Continuing with -
'An Hour and An End' by William Grotheer.
May God help us, bringing us to all truth, giving us the wisdom we need
to understand. Please Lord, we need You,
Your love!
Yesterday we
discussed the three angels message, the message given to God's chosen people in
the mid-1800's. The messages given to the Seventh Day Adventists. The messages, the truth that the church
turned their back on. Let's read more…
*******
p 30 -- Chapter X --
The Church - 1967-1980
In permitting the
final sign given by Jesus to be fulfilled, God was seeking to tell the Church
something, even as God used John the Baptist to seek to tell the Jewish Church
something in that day -- there was only a brief period of time left in which to
bring forth "fruits meet for repentance." (Matt. 3:8)
It dare not be overlooked that the
"trust" committed to the Church - the Three Angels' Messages of
Revelation 14 (See 9T:19) - was a message to every "nation" as well
as to individuals. With the "times of the nations" about to be
fulfilled, the Church faced a crisis of the greatest magnitude -- either the
work had to be finished; was finished; or else the Church had failed in its
trust before God. Further, if the Church has altered the basic beliefs of the
Three Angels' Messages, how could they in reality profess before God that they
were still able to carry to completion that which had been committed to their
trust? This is not a theoretical question, and the answer is written with indelible
ink on the pages of history.
During the second
session of Vatican II, a Seventh-day Adventist "representative" and a
staff member of the World Council of Churches concluded that informal talks
between a group of Seventh-day Adventists and an equal number of
representatives of the WCC would "fulfill a useful purpose." The
first informal meeting was held in 1965. This was followed by formalized
meetings with the "blessing," authorization and funding by the
employing bodies of the Adventist participants. (So Much in Common, p. 98) The
results of these meetings were quick in coming.
The January, 1967,
issue of the official paper of the WCC - Ecumenical Review - carried an article
on "The Seventh-day Adventist Church." Our official organ - Review
& Herald - responded through its associate editor, Raymond F. Cottrell, in
three editorials (March 23, 30, & April 6, 1967) In the last editorial,
Cottrell concluded: - It is no
small measure of regret that SDA's do not find it possible, as an organization,
to be more closely associated with others who profess the name of Christ. On
the other hand, if the Secretariat on Faith and Order, for instance, were to
invite SDA's to appoint someone competent in that area to meet with their group
from time to time and represent the SDA point of view, we could accept such an
invitation with a clear conscience. Perhaps the same might be done in other
areas of Christian concern. On such a basis we would concur with Dr. Hanspicker
that the WCC is "one more place" where SDA's might bear their
distinctive "witness to the full truth of the Gospel." (p. 13f)
The invitation was
not long in coming. The Central Committee of the WCC appointed Dr. Earle
Hilgert, vice-president for Academic Administration of Andrews University as a
member of the 120 member Commission on Faith and Order. (See Exhibit #10) The
leadership of the Church endorsed this selection. Events moved so rapidly in
1967 that Dr. Hilgert was able to attend the triennial meeting of the Faith and
Order Commission held in Bristol, England, July 30 to August 8, 1967, as the
first Seventhday Adventist to serve on such a Commission.
[Note: Dr. Hilgert
has since become an ordained Presbyterian minister and is serving on the staff
of McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago, Illinois. His replacement on the
Faith and Order Commission was Dr. Raoul Dederen, also of Andrews University.]
The hierarchy of the
Seventh-day Adventist Church loudly proclaims to the laity that the Church is
not a member of the World Council of Churches. This is true, but the
p 31 -- request and
subsequent appointment of a Seventh-day Adventist theologian to the Faith and
Order Commission have far greater implications than appears on the surface.
Cottrell sought to cover his suggestion as "an opportunity to witness."
This naive stance betrays either ignorance of, or a purposeful cover up of the
real objectives of the Faith and Order Commission. It must be clearly
understood that the World Council of Churches is "a fellowship of churches
which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour according to the
Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfill together their common calling to the
glory of the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit." (WCC Constitution) The
WCC does not perceive itself as "a universal authority controlling what
Christians should believe and do." However, they are striving as a
"community" to "realize the goal of visible Church unity."
To assist this "community" -
Towards this goal, the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council
provides theological support for the efforts the churches are making towards
unity. Indeed the Commission has been charged by the Council members to keep
always before them their accepted obligation to work towards manifesting more
visibly God's gift of Church unity. So it is that the stated aim of the
Commission is "to proclaim the oneness of the Church of Jesus Christ and
to call the churches to the goal of visible unity in one faith and one
eucharistic fellowship, expressed in common worship and common life in Christ,
in order that the world might believe." (By-Laws) [Baptism, Eucharist and
Ministry, pp. vii & viii; Faith and Order Paper No. 11, Emphasis mine]
This is what the
leadership of the Church through its official organ asked to become a part of
in 1967. Then we forwarded this whole process toward "Church unity"
by placing in the Statement of Beliefs voted at Dallas, Texas, in 1980, the
full Constitutional statement of the WCC which is required for membership in
that organization.
The Fall Out --
"Since 1968 the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has been
actively represented at the annual meeting of 'Secretaries of World
Confessional Families'. This participation is largely the result of WCC/SDA
Conversations and contacts made at the time of the Uppsala Assembly [of the
WCC]." (So Much in Common, p. 100) This association led to the separate
audience granted by Pope Paul VI to the "participants of the Conference of
Secretaries of the World Confessional Families." (RNS, May 19, 1977, p.
19) The Secretary for the Conference of Secretaries is Dr. B. B. Beach of the
Adventist Church, who on the occasion presented the Pope with a gold medallion
as "a symbol of the Seventh-day Adventist Church." (Review, August
11, 1977, p. 23) Thus in symbolism the Church was given into the hands of the
Anti-christ. No greater affront could be given to the God of Heaven than for
His chosen people through a representative to wantonly defy the message of the
Third Angel as was done on this occasion. This act was done with the full
approval of, and prior arrangements with the Northern Europe-West Africa
Division Committee. [For full details, see Steps to Rome]
The fraternization
with the World Council of Churches on an international level reaches down to
the local units of this "community" - the Ministerial Associations.
Southern Tidings the official paper of the Southern Union Conference in the
Telex news section for April, 1975, reported that Elder Robert Hunter, then
pastor of the Morganton District of the Carolina Conference, joined in the
local ministerial association's "Pulpit Exchange Day." The pulpit of
the Adventist Church on that day was occupied by Thomas Burke, parish priest of
the Roman Catholic Church. "The theme of the city-wide program was 'Blest
Be the Tie."'
The strong contrast
envisioned in the Third Angel's Message between those who were to be entrusted
with the giving of this message, and the power symbolically represented by the
"beast" was nullified in a Brief presented in the United States
p 32 -- District
Court for Northern California. The Brief read: - Although it is true that there was a
period in the life of the Seventh-day Adventist Church when the denomination
took a distinctly anti-Roman Catholic viewpoint, and the term
"hierarchy" was used in a perjorative sense to refer to the papal
form of church governance, that attitude on the Church's part was nothing more
than a manifestation of widespread anti-popery among conservative protestant
denominations in the early part of this century and the latter part of the
last, and which has now been consigned to the historical trash heap as far as
the Seventh-day Adventist Church is concerned. (Reply Brief for Defendants in
Support of Their Motion for Summary Judgment, Civ. No. 74-2025 CBR) [See
Fotenote, p. 41, Excerpts - Legal Documents; EEOC v. PPPA]
In the same Brief,
the legal counsel for the Church's officers quoted from an affidavit given by
one of the intervenors, Mrs. Lorna Tobler, in which she had sworn that during
her training and instruction in Adventist schools and churches, she had been taught
that the Adventist Church strongly disapproved "the Roman Catholic
system." To this the reply in the Brief read: - In several ways this illustrates the
dangers incurred by an individual church member who presumes to deny the
authority of the duly constituted officials and governing bodies of the Church.
In the first place, it is true that for a period in its history, the
Seventh-day Adventist Church had an aversion to Roman Catholicism and especially
to the papal form of church government -- an aversion shared by virtually all
Protestant denominations ... While, however, Adventist doctrine continues to
teach that church government by one man is contrary to the Word of God, it is
not good Seventh-day Adventism to express, as Mrs Tobler has done, an aversion
to Roman Catholicism as such. (Ibid., p. 46)
How must the God of
Heaven have felt when the Church, to whom He had committed in sacred trust the
giving of the Three Angels' Messages, no longer shared the aversion" with
which the book of Revelation indicates He holds the Papal system?
Monetary Trust --
Not only did God entrust His chosen people with truth, and the final message to
the nations, but He also entrusted them with the means to carry out this
primary purpose of their calling. How have these means been handled, and when
were fateful decisions made? In an article - "Investment Practices of the
General Conference," Elder Robert E. Osborn of the Church's Treasury
Department wrote: - Because the
General Conference is responsible for a large pool of capital, the controlling
investment and securities committee decided in 1967 to retain professional
investment counsel. (This took place at the time the "unitized funds"
program. described later in this article, began operation.) Lionel D. Edie
& Company, Inc., of New York City, was chosen to do the research, analysis,
and selection of securities for the General Conference portfolio. Members of
the investment section of the Treasurer's Office worked very closely with Edie
& Company and kept in communication by telephone and in person conferences
for detailed review of current and projected trends in the economic and money
markets. (Spectrum, Vol. 5, #2, 1973)
The "unitized
funds" program, as explained by Osborn, "operated in a manner similar
to mutual funds. All unit holders (conferences, unions, divisions, the General
Conference, and church-owned institutions) own a proportionate share of the unitized
funds, on the basis of the amount invested; and unit holders share in the
investment income and capital appreciation." [And loss?] (Ibid., pp.
53-54)
While no report is
available to this writer as to the amount of the losses sustained in playing
the stock market by the General Conference since 1967, a window into the
results of this type of monetary practice is to be found in reports of the
investments made by one conference in the Pacific Union. The Pacific Union had
chosen to set up its own investment program. One conference - Northern
California - during a period of six years - 1968-1973 - had a "paper
loss" of over $2 Million. This loss involved
p 33 -- funds of
trust deposits, and revocable trust funds. A Lay Advisory Committee reporting
on the investments and the losses stated - "If the trustors and trust
depositors should elect to withdraw their money the fund would be insolvent -
unable to honor these withdrawal requests." This committee made the
following two-fold recommendation: -
That the Conference and the Association adopt a policy of making no
additional stock investments after this date and of eliminating all investments
in common stock and stock investment funds and that the time for accomplishing
this be no more than two years. (Report #2, Sub-Committee on Conference
Organization & Finance of the Steering Committee of the NCC-LAC)
One member of the
Steering Committee, Ken Cortner, reported in the Adventist Laymen's Pipeline,
July 1, 1983, the full picture of these investment procedures. That report
read: - Church publications have
been silent concerning some seven (7) million dollars of Northern's [Northern
California Conference] funds turned over to the Pacific Union Conference in the
late 60s and early 70s for investment in the stock market. The market had
seriously declined thereafter, and in January 1974 conference officials,
without disclosing either the investment or the loss to the church members
ordered the sale of shares of stocks that had cost $837,402.97 for $500,000.
The realized loss in that single transaction that was sustained by Northern
California Conference and/or Association was $337,402.97.
In the fall of 1974,
a then independent Northern California Conference Lay Advisory Committee
(NCC-LAC), chaired by a lay person in contrast to the present (1983)
chairmanship being held and under the control of the conference president,
discovered the investments and asked the Conference Executive Committee to call
a halt to any further dealings in the stock market and that divestiture of all
stock held be completed within a two year period. They contended the
$2,053,298.42 loss of stock value from 1968 through 1973 was "only a paper
loss" and that by waiting for whatever time it took, the market would
recover and possibly even bring a profit. LAC members, generally. did not agree
with that decision but lacking authority and having only an advisory capacity
felt that they had done their job.
Local and Union
Conference officials had characterized the stock purchased as "all of the
blue chip variety" and that they had been selected by "a group of
experts to whom we gave complete authority to buy and sell in our behalf."
Laymen learned that the "group of experts" contained not one single
Seventh-day Adventist Church member and the portfolio of stocks described as
"all of the blue chip variety" consisted of such companies as
Ringling Bros., Barnum and Bailey Circus, and among others, a host of small,
insignificant, virtually unknown and highly speculative businesses.
Keep in mind that
this is but the story of one conference and its investments. Some units of the
General Conference "unitized funds" program dissatisfied with the
results turned to the glowing possibility of Dr. Davenport's investment
schemes. The story of the resulting scandal need not be recited here.
Liberal Trend -- Not
only did the SDA-Evangelical Conferences in the mid-1950s signal a doctrinal
revision of some of the basic concepts of the Advent Movement, but by the
mid-1960s, "for the first time in the history of the church, a whole
generation of scholars with doctorates from secular universities became active
in church institutions." (Spectrum, Vol. 15, #2, p. 23) Further, there
were Adventists with a similar training in gainful employment outside the
church's institutions. Some of these became convinced that individual
participation within the framework of the church was an ineffectual means of
dealing with the issues of the 20th Century they faced in the society in which
they moved. Others met in small groups both here and abroad "with the
primary aim of trying to understand how the secularizing and divisive trends
[could] be reversed." These groups were formed around academic and
professional people.
p 34 -- "To
further this spontaneous search for meaningful participation, the General
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists invited representatives from several of
the groups to meet with them in October of 1967. The purpose was to discuss
possible methods of establishing a cohesive program to provide for dialogue
between the church leadership and this segment of the laity and to involve the
latter more significantly in the activities and concerns of the formal church.
The outgrowth of that meeting was an action by the officers of the General
Conference (taken at the 1967 Fall Council) to approve the establishment of an
organization known as The Association of Adventist Forums." [AAF]
(Spectrum, Vol 1, #1, Winter, 1969)
It is AAF which
publishes Spectrum. This Association with its publication has been on the
"cutting edge" of liberal trends within the church structure, manner
of life, and doctrinal revision. While they prefer to see themselves as
"progressives," both the liberals within the church, and the liberals
of the Adventist community outside the payroll structure find common cause. It
was the AAF which provided Dr. Desmond Ford the podium from which he launched
his attack on the sanctuary teaching of the Advent Movement.
During the
administration of R. R. Figuhr, not only was approval given but firm support
maintained by Figuhr himself in the publication of Questions on Doctrine.
Further, during his administration, provision was made for a study program in
geology which led to the establishment of the Geoscience Research Institute. In
the early 1960s a change was made in the leadership of the Institute, and
"by the mid-1960s, the progessives' [liberals'] study of the issues led
them to conclude that harmony between Genesis and geology required some kind of
a theological accommodation by the church." (Spectrum, Vol. 15, #2, p. 26)
This conclusion led to the appointment of two men with theological backgrounds
from the Seminary. The reason - "At that time the most theologically
flexible products of the Adventist educational system were its seminary
graduates." (Ibid.)
The resolution of
the problem in the eyes of the liberals required much more time be allotted
than six literal days, and a creation six thousand years ago of "the
earth, the sea, and all that in them is." (Ex. 20:11) Any altering of the
concept of six literal days for the creation of the earth ex nihilo (out of
nothing) strikes at the very heart of the Sabbath commandment. In such a
schema, the Sabbath ceases to be a specific memorial, and the emphasis on the
seventh day irrelevant. It can then be thought of as a celebration, a weekly
rest for man's restlessness.
It dare not be
overlooked that all these major actions which laid the groundwork for the
acceptability of liberalism in the Church, and open agitation of the same, was
done with the full approval of the highest officers of the Church, starting
with Figuhr in the mid-1950s, and culminating with the Pierson-Wilson official
blessing in 1967.
The Closing Event --
In 1979, the Annual Council voted a new Statement of Beliefs to be presented
for adoption at the 1980 session of the General Conference in Dallas, Texas.
The full disclosure of all that took place in the formulation of the Statement of
Beliefs voted at the Annual Council and the final adoption of the 27
Fundamentals as voted at Dallas, has yet to be written. There are gaps in the
story as known. This detail is beyond the scope of this manuscript. However,
certain factors of this story must be understood. The Statement as adopted by
the Annual Council was written by a group of theologians at Andrews University.
(Spectrum, Vol. 11, #3, p. 61) It was sent out to "the division committees
immediately as well as unions and overseas colleges. It was given to the
Adventist Review for immediate publication in the hope that as many reactions
as possible could be received from the field prior to the General Conference
quinquennial session in Dallas. Unfortunately, for reasons never disclosed, it
did not appear for four months, until February 21, 1980," (Ibid., #1, p.
6; emphasis mine)
p 35 -- Substantive
changes from previous Statements of Belief were apparent in the Andrews
University formulation. Sections on the Godhead were expanded; other sections
contained new terminology which altered historic Adventist concepts; and new
sections were added not covered in any previous Statements. Section 2,
captioned, "The Trinity" read in part: "That there is one God:
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a self-existing Unity in Trinity." Elsewhere
in the Statement, "the oneness of the triune God" is noted. The death
of Christ is spoken of as "this act of atonement" and declared to be
"a complete and perfect atonement." Such a position makes any concept
of a final atonement irrelevant. The heavenly ministry of Christ is described
as simply "making available to believers, the benefits of His atoning
sacrifice offered once for all on the cross." Then in 1844, Christ merely
"entered the second and last phase of His atoning work." Baptism and
the Lord's Supper were noted as "sacraments," and "the service
of foot washing" was designated "a means to seek renewed
cleansing." The "ministries of the Church" as defined in the
Statement include "the ministry of intercession." All of these
expressions have Roman Catholic overtones. The Church itself is defined to be
"the company of believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and
Saviour." (Adventist Review, Feb. 21, 1980, pp. 8-10)
When the time came
for a discussion of the Statement of Beliefs at Dallas, the delegates received
a different formulation than had been adopted at the Annual Council and no
explanation was given as to why. This brought expressions of shock and dismay
from a number of delegates. "Those who had been involved in formulating
the earlier draft felt that the new version was disastrous in form, if not
content. Gone was the balance, the beauty and the sensitivity to words. Clumsy
rhetoric prevailed." (Spectrum, Vol. 11, #1, p. 8) Substantive alterations
were also apparent. The statement on the Godhead was modified to read -
"There is one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of Three
co-etemal Persons." Although there was considerable discussion over this
new wording (Adventist Review, April 22, 1980, pp. 11, 14), it was made a part
of the voted Statement with only cosmetic alterations. The terms,
"sacraments" and "means" were deleted as was also the idea
of a minister in the role of an intercessor. The Cross was still referred to as
the "act of the atonement." This was changed in the voted Statement
to read - "this perfect atonement" - which in reality changed
nothing, still nullifying the concept of a final atonement. If the Cross is the
"perfect" atonement nothing can be added to that which is perfect. In
historic Adventism, the Cross, typified by the Altar of the Court, is the place
of sacrifice and an atonement which brought forgiveness, to be followed with a
final atonement which resulted in cleansing. The section on the Church was
rewritten and divided into two statements, but when finally voted, a key
wording from the Andrews University formulation was restored - "The church
is a community of believers who confess Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour."
The retention of the
definition of the Church from the Andrews University formulation when coupled
with the Statement on the Trinity - a statement never appearing in any prior
Statements of Belief from 1872 to 1979 - is significant. These two concepts are
borrowed from the Constitution of the World Council of Churches. The first
article of that Constitution reads - "The World Council of Churches is a
fellowship of churches which confess the Lord Jesus Christ as God and Saviour
according to the Scriptures and therefore seek to fulfill together their common
calling to the one God, Father, Son and Holy Spirit." Further, the idea of
"one God: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, a unity of three co-etemal
Persons" was first formulated by the Council of Constantinople in A.D.
381.(Early Christian Doctrine, p. 88)
In all three
Statements - the Andrews University formulation, the one given to the
delegates, and the one finally voted by them - there appears a phraseology
describing the heavenly ministry of Christ which also had never appeared in any
previous statement of Adventist beliefs. It read in its final form -
"There is a sanctuary in heaven, the true tabernacle which the Lord set up
and not man. In it Christ
p 36 -- ministers in
our behalf, making available to believers the benefits of His atoning sacrifice
offered once for all on the cross." This language was first used in the
book - Questions on Doctrine (pp. 354-355, 381), where it stated: - Jesus our surety entered the "holy
places" and appeared in the presence of God for us. But it was not with
the hope of obtaining something for us at that time, or at some future time.
No! He had already obtained it for us on the cross. And now as our High Priest,
He ministers the virtues of the atoning sacrifice for us." (p. 381,
emphasis theirs)
Introduced during
the morning session prior to the final reading and voting of the Statement of
Beliefs was Bishop Robert Terwilliger, a representative of the Anglican
Consultative Council. He had been reading the proposed Statement of Beliefs,
and had listened to some of the discussion. When he responded to Dr. B. B.
Beach's introduction, he said - "As I have read the beliefs set before you
for revision, I had hoped to find some degree of disagreement. I had the most
awful disappointment. I found increasingly that we are together in our faith.
Therefore the unity that we share is not simply a unity of good will and
fellowship but unity in faith increasingly, a unity in Christ." (Adventist
Review, May 1, 1980, p. 16)
How can God finish
His work on the earth through an instrumentality that has so altered the faith
committed to it in trust that an Anglican bishop perceives a growing unity with
that which he believes? This culminating denial in a series which began in the
1950s, left God with no alternatives. The Church weighed in the balances of the
Sanctuary was found to be wanting. He had given the prophetic warning in 1967
when the military forces of Israel retook Jerusalem that the final period had
begun - the achri hou (until) of Luke 21:24. Now that period was up. Three
months after the Statement of Beliefs was voted at Dallas, the Israeli Knesset
voted to move the entire government from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. The times of
the visitation of the nations being ended, God would take things into His own
hands for the completion of the Advent Movement which He had begun in 1844. We
are now in the tarrying time as events move rapidly to the final conflict of
the great day of God Almighty. The end of all things is at hand.'
*******
Time and again we
can read in the old testament of Israel's backsliding. We ask ourselves how
could those who witnessed the miracles performed by God to free them from
Egyptian slavery doubt God's ability to care for them? They questioned God's
ability to sustain them going so far as to say it would be better if they'd
never left Egypt. Then when God provided
miraculously food from heaven on a daily basis (enough on Friday- the
preparation day to last through the Sabbath), they wanted more, they wanted
meat not just heavenly bread. They got
that meat but at what price? They weren't happy to be God's, they agreed to His
covenant and then turned right around
and broke the covenant. Then over and
over they would be His only to turn away from Him. So how can we know all this and not believe
that God's chosen people in the tail end of history would apostatize? People want to say it's impossible, they
wouldn't do that. Yet all the facts say otherwise. Once again, God is left with
a remnant of His chosen.
We are told this--
Mat 7:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the
way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
And this--
Mat 25:1 Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened
unto ten virgins, which took their lamps, and went forth to meet the
bridegroom.
Mat 25:2 And five of them were wise, and five were
foolish.
Mat 25:3 They that were foolish took their lamps, and
took no oil with them:
Mat 25:4 But the wise took oil in their vessels with
their lamps.
Mat 25:5 While the bridegroom tarried, they all
slumbered and slept.
Mat 25:6 And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold,
the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.
Mat 25:7 Then all those virgins arose, and trimmed
their lamps.
Mat 25:8 And the foolish said unto the wise, Give us
of your oil; for our lamps are gone out.
Mat 25:9 But the wise answered, saying, Not so; lest
there be not enough for us and you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy
for yourselves.
Mat 25:10 And while they went to buy, the bridegroom
came; and they that were ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door
was shut.
Mat 25:11 Afterward came also the other virgins,
saying, Lord, Lord, open to us.
Mat 25:12 But he answered and said, Verily I say unto
you, I know you not.
Mat 25:13 Watch therefore, for ye know neither the day
nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.
Five out of ten of
the virgins- of those watching, those professed to be Christ's true followers,
only five are really God's in this parable, only five have the oil they need.
This isn't talking
about the outright people who defy God and don't believe in Him at all, these
are among those who by all appearances are God's!
The church entrusted
with the truth has apostatized! They
might look the same, talk the good talk, but the truth is they are no longer
following God's truth, but a truth they've made up themselves. How many of
God's people are going to be led astray like lambs to a slaughter because they
refuse to believe the truth, they follow blindly. Please! If you are among
those who belong to the Seventh Day Adventist corporate church, please, seek
the truth! If you've read this far, read further, study more, pray! The truth is out there! The truth will be
known by all those who seek it!
Please, Lord, help
us! Guide us to YOUR truth, only YOUR truth! We would be Yours! We would be
among the five virgins who bring the extra oil with them and are ready, are
prepared, are waiting for YOU!
Please, by Your
grace! Your LOVE!
