If there was one change the Church could do in 2017

[Stan]

If there was one change the Church could do in 2017, what would that be?

AND PLEASE, NOT about women ordination...  that is covered elsewhere.?

 

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

2 hours ago, Stan said:

If there was one change the Church could do in 2017, what would that be?

 

I'd say Downsize..

[LifeHiscost]

2 hours ago, Stan said:

If there was one change the Church could do in 2017, what would that be?

AND PLEASE, NOT about women ordination...  that is covered elsewhere.?

 

I've continually heard that it is not Jesus being unwilling to return to this world but that it is the church who are not ready. Since only those who do not know Jesus are the only ones who cannot enter the Kingdom, it would seem to me since Jesus leaves no stone unturned to make sure all have opportunity to become acquainted with Him before He comes and since all humanity have free choice under His rule, the bride of Christ should concentrate on introducing Jesus to whoever will listen as primary and walk as closely as possible as Jesus would have us walk, discontinuing the sense of needing to be politically correct, all the more so as we see true Christianity falling into disfavor world wide.

…13But the one who perseveres to the end will be saved. 14And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in all the world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come. Matthew 24

God is Love!~Jesus saves!   

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

2 minutes ago, LifeHiscost said:

concentrate on introducing Jesus to whoever will listen

hasn't evangelism been the #1 priority of the church since its inception?  (just wondering... maybe that's *not* been the priority)

[LifeHiscost]

2 minutes ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

hasn't evangelism been the #1 priority of the church since its inception?  (just wondering... maybe that's *not* been the priority)

Perhaps the stated goal at the leadership level, however from the heart level, what could we say about this example.

6Whoever claims to abide in Him must walk as Jesus walked....1 John 2

34A new commandment I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so also you must love one another. 35By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you love one another.”…. John 13

We are told many will come into the church in the end days (which I believe we are in) while many will also leave. The church I'm happy to belong to (SDAdventist) has expressed their love to my wife and I with tangible loving expressions and acts over the last four years that has made some very difficult times much more endurable. Each incident or event we attribute to the grace of Jesus.

Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God....Hebrew 12

God is Love!~Jesus saves! 

[doug yowell]

#1) Stop supporting and participating in the killing of unborn human beings.

[phkrause]

3 hours ago, rudywoofs (Pam) said:

I'd say Downsize..

When you say downsize, what do you mean?

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

2 hours ago, phkrause said:

When you say downsize, what do you mean?

I think the church is too top heavy.  The church needs to be given back to the people.

[Kevin H]

To restart the Seventh-day Adventist Jewish movement and start a Seventh-day Adventist Muslim movement. To reach out to people with the good news about Hell and God's love and help people where they are in their growth, rather than just on a hunt to find new tithe paying church members.

[Gregory Matthews]

I believe that if the Church fails to make certain changes that need to be made, in a time  when they could be made, God will intervene in a manner to bring them about that will not be easy and fun.

Having said the above, I believe:

That the change most needed is to make the local congregation the primary focus of mission and ministry and that all other "higher" organizations should have as their mission and ministry that of helping the local congregation to   identify their needs and to equip them for meeting those needs.

That present focus of the Church, as I see it in practice today, is for each "higher" level of organization to bring all "lower" levels of organization into line so that all march in "lock step."

As I come from a military background, let me illustrate from that background.

Believe it or not.  There is a science to the study of military operations and combat.  Dependent upon their rank and position, all U.S. military officers are trained in the science of such.  As part of their training, U.S. military officers are trained as to how a presumed enemy force is going to operate.  The result is that during the so-called "cold-war" in any given situation the U.S. forces would be able to accurately predict how the Soviet forces  would operate.  This was because Soviet forces operated in strict accord with their doctrine.  They did not deviate. 

The U.S. military also has clearly stated doctrine.  That doctrine is under  constant evaluation and changes as circumstances change.  U.S. military forces are trained in that doctrine.

But, on all levels, U.S. Commanders are expected to do what is needed to accomplish the mission.  When it comes to a 4-star, that officer has total ability to disregard doctrine and to accomplish the mission in any manner that the 4-star choses.  If a 4l-star issues an order that violates doctrine and policy, that order is put into effect.

The classic case of this is our invasion of Iraq.  The 4-star in charge was so successful, in part, due to the fact that the 4-star deployed U.S. forces in  manner that was not in accord with the  doctrine.  I could give you other examples of such.  W hen such happens, the President can remove the 4-star and such has been done.  But, while the 4-star is in the position the 4-star can do what ever the 4-star thinks should be done.

We need to put the local congregation into the 1st place.  It should be the highest level of organization, not the  General Conference.

 

  

 

 

 

[Mario-One]

14 hours ago, Gregory Matthews said:

I believe that if the Church fails to make certain changes that need to be made, in a time  when they could be made, God will intervene in a manner to bring them about that will not be easy and fun.

Having said the above, I believe:

That the change most needed is to make the local congregation the primary focus of mission and ministry and that all other "higher" organizations should have as their mission and ministry that of helping the local congregation to   identify their needs and to equip them for meeting those needs.

That present focus of the Church, as I see it in practice today, is for each "higher" level of organization to bring all "lower" levels of organization into line so that all march in "lock step."

As I come from a military background, let me illustrate from that background.

Believe it or not.  There is a science to the study of military operations and combat.  Dependent upon their rank and position, all U.S. military officers are trained in the science of such.  As part of their training, U.S. military officers are trained as to how a presumed enemy force is going to operate.  The result is that during the so-called "cold-war" in any given situation the U.S. forces would be able to accurately predict how the Soviet forces  would operate.  This was because Soviet forces operated in strict accord with their doctrine.  They did not deviate. 

The U.S. military also has clearly stated doctrine.  That doctrine is under  constant evaluation and changes as circumstances change.  U.S. military forces are trained in that doctrine.

But, on all levels, U.S. Commanders are expected to do what is needed to accomplish the mission.  When it comes to a 4-star, that officer has total ability to disregard doctrine and to accomplish the mission in any manner that the 4-star choses.  If a 4l-star issues an order that violates doctrine and policy, that order is put into effect.

The classic case of this is our invasion of Iraq.  The 4-star in charge was so successful, in part, due to the fact that the 4-star deployed U.S. forces in  manner that was not in accord with the  doctrine.  I could give you other examples of such.  W hen such happens, the President can remove the 4-star and such has been done.  But, while the 4-star is in the position the 4-star can do what ever the 4-star thinks should be done.

We need to put the local congregation into the 1st place.  It should be the highest level of organization, not the  General Conference.

 

  

 

 

 

There is an SoP quotation that says when God will intervene

"When men, being in power, oppress and spoil their fellow men, and no earthly tribunal can be found to do justice, God will interpose in behalf of those who cannot defend themselves. He will punish for every act of oppression. No earthly wisdom can secure wrongdoers against the judgments of heaven. And when men put their trust in earthly powers instead of their Maker, when they become lifted up in pride and self-confidence, God will in His own time make them to be despised"  (Letter 122, 1900). { 7BC 946.6 } 

Which is my way to introduce my thoughts of what needs to be changed in 2017, there is no accountability because the process which holds church leaders accountable is ignored. This emboldens people in positions of trust to do things their own way, even if it violates proper procedure. On Oct. 11, 2016 the Annual Council approved a statement they called 'Unity in Mission' which is a procedure to deal with non-compliance with proper church procedure. It may have been the WO issue the triggered this measure, but it was necessary to deal with other issues beside WO.  What this means is that God has set up an "earthly tribunal" and gives the church a chance to correct their mistakes before He intervenes.  In God's own time He makes them to be despised, but I think their name is removed from the Book of Life before this happens, which means the church is not doing those who need discipline any favor by ignoring their behavior. The church needs to hold leaders accountable for misconduct for the good of the church as well as to glorify God. 

[Mario-One]

17 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

So, you are saying "accountability" needs to be changed. Do you think this should only apply to those i"n positions of power?

I am sorry that I did not make it clear.  There is Working Policy for misconduct by a pastor ( L-60 section 10 ) and another policy for misconduct by Administrative officer (President, Secretary, Treasurer)  ( L-60 section 15) which could be improved but the problem is that they are ignored. I have seen a pastor with 52 accusations of misconduct transferred to another church ( and this was after he physically assaulted a member and stole his property; same pastor gave false report to police and tried to have a member arrested for trespassing when he attended worship service).  These 52 accusations were not from one person, it was from a dozen concerned members, and when the conference failed to discipline this pastor, many of the grieved members left the church. I have seen Conference administrators ignore the church manual and authorize a pastor to call the police to arrest two Adventist ladies if they attended church, this is not the way to deal with grievances. The conference leaders used their position to prevent an investigation into their conduct. These two ladies stopped attending church because the Union and the NAD would not do their duty which is clearly written in church policy.  So I do think changing the policies will help as much as enforcing them as they are written.

[Sojourner]

Probably to delete the 1844 heavenly sanctuary doctrine which relies on a vision of Ellen White to be authenticated. 

[Gregory Matthews]

Mario-One, you have made a comment that I believes deserves a response as I have some agreement with it as well as some disagreement.  In order to attempt to be clear in my response, I will number your statements and follow each by my response which I will place in brackets along with my initials in an attempt to be clear as what you wrote and what is my  response:

 1) There is Working Policy for misconduct by a pastor ( L-60 section 10 ) and another policy for misconduct by Administrative officer (President, Secretary, Treasurer)  ( L-60 section 15) which could be improved but the problem is that they are ignored.

[I am going to assume that you referenced that NAD Working Policy and not the GC Working Policy.  It should be noted that, as L-60-15 states, the provisions of L-60-20 and L-60-25 apply, which you did not cite.  L-60-20 defines the boundaries that apply as:  Moral Fall, Apostasy, Dissidence, Embezzlement/Theft, Other Reasons.  It appears to me that you suggest that the "Other Reasons" category is the one that applies in this case--GM.]

2)  I have seen a pastor with 52 accusations of misconduct transferred to another church ( and this was after he physically assaulted a member and stole his property; same pastor gave false report to police and tried to have a member arrested for trespassing when he attended worship service).  These 52 accusations were not from one person, it was from a dozen concerned members, and when the conference failed to discipline this pastor, many of the grieved members left the church.

[You have listed three (3) specific criminal offenses--assault, theft & false police report.  Conviction on any of these offenses would clearly fall under the "Other Reasons" category of L-60-20.  But, it would require a criminal conviction to properly discipline the pastor.  Were criminal charges made?  Did the police charge the pastor with making a false report.  NOTE:  In order to be so charged it would have to be proven that the pastor knew that the report was false.  Absent that knowledge, a conviction would be unlikely.  If the pastor was not charged with assault, why?  If not charged with theft, why?  I will suggest that if the pastor was not charged, it was probably due to the belief of the authorities that a conviction could not be obtained.   The process of discipline should be fair to all parties.  Absent criminal convictions on the three crimes that you allege the pastor committed, it would be very hard for the church to administer any serious discipline.  Yes, it   could potentially be possible for the Church to administer some sort of minor discipline.  But, how   would you know whether or not such had been done?  It is highly likely that you would not know.  As to  members leaving the church, was that the local congregation or the denomination?  If the local congregation, it may (?) very well have been the right thing to do.  Yes, either would be sad--GM.]

3)  I have seen Conference administrators ignore the church manual and authorize a pastor to call the police to arrest two Adventist ladies if they attended church, this is not the way to deal with grievances. The conference leaders used their position to prevent an investigation into their conduct.

[On the contrary, calling the police was exactly the thing to do.  The word "arrest" had a specific meaning in criminal law.  I am uncertain as to whether you are using that work in its formal meaning.  If you are formally using it, you are telling us that the "Adventist Ladies"  were considered potentially intending to violate an order by a judge and/or commit other criminal conduct that could result in criminal charges.  You may have been using word in a less than formal sense.  If so, removing the women from church property does not constitute arrest in a formal sense.  Regardless of what you may think, the pastor, does have the right to direct the police to remove a person form the property.  As a congregational pastor I have been in a situation where I directed the local elders to, under carefully defined situations, to ask the police to remove a person from services on a Sabbath morning.  Fortunately, they did not have to do so.  But, such may be required in order to provide for either the safety of members or for their freedom to worship.  As to you allegation that the Conference prevented investigation of the pastor, I can clearly say that the Conference did not have the power to prevent police from doing a criminal investigation of some of what you allege.  To attempt to prevent police investigation of those aspects could have had the potential of Conference Officials being charged with a crime--GM.] 

 

4)  These two ladies stopped attending church because the Union and the NAD would not do their duty which is clearly written in church policy.  So I do think changing the policies will help as much as enforcing them as they are written.

[You have failed to document that the Church failed in its duty and/or failed to follow policy.  However, I do agree that such failure has happened in the past.  I do agree that there are issues that need to be addressed.  In any case, your case is sad--GM]

 

 

[LifeHiscost]

11 hours ago, Sojourner said:

Probably to delete the 1844 heavenly sanctuary doctrine which relies on a vision of Ellen White to be authenticated. 

1The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2and who ministers in the sanctuary and true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man. 3Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. So it was necessary for this One also to have something to offer.… Hebrews 8

What part of this do you find objectionable?

6Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. 7Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written, The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. 8Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three and twenty thousand. 9Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents. 10Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer. 11Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. 12Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. 13There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it. ...1 Corinthians 10

God is Love!~Jesus saves! 

[Ron Amnsn]

53 minutes ago, LifeHiscost said:

1The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, 2and who ministers in the sanctuary and true tabernacle set up by the Lord, not by man. 3Every high priest is appointed to offer both gifts and sacrifices. So it was necessary for this One also to have something to offer.… Hebrews 8

What part of this do you find objectionable?

This discussion should probably be moved to a different thread.  There's nothing objectionable in what is actually written in Scripture -- it's the part that isn't in Scripture that should be tested by Scripture.

[Green Cochoa]

On 01/01/2017 at 11:48 PM, Gregory Matthews said:

That the change most needed is to make the local congregation the primary focus of mission and ministry and that all other "higher" organizations should have as their mission and ministry that of helping the local congregation to   identify their needs and to equip them for meeting those needs.

That present focus of the Church, as I see it in practice today, is for each "higher" level of organization to bring all "lower" levels of organization into line so that all march in "lock step."

I agree almost fully with this portion of your post.  There are other portions which I believe detract significantly from this message--and introduce an element of confusion, as if marching to the beat of a different drum is good.

Before I read your post, I was about to present my thoughts relative to the question for this thread that ran along the same lines as what I've quoted you saying above.  However, I will be a little more focused, perhaps, on the specifics of the change that I see as needed most.

 

I believe the church most needs a change in structural philosophy.  The church must cease and desist from its continual efforts to centralize, to organize under a single leadership entity or organization, to legitimize and enforce "memorandums of understanding" upon supporting ministries in an effort to essentially annex them to the church, and in general to "bureaucratize" the work of the Lord's servants.

 

As examples of what should NOT be done, that the church has recently done, I would remember the following:

-- Annex the ASI organization to become an arm of the church under the General Conference (so much for the "laymen" organization)

-- Merge the Review and Herald Publishing Association into the Pacific Press Publishing Association, essentially closing it

-- Force supporting ministries to sign agreements called "memorandums of understanding" (MOUs) in order to authorize their work and cooperation with the church

-- Centralize all financial decisions and support of local church efforts to institutions hundreds or thousands of miles away who are out-of-touch with the local needs

-- Insist that tithes may only be paid to the local Conference and may not be forwarded to other conferences or missions of the church around the world

-- Prohibit churches from forwarding donations to independent or supporting ministries

-- Enforce only the official use of the name "Adventist" upon all worldwide, including schools, websites, etc., such that only the church's official branches and organizations may legally use it

-- Automatically deduct tithe monies from workers' salaries, procedurally, usually without the individuals' ability to choose otherwise (you sign the consent to get the job)

 

All of the above represent efforts toward control, control, control.  These efforts come under the "kingly power" designation used by Mrs. White to decry them. They will NOT help to further the Lord's work around the world.  Several of the above are outright sins of which we are informed through Mrs. White, yet the church has gone forward with them, full knowing what she said (not sins of ignorance).

[Green Cochoa]

41 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

Green. You are all excited about nothing. You have grossly misrepresented almost everything you talked about. If we did it your way there would be nothing left but little pieces of every man doing whats right in their own eyes.

#1:  I am not excited about it.  Nothing could be further from the truth.  In place of "excited," I am dismayed and discouraged.

#2:  I have not misrepresented.  If I have, you have failed to show where and how.

#3:  It is according to the Lord's will that each be both "fully persuaded in his own mind" and have independence to work for the Lord as he sees fit, without others acting as conscience for him.

Those are facts.

[Gregory Matthews]

Green, I have substantial agreement with your listing.  However, will comment on the following:

I strongly believe that the following statement is not accurate, at least in North America.  I cannot vouch for other countries.  I acknowledge that there was a time when it was true in North America, at least for some, but I am not  certain that it was true for all.

Quote

-- Automatically deduct tithe monies from workers' salaries, procedurally, usually without the individuals' ability to choose otherwise (you sign the consent to get the job)

I do disagree with your comment about the use of the copyrighted names for the denomination.  I can remember when, in one location, one could do  their laundry at a place that used the name of the denomination in the name of the business.    As to the copyright of the word "Adventist."  The denomination has clearly established that as a trademark and has it covered by copyright protection.  The courts have, so far, allowed those protections to exist.  However, my personal thinking is that the word "Adventist" has actually passed into the public domain and  therefore it may be used by anyone as long as one does not falsely use it to indicate a relationship with the denomination that does not exist.  I personally believe that one good attorney who knew what he/she was doing could remove that word from some of the protections that  the denomination now has.

In general, I do not believe that the following is accurate.   However, I do acknowledge that it is possible that it may have occurred  in very limited circumstances both as to an individual congregation and as to a specific ministry.

Quote

-- Prohibit churches from forwarding donations to independent or supporting ministries.

I do believe that the denomination has had very little success  in the following:

Quote

Force supporting ministries to sign agreements called "memorandums of understanding" (MOUs) in order to authorize their work and cooperation with the church

 

  

[Green Cochoa]

Gregory,

I refused to sign the consent form for automatically taking tithe out of my salary when I worked for the church in one conference.  I was the only conference employee in that status, with all others in compliance--largely because I insisted in sometimes heavy conversation on the topic with the conference president until finally I had secured my liberty, an act of bravery seldom seen in opposing a superior for that region.  Even then, my liberty came with certain conditions to which I gave oral consent.  I am aware of this still being true today in certain places.  As such, it is still true of the "church" which is a worldwide organization, not merely a North American one.

I attempted to follow the church's wisdom in signing the MOU as a representative of another ministry, only to have the whole thing backfire.  In the end, the policy was pushed, virtually forced, division-wide.  All of the big players among the independent ministries have signed.  Where I am, we did not end up doing so.  After some research, I discovered Ellen White wrote strongly against signing such agreements.  Although, since we did not sign, we have received no support from the church, God supplied our lack.

Adventist schools in my part of the world that are operated by lay members have resorted to either removing "Adventist" from their names or shortening it to "Advent."  However, there are other groups, not Adventists, who use the term "Advent" as well, thus creating confusion.  It is no longer possible to be certain if a school is operated by Adventists around here judging by its name.  This is unfortunate, and creates inefficiencies and even pitfalls for newcomers to the area.

Wanderer has no idea what he speaks of regarding my experience, and would be wise to remain silent on it.  He is in error to say the church has not, by these policies, hindered my work.  One of the church policies regarding employment prevented me from distributing Christian books--which I had felt God calling me to do.  The church does many things well.  It also makes mistakes, and should not be seen as inerrant.  It is our duty to speak up about the wrongs we encounter, and to sigh and cry for the abominations in the church.  To remain silent and consenting is to (sinfully) agree with the wrong.  I have spoken up to the leaders in each place I have been regarding some of these things.  My voice may not have effected changes, but the decisions of the leadership were then their own responsibility, and not mine. 

To me, personally, learning of the merger of the publishing houses was the greatest blow this past year.  That was a sin.  Ellen White wrote very specifically about that, and the leaders who made the decision were aware of her comments!  As such, I find the church to have egregiously gone contrary to a "thus saith the LORD."  Our publishing houses are in danger of being closed up all around the world.

This topic is about changes we would like to see in the church.  If all were well, there would be no need of making any such.

[Green Cochoa]

18 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

I actually do know what I am talking about . . .

It's human nature to think so.

When you've walked a mile in my shoes, you'll be certain to update your perspective.  You have no clue, really, as to what I've experienced.  You probably did not know that in some conferences of the church on this planet, the conference-employed literature evangelism director is prohibited from selling books by local policy.  It has to do with the GC policy that forbids a "conflict of interest" in having multiple sources of income.  Since he's paid a salary, he cannot also sell books.  It is very ironic, of course, that the LE director cannot have any experience doing what he supposedly teaches to others (to non-conference employees, because employees could not sell books per the same policy).  Furthermore, such a policy flies in the face of Ellen White's counsels.  Mrs. White taught that pastors should sell books.  For example: "I have been shown that the most precious ministry can be done by canvassing, and that by ministers. By doing this work, they will obtain a varied experience and will be doing the very work that the apostle Paul did." --Ellen White.

You said:

11 minutes ago, The Wanderer said:

But none of the things you listed, whether or not they are true, should stop you from distributing literature or from other ministry.

Again, you have no idea what you are talking about with respect to my personal experience.  The conference I was working in at that time was the one, as my employer, which contacted the labor department on my behalf which issued my missionary visa to the country, including my work permit.  Had I not complied, I would have had to leave the country.  That's a pretty big show stopper, don't you think?  It's hard to distribute books when you cannot physically be present to do so.  The church in that location did use its powers for securing visas to control which foreign missionaries were allowed to stay.  I will not go into further details on this.  I'm not here to bash the church.  These are simply statements of fact relative to my experience which you ought never to have needed in order to have some respect for what I have shared.  Suffice it to say, I am happy to no longer be working for the church.  As an independent, they can no longer stop me from distributing books.  [Now it's the government stopping me (another story)].  But this, again, underscores the need for the church to have a paradigm shift in its perspective regarding control of the workers.

[Sojourner]

Would the 1844 doctrine exist if Ellen White had not had a vision about it? Why is it that no other Christian group or theologians have been able to look at the scripture and come up with the same year and resultant doctrine? 

[Gregory Matthews]

Green:

I am glad to dialogue with you and as I have never claimed perfection, I appreciate any disagreement that you may have with what I have said.  So, I will respond again:

1) Tithe deducted:  I am aware that even in the NAD, denominational employees are often required to pay tithe to the Conference that employees them.  I am not aware that they also may still be required to have the tithe deducted from their salary by the Conference that employees them.  I strongly object to that.  God has left the calculation of tithe to the individual person and in my thinking, for the Conference to do that calculation violates the will of God.

I will relate my personal experience:  As a congregational pastor of a 3-church district, the Conference Treasurer was sitting in my home going over the records of the three churches that I pastored.  All of a sudden I heard him exclaim:  Why you are paying a honest tithe.  I immediately asked him what he meant.  He replied that I was clearly paying tithe through two of my congregations and the Conference had only checked for payment through one of the congregations.  I then engaged him in a conversation that included several aspects of this issue that do not need to be stated in this post. 

2)  As to the use of the word "Adventist.:"  I believe that the authority that the denomination presently has over the use of that word could be overturned by a competent attorney who knew what they were doing.  The problem is that such would require funding that few have.  The present use  of such names by the so called Reform Movement  is one, but not the only, example of what I am talking about.  In my opinion, the denomination would lose any attempt to prevent the use of the word Adventist. 

3)  As to the sale of SDA publications:  There are aspects of denominational policy on that which I  believe are ill-advised and prevent the circulation of our books.  So, while I might not agree with every aspect of what you think, I do have, I think, substantial agreement. 

4) As to the Conference LE not being allowed to sell books:  In my experience that was allowed, but only in concert with working with the individual LEs and in such cases the employee received the financial credit for the sales that the Conference LE made.  My agreement   with that policy stems from the idea that in "ethics" one must avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest as well as the actual fact.  That is the ethical standard in the world at large and as such I will suggest that it is important that it be followed.  NOTE:  Please do not give me a current example from the political world around us in which that appearance is seemingly not being followed.  

5)  As to the response that The Wanderer made to you:  You have come across to me as over reacting a bit.   I would suggest that it might be well to cool it a bit.  I think that you made some points in responding to him.  But, I think that you would have done yourself better by being a bit more relaxed.  Just a piece of unasked for advice which I have given you free of charge and you obviously do not have to agree with.  

6)  As to your no longer working for the denomination:  People who are doing a work for he Lord are not all required to be denominational employees.  You can work for the Lord outside of denominational employment.  On a personal basis, I agree that such is probably best for you and the denomination.  That is not a negative perception of you.  So, do not take it as such.

Green, blessings on you.  In all of your life, may you follow the leading of God, wherever God may take you, even when it is in a direction that you do not expect.

 

 

[Gregory Matthews]

Green, the following is an example of a situation in which I believe the denomination should protect its good name.

http://atoday.org/trinidadian-vendor-accused-of-profiting-from-murdered-adventists-name/

 

 

[Green Cochoa]

1 hour ago, Gregory Matthews said:

My agreement   with that policy stems from the idea that in "ethics" one must avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest as well as the actual fact.

I will respond to just this point.  Who is your employer?

 

I consider myself to work for God.  It is NEVER a conflict of interest to do two things for Him at once, provided I am temperate with my time and energy.  If they both give me an income, so much the better, as I will then have more resources to use in furthering God's work.  God's work is NOT merely an 8-5 job, as the Conference had it (though I regularly did work overtime).  For more perspective on the matter, I would recommend checking the Ellen White CD for "signing agreements".