over the mercy seat, and their faces turned toward it. This
            my accompanying angel informed me represented all the heavenly host
            looking with reverential awe toward the law of God, which had been
            written by the finger of God. {CET 85.4}

            Jesus raised the cover of the ark, and I beheld the tables of stone on which the ten commandments were written. I was amazed as I saw the fourth
            commandment in the very center of the ten precepts, with a soft halo of
            light encircling it. Said the angel, “It is the only one of the ten which defines the living God who created the heavens and the earth and
            all things that are therein.” {CET 85.5}

            When the foundations of the earth were laid, then was also laid the foundation of the Sabbath. I was shown that if the true Sabbath had been kept,
            there would never have been an infidel or an atheist. The observance of
            the Sabbath would have preserved the world from idolatry. {CET 86.1}

          • icls

            Part 2 continued:
            The
            fourth commandment has been trampled upon, therefore we are called upon
            to repair the breach in the law and plead for the desecrated Sabbath. The man of sin, who exalted himself above God, and thought to change times and laws, brought about the change of the Sabbath from the seventh to the first day
            of the week. In doing this he made a breach in the law of God. Just
            prior to the great day of God, a message is sent forth to warn the
            people to come back to their allegiance to the law of God, which
            anti-christ has broken down. Attention must be called to the breach in
            the law, by precept and example. {CET 86.2}

            I was shown that the precious promises of Isaiah 58:12-14 apply to those who labor for the restoration of the true Sabbath. {CET 87.1}

            I was shown that the third angel proclaiming the commandments of God and the faith of Jesus,1 represents
            the people who receive this message, and raise the voice of warning to
            the world to keep the commandments of God and His law as the apple of
            the eye; and that in response to this warning, many would embrace the
            Sabbath of the Lord. {CET 87.2}

            Another quote:

            Roman Catholics acknowledge that the change of the Sabbath was made by their church, and declare that Protestants by observing the Sunday are recognizing her power. In the Catholic Catechism of Christian Religion, in
            answer to a question as to the day to be observed in obedience to the
            fourth commandment, this statement is made: “During the old law, Saturday was the day sanctified; but the church, instructed by Jesus Christ, and directed by the Spirit of God, has substituted Sunday for Saturday; so now we sanctify the first, not the seventh day. Sunday means, and now is, the day of the Lord.” {The Great Controversy 447.4}

            As the sign of the authority of the Catholic Church, papist writers cite “the very act of changing the Sabbath into Sunday, which Protestants allow of; … because by keeping Sunday, they acknowledge the church’s power to ordain feasts, and to command them under sin.”—Henry Tuberville, An Abridgment of the Christian Doctrine, page
            58. What then is the change of the Sabbath, but the sign, or mark, of
            the authority of the Roman Church—“the mark of the beast”? {GC 448.1}

            The
            Roman Church has not relinquished her claim to supremacy; and when the
            world and the Protestant churches accept a sabbath of her creating,
            while they reject the Bible Sabbath, they virtually admit this
            assumption. They may claim the authority of tradition and of the Fathers
            for the change; but in so doing they ignore the very principle which
            separates them from Rome—that “the Bible, and the Bible only, is the
            religion of Protestants.” The papist can see that they are deceiving
            themselves, willingly closing their eyes to the facts in the case. As
            the movement for Sunday enforcement gains favor, he rejoices, feeling
            assured that it will eventually bring the whole Protestant world under
            the banner of Rome. {GC 448.2}

            Another quote:
            The temptation will come. If you keep the Sabbath, the very day the fourth commandment has specified, you shall have to give up this source of gain. You shall have to close your business on Saturday,
            the busiest and most profitable day in the week. And when you hesitate
            to comply with a plain “Thus saith the Lord,” because you will lose
            profit, and riches will not increase unto you, you continue in
            disobedience to God and bow the knee to Satan as he tempted Christ to
            do. {17MR 79.3}

            {emphasis supplied}

            Respectfully, I wonder whether Pastor Oliver would take issue with the above quotes provided.

          • icls

            4 November
            2012 SAMOA SATURDAY SABBATH KEEPERS LEAUVAA-UTA OFFICIAL OPENING ON 3 NOVEMBER 2012

            More
            exciting things are happening in Samoa! “To God be the glory, great
            things He has done!” On Sabbath, 3 November 2012, the Leuvaa-uta Branch
            of the Samoa Saturday Sabbath Keepers (SSSK) Group officially opened.

            For
            the first time since 29 December 2012, the doors of the Seventh-day
            Adventist Church at Leauvaa-uta were opened on the seventh-day Sabbath
            of the Lord and tears of joy and exaltation to God flowed freely as the
            Satuday Sabbath keepers praised the “Lord of the Sabbath” for another
            milestone in the journey of His Sabbathkeeping children in Samoa. A bus
            and seven private vehicles transported the Lighthouse members from
            Alafua to Leauvaa-uta.

            The ride took us through Aleisa and we
            enjoyed the lush green scenery of the countryside. About ten minutes
            from the right turn-off at Aleisa, we came across two of our Leauvaa-uta
            brethren, in white shirts, black wrap-arounds and neckties, waiting
            with bright smiles by the roadside to show us the way to the SDA church.
            When we finally arrived, Salā Peteli Kuresa (on whose land the church
            is built), elders and members of the Leauvaa-uta Group were waiting with
            wide smiles to greet us in front of their church building.

            The
            week before the Sabbath had been a very challenging one for our members
            at Leauvaa-uta. Right from the start, it was their wish to remain on
            good terms with their other SDA members who worship on Sunday. For that
            reason, they (Saturday Sabbath keepers) were cautious and courteous in
            their approach in dealing with the Leauvaa-uta pastor and Sundaykeeping
            members, requesting that the Saturday Sabbath keepers be allowed to use
            the church building for their worship on Sabbath with the Sunday keepers
            to worship there on Sunday.

            Their requests were denied and all
            attempts were made to prevent the church being opened on Sabbath
            (Saturday). After two meetings, with the last one being quite ‘frosty’,
            and the Saturday Sabbath keepers being told that they cannot use the
            church, the Sabbath keepers stood their ground, and informed the Sunday
            keepers courteously but firmly that the church will be opened for
            worship on God’s seventh day Sabbath, commencing from 3 November 2012.

            The
            Sunday keepers could not accept this decision and the suggestion for
            them to continue to use the church on Sundays until the dilemma is
            resolved. So as of today (Sunday) they have now gone elsewhere for their
            Sunday services and so the Leauva’a church building is now the first
            formal church building in Samoa to be exclusively reopened on Saturday
            for Sabbath worship. Approximately 21 families used to worship at the
            Leauvaa-uta SDA Group until the ‘seventh day Sabbath issue’ came up in
            December 2011.

            Today, seven families are ‘Sabbath keepers’ at
            Leauvaa-uta and it is their aim to start witnessing to their people and
            community. This is not easy as their firm stand has put a wider rift
            between them and their Sundaykeeping sisters and brothers. Our
            Leauvaa-uta Sabbathkeepers are courageous people who, despite the
            challenges and complications in their way, they are determined to “obey
            the Lord – come what may.”

            There are now five Seventh-day
            Adventist Sabbathkeeping Groups in Samoa: Samatau, Lighthouse, Pu’apu’a
            (Savaii), Multicultural and Leauvaa-uta. The Sabbathkeepers in Samoa are
            moving forward – slowly but surely! Please pray for our Leauvaa-uta
            members; they need your prayers especially at this time as their ship
            sails through the treacherous and hazardous seas. These days, it is more
            meaningful when we sing the favourite hymn: “Jesus Saviour, pilot me
            over life’s tempestuous sea.” Thank you for your thoughts, support and
            prayers.

          • icls

            Hi Folks,

            I received the following message from Brother Puni:

            ===================================================

            Please include my email: edwin@puni.co.nz to encourage people to subscribe to get regular updates from me.

            Alofa atu and thank you for your prayers.

            Pa’u ****

  • ChuckT

    The clear purpose of this site concerns the ordination of women as pastors. The clear focus of the site was the Pacific Union Conference constituency meeting. The clear purpose of the PUCon constituency meeting was the ordination of pastors without regard to gender, notwithstanding the official call that proposed to amend the Bylaws. One need only look at the two issues of the Recorder that preceded the meeting. They were filled with material about ordination–mostly in favor–and little or no material about the Bylaws amendment.

    The session itself focused almost entirely on the issue of ordination without regard to gender. Most notably, the delegation from the GC argued its position of delay on the issue of ordination almost to the complete exclusion of the Bylaws matter.

    Given this reality, it is incomprehensible to read in your post that this site had a significant impact on the action of the PUCon session. The session was called to deal with ordination without regard to gender. It was always about that issue. The only significant action of the session was the vote to process ordinations without regard to gender. The principal, well known floor supports of the reactionary position of this site garnered audible support from no more than a dozen people. Not even the GC delegation spoke in favor of your position. The delegates overwhelming rejected your position by a vote of 79% to 21%, following the same actions with similar percentages by two other union conference constituencies within the world church. If this is what it means to make “a decisive difference,” I am sure the supporters of ordination without regard to gender will hope that you keep this site active forever.

    • Ed Ward

      Agree. As a delegate I have to laugh at the suggestion that there was any momentum toward the position of this site and it’s ilk. Doing the math, a vast majority voted positive on both motions. If you remove the few GC votes – that assuredly voted against both motions , the union members actually did approve the first motion by 2/3 majority. This was all about women’s ordination and in every formal constituent vote to date, the charter has been clear.
      I think it is safe to say that the analysis applied to this site’s impact is the same analysis applied to the ordination issue – Dishonest, delusional, and absolutely ignorant of the facts.

  • Masiye

    These are really really the last chapters of the last days of planet earth. However, it saddens me to learn that even when all of us SDAs know full well the times we’re living in, we still behave as if Christ’s coming is still afar off! Why do we waste time and energy on trivia when we should have been exerting our energies on preaching, praying and waiting upon the imminent coming of the lord???

    • Ed Ward

      …because fighting for justice, equality, and compassion as Jesus teaches is important. The so-called last days should be the motivation not the justification to turn a blind eye.

  • t.dessie

    here is pr.Dwight’s sermon on women ordination today.
    http://media.pmchurch.org/media/2012-10-06.mp3

  • http://www.facebook.com/john.r.contreraz John R Contreraz

    I cannot believe what I’m hearing in Dwight Nelson’s sermon!! Another attempt to circumvent the Bible. I must question his method for interpretation since he is going to preach his own convictions and not necesarily Biblical truth. For example, in a sermon a couple of years ago he proclaimed that the muslim god Allah is our God! I checked the verse you used to try to prove your theory, the word is tsaba’ (H6635) it says nothing about women as the modernized Catholic Bible versions suggest. Tsaba’ is correctly rendered as and army, as in “The Lord of hosts.” (And it is a masculine noun on top of that…!) Come on!

    • Keith Parris

      There’s a careful analysis of Dwight Nelson’s sermon at http://secretsunsealed.org/Downloads/newsletter2Q12web.pdf

      • Ed Stime

        Stephen Bohr never does a careful analysis. He does an analysis seeking to extract a truth that meets his established moronic beliefs. This is bogus.

        • Servant

          Ed, you have failed to cite even one example of careless analysis by Stephen Bohr. These are unsubstantiated ad hominem claims. Do you really expect thinking people to take these concerns seriously without support?

          • Ed Stime

            Actually it is thinking people that understand this.

          • A servant

            You didn’t respond to my request for evidence to support your claims. How do you expect ANY fair-minded person to agree with your position or even understand it? History and personal experience alike demonstrate that personal attacks are generally made only when other arguments are in short supply. Again, you are respectfully invited to demonstrate how any of Bohr’s beliefs qualify as moronic.

        • Ron Stone M.D.

          So please inform us of Pastor Bohr’s “moronic beliefs.” I watch him almost daily and have heard none. Details please!

          • Phyllis Lag

            I’ll jump in and say “all”. Lifestyle, power or grace, church history, origins, gender equality, race, historical Jesus, eschatology, tithing, biblical interpretation and meaning, revelation, homosexuality. He’s wrong on it all. The easier question is what is right.

          • Bill Sorensen

            Wow, that’s pretty comprehensive, Phyllis. You said, ” He’s wrong on it all.” Even the Catholic church is not wrong on everything. Dr. Stone simply asked for some explanation and you cop out by saying ” He’s wrong on it all.”
            I don’t see any credibility in such a statement.
            Bill Sorensen

          • Bill Sorensen

            Well, the lines have been drawn and all the arguments and reasons have been presented on both sides. Enough, already. Take your stand and let the war begin. Just like in heaven.
            I am sick of hearing “unity, unity, unity.” It is time for some accountability and discipline. The politicians go on and on. Just like the secular world.
            The only “unity” we want is on the word of God. We oppose WO because it is not biblical. Anyone who can read can readily see this reality. All the liberals have is double talk, ignorance, and culture to appeal to for their position. And they use the same arguments in principle that Sunday keepers use to justify their rejection of bible truth.
            In the end, the shaking will intensify and there will be no “unity” no matter how hard Wilson and all the politicians try to make it happen. Conservatives will not yield, neither will the liberals. And those who are loyal to bible truth will no doubt be a minority group. The vast majority swing like a two-way door and go any way that is convenient and expedient.
            God can not, and will not “force” the church to do what is right and biblical. He never has, and never will. So if you are waiting for “the church” to make the right decision and do the right thing, you may be waiting for the proverbial “hell to freeze over” before it happens. God always demands individual accountablity over and above “the church” and we are in just such a situation.
            Believe it or not.
            Bill Sorensen

          • http://twitter.com/Sieg55255900 Sieg

            EGW predicted this apostasy in our church. It has happened before: http://www.slideshare.net/Afryea/abomination-of-desolation-church-history-by-robert-sessler-6041657

        • Ron Stone M.D.

          Your post is totally BOGUS.

          • Ed Stime

            I guess we’re all bogus. I might agree to that :)

    • Ron Stone M.D.

      Nelson tries to be too “hip” many times, and he ends up spouting off some major blunders. “Allah is God” is one of his most embarrassing ones to be sure!

      • MAllen

        Brother Ron and All,
        You are aware that the word “Allah” is only a title as most of the names given to God as the word “God” is also a title?? A title only discribes the position on task given. My wife’s natural tongue is different from English. When she speaks, sometimes it takes her an entire sentence just to translate a ‘word’ from her native tongue to English because there are no one English word to say that word.Is it possible that in our ignorance, the word ‘Allah’ carries the same or one of the titles we give God and yet our prejudice mindset to other cultures makes us feel that if the call the Creator any other name, the they worship a false God???
        Now before any decide to JUMP UP and start questing me as to if I am a SDA…save your breath. We can sit here and discuss SDA doctrines with all and you make the decision based on the answers you all get from the Bible and SOP. Please pay attention below.
        Quoted words from Bob Marley…”Educate yourself from metal slavery, none of them can free our minds…”
        Quoted words from Malcom X….”Who prescribes you knowledge, prescribes the circumference of your knowledge”
        Hope this helps:
        Who is Allah
        First of all, it is important to note that “Allah” is the same word that Arabic-speaking Christians and Jews use for God. If you pick up an Arabic Bible, you will see the word “Allah” being used where “God” is used in English. This is because “Allah” is the only word in the Arabic language equivalent to the English word “God” with a capital “G”. Additionally, the word “Allah” cannot be made plural or given gender (i.e. masculine or feminine), which goes hand-in-hand with the Islamic concept of God. Because of this, and also because the Qur’an, which is the holy scripture of Muslims, was revealed in the Arabic language, some Muslims use the word “Allah” for “God”, even when they are speaking other languages. This is not unique to the word “Allah”, since many Muslims tend to use Arabic words when discussing Islamic issues, regardless of the language that they speak. This is because the universal teachings of Islam – even though they have been translated in every major language – have been preserved in the Arabic language.

        It is interesting to note that the Aramaic word “El”, which is the word for God in the language that Jesus spoke, is certainly more similar in sound to the word “Allah” than the English word “God”. This also holds true for the various Hebrew words for God, which are “El” and “Elah”, and the plural form “Elohim”. The reason for these similarities is that Aramaic, Hebrew and Arabic are all Semitic languages with common origins. It should also be noted that in translating the Bible into English, the Hebrew word “El” is translated variously as “God”, “God” and “angel”! This imprecise language allows different translators, based on their preconceived notions, to translate the word to fit their own views. The Arabic word “Allah” presents no such difficulty or ambiguity, since it is only used for Almighty God alone. Additionally, in English, the only difference between “God”, meaning a false God, and “God”, meaning the One True God, is the capital “G”. In the Arabic alphabet, since it does not have capital letters, the word for God (i.e. Allah) is formed by adding the equivalent to the English word “the” (Al-) to the Arabic word for “God/God” (ilah). So the Arabic word “Allah” literally it means “The God” – the “Al-” in Arabic basically serving the same function as the capital “G” in English. Due to the above mentioned facts, a more accurate translation of the word “Allah” into English might be “The One -and-Only God” or “The One True God”.

        • D. Clements

          The original name for Laodiciea was “Diosopolis” or “City of Zeus”. Do you adovacate that “Zeus” is only a title for God also? It uses the “Dios” later adopted in Spanish to mean “God,” so I suppose if Allah is title for God, Zeus is also. If you are uncomfortable with that concept, imagine how the rest us are, being told yet another false god, Allah, is also our God.

        • John

          No no no. Allah is not just a word for god, this is not true. It is a contraction of two words. Al Illah, which Illah (illah) was the name of a moon good, Al meant The. When the words are contracted it spells Allah. Al Illah is the name of the idol of the moon god which Mohammed kept in the Kaaba. All the other ones were taken out. It is a female deity, the round god inside the quare Kaaba. It’s a sex cult symbol.

    • john

      Nelson is a Jesuit infiltrator, simple as that. By their fruits you will know them. He is one of them, no doubt about it.

  • R. Shorter

    The Fall Counsel has just condemned the actions of the Columbia and PUC with a vote of 261 to 23. Thank the Lord! 10/16/12

    • Jen Richards

      Don’t let the bastards get you down… good words to live by in the power grab. Luckily a few Unions don’t give a damn.

      • MAllen

        Jen,
        Those are lovely words coming out of ‘christians’ mouth….wow. Do you also praise the Lord with the same mouth too?
        James
        3:8 But the tongue can no man tame; [it is] an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.
        3:9 Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similitude of God.
        3:10 Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not so to be.
        3:11 Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet [water] and bitter?
        3:12 Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so [can] no fountain both yield salt water and fresh.
        3:13 Who [is] a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him show out of a good conversation his works with meekness of wisdom.
        3:14 But if ye have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the truth.
        3:15 This wisdom descendeth not from above, but [is] earthly, sensual, devilish.
        3:16 For where envying and strife [is], there [is] confusion and every evil work.
        3:17 But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, [and] easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy.
        3:18 And the fruit of righteousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.
        Please tell me which portion of these verses you disagree with?

    • Bill Sorensen

      We see how the Spectrum and A-today cult are responding to the declaration. Go read their comments along with Jen Richards post below. Many are not even SDA church members but hope to have an influence on the SDA church.
      But I don’t agree “the church” corporately will decide moral issues for church members. If the church follows the bible, then fine, support it and its decisions. At this point, we have no assurance they will.
      They have bungled their obligations and responsibilities so long it is doubtful they will act in any final dynamic way in defense of bible truth. Unless they oppose local ordination of Women in the local church, they have made no viable headway in correcting the errors of the past. A statis quo attitude is not acceptable to at least some of us.
      To appeal to historic church action concerning circumcision and other such problems by the Jerusalem council can hardly fit this present scenario. They decided in a few days or weeks, not years and years or several decades to make a decision. The church will have to “man up” or fill their diaper and sit down in it. Politics will not resolve this moral issue and time will not make it go away.
      Fundamental bible Adventism is at stake. Will the church follow the bible or not. Male headship is a clear moral mandate throughout scripture and no amount of touting “female equality” will change or undermine this clear imperative. The game is almost over. Make sure you have a clear biblical foundation for your faith. And don’t let these cult movements in the church destroy bible Adventism. Loyalty to bible Adventism may be a minority, but we have truth on our side. And we need not be intimidated by blow hard liberals who have forced their will on the church community for several decades. The “terrible ordeal” (EGW), will intensify more and more as the shaking builds to a final end.
      Keep the faith
      Bill Sorensen

      • Yashman green

        The only cult is head-in-sand fundamentalism. The lies and threats from the Bible thumpers will not matter a wit. Those on the side of discrimination never win. Those that justify it from the Bible are the scourge of Kingdom of Heaven.

        • r.shorter

          Does discrimination against the Creator’s will and His written word fit in here anywhere? Where is the text in God’s word that one may reference regarding your last sentence, Yashman?

          • MAllen

            R.Shorter,
            What you cannot give a SOLID Bible account for is that it is “discrimination against the Creater’s will”. Do you have a clear understanding of the ‘Creators will’? If you knew who the “Co-Creator” is, you may have a difference in understanding. I will again reiterate Luke 5:39 “No man also having drunk old [wine] straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.”
            When you are ready to “come let us reason together” according to the Bible and not “debate for strife”, then let me know.

      • MAllen

        Luke 5:37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; else the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the bottles shall perish.
        5:38 But new wine must be put into new bottles; and both are preserved.
        5:39 No man also having drunk old [wine] straightway desireth new: for he saith, The old is better.

      • MAllen

        Bill, I cannot say much to your comment but to as gentle ‘sigh’ and the below Bible quote….Ignorance is a sin winked at by God, but WILFULL ignorance!!!
        Try and figure out the texts below with a quite unemotional prayer.

        • Bill Sorensen

          MAllen, you are correct about “wilfull ignorance”. Like Sunday keepers who pervert and corrupt the bible, those who support WO are in the same boat.
          All the arguments have been made on both issues. Sunday vs. Sabbath and WO vs. male headship. Both the bible Sabbath and male headship are so clearly biblical, those who oppose either may well be considered wilfully ignorant.
          Bill Sorensen

          • Phyllis Lag

            And those that defend discrimination are not only ignorant, but evil in the greatest sense of the concept.

          • Bill Sorensen

            Phyllis Lag•16 hours ago•parent
            −+Flag as inappropriate
            Bill Sorensen: And those that defend discrimination are not only ignorant, but evil in the greatest sense of the concept.
            Phyllis, I really don’t think you have an understanding of the issues and have been somewhat brain washed by the liberal agenda. This issue has nothing to do with discrimination. This is typical of a liberal distortion of what male headship is about.
            But all this shows how the bible has been undermined by the false gospel so that people don’t really take scripture seriously.The helter-skelter method of interpreting the bible by liberal scholars parallels how the Catholic church uses scripture.
            SDA’s have traditionally been “people of the book”. Not today. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry can blow hard their way across the church with an air of enlightenment and authority and the members OOOO….and aaah…. with every false presentation and lap it up like pig swill at the hog trough.
            A false gospel will always destroy the intensity needed for a clear and definitive understanding of the bible and substitute a liberal understanding without a dynamic substance to challenge false teaching. And so Adventism now has a messsage of Pluralism and acceptance with no “judging” anyone or anything as a gospel mandate.
            With this concept, the devil has taken control to a large degree much of modern Adventism with the final agenda of unity without substance. So, in the end, we wil see who is
            ” evil in the greatest sense of the concept.”
            Today, we have politics instead of biblical scholarship and the bible must fit our political agenda. Just like Rome.
            Believe it or not.
            Bill Sorensen

          • Phyllis Lag

            Actually I am very close to this issue, know the politics inside and out and have come to the conclusion that the fundamentalist position is absolutely wrong beyond what most liberals will admit. Most won’t call the position what it is…nieve, cultural, and very inappropriate.

          • MAllen

            Phyllis,
            what a lot of people on this forum don’t realize is that they are making black white and white black and most are just mixing them to grey, so of like the description Rev. 3:15-17 to us as a corporate body and yet we still carry on as we we have all the answer to everything as a body based on democracy. When has EVER the majority right? Where they right in Noah’s day, in the tower of Babel, in Elijah, in David and Saul, in any of the old prophets, in Ezekiel’s day, in Daniel’s day, in John the Baptist’s day, in Jesus’s day, in the Reformer’s-Luther’s day, in Millers day, in EG White’s day. Wow are we so blind to think that we are much more advanced in ourselves and thus call the “True and Faithful Witness” an liar?

            Next point is…are we part of that Majority not wanting women to be ordained? Let us see. Women Priests in Catholic church of over 1 billion people, women Rabbi’s in the Jewish church, women clergy in the Muslim temples, women pastors in the Mormon church….so how much of the religious world did I cover? I would say well over 3/4.

            So as we find people like Bill arguing “Bible”, the Bible has shown that History in all cultures have been set aside women to be clergy, so how “peculiar” are we as SDA in not conforming or following the world?

            The problem is that if they knew who the Holy Spirit is and the purpose of women on this earth, they would shun their male dominating ideas and know that they have no clue about the family of heaven because of their “willful” blindness so express in Romans 1: 17-26….NONE have an excuse, but instead of coming to ‘reason” together, they all come to “debate” for strife and thus few will learn, cause the Father to “VOMIT” them out…If I lie, read Rev 3:15-17 again.

            The Bible teaches completely opposite of what Bill and like mind is teaching, but none will sit and examine the Bible to see what lessons their is about the reason for females and WISDOM to be gained of itself.

            The question Bill should answer is, “If he was wrong, would he TRULY want to know and WHY?”

          • MAllen

            Bill, let me ask a question…Thou we think things are very clear in the Bible, let me ask you this, “What was the name God gave to the woman created from the rib of Adam the male?
            Please bear with me and because I know it “seems” very clear to everyone out there the “Bible answer”.

            I will wait for the answer and then reply to make my point.

            Cheers,
            MAllen

          • Bill Sorensen

            Bill, let me ask a question…Thou we think things are very clear in the Bible, let me ask you this, “What was the name God gave to the woman created from the rib of Adam the male?
            Please bear with me and because I know it “seems” very clear to everyone out there the “Bible answer”.

            I will wait for the answer and then reply to make my point.

            Cheers,
            MAllen

            I suggest you go back and see who named Eve. God never gave her a name. But in Gen. 3:20 Adam named her Eve.
            So……..what’s your point?
            Bill

          • MAllen

            That is my point. We think we have a clear understanding of the Bible when there are things that we miss or just don’t know.

            You said “God never gave her a name”. Well you are wrong because God did give her a name. Second Adam gave her a name before and a name after her fall in sin.

            Read Gen. 5:1-2 Pay attention to the fact that “God called THEIR name ADAM.”
            She was named Adam and he was named Adam. The male Adam did not name the “woman” before she sinned Eve until after she sinned. This is a major thing in dealing with the issue of roles as so many is so ignorant about. We will deal with the details about that later.

            Now I will ask another question.
            As an SDA we account 360 days to a year in order to justify the date of 1844 as the year that the investigative judgement began. Prove from the bible that there are 360 days to a year which come out to 30 days to a month? Remember the foundation of what we believe lies in your Biblical accounting for this date for those on this forum who may not be SDA’s or struggling with the 1844 issue. Answer wisely seen you defend the faith.

            When you answer this I will get back the main subject but your answer will deal with the coontinuing point I am making.

            MA

          • http://www.facebook.com/bill.sorensen.96 Bill Sorensen

            “Read Gen. 5:1-2 Pay attention to the fact that “God called THEIR name ADAM.”
            She was named Adam and he was named Adam.”
            Like Mr. and Mrs. Adam. If you have a point, make it and quit beating around the bush.

          • MAllen

            Brother Bill
            You Are not ready to reason with the desire to try and learn anything but debate for strife. You made a point and a definite one about the name of the female Adam and now you use the pure lifeless argument of Mr and Mrs when nothing in the Bible shows back then of having last names based on marriage. They have always been called by their own first names. Abraham and Sarah, Issac and Rebecca, and we go on and on. So let us stop acting in such will ignorant manner.
            You should have looked at this with interest as to why God called her Adam, the same as He said to Abraham, ” Sarah thy wife with bare a child” not Mrs Abraham will bare a child. Come my friend lets us be Christian men here and reason intelligently.

            You still have not answered the second question and the reason is quite clear as to why, if you where been honest. Now, the point why you cannot answer is that you just don’t know the answer and you can get the answer but your pride of self to know the word of God you feel will be compromised if you just can’t answer both questions.

            You give the impression that you have clear Bible answers over WO and it is not because you have a clear Bible answers on the subject but because your pride of self clearly overrules your willingness to want to know the truth, what can I do.

            You tell me to stop beating around the bush and yet you are the beating around the bush. Answer the questions with a honest heart and pray about the desire to want to know the truth for both question and then when you get the info on the position of the woman in the bible according to The Father, you will get a coming together to understand you error in your reasoning on WO calling enough Bible evidence, when it is all supposition.

            Please read TM 105-110 to learn how you are to enter into the study of the word of God.

            I speak straight to you but with no lack of love and care for you and all on this site but we all need to change our attitudes.

            If you were wrong would I want to know should be the first and last question and when I know, what do I do about it.

            Come now let us reason together as Christians but if these are the type of debating answers I will get from you, then should I not take the same position as Christ when he was on his illegal trial to the leaders????

            Pray about it before you respond. I will ask you if you did when you reply

            With a prayerful heart,

            MAllen

          • Jeremy K

            I second your points. Forgive them Father for they know not what they do…

          • MAllen

            So then you admit God did her a name contrary to your bold statement that ” God never gave her a name”? Whether He called her Mrs Adam or not. So what was her first name or was she without name for till Gen 3:20.

            Consider your reasoning

          • http://www.facebook.com/bill.sorensen.96 Bill Sorensen

            I don’t have a clue of what you are talking about. Unless you can make some viable point, I have no futher interest in our dialogue. I will simply say, my view is based on a total overview of all the scriptural evidence and not based on some obscure point about what did God name Eve and when.
            The ball is in your court. Make your point, and I will consider it.
            Bill Sorensen

          • MAllen

            “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools..”Rom 1: 22

            Here is my Point Bill.

            I have seen nothing but a bunch of “pointless’ arguments been put on this site for the past several months as I have followed them. NONE of them has any Bible foundation as to what God ordained in comparison to what God allowed.

            Yet, they all come on the site like yourself and talk about the amount of Bible evidence you have is “so clear”. How do you know what is clear or not when most of you cannot even defend the foundation of the SDA church and its doctrines of the Investigative judgment or how we even began as a SDA church?

            Yet we sit here and push our male dominant arguments as if we know the Bible…You yourself cannot even answer two simple questions in the Bible about your fundamental beliefs of a SDA in regards to how this church came about, but all of a sudden this WO comes up and everyone is an expert in translating what the Bible says.

            I asked you two questions to make a point, that the very things you suppose to know in such as simple way, you do not know in a BIG way, yet you and many think you have a correct understanding of the issue of WO in the Bible and what God ordains compared to what man ordains. Which do you think carries the heavier weight, what a man does?? Are you telling me that no where in the Bible, God did not ordain a woman to preach unless a group of men puts hands on them???

            How do you know you even have the right evidence when the question or issue is faulty in the first place? You and many should consider the possibilities as stated by EG White “They do not consider the possibility that they themselves have not rightly understood the word. They will not open their eyes to discern the fact that they have misinterpreted and misapplied the Scriptures, and have built up false theories, calling them fundamental doctrines of the faith. ” {TM 69.2}

            The question on the name of the woman called Eve was only a test to you to see what type of attitude you have when it comes to investigation and been corrected and it testified your spirit because when you were corrected on the matter, you had no interest to learn but allowed your pride to over rule your common sense and to play games with the comments “Mr and Mrs Adam, instead just admitting that you did not know that or asking why it was so. Instead you mocked the correction and tried to push it off as pointless. How can one with such a mind have true investigation of a matter with a honest heart to WANT to know the truth?

            That was the clue for you to let you know you have a GROSS misunderstanding of the role of women in this world as GOD INTENDED not what He allowed…that is a huge difference. God Allowed many in the Bible but did not ordain it to be so. Jesus even said that God allowed Moses to write many things in the law, but “it was not so from the beginning”. This is why He came to clean up those misapplied scriptures in His day and can we the ‘vomit’ of Rev 3:15-17 say we are any better than those in Christ’s day. Is the “true and Faithful Witness a liar when he told us who we are?

            Men where allowed to have more than one wife, but it was NOT what he ordained. Many things in the Bible was allowed by God but not ordained. That is what you should consider when you jump on the band wagon of anti WO.

            Some of the crazy arguments of the position of the women prophets are different from that of a “pastor” is completely crazy, reasoning that EG White was not ordained by the laying of hands, YET was ORDAINED BY the Holy Spirit to be the teacher to the pastors!!! How can one reason with anyone with such circular reasoning? Yet some of these are the evidence that they use to argue against WO? There is so many things, time cannot allow me to put them on here.

            I will assure you if you put all your “Bible evidence” in a numbered order, EVERYONE of them will be answered by the Bible against what your interpretations of the very verses you use to support your anti WO.

            If you cannot “…be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear:” 1Pe 3:15, then how can you take such a bold position on WO when there is not cut answers on the matter, when their is cut answer on the matter of the Female Adam’s name and the number of days in a month dictated in the Bible which the hope of the SDA church and the Sanctuary depends on???

            I will send you the info on why the woman was named “Adam” also, but take some time and read Rom 1:17-26 and pay attention to verse 20. You might get a another clue as to why your position and so many is faulty and as you continue in verse 21 to show the result of their attitude towards the very foundation of the Godhead the male dominant ignorant attitudes against women int he ministry.

            If you have a mind to learn, then you will see that your arguments against WO is based on how you were told to think, deceiving you from the fact that the original argument is wrong in the first place and this is why you cannot give a Bible answer without contradicting the principles of the Bible. devil playing games and many wearing the jersey.

            “21 Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.
            22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,
            23 And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.”

            What you do with the information is up to you, but remember “WILLFUL ignorance is a SIN.

            I am so SORRY for coming so hard towards you, but I have seen enough of this foolishness against the Most High, Alohim.

            I am not your enemy, only the one who will stir up the passion of the heart to fight instead of trying to learn for life’s sake.

            Respectfully
            Galatians 4:16

          • jia Tang

            It’s refreshing to hear the truth again and the denouncement of willful negligence to God’s example. I go back to a few other arguments that state the sin of taking the Lord’s name in vain. This has nothing to do with swearing, but has everything to do with using the Lord to justify the very things He hates – discrimination, inequality, denial of His blessings.

          • Ronnah Smith

            Here! Hear! Finally some sanity on this site. The cat is coming out of the bag. The fundamentalists are anti-historical (as they’ve always been), bigoted, and unknowing humanists. They begin with a belief and work to justify it. It is an utter abomination. In the words of Jesus of Nazareth, “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they will be called children of God.” “…their ears are hard of hearing, and they have shut their eyes; so that they might not look with their eyes, and understand with their heart…” “Unless you change and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.” “…but many who are first will be last, and the last will be first.” I don’t recognize Jesus in the pages of this site. Jesus had no interest in leadership, rank, or perfection of belief. He ranted against such. I only see hubris, hate, and fear here so it is nice to see some assertion of a Christian view.

          • MAllen

            Jia
            If Bill chooses not to answer any further, I will give the answers to questions he cannot give. I will also explain as to why this madness is so against the Godhead of heaven. Then one will see how Romans 1:17-26 and key point verse 20 ties into Gen 5:1-2 and why this completely disqualify the erroneous position they are taking against women and why the devil wants it to be so. IT WILL CHANGE the way you look at the Bble and any man who gets it, will look at their wives and mothers with greater respect and women in general.

            Malcolm X made a very powerful statement once. He said “who prescribes your knowledge will prescribe the circumference of your knowledge.”

            God has no circumference. Let him prescribe your knowledge, not a position on earth only because he was given authority by sinful men of lesser authority as His prophets.

            Respectfully let us understand, God is NOT a respect or of person.

            Brother MAllen

          • http://www.facebook.com/bill.sorensen.96 Bill Sorensen

            George Evans Bill Sorensen That’s right,
            George. Repentance is another issue as some have already stated. But many of us
            know the Gay agenda has no affinity to repentance. And so it must be dealt with
            from this perspective. In many areas the church today will not define sin. In
            which case, sin is not only tolerated but condoned and supported on several
            levels. WO is just one of them and the Gay movement is another. It is all one
            and the same spirit of rebellion against the bible.

            The major argument of the liberal agenda is the bible is not definitive
            enough to make anything non-negotiable. So, we don’t know how to dress for
            church. We don’t know what music is OK in church. We don’t know if jewelry is
            sin or not. We don’t know if WO is biblical or not. We don’t know if God
            created the world in six literal days and rested on the seventh day and made it
            holy.

            Once the gospel is used to over throw and discredit the law and claim the
            bible is not discernable on clear biblical issues, the door is open for any and
            all sin. Eventually, lay members are told they must “trust the
            experts” to tell us what all this means. Do you hear Rome speaking?

            Is the dragon making powerful inroads into Adventism? And one final comment.
            How is it all the liberal Union Presidents can come out publically as well as
            all the other liberal leaders and state clearly and plainly their support of
            WO? And how is it Ted Wilson who some believe is very conservative and against
            WO must be silent so as not to influence the study of this issue?

            Why doesn’t he “man up” and state clearly and plainly his personal
            conviction in public? We don’t see these other “leaders” timid in
            expressing their personal views. They don’t mind “influencing” the
            study committee with their views and convictions. The duplicity in the church
            is so over whelmingly liberal, that conservative leaders act like “dumb
            dogs that won’t bark” when they should make their position known clearly
            and publically for all to know.

            The whole thing is disgusting and beyond any viable rational evaluation by
            any reasonable and reasoning person. We never see any real prophet doing
            anything but demanding accountability by an apostate leadership. Elijah,
            Jeremiah, Isaiah, John the Baptist, Martin Luther and yes, Jesus Himself all
            demanding accountability for apostacy. Neither did they sit by and wait for
            some church “vote” to decide what is biblical and what is not. The
            church will surely split. Just accept it and determine to be on the right side
            biblically. Unity is not possible at this point.

            Believe it or not.

            Bill Sorensen

          • MAllen

            Bill is this not a cheap attempt to evade the questions I have asked for nothing you have placed here has answered a single quote I have made by Bible or SOP. Come now, BE A Christian and a Gentleman with honesty.

            The attempt is lazy and does nothing to help you in really finding the truth but reveals to all those who are watching that you lack a bible education and the spirit of investigation, thus making you look ignorant.

            I for one do not believe you are ignorant, just too proud to accept the fact that you flat out do not know what you are talking about on the issue of WO because you CANNOT prove from the Bible with no direct the issue on ordination of women.

            You try to throw in homosexuality in this to make it seems like the worste sin but here is where you err. Go to the book of Lev or Deut and show me how God placed homosexuality with WO?? Did not God place all the sexual sins before the people of which They stated that they find it “detestable” or an “abomination”? Was WO part of those, then how do you attempt to rewrite the Bible? Dont allow the devil to deceive you by having you hold your pride at the forefront. Seek help from The Lord not his foe.

            On the contrary you attempt to make an all male godhead and believe that is the position of Alohim. One problem is that you don’t know the word Alohim is actually plural carrying both the male and female gender in the Hebrew the language it was written in. Please go check out the Hebrew bible or concodence. When the Bible opened up and said “let US make man (mankind) in “Our Image” and in “Our likeness” you and most of the male world assumed that to be “male”

            Now if that was the case then you cannot explain the “image and likeness” the female Adam was made. Yet God did not leave it for us to wonder for He made it clear that ” the INVISABLE things of him FROM the CREATION of the world are CLEARLY SEEN, been UNDERSTOOD by the things that MADE, even the ETERTERNAL power and GODHEAD; so that NONE is without EXCUSE. Romans 1:20

            So while you blind yourself to these facts, God is trying to tell you to go see the creation and see how the Godhead came into existence. Go back to verse 19 and see what it says. God hath showed it to us, so why are you so confused on the equality of the female if you understood the Role of the Holy Spirit which in All cases in the Bible of Hebrew origin is FEMALE despite the fact that men as put the title “he” to her name name.

            Go back now to Romans 1 and continue down the rest of the verses and then it starts talking about the fact that when you lose the truth of the Gohead you will entangle yourself to “vain imagination” and this will lead to homosexuality. WHY?
            Because verse 22 “professing themselves to be wise (as most of you think you are with this WO issue), they became fools ( and by the way the term “fool” in the bible means one who does not believe there is a God or in this case a female God), and changed the GLORY (the shikinah, the train, the Holy Spirit whom is the Glory of the father as a woman is the Glory of a man and the woman was brought forth from Adam to be equal with him and be his glory she also was NAMED Adam as the Holy Spirit was also named God) of the uncorupatble God into an image made like to corruptible man….”

            What was the result, read further….homosexuality. So your vain attempt to change the order of things is only inspired by the Devil for he is the hater of all females. Why? Because she represents something that he cannot do and that is create Life and you play the part of helping him suppress the truth of the very Godhead that is in existence to which women are to represent in the ministry..

            With all due respect the fact that you put homosexuality together with WO is only INSPIRED by the devil and you and all who use this vain excuse to down play the ORDAINED position that the Father has set up for Himself and His Son is to say that the Godhead is of homosexual origin to have an all male Godhead….GOD forbid.

            Go to verse 25 and see how this truth was turned into a lie… Remember in the first part of Romans the Bible said the truth was “shown” and that “none is without excuse” to know as it is “clearly seen”. If all those use of words have you confused about the Gohead then you might as well call God a liar in the Bible for using those words…but the last time I checked it stated “God is not a man that he should lie” numbers 23 and that the one thing God CANNOT do is lie. So then why are you not “clearly” seeing what has been “shown” that you have “no excuse” about the “Eternal Power and Godhead”? What truth about God has been turned into a lie and explain why Paul put both these statements together and what is he talking about when he included homosexuality in the same verses about the lost truth about God? If you answer these question, which I doubt you will, then if you are HONEST you will not lie to yourself for you will end up the same way the Bible says you will..verse 26-32, then you will see the truth. Be very careful my brother.

            Now you have some information about why the question of the male and female Adam was important. Gen 5:1-2. It is creation which you were told by Romans to go see to understand the Godhead. All things created had all these things in common.
            Came of its OWN KIND. All had BOTH MALE and FEMALE in animals, plants and man. All was to bring from itself its OWN KIND. All was good, except when male Adam was by himself, God said it was “not good” so He brought forth from the man a helpmeet and the man Adam called her “woman”, not Eve. That name was not given to her until after she sinned.

            “SO THAT NONE IS WITHOUT EXCUSE verse 20.
            It was not good that the Father was alone and so He brought from himself the Holy Spirit to be His Helpmeet and named her GOD becaus she of of HIS OWN KIND and thus now EQUAL to him. She was to be the giver of all life as all living of mankind was to come from her as she was to be the “MOTHER”. This is why you always see the crying for sinful man to come back been done in the form of God as a mother crying for her children. It is the Holy Spirit doing this equal with the Farher. Go to the books of Solomon and see what the wisest man on earth figured out on this matter…Just remember what Paul said, “thinking themselves wise they became fools” watch yourself.

            Verse 18 says that they “hold the truth in unrighteousness” Who has this truth that they are using in unrighteousness? How about the devils organization on earth, the Roman Chtholic church. They believe in the Father and Son but they also have a counterfeit and that is “Mary MOTHER of God”. You see my friend you cannot COUNTERFIET something that does not EXIST. The only reason they have Mary as a counterfeit is because there has to be a REAL female true mother of God or the devil is wasting his time putting an organization together like the Father if the parts are different. Deception only works if it is LIKE the real or everyone will know. Now ask this question again.
            Who pushes the suppression of women in the priesthood more than the Catholic Church? And who has the HIGHEST homosexuality rate in all Christian religion?? You answer is given in the book of Romans 1.

            Take your time, this might be too overwhelming for you but if you have Bible and historical language proof to refute what is been said, please give it or just keep silent on the matter.

            WO is completely RIGHT and it is the representation of the Helpmeet of the Godhead and thus you err and all those who think like you and use no TRUE Bible explanation. To reverse the issue of homosexuality as part of WO is actually the work of the devil using you to do the opposite of what he knows to be true and you are now “his helpmeet”

            Get out before it is too late and don’t let your pride stand in the way. Remember, it ALWAYS comes befor the FALL.

            Don’t hate me for telling you the truth.

            In Love, thou you cannot see it yet
            MAllen

          • Jia Tang

            “There is only one time when it is essential to awaken. That time is now.” -Buddha

          • MAllen

            Jia
            Had asked Bill to give the reason for his faith in regards to how he can prove from the Bible only that there was only 30 days in a biblical month. The importance of this is the issue of the 1844 message which is the foundation if the SDA church.
            He could not answer thou profess great Bible insight on other bible topics. Now if we cannot search the bible and find reasons to defend our faith, it is best if we keep Silent on subjects we know nothing of and most importantly humble ourselves to get the answer.

            Why is this important, first I asked Bill this so that I can make a point that not all things he may understand and the WO thing maybe one of them if he could search the bible and find the info I am about to give him and any following this discussion.

            If we cannot prove that the bible only has 30 days in a month, the the position of arriving to 1844 will be crushed in a debate. The reason is simple. If we use the Roman calendar we will have various dates based on the fact that we have 28-31 days per month, yet according to William Miller arrived at the 1844 he used a 30 day month to get 360 days a year, not 364-5 days a year.

            Where is the proof in the Bible that there is only 30 days to a year???

            Gen. 7:11 said, “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the SECOND MONTH, the SEVENTEENTH DAY of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the deep broken open…..”

            Gen. 7:24 said, “And the water prevailed upon the earth an hundred and fifty days”

            Gen. 8:3-4 said, “And the waters returned from off the earth….the end of the HUNDRED and FIFTY DAYS….the ark rested in the SEVENTH MONTH, on the SEVENTEENTH DAY…”

            The math is very simple. Month 2 on the 17th day the rain started and it began to abate on Month 7 on the 17th day. Now, the water prevailed (Gen.7:24) for 150 days. You subtract month 7 from month 2 and you have 5 months. The total number of days in that 5 months was 150 days, thus you have30 days to a biblical month.

            We must recognize that it was VERY specific that the bible made emphasis that it was the 17th day of both month 2 and month 7.

            It is a simple math and now you have bible proof that the Hebrew days to the month is only 30. Now you can figure out the number of years based on the 12 month colander thus arriving at 1844, the start of the first day Adventist which eventually became SDA years later. It was also noted that the first month start in March/April and this is why we ended up in October which was the 7th month of the year not July as they first thought.

            Just a little bible INVESTIGATION lesson I had to learn with myself with a humble heart. The ONLY way one can learn.

            With great respect my sister.
            Sincerely
            MAllen

          • MAllen

            Typo Correction:
            “Where is the proof in the Bible that there is only 30 days to a year???”

            It should say “30 days to a MONTH, not a year”

          • Jia Tang

            Actually my statement was about the blowhards,like Ron, Bill, David, and Kevin P that don’t know the Bible and misrepresent it at their own peril. There is no greater thorn in God’s flesh. Luckily the vast number of NA Adventists reject their hate and prejudice. PUC again obeyed the will of God expressed through prayerful votes to ordain without regard to gender”. More females ordained in various ministries. God’s will can’t be stopped by Adventist backsliders.

          • MAllen

            Well agreed. I do understand who it was for. I just wanted to go back what I said earlier to Bill just to show him how simple the Bible is once they put their Prejudice aside. This was a question I had asked him, but I thought I would put the answer to you indirectly to him to show his willful ignorance, when people are wiling to be taught by the “unction” of the Spirit.

            Hey, any old light in a new light we get is always good:)

            God’s blessing, but the is far from over.

            Regards
            MAllen

          • Bill Sorensen

            “It was not good that the Father was alone and so He brought from himself the Holy Spirit to be His Helpmeet and named her GOD becaus she of of HIS OWN KIND and thus now EQUAL to him. She was to be the giver of all life as all living of mankind was to come from her as she was to be the “MOTHER”.”

            Nothing but Mormon drivel. Blowhard pontificating. Get a life.
            Bill Sorensen

          • Jia Tang

            I see that Bill has finally shown his pent up anger, fear and ineptitude.

          • Bill Sorensen

            No doubt, Jesuits have infilterated every Christian forum with massive doses of confusion and self affirmation of wisdom and spiritual understanding. I only hope most sincere bible Adventists can readily see the inane and vain explanations coming from some of these so called spiritual explanations of the word of God. Maybe Jesus had some “pent up anger” when He said, “Ye are of your father the devil……” because they were deceiving some honest and sincere individuals in His day.
            Signs of the times. No doubt.
            Bill

          • Jia Tang

            Doesn’t matter. Netherlands union just passed an Equality motion by a clear majority. Bill is not Adventist. He is a bigoted fundamentalist that has failed to understand the Bible or the Present Truth

          • MAllen

            Bill,
            If you believe the SDA church has a Messenger from God, which I completely do, How do you answer this quote from EG White so that you can explain to Jia and others watching? Are you following the INSTRUCTIONS here given by God??

            Please clarify….

            “Examination of New Views—Truth is eternal, and conflict with error will only make manifest its strength….. Suppose a brother held a view that differed from yours, and he should come to you, proposing that you sit down with him and make an investigation of that point in the Scriptures; should you rise up, filled with prejudice, and condemn his ideas, while refusing to give him a candid hearing? – {CW 44.1}
            The only right way would be to sit down as Christians and investigate the position presented, in the light of God’s word, which will reveal truth and unmask error. To ridicule his ideas would not weaken his position in the least if it were false, or strengthen your position if it were true. If the pillars of our faith will not stand the test of investigation, it is time that we knew it. There must be no spirit of pharisaism cherished among us. When Christ came to His own, His own received Him not; and it is a matter of solemn interest to us that we should not pursue a similar course in refusing light from heaven. – {CW 44.2}”

            Jia and other that are watching awaits your answer.
            Pray my brother, do not allow self to rise up in your answer,
            Regards
            MAllen

          • MAllen

            Mr Bill,
            What part of the scriptures that I have given you that you have replied with scripture? When you get over your emotional outburst and be the Christian that you should be, then i am willing to listen to you. Everyone out there is watching and it doesn’t make you look good. If you cannot defend your faith, then why profess it? Imagine if you were back in the days of Luther, is this how you would have defended “Righteous by Faith” at the Ausberg Confession? How intelligent would you have look? Probably the same as now, which is not looking too good. I am not trying to expose your inability to explain your faith but was only trying to show you that you DO NOT understand as much as you think you know on the issue of WO but you have exposed your own self of “ineptitude”.

            First of all, let us be correct on this matter. The Mormons does not teach this that I have laid before you, the Bible tell you in Romans 1 simply to go see how the Godhead that we cannot see is explained by the things created that we can see.

            DO YOU NOT BELIEVE THE BIBLE? If you do, can you then tell me what part of the created things tell us of how the existence of the invisible Godhead is? I await your EDUCATED answer from the Bible and not from your emotional outburst.

            By the way……

            It was the leadership priest that Jesus was speaking to calling them the “children of the devil” because THEY were deceiving the congregation, it was not people in the congregation deceiving each other. Please go back and read again what the Bible says not what you THINK it says.
            Thank you.

          • MAllen

            Bill,

            One more thing, “Jesuits” infiltrate the leaderships of organizations where they are effective to make changes unknown to the congregation where they have an influence, they are not simple organic farmers like myself who have no pull on anything this church does or not do….think intelligently on this.
            Regards
            MA

          • MAllen

            Bill take some time a READ, not browse through Proverbs 8.
            Look up the definition of “brought forth” in comparison to “begat” or “begotten”. Try to handle this one with intellect and not an emotional outburst, please. It is unbecoming of true Christian character.

            And yes, I do have a life “in” the Holy Spirit. Do you have life?

  • Cristina

    Thank you Bil , and thank God for man like you that have the discernment to call sin by its name. “The greatest want of the world is the want of men-men who will not be bought or sold, men who in their inmost souls are true and honest, men who do not fear to call sin by its right name, men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole, man who will stand for the right though the heavens fall.”