Can the Remnant Church Fail?

[ClubV12]

Not ONE person can point to a Spirit of Prophecy quote that even hints at the church will not fall is based on conditions and MAY, have or will fall before the 2nd coming. Not ONE quote can be provided that even suggests that possibility.

There are many examples of peoples, nations, tribes who fell out of favor with God recorded in the bible. Many times over. Though you cite a 100 such examples they do not have anything to do with the plain and clear words of the prophet for these end times.

The church WILL NOT FALL. I have studied this subject in depth, Nic, Gibs, far from being "selective" the evidence continually builds on itself. Sister White is clearly referring to the "Church" as that organized, visible body of believers that constitute the official Seventh-day Adventist church. She is clear in her referrences as to the CONDITIONS that apply when the G.C. is the highest authority on earth. IT IS NOT the highest authority of a few men at the top of leadership in the G.C., as you mistakenly seem to believe Nic. When ASSEMBLED and in SESSION, represented by a wide spectrum of leaders from around the world, it IS, IT REMAINS, the highest authority on earth.

The church is not, as many would have us believe, some rogue group meeting in some private house, saying the Adventist church is in apostasy. There are countless off shoots of such people with countless variations on the Adventist beliefs who say this all the time.

Show me ONE quote that says todays church MAY, COULD, MIGHT or WILL fall based on some conditional promise from the Spirit of Prophecy. ONE. You cannot do it because it does not exist. This issue is not open to debate, the church will go through to the end, period.

Sister White says of those that have withdrawn their membership and their support, the church is better off without them. NOT my words, her's. And I agree, "good riddance", don't let the screen door hit you on the back side when you leave. And don't linger in the parking lot either, make a clean break, get out, leave, go away, don't look back. The church is better off without you.

[Tom Wetmore]

Sister White says of those that have withdrawn their membership and their support, the church is better off without them. NOT my words, her's...

Could you give us a reference to where she says that?

[M. T. Cross]

There are many examples of peoples, nations, tribes who fell out of favor with God recorded in the bible. Many times over. Though you cite a 100 such examples they do not have anything to do with the plain and clear words of the prophet for these end times.

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

“Not ONE person can point to a Spirit of Prophecy quote that even hints at the church will not fall is based on conditions and MAY, have or will fall before the 2nd coming. Not ONE quote can be provided that even suggests that possibility.”

True! And not one person can provide a single quote negating what Ellen White said about the fact that God’s promises and threatening are conditional. God voided the promise he made to Priest Abiathar and his descendants; the Lord voided the promise he made through his prophets to the city of Jerusalem; the Lord voided the promise made by the Angel Gabriel to Mary that her Son would sit on David’s throne forever. In fact he was prevented from doing so by the murder minded Jewish leaders.

When Jesus cleansed the Temple of Jerusalem he asserted his right to be their King; they rejected and killed him. There was no way for God to fulfill his promise to Mary. If we as a church do not repent and confess our sin, the Lord may have no option but to spit us out of his mouth, as described in Scripture. Notice that the future of the last church alluded to in the book of Revelation is not set in cement. Our future is contingent on our moral behavior. This is true about organizations and about individual members of our church.

“The church WILL NOT FALL. I have studied this subject in depth, Nic, Gibs, far from being "selective" the evidence continually builds on itself.”

You are basing your prediction on a single statement by Ellen White, while ignoring other statements by her which offer a more balanced and biblically based doctrines. This is rather dangerous! You have studied this in depth and I have done likewise. My position is based not on a single inspired statement but on several statements and principles contained in what the Lord has revealed to us.

“She is clear in her references as to the CONDITIONS that apply when the G.C. is the highest authority on earth. IT IS NOT the highest authority of a few men at the top of leadership in the G.C., as you mistakenly seem to believe Nic. When ASSEMBLED and in SESSION, represented by a wide spectrum of leaders from around the world, it IS, IT REMAINS, the highest authority on earth.”

You arguments sound very similar to those used by Rome. They argue that Peter was given the Keys of heaven to him as the right representative of the Christian Church and that the gates of hell would not prevail against her. Was this promise fulfilled to the organized Christian Church? Did the gates of hell prevail against the organized Christian Church? It certainly did! But it did not prevail against his true, invisible church composed of all his true believers who refused to follow the orders of the organized church.

“Sister White says of those that have withdrawn their membership and their support, the church is better off without them. NOT my words, her's. And I agree, "good riddance", don't let the screen door hit you on the back side when you leave. And don't linger in the parking lot either, make a clean break, get out, leave, go away, don't look back. The church is better off without you.”

I feel this last comment of yours is out of bounds. I have not suggested that I am leaving. Remember that Prophet Jeremiah was declared persona non grata by his countrymen. Are you sure the Lord feels this way about what I have been doing on behalf of the unborn and the Adventist Church?

[Gibs]

The SDA so called church may have clinched it when made it's self a corporation of the world. God's Church is not trademarked, He the Rock originated it as Ekklesia, Church to us and it has no other name. He named it and any of another name is not His. His proves it is His by the straight testimony of His Ordained ministers. A true Spiritual Member of His Body soon can tell who the one preaching is ordained of. The Voice of the True Shepherd, The Truth.

When a body of believers and it's head does evil things and teaches untruths it is not His Body but of another.

There is only one Body that has not fallen to the gates of Hell and that is His Faithful Ekklesia.

Mt 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Christ Jesus was and is that Rock! Not Peter as some would like to make it out. All the Apostles were a stone as was Peter but Jesus Christ is the Rock. Peter was no higher than any of the rest.

Don't be deceived, your name on HIS Book and not blotted out is where it counts. It is called the Lambs Book of Life. Not on any denominational structure roll.

Re 21:27 And there shall in no wise enter into it any thing that defileth, neither whatsoever worketh abomination, or maketh a lie: but they which are written in the Lamb's book of life.

Da 12:1 And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book.

The theology also must be right, read,

Re 3:5 He that overcometh, the same shall be clothed in white raiment; and I will not blot out his name out of the book of life, but I will confess his name before my Father, and before his angels.

The secret of the Overcomer is Christ in you the Hope of Glory!

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

I'm done here....

Interpret the scripture and spirit of propecy however you see fit. The Testimonies are clear on this issue, those looking for excuses to believe the church has or will fall will find plenty of hooks to hang their doubts on.

As to WHEN the "end times" began, we know, from the Spirit of Prophecy the time in which WE are living right now is that time. Paul, for instance, was very aware that HE was NOT living in the "time of the end". The mistake here is that even Adam was looking for the coming Messiah in HIS day, but he was not living in the "end times", as we are today. It is easy to confuse the two concepts, which is WHY we have been given the Spirit of Prophecy to help us discern the truth.

Nic, you seem very confused on these simple issues. There is no single quote I base my beliefs on, either from the bible or from Ellen White. It is the larger body of her work that I draw specific conclusions regarding these "end time" events. There is no question the Genercal Conference IS the highest authority on earth. You can interpret that, twist it, wrestle with it, define it, any way you like. It remains fundamentally true when you understood it correctly.

The same can be said of the church, it will not fall. For those who have LEFT THE CHURCH already, they will never be able to understand this. They will find "hook after hook" to hang their doubts on, it is hopeless for them to correctly interpret scripture or the Spirit of Prophecy. I'm OK with that, the church is better off without them.

"Many of the Sabbathkeeping Adventists in ----- have been very weak. They have been miserable representatives of the truth. They have not been an honor to the cause of present truth, and the cause would have been better off without them. You have taken the unconsecrated lives of Sabbathkeepers as an excuse for your occupying a position of doubt and unbelief."

Testimonies, Volume 2, 109

This same principle, the church, the school, the movement is applied over and over again through out Ellen Whites work. The unconsecrated minister for instance, the church is better off without him. The school is better off without some leaders and students who refuse to come under the discipline of the church. Those who "fight against" the Testimonies of Ellen White should be disfellowshipped! This theme is carried throughout her work. We see in the camp of Israel as well. Those who would not submit to "church authority" we put out of the camp, or killed outright. That concept has not changed.

Now the unbalanced mind and those who not within the church will argue WHO will decide? And of course the classic argument of the wheat and tares. Fine, hang your doubts on those hooks and post all your "excuses" for rebellion and your call for the scattering of Gods people. But make no mistake, the CHURCH BODY WILL judge you, it has an obligation to judge and determine who is and who is not worthy to be in the camp. The "camp" is better off without those who refuse to submit to leadership and fight against the church.

[M. T. Cross]

We see in the camp of Israel as well. Those who would not submit to "church authority" we put out of the camp, or killed outright. That concept has not changed.

I would hope its changed!! If not there is an implication there that people that do not submit to the authority of the SDA GC should be killed. Thats a little crazy.

[ClubV12]

Those who fail to submit to the highest authority on earth, the General Conference will in fact "be killed". Whatever is bound on earth by that body of belivers, the church, is bound in heaven. If that body puts you outside the camp and you continue to fight that decision and fight against that body of believers, eternal death will surely follow in good time. Nothing has changed since the time of Adam and Eve. Satans first lie was they wouldn't die, but they did. Same today, obey and live, disobey and die.

Many reject that as to harsh, but thats just another excuse for not understanding and seeing the love behind it. What other choice could be allowed? Eternal life WITH sin? Never happen, only two groups in the end, believers and obediance, and disbelievers and death, no middle ground here.

[M. T. Cross]

Those who fail to submit to the highest authority on earth, the General Conference will in fact "be killed". Whatever is bound on earth by that body of belivers, the church, is bound in heaven. If that body puts you outside the camp and you continue to fight that decision and fight against that body of believers, eternal death will surely follow in good time. Nothing has changed since the time of Adam and Eve. Satans first lie was they wouldn't die, but they did. Same today, obey and live, disobey and die.

Many reject that as to harsh, but thats just another excuse for not understanding and seeing the love behind it. What other choice could be allowed? Eternal life WITH sin? Never happen, only two groups in the end, believers and obediance, and disbelievers and death, no middle ground here.

Well I see it a whole lot differently than that, but each of us see things our own way I guess.

What I have a hard time understanding is this. Those of the camp that buy the "SUBMIT TO GOD IN OBEDIENCE OR DIE" theory. How can you so deeply love a God like that? How can you respect that? I just don't get it.

[ClubV12]

Of course you don't understand it, I get that. If you don't accept the concept of the Seventh-day Adventist church as God's church on earth, this and so many other concepts regarding His chosen people will be impossible to understand.

It's a different matter for those within the church, members of the church. Should they choose to openly "fight against" (Ellen Whites words) the Testimonies or fail to submit to the counsel of the Elders within their local church (see the church manual on this issue) or fight against the established rules, laws, regulations of the General Conference they are facing disfellowship. What IS disfellowship according to the bible? Delivered unto Satan that they might see and understand their position and come back to Christ. Not in name, but in spirit, so that they may LIVE and not die. Disfellowship is an act of LOVE, not anger. Those who disobey the body of believers ultimately disobey God and what does THAT lead to?

The concept of disobey and die is the very heart of the Great Controversy. Death is the final solution, the ONLY possible solution to permanently removing sin from the Universe. It is a strange thing to God, He takes no pleasure in it. What options do you recommend? That sin should be allowed to exist for eternity? Heaven forbid (literally).

[M. T. Cross]

Quote:

Of course you don't understand it, I get that. If you don't accept the concept of the Seventh-day Adventist church as God's church on earth, this and so many other concepts regarding His chosen people will be impossible to understand.

The Obey or Die thing is not unique to the SDA church. Its not even unique to Christianity.

Quote:

It's a different matter for those within the church, members of the church. Should they choose to openly "fight against" (Ellen Whites words) the Testimonies or fail to submit to the counsel of the Elders within their local church (see the church manual on this issue) or fight against the established rules, laws, regulations of the General Conference they are facing disfellowship. What IS disfellowship according to the bible? Delivered unto Satan that they might see and understand their position and come back to Christ. Not in name, but in spirit, so that they may LIVE and not die. Disfellowship is an act of LOVE, not anger. Those who disobey the body of believers ultimately disobey God and what does THAT lead to?

I think that there is a real line between fighting against the churches dogma and doctrine and trying to enhance it, trying to further it. No - those that do the latter should not be disfellowshiped. Thing about Scripture, even about EGW's writings is it can all be interpreted different ways. People will always disagree on the meanings of things. Its a part of our built in nature.

Take for example yourself and say Gibs. Now this is not meant as a personal thing towards either of you - its just the first example that comes to mind. You both claim to have given your heart and soul to Jesus and the Father, and to have submiited your will to be guided by the Holy Spirit. Yet you come up with very very different results.

So who is to say who is oberying what in the correct manner? The lines in their are so blurry.

Take that a step further. I long ago prayed endlessly to be guided to the Truth. I ended up in avery very different place. My road has come around to a place where love, kindess and hope are much higher ideals. Given that the bible says that God is Love I am pretty much inclined to think that God will accept the path I took. He/She/It likely guided me to it.

Quote:

The concept of disobey and die is the very heart of the Great Controversy. Death is the final solution, the ONLY possible solution to permanently removing sin from the Universe. It is a strange thing to God, He takes no pleasure in it. What options do you recommend? That sin should be allowed to exist for eternity? Heaven forbid (literally).

I really have to wonder about this. Could not the Devil have been bound from spreading his sinful ways? Could not have he been destroyed right in the beginning? Why let so very many human lives be destroyed and false paths be taken by letting this evil critter have his way on our earth? We are his children and thats how we are treated?

It defies any rational sense.

I don't think that one is wrong in being an Adventist. I would never encourage anyone to leave the Church if they feel its message deeply within their soul. But the whole Gods chosen people thing IMO is arrogant and filled with human pride. I think it is the very thing that will cause the church to fall if it does. Just like Israel.

[Gibs]

Clubv12,

You see the Jews couldn't see that their apostasy put them out of God's favor either. Neither can the Catholic faith or any other of so called protestant faiths. The word "protestant" spells out the key to the problem, no protestantism among any and this includes SDA's and I'm not sure there is any real protestantism even of the Sabbath issue which is about the only one you can see they haven't fallen into with the world.

You surely see unless there is recovery of the old paths it is soon all over. I really believe you are one who sees it and it hurts so bad it is unbearable. Yes my Bro. it is for me too. But I've fought the good fight hard and my time is almost over, but let me tell you, also for the whole world and don't know it. Maybe not as short a timer as me but then again If Jesus wants to see me through it all I am willing as I would really be in Glory Land to see Him come in the clouds.

We are heading into some "doggone hard sledding" that most are not envisioning. I must claim this promise,

Isa 46:4 And even to your old age I am he; and even to hoar hairs will I carry you: I have made, and I will bear; even I will carry, and will deliver you.

His will be done toward me for I know He knows best.

We must always remember His promises to us are conditional upon obedience and obedience is scoffed at by many in the body today and it is the members who make up the body such as it is.

Neither is any reform coming in or beginning to come is EGW was hopeful of. I do believe before she died she saw it wasn't going to happen. She began to see it it seems in 1901 from what I gather. Then in 1903 it appears they cinched it their way and not what she had admonished.

I can not condone it and will not and must be a discenter of the fallbacks. Will I be a Martyr? I don't know but I will not and must not buckle to the wrong.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

"I think that there is a real line between fighting against the churches dogma and doctrine and trying to enhance it, trying to further it."

I compelety agree with that Emptycross, it is the primary reason the Lord says let the wheat and tares grow together. We cannot judge the heart. But the church does have a responsibility to judge "open sin", obvious sin. "Fighting against" the Spirit of Prophecy, for instance, does not include those who are still wrestling with how they see the counsel. Inspired, personal opinion or whatever. At some point you cross a line from honest questions to outright rebellion. Openly calling Ellen White a fraud is crossing that line. Consistently "attacking" her work as irrelevant is crossing that line. Preaching a doctrinal point the church does not support officially is another. The local church, the Conference or perhaps the G.C. may be involved depending on the person or circumstances. We should with pen and voice express our concerns sincerely. But we have to "protest" in the right manner. Withdrawing your membership, tithes, offerings, physical support, stop coming to church, these are all forms of protest that "cross a line" into "fighting against" the church.

If you don't like any regular church in your neighborhood? Start your own genuine Seventh-day Adventist church in your home. Follow the rules of the Conference, get your little church organized, pay your tithe TO THE CONFERENCE, accept the Pastor appointed by the Conference. For the most part YOU call the shots as YOU see the need, operating within the established guidelines of the visible church, the primary body of believers. If not, whatever group or church you think you have is not a Seventh-day Adventist church. It is, by defintion, an off shoot of that church, just a simple fact of life.

Ellen Whites book, "The Great Controversy" deals with the "why was sin permitted", "how will sin be dealt with" and "why wasn't Satan just destroyed immediately" questions many ask, we all ask.

[Gibs]

Noone has any need to start a church and it would be in in competition with the True One Christ set up. That is the trouble today with all the so called churches of the world. They compete for His Ekklesia with their named whatever they get it in their head to call it. Not needed, NONE were ever needed. The Reformation just needed to go back to what it was before the Papacy.

It was still His, Ekklesia, and today the same must be returned to. His True Spiritual Members do and they are what make up His Spiritual Body today. They are calling out about the false teaching and the men heading up the structures will not hear as they will not give up their usurped king status.

Lu 18:8 I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?

How much True Faith will He find? How much presumption will He find?

Are the True ones SDA's? Generic ones yes but not corporate ones I'm very afraid.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

[ClubV12]

The early church, with Paul and the other leaders was an organized and structured body of believers. They too had a General Conference, which DID assemble with representatives from all the main churches of that time. They were then, as is the case today, the highest authority on earth. Letters from this General Conference went out to all the regular churches of that time with instructions on doctrinal beliefs. Those churches were expected to follow the leaderships counsel.

All of heaven moves in order and harmony. A single angel leads a single chorus of angels in praise, for instance. All are governed by rules and regulations, every created intelligence has a part to play and are perfectly happy with those arrangements. The church on earth is no different, it is NOT some loosely grouped together house of people here and there with no distinct leadership. The Millerites who became the Adventists wrestled with how the structure should be set up, the official organization, the sanctioned body of believers, the visible church. God led our pioneering people step by step as they could accept the light into this heavenly ordained and structured body of believers we have today.

This concept of "Ekklesia" is being misrepresented and is entirely out of synch with the plain counsel of Sister White on the structure of leadership and the organization of the Seventh-day Adventist church. The single object of His supreme attention.

It is not to hard to interpret the Spirit of Prophecy, like the bible interprets itself, so the Testimonies interpret themselves. They must be studied as a whole, searched diligently for the gems of truth. And like the bible, only those who are the true followers of Christ will understand and find the balance.

It was earlier asked, if two people with opposing views are SURE they are both being led of the Spirit and with much prayer and conviction of heart, how will we know who is right? An excellent question, as we are told the path of error will lie close to the path of truth. We cannot trust our feelings is #1. We cannot give much weight to those who "claim" to be led of the Spirit. We cannot base on conclusions on how long they have been in the faith, how much good works they have done, how Godly they appear to be. We must base the conclusion on sound principle and the greater body of work from the bible and the Spirit of Prophecy. This will not be an easy task, it will not be readily apparent, it will take much study, much prayer and a humbling of spirit to arrive at the truth.

Why do I not accept Gib's theology? Simple, it violates one important aspect of the principles by which we are to determine "truth". It is a call to separate from the body of believers, it is a call to scatter and not draw closer. It is a call for an independant body of believers who stand alone literally in spite of the Godly order of things our pioneers established. The only thing we have to fear is that we forget how God has led us in the past, to tear down and replace the foundation with some new concept of "church" as we know it. The church WILL appear as about to fall, some say it HAS fallen. Which places them in direct opposition to the organized body of believers. And THAT is a not only a serious mistake, it is cause for disfellowship according to the Seventh-day Adventist church manual. These are the facts of the matter according to the G.C. and the church manual, those that have a problem with that should take it up with their local Conference or the G.C. itself, I didn't write the rules.

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

“Nic, you seem very confused on these simple issues.”

If I am confused over my claim that our Remnant Church is in danger of falling, then our official Ministry magazine publishers were also confused when they published the history of our involvement in the lucrative abortion business. Here are a few details from an article authored by our Adventist historian George Gainer.

Gainer’s article started with the following anecdote related by a non-Adventist pastor who chose our Washington Adventist Hospital for pre-natal care. His wife was pregnant, and this pastor wanted his wife to be cared for by an Adventist physician. The first question this doctor asked the couple was: “Do you want to keep this baby?”

The pastor and his wife could not believe their eyes. They got up and left the office with the following explanation: “We must be in the wrong place.” This is how this Christian couple discovered that this Adventist hospital was offering abortions on demand and not the so called “therapeutic” kind resulting from rape, incest or malformation.

Then he documented the fact that our Adventist pioneers were very active in the pro-life movement which produced the anti-abortion legislation which lasted until 1973, and proceeded to detail how we compromised on this moral issue when the State of Hawaii legalized abortion in 1970.

Our Adventist Castle Memorial Hospital was staffed by Adventist and non-Adventist physicians. A man who had donated $25,000 for the construction of said medical institution came asking for an abortion for his pregnant daughter.

Then the non-Adventist physicians demanded the right to offer elective abortions to their patients and threatened to take their patients elsewhere in the event their petition was denied; the church leadership was made aware of this anomalous situation, and our leaders caved in for fear of loosing business to competing public medical institutions.

Then “On March 17, 1970, Neal C. Wilson, president of the North American Division, made a statement on abortion that was carried by the Religious News Service. He predicted that when the denomination met at Atlantic City in June it would steer a middle-of-the-road course.”

And he rationalized such a morally devious course of action with the following explanation: "Though we walk the fence, Adventists lean toward abortion rather than against it. Because we realize we are confronted by big problems of hunger and overpopulation, we do not oppose family planning and appropriate endeavors to control population."

Think about this: This incredible declaration was made in the richest country of the world at a time when the Unites States of America was also the largest creditor—not the largest debtor as today—on earth and the largest producer of food and clothing. Of course, we need to also remember that this declaration was made at the time when the Atomic Clock was pointing to three minutes before midnight.

The fear of a nuclear war between the U.S. and the Soviet Union was matched by the fear of the uncontrolled demographic growth in the Communist country of China. The fear of God was set aside by the fear of a nuclear annihilation of the human race from planet earth. Moral detours are usually taken at a time of great fear of an impending catastrophe. I am not attempting to justify the action of the Adventist leadership, but simply trying to understand the complexity of our moral failure.

These events gave rise to the need for the development of guidelines for the provision of abortions in Adventist medical institutions. A separate set of guidelines were drafted, one for the Adventist hospitals and the other for public consumption. The net result of all this led M. C. Midkiff to make the following declaration: "I believe if you do a bit of research you will find that the majority of Adventist hospitals permit abortion on request."

According to George Gainer, “The American Hospital Association Guide to the Health Care Field, 1986 lists 12 of the 56 Adventist hospitals in the United States as offering "abortion services," including "a program and facilities." The hospitals identified by said entity include the following Adventist medical institutions:

“Castle Medical Center, Hadley Memorial Hospital, Hanford Community Hospital, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Porter Memorial Hospital, Portland Adventist Medical Center, Shady Grove Adventist Hospital, Shawnee Mission Medical Center, Sierra Vista Hospital, Walla Walla General Hospital, Washington Adventist Hospital, and White Memorial Medical Center.”

And let us not forget that Adventist were in the forefront in the legalization of abortion, since our Castle Memorial Hospital in Hawaii started offering elective abortion services back in 1970—three years before the practice was legalized in the U.S. mainland. This is incredible. The Remnant Church of God with the last message to a perishing world engaged--like the Nazi regime-- in the extermination of innocent human beings by the thousands for the sake of expediency and profit.

If our Adventist pioneers were to witness this terrible deviation from moral duty inside the medical institutions they worked so hard to establish, they would writhe in anguish and pain. As God’s people on earth, we need to repent of this terrible sin, publicly acknowledge our moral depravity and ask God to forgive us for veering off the right path and plead for a revival of the faith delivered to the saints.

The brief description of George Gainer’s report I have included here contains merely some of the salient events he talks about in carefully documented details. If this issue is of interest to you, I encourage you to read the original document published by the Ministry magazine. Here is the Internet link to it:

http://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/...#at_pco=cft-1.0

All this confirms my position and all the research I have done in the last few years and which I recently published in book form. The title is “From Pro-life to Pro-choice: The Dramatic Shift in Seventh-day Adventists’ Attitudes Towards Abortion.” You can find it at http://lulu.com. All you need is to type my name in the search blank space.

You also said: “There is no question the General Conference IS the highest authority on earth.”

Yes, when it follows the dictates of Scripture and the Ten Commandments, but when it deviates from moral duty and starts redefining the Sixth Commanment in order to profit from the killing of innocent unborn babies, then we need to listen to a “Thus said the Lord” instead of the General Conference.

“You can interpret that, twist it, wrestle with it, define it, any way you like. It remains fundamentally true when you understood it correctly.”

The twisting was done by the Adventist leaders who redefined the original and clear meaning of the Sixth Commandment as found in Exodus 20.

“But make no mistake, the CHURCH BODY WILL judge you, it has an obligation to judge and determine who is and who is not worthy to be in the camp. The "camp" is better off without those who refuse to submit to leadership and fight against the church.”

The church may judge me, but the Lord will judge me and the church and we all will be judged by what we find in Scripture and the Ten Rules the Lord provided for human behavior.

[ClubV12]

Your looking at medical institutions and their policies, which you don't agree with, and from that making a determination the "church" has or will fall. You could do the same thing looking at many different Adventist institutions. Our schools, our colleges, you won't have to look far to find all kinds of things that would "bother you" for one reason or another. Movies, songs, games, sports teams, evolution teaching, the list is long. Brother Gibs seems to focus primarily on the wrong teachings in some Adventist churches and from that determines the church has or will fall. Some folks look and see uncosecrated Ministers preaching a smooth saying and then determine the church has fallen. Some look at our various publishing houses and don't agree with their policies or what they are printing these days. Some see the evangelistic endeavors that cost so much and produce small results as proof the church has fallen.

There is an endless variety of things to look at that will distract you from keeping your eyes on Jesus alone. It might be the cares of this life that distract you, impending doom off loosing your house to foreclosure, or your job. Maybe you see how unfair someone has been treated by the church and feel, sincerely, you must take a stand and remove yourself from the church.

In all the above cases many folks are very sincere in what they say or do or the action they take. Deny their membership, quit paying tithe and offerings, protest through some radical action. Be careful, Sister White warns there will be many who are "sincerely MISTAKEN".

Remove yourself from the church, for whatever reason, and you've lost your anchor. It is rare that those who make such a move ever recover, according to Sister White. The delusion is strong, the conviction they are doing the Lords work runs deep. THAT is why we cannot trust our feelings or the sincere testimony of others. We MUST apply the principles, have a truly broken heart, a HUMBLE spirit, and it will take time to reason these things out. In the end, the path of error will lay so close to the path of truth your only hope will be the Holy Spirit.

But many do not understand HOW the Holy Spirit works. It is a serious mistake to think that inspiration will come to you and you alone. If the inspiration is in HARMONY with the brethren, that is a sure sign your on the right track. IF you ignore the counsel of the brethren, the church elders, the board, the Conference, the G.C. and move against their counsel it is a sure sign that "inspiration" you "feel" is not from a divine source.

The CHURCH WILL judge you and what is bound on earth by that body of believers is bound in Heaven. God will judge you all right, and He will use the body of believers to help you see it. If you violate the Sabbath commandment consistently and the church disfellowships you, God judged you, not the church.

[phkrause]

Club you've made some excellent points. Unfortunately some Adventist, that have been in the church for a long time, only see and only look for the bad, in the church and the people in the church. Its sad, but I guess they feel its there life's work, and will be rewarded accordingly for there effords(sp).

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

“Your looking at medical institutions and their policies, which you don't agree with, and from that making a determination the "church" has or will fall.”

Did I ever state that the church has or will fall? Ellen White told us that in her time our church was in danger of becoming a sister to Babylon. What did she mean by said statement? The name Babylon is associated in the Bible with a fallen condition. If she said this about the condition of our church almost a century ago when abortion was condemned by our pioneers as murder, then what do you think she would say today when we have allowed the killing of babies in our own hospitals? Would she say that we are not in danger of falling?

“You could do the same thing looking at many different Adventist institutions. Our schools, our colleges, you won't have to look far to find all kinds of things that would "bother you" for one reason or another. Movies, songs, games, sports teams, evolution teaching, the list is long.”

Can you compare movies and songs to the murder of innocent babies? How many human beings have died as a result of watching immoral movies? 50 million? 30 million? 10 million? Are you comparing apples with apples?

“There is an endless variety of things to look at that will distract you from keeping your eyes on Jesus alone.”

Can you keep your eyes fixed on Jesus who gave us the Ten rules of behavior while tearing the limbs and crushing the head of an innocent baby?

“IF you ignore the counsel of the brethren, the church elders, the board, the Conference, the G.C. and move against their counsel it is a sure sign that "inspiration" you "feel" is not from a divine source.”

What did Peter say when the Sanhedrin, which was the most sacred church council among the Jews, when they ordered him to stop preaching about Jesus? “We must obey God rather than man.”

[ClubV12]

What did Peter say when the General Conference of the early church established doctrine?

To all the churches of that time: Obey, this is a requirement from the highest authority on earth. And letters with instruction were sent out to every church in existence. The instructions were clear, the doctrines issued by that body of leadership were binding on the Christians, who were to obey God by following those instructions.

Now as it concerns the General Conference of OUR time, what IS the churches official position on abortion? Not Loma Lindas position, not some Adventist Medical institution in Colorado or Michigan or Zambia. Not some publishing house printing stuff you don't like. Not some Adventist University teaching whatever. Not some church you happen to know off. What is the official position of the highest authority on earth, the General Conference, on abortion. THAT is where you must look to determine Gods will for His people on earth. Just as the early church looked to Paul, Peter, Banabas AND a wide range of Godly men representing the known world churches of their time assembled in a general conference and establishing BINDING doctrinal beliefs.

[ClubV12]

The official position of the Seventh-day Adventist church on abortion:

"The official Adventist position on abortion is that "abortions for reasons of birth control, gender selection, or convenience are not condoned." At times, however, women may face exceptional circumstances that present serious moral or medical dilemmas, such as significant threats to the pregnant woman's life or health, severe congenital defects in the fetus, and pregnancy resulting from rape or incest; in these cases individuals are counseled to make their own decisions."

I find the above counsel and official position well balanced. In addition, since it comes from the highest authority on earth, it is bound in heaven as well. To fight against it is to fight against the throne of God.

I will not force MY will on a mother who has been raped and wants to abort the child. I don't know her circumstances, the details, the family situation. SHAME on those who would FORCE a decision on her in ALL cases, regardless of the circumstances. Frankly, such people just give me the creeps, especially when they come carrying a bible and spouting all things spiritual while trying to kill the mother who will die if the child isn't aborted. Who's the murder in THAT case?

[Nic Samojluk]

pkrause wrote:

“Club you've made some excellent points. Unfortunately some Adventist, that have been in the church for a long time, only see and only look for the bad, in the church and the people in the church.”

You’re here responding to Club, but he was commenting on my views and those of Gibs. Therefore, it is difficult for me to determine whether you are referring to me, to Gibs, or to both. I will respond with the assumption that you had me in mind with your comments.

Let me start by saying that when I started my research, I was confronted with a dilemma: Jan Paulsen, the former GC president, had publicly stated that the Adventist Church was pro-life, while a very influential LLU ethicists had declared that our Adventist Church was definitely pro-choice. This apparent contradiction intrigued me, and I decided to find out.

I began by searching through our denominational publications, including books and leading magazines like Ministry, Spectrum, and Adventist Today, and recording everything that was said about abortion between 1970 and 2006. I accumulated hundreds of comments, pro and con dealing with the issue. I did not discard anything because I wanted to be fair. The result is the book I recently published.

I conclude that your suggestion that I was looking for the bad only is in error and it is denied by the facts. You either did not read my book, or perhaps were, like you stated, looking for the bad only in what I had done.

And remember that my work shows a reflection of what other Adventists have said and recorded for posterity in the pages of our Adventist publication. And do not forget that I have hundreds of quotations from our official Ministry magazine.

This means that if you disagree with me, you are disagreeing with what hundreds of Adventists have written about out church; which means that--if the results of my research is correct—and if you think that I was looking for the bad in the church, you are condemning the actions of two third of Adventists.

I have received favorable comments about my work and unfavorable. Since you are not impressed with the results of my investigation, in order to balance this, let me cite some of the favorable comments I have received so far. Today I received the following from someone who has read the book. I am including a copy of the book reviews which have been posted so far. You can add your negative comments there if you so desire. The link is: http://lulu.com. All you have to do is type my name in the blank search space.

**********

Hi Nic,

I was more than happy to read your book and review it. I probably did not do it justice or provide the good review that it deserves, but I did my best. It is an excellent book, and I still stand by my assertion that it is the most important book for Adventism in the 21st century, or until they get their abortion policy right. In reading your book, this was the first time I had ever seen the writings of the early pioneers and their very clear opposition to abortion. It is a good thing to learn new things! I must say that I was horrified by some of the thoughts and comments and positions of some of those leaders, theologians, and ethicists.

But I am encouraged that it still seems that the majority of SDAs are opposed to abortion, and just uninformed. When I took up my "battle" with the Union and the GC, the other Elders in my church joined me. They too were stunned at what was going on because the church had done such a slick job of covering up their abortion policy and practice.

I am pushing your book every chance I get. But you should no longer give it away. It is time that people buy it and that you receive some tangible recompense for your hard work and dedication. The worker is worth his hire...and in this case I believe you are worth much more than your hire.

Nic, you are a Saint even without my nomination, so you truly have little choice in accepting that verdict! We should get your picture on a card, write a pro-life prayer on the back and then sell your prayer cards in the Adventist Book and Bible Centers, or whatever they are called now. Just don't tell the Pope and the Cardinals and Bishops that I have bypassed their very rigid process for declaring sainthood....I'm in enough hot water with many others already....lol.

Nic, I am praying that not only does your book sell thousands, if not millions, of copies, but that Adventists will read it and bring about the change so desperately needed in Adventist hospitals. If there is ever anything that you think I can help you with, please do not hesitate to ask. I will do my best to help!

God bless you Nic, and keep in touch!

Mike

*********

4 People Reviewed This Item

Nov. 21, 2011By tammy_roesch

Thank you Nic, for documenting all this information! If anyone wants the facts as to where the SDA Church, as a Denomination, REALLY stands on the subject of Abortion, they should read this book. There will be no true "Revival & Reformation" in the Church, while the SDA Church is on the Pro-Choice side of the aisle. There are ONLY two sides....there is no "FENCE" to sit on, no "middle of the road" to walk on, when it comes to the subject of Abortion. I hope and pray that enough people will read this book and demand that the Church take the side of LIFE and not DEATH. God bless you, Nic!

Nov. 30, 2011By Juanita Y. Mayyes

This book is a very interesting read for every Adventist church member who cares about the cause of life and the sanctity of human life. The reader may be shocked and saddened by the information shared in its pages. Our Adventist pioneers, including James and Ellen White would feel the same way; for they too, were passionately pro life and supported the efforts in their day to make abortion illegal.

I also was shocked and saddened about our Adventist leaders and pastors whose opinion prevailed, resulting in our church’s turning to the pro choice side of the abortion issue. Read how in one hospital, the decision makers decided to allow elective abortion rather than to trust God to bless... More > and prosper them for remaining true to the Ten Commandments. Learn the reasons why our leaders and pastors took the positions they did and came to side with pro choice position rather than pro-life one. One article I have in mind that is included in the book did not even seem to be authored by a Christian person.

Perhaps the time is now for the SDA church to go back to our beginnings and get back on the path of the pioneers and follow on it. Maybe this book is written for such a time as this. This book is a must read for every Seventh Day Adventist church member, pastor, and leader. Find out why we must defend the right to life of our little brothers and sisters, the smallest and youngest members in God’s family.

Jan. 10, 2012By Michael Senseney

In the early 90s, as an Elder in my SDA church, I corresponded with the presidents of the Columbia Union and the General Conference on the issue of abortions being performed in Maryland Adventist hospitals. At first, the Union president attempted to assure me that I was taken in by vicious rumors. I obtained statistics that showed thousands of abortions were being performed bringing in millions of dollars. When the facts were presented to SDA leadership, the correspondence ended with nothing but the silent ignoring of my pleas. Unfortunately this appears to be the standard operating procedure utilized by church leadership toward any and all pro-life Adventists.

Nic Samojluk's book reveals in great detail and irrefutable evidence, this approach by SDA leadership regarding the issue of abortion in Adventist hospitals, and the commitment of that leadership to the elective and selective extermination of pre-natal human life. One has to ask why. A good starting place is to follow the money. Mr. Samojluk provides sound details which show the source of Adventist abortion policy to be that of money in pursuing this devilish blood lust in continuing to kill innocent human beings.

This is perhaps the most important book for SDAs in the 21st century. Mr. Samojluk provides in great detail, the debate regarding abortion policy in the Adventist denomination, and how it was pretty much shoved down the throats of SDA laity, the majority of whom seem opposed to abortion. The future of Adventism hinges on this one single issue...to kill or not to kill innocent human life. All moral authority, if any ever truly existed, in the Seventh-day Adventist church, should be considered null and void as long as they take the stand with complete and total disregard for precious human life.

In addition to the detailed debate and confusion between Adventist leadership and laity so clearly revealed in this book. Mr. Samojluk presents some of the best logic and reasoning for why a pro-life position is the only position a self professed Christian organization can support in good faith. This book, in spite of the tragedy of the topic, is a delight to read because of the clear insights presented by Mr. Samojluk. At times tears came to my eyes, as when reading that President Wilson's solution to world hunger could be found in the slaughter of humans who will one day eat food, and not in feeding the hungry as commanded by our Lord and Savior; or the terrifying embrace of eugenics by James W . Walters and his sophistries regarding personhood.

All of Mr. Samojluk's writings on this subject are well worth the read, and a must read for all SDAs. One of my favorites was his creative piece entitled "A Stigmata Case in Loma Linda". While this is a must read for all SDAs in the hope of recovering from the damage done by the church's position on abortion; this is a must read for all non-Adventists who desire to understand this denomination, especially those who may be considering joining the SDA church. Beware that the call to come out of Babylon is more applicable to Adventists than non-Adventists. One has to wonder how much of the "Remnant" remains. …

Nov. 14, 2011By Martin Weber

Nic has written an important book for Seventh-day Adventists on what may be the greatest moral issue of our time. What I've read of it is very impressive. I wish Adventists everywhere had the integrity that Orlando-based Adventist Health System has when it comes to unborn human life (hospitals in the Southeast U.S. and Mid-America). Concern to protect unborn human life should be at the top of our list in the current quest for revival and reformation.

*********

I also received a few days ago a telephone call from a retired Andrews University professor who is scheduled to teach a class in ethics at said Adventist institution who told me that he is planning to use my book in his teaching. He told me he believes that all Adventists should read this book. I wish this would happen, but of course I am merely dreaming. I have given out 60 copies of my book to friends and acquaintances, and I just ordered ten additional copies to give out. I wish I had a million dollars to invest in this project.

[ClubV12]

I see a LOT of articles, comments, rumors, books, etc. that say, suggest or imply that, "Adventists believe...." _____________ (fill in the blank).

#1 WHO are Adventists? For myself, I have concluded that would be those who actually hold membership in an official Seventh-day Adventist church. There are lot's of professed Adventists that have a wide variety of view's. They do not speak for the church as a body of believers.

#2 There are lots of Adventist institutions (official, members of, not independants), not all of them agree on everthing. It would be nice to think they all at least agree on the 28, but sometimes I even wonder about that!

So, when someone asks, "What do Adventists believe?". I like to go to the official source(s). The 28, the church manual, a direct statement by the G.C. that originated from an "in session" world meeting.

Individual churches, groups, institutions, schools differ widely in acceptable policies of dress, entertainment, health reform and a host of other life style choices. The G.C. has guidelines and stated positions on such things as dance, movies, music, dress and abortion as it concerns this thread. CLEARLY much of the membership (official Seventh-day Adventists) do not fully invest themselves in these guidelines and positions. In some cases, very loosely interpreting what they see as to the meaning, in other cases all but ignoring them.

This of course feeds the concept that some have that the church has fallen, might fall, will fall, etc. Surely the church will appear as about to fall.

I haven't read your book Nic, I'm sure it has a place and contains valuable information. There are many good books that may help "our people" to find the path some have wandered from. But I won't hold my breath waiting for revival and reformation. In fact, Sister White counsels us NOT TO! We know there will be false revivals and reformations, we know there will be a very real revival and reformation as well! It will be difficult to discern the real from the fake.

My view is that true revival and reformation will happen only at the time of the last shaking. One could say, and correctly so, we HAVE been in the shaking for decades, if not a century or more. But I'm talking about events like the church HAS gone through and will go through again. The Civil War comes to mind, when our people faced death for choosing the Sabbath over the military draft. Or WW1 which split the church over the conscientious objector positions some took. Perhaps the Great Depression era and WW2 and the calamity they brought. Times of very intense personal decisions impacting life, liberty and your ability to simply survive. The church will be purified only through very serious trials such as we have not yet seen, worse than we have yet seen. Wait for it, it will come.

Meanwhile, I'll go with the G.C.'s official position as it concerns what "Adventists" really believe. As opposed to what "most" Adventists tend to believe. My gutt leaves me wondering if "most" of them have it wrong.

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

“What did Peter say when the General Conference of the early church established doctrine? To all the churches of that time: Obey, this is a requirement from the highest authority on earth. And letters with instruction were sent out to every church in existence. The instructions were clear; the doctrines issued by that body of leadership were binding on the Christians, who were to obey God by following those instructions.”

Yes, until Paul came and said: Nonsense! You Christians have no need to abstain from food sacrificed to idols. And remember what Peter told the members of the Sanhedrin when he was ordered not to preach about Jesus: “We must obey God rather than men.”

If the GC leadership were to justify stealing, rape, and the sexual abuse of children, would you argue that we must obey? If not, why not? And don’t forget that stealing is not as tragic as murder, which has resulted in the deaths of over 50 million innocent children!

“Now as it concerns the General Conference of OUR time, what IS the churches official position on abortion? Not Loma Linda’s position, not some Adventist Medical institution in Colorado or Michigan or Zambia.”

Did you know that the GC delegated the responsibility to draft the “Guidelines on Abortion” to the Loma Linda University? Do you think that this was a wise decision? This was akin to the government asking the tobacco industry to set the rules guiding people about smoking. Should conflict of interest have been considerd?

“What is the official position of the highest authority on earth, the General Conference, on abortion?”

The official position states that killing innocent unborn babies is morally acceptable under a variety of circumstances including when the pregnant woman’s mental health is affected. Well, this is what led to our hospitals offering abortions on demand.

Have you ever seen a woman facing an unwanted pregnancy whose mental condition is not affected? The woman says to her doctor: “I am terribly depressed and I can’t sleep," and bingo: another innocent baby is butchered without mercy and without anesthesia.

“THAT is where you must look to determine Gods will for His people on earth.”

I guess what the Bible teaches about murder doesn’t count! Is it safe to obey men rather than God who wrote his Ten Rules of human behavior on tablets of stone?

[Nic Samojluk]

ClubV12 wrote:

"The official position of the Seventh-day Adventist church on abortion:

"The official Adventist position on abortion is that "abortions for reasons of birth control, gender selection, or convenience are not condoned." At times, however, women may face exceptional circumstances that present serious moral or medical dilemmas, such as significant threats to the pregnant woman's life or health, severe congenital defects in the fetus, and pregnancy resulting from rape or incest; in these cases individuals are counseled to make their own decisions."

“I find the above counsel and official position well balanced. In addition, since it comes from the highest authority on earth, it is bound in heaven as well. To fight against it is to fight against the throne of God.”

I find this position in violation of God’s dictum which states: “You shall not murder.” We must obey God rather than men, regardless of their position or authority. God has only four words regarding the killing of innocent human beings: “YOU SHALL NOT MURDER.” Our church has almost 100 hundred, and they redefined what the Lord ordered and justify what God has forbidden. We have done to the Sixth Commandment what Rome did to the Fourth one. The Lord will hold our church leaders responsible their flagrant violation of God’s Law.

“I will not force MY will on a mother who has been raped and wants to abort the child.”

Neither will I! I have no power to prevent a woman from having an abortion. The government is the only one with such power, and unfortunately, the government decided to look the other way while the genocide of unborn is taking place.

Our church is doing exactly what it did in Germany while the Jews were being exterminated. It kept its mouth shut and compromised on killing and on the Sabbath.

We failed as a church in Germany, in Rwanda, and now in the U.S. Is this the way we are preparing ourselves to stand firm when the death decree will be issued against Sabbath keepers?