A Reform-minded Seventh-day Adventist forum In our aim to exalt everything important, first and foremost, we seek to promote a clear understanding of Daniel, Revelation, the three angels' messages and the alpha and omega of apostasy.
Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 9:05 pm Post subject: A fascinating development for the SDA church....
For those who are a part of the SDA denomination a recent development is surprising many. A group is breaking off from the sda church with the thought of starting an independent ministry that would in essence be its own denomination.
There reasons for doing so are that they feel the church is not using its resources for mission, and is far too top heavy with administration, and far too scant in workers in the field, church planting etc.
Ron Gladden is the one spearheading the movement. Here is a letter from Ron to Russel at the NADIE.
Quote:
August 20, 2004
Elder Russell Burrill, Director
North American Division Evangelism Institute
Hi Russell,
Last week when I received your letter, I promised you I would respond. Since your letter apparently was sent to multiple people, I will address mine to you and copy others in hopes that those who read your letter will have a chance to read this one as well. All of us are familiar with the passage in Luke 9 where John said to Jesus, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow with us." Jesus responded, "Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is on our side” (vs. 49,50; NKJV).
Ellen White comments on this passage in Acts of the Apostles: “None who showed themselves in any way friendly to Christ were to be repulsed. The disciples must not indulge a narrow, exclusive spirit, but must manifest the same far-reaching sympathy which they had seen in their Master. James and John had thought that in checking this man they had in view the Lord’s honor; but they began to see that they were jealous for their own. They acknowledged their error and accepted the reproof” (pp. 543 & 544). According to the working policy of the General Conference, God does not restrict His blessings to those who work within the structure of the Seventh-day Adventist church. Our official position is that “we hold in high esteem Christian men and women in other communions who are engaged in winning souls to Christ.” [1]
Jesus’ response to the disciples was not ambiguous. Ellen White affirms – as does our official working policy – that God works through those outside of our circles. It seems reasonable that since this is true of those who preach things that are not in harmony with all of the Bible’s teachings, it would certainly include those who preach the same doctrines.
[1] Quoted in the Adult Sabbath School Quarterly, July-September, 2004, p. 64: “However committed we are to our message, we mustn’t read more into it than is there, such as the belief that we alone as Seventh-day Adventists are saved. That view has not, nor has ever been, the official position of the Seventh-day Adventist Church: ‘We recognize those agencies that lift up Christ before men as a part of the divine plan for evangelization of the world, and we hold in high esteem Christian men and women in other communions who are engaged in winning souls to Christ.’—General Conference Working Policy (1999-2000), p. 494, Policy O 100, art. 1. The question for us this week is How should we relate to these other Christians, those who, for all we know, have been redeemed by the blood of Christ?”
We have prayed much over the decision to start Adventist churches in doctrine that utilize a different organizational structure. We are convinced that God is leading and that many more people will accept this message and be saved in His kingdom. Whether or not a person agrees with us, the above passage makes it plain that God could, in fact, be leading us.
When Hosea announced to his friends, “God told me to marry a prostitute,” I doubt his friends said, “Right on, Hosea. Sounds just like God to me!” Instead, they were alarmed and wondered why he was pursuing a path that would take him away from God. We don’t always understand God’s ways of working. Down through history, He has a track record of leading in some surprising ways.
Perhaps that is why Gamaliel’s counsel in Acts 5 is so vitally important: “And now I say to you, keep away from these men and let them alone; for if this plan or this work is of men, it will come to nothing; but if it is of God, you cannot overthrow it – lest you be found to fight against God” (vs. 38-39; NKJV).
Gamaliel was not speaking with human wisdom or simply utilizing conflict resolution skills when he delivered this advice; Ellen White states that the Holy Spirit moved upon Gamaliel to speak these words (Testimonies to Ministers, p. 72).
I would appeal to you to follow Gamaliel’s advice. We are not against the Seventh-day Adventist church; we are not against any one. We are loyal Adventist Christians who believe that God will be honored as another group joins in proclaiming the message. If God is indeed leading us, please realize what a tragedy it would be for someone to oppose us, especially if that person does so in a harsh manner and/or persuades others to join their cause. Remember, too, that Ellen White considered her own statements about the church to be conditional. (See 1SM, p. 67 and 8T, p. 247.)
When we met with Elder Schneider and two of his colleagues, we made a pledge that we will remain positive toward the church. By God’s grace, we will keep that pledge. If any arrows fly, we told Elder Schneider, they will only fly in one direction and that will not be from us. We hope and pray that we could all agree to take Luke 9 and Acts 5 to heart, to lay these matters humbly and prayerfully before God and ask for Him to bless or withdraw His blessing as He sees fit.
Now let me respond briefly to the major points in your letter.
1. You state that we are starting a new denomination. This is absolutely not our intention. We appealed to our leaders to consider Mission Catalyst as a pilot project, to give it a few years and see if God is in it. We asked if we could find enough common ground that we could operate under the structural umbrella of the church. Some people may label Mission Catalyst as a denomination, but we believe it inaccurately characterizes our ministry. We are, in fact, a network of churches that is loyal to the Adventist message and mission and passionate about taking it to the world. We would love to partner with the church to make that happen. We would also prefer to call our churches “Seventh-day Adventist” but are aware that if we did, we would likely face legal action.
2. You state that one of the 27 fundamental beliefs “declares that you believe that the Seventh-day Adventist church constitutes God’s remnant people.” None of the 27 fundamentals states that at all. The only statements that mention the remnant are numbers 12 & 17, but neither of them states that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is the remnant church. Instead, the remnant is comprised of those who meet certain criteria. We agree with those and will proclaim them.
3. Your letter states that we are “totally doing away with all mission work.” Actually, we are requiring each church that we start to be engaged in a mission project.
4. Your letter states that we “have no room for any educational system.” Many of the finest Christian schools in America are based in local churches. As time goes on and our churches become significant, I have no doubt that many of them will create Christian schools.
5. You state that “your bureaucracy costs more than the denomination” because the local church will send 10% of its giving to the support office. The vast majority of that money will be spent to start churches in the 318 metro areas in the United States and in other countries. The amount of money needed to staff the support office will be amazingly small.
6. You state that the church planter assessment system belongs to the church. We agree. When we left our office in June, Lavelle Whitehouse and I left the material there in hopes that someone would pick it up and continue with the program. We have created a new and very different process that will help us identify founding pastors of new churches.
7. You state that we have planted 1211 new churches in the last nine years. According to official statistics, the North American Division has experienced a net gain of 318 churches from the end of 1996 (when the first Seeds program began) to the end of 2003. NAD did not track companies in 1996 so these numbers reflect an apples-to-apples comparison. There may be other points that you have made in other letters. I have heard of another letter (or two?) that you have sent out, but since I have not seen it, I can only respond to your letter to me.
A few more thoughts. I hope we can steer the discussion away from any person or group of persons to the central issue: using the resources God has placed in our care as efficiently as possible for the spread of the gospel. We cannot pretend that the organization is structured as efficiently as possible and is producing the maximum kingdom impact. We all recognize that we have drifted significantly from the days when the mission was primary.
So far, administrators seem unwilling to discuss why a denominational policy permits conference, union or division offices to pays their secretaries and custodians, and to buy office equipment, with tithe funds, while a local church cannot. The conference spends tithe to bring in guest speakers for the annual camp meeting, but a local church cannot. The Union office uses tithe to print their communication paper; the local church cannot. The conference pays part of a Bible teacher’s salary out of tithe; the local church cannot. Through tithe exchange, a conference or union can even use tithe for the acquisition and maintenance of buildings which, of course, the local church cannot. These are some of the issues that bring great concern to loyal Adventists who love the message, but realize that local churches are financially hamstrung when it comes to the mission.
Everyone knows that most of the Adventist ministries accept tithe. When we met with Elder Schneider, I shared with him that several persons from Adventist media ministries have told us personally that their ministry accepts tithe. One leader in a media ministry told me that they get phone calls all the time asking if they will accept tithe. The potential donor is told, “If you mark it as tithe, we are supposed to send it back; if you want us to accept it, make sure the check doesn’t say ‘tithe’ on it.”
Another media ministry leader told us, “When we receive a tithe check, we place a phone call to the donor: ‘It is against our policy to accept tithe. Did you mean for us to receive your tithe?’ If the person says, ‘No,’ we return the check to the donor. If the person says, ‘Yes, I meant to send you our tithe,’ we accept it.”
Accepting tithe for supporting ministries is common practice. Mission Catalyst has decided to follow the lead of others with one exception. We are not pretending that we don’t accept it; we believe that the tithe is for the proclamation of the Adventist message and we will use it as efficiently as we can.
One more thing. Demographic studies show that a large chunk of the population tell researchers that they will never become part of any denomination. Is it acceptable to write them off? It would be wonderful if the denomination and Mission Catalyst could have a Toyota/Lexus relationship.
Researchers told Toyota that people would not spend $50,000 on a Toyota, but they would if the automobile or SUV had a separate identity. Toyota created a new brand called Lexus and those who were never in the market for what they perceived as a lowly Toyota were soon proudly cruising the neighborhood in a Lexus.
What business are we in? Toyota and Lexus are in the automobile manufacturing business. They will do whatever it takes to make their product attractive. We are in the soul-saving “business.” What are we willing to do to make our “product” more attractive – without compromising our theological integrity – to the greatest number of people?
Since we are not allowed, legally, to use the Seventh-day Adventist name in our churches, we will offer the same high-quality message under a different name. We are praying for a positive partnership with the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. We will preach the same message. We will reach, by God’s grace, hundreds of thousands of lost people, some of whom would never be reached without this ministry.
Please join us, Russell, in praying for God to lead and bless. Please help us keep a positive relationship between the official denomination and Mission Catalyst. I have looked up to you, respected you, and considered you a friend for many years. I continue to respect you and will always consider you a friend. I pledge to pray for God to bless your leadership and your ministry. In the spirit of Luke 9 and Acts 5, please pray for me and for those of us who are sticking our necks out to try and lead more souls into God’s kingdom.
Posted: Fri Aug 27, 2004 10:49 pm Post subject: Breaking off from the S.D.A. Church??
Dear Brethren,
It seems to be pulling a long bow indeed, to reason from Church members simply doing the work our God requires, to assuming that they are ipso facto "breaking off from the Church." Certainly they are breaking away from that part of the Church which has failed to do it, that is surely a different feature.
People who reason like that, are actually engaging in the "Fallacy of the illicit process." It is illogical to think that any person who is moving under the influence of God the Holy Spirit and carrying out the Will of the Father, is really breaking off from the Church, for it cannot be.
However it is common place for many to begin to demonize those who, by their righteous actions cause the slothful to appear wanting.
Think about it. The very first response from Satanic agencies will be to persecute those who endeavour to push God's work forward. The second action will be the response from so-called Church members to loftily claim that "Some people bring persecution upon themselves." This latter group are of course far too clever and shrewd to get caught out like that. Far better to just sit in the pews with deaf ears petending to be Christians and fully expecting that one day the Lord of Glory will choose them above all others for salvation while utterly ignoring those who went out and did the work - despising the shame.
I must say that I have significant difficulty accepting that view however common it is within the Church at large.
However, the words "Breaking Off from the Church" really says it all. This is the beginning of the demonizing of those faithful people, and the damnation of all who agree with it.
Tragic, but there you are.
Further, not too long ago I heard a phone conversation between a member of an independent group and a senior minister - seemingly in Canada, in which they were straightly charged that they had no right to the name "Seventh-day Adventist" because, as that unfortunate man stated, "We own it!!" This of course was hotly disputed but the bottom line was the oft repeated statement to that senior minister, "The fires are waiting."
Given that the name Seventh-day Adventist Church is only a tag for "The Everlasting Gospel," are we to believe that the GC in - rampant apostasy- claims to own the Everlasting Gospel??
The mind boggles.
Sincerely,
Ross _________________ R.R. Pollock
Ross, Perhaps I should clarify. I do not necessarily see it as a negative thing at all. I posted it because I knew it would be of special interest to some on this site who also would like to see reform at a faster rate.
But even though they claim it would merely be an independent ministry, it is actually a new system of organization. In fact, it is because of their view of the current organization that they are doing it.
The system will encourage churches and pastors to enroll under their General Conference. Churches that do so will then pay 1/10 of the tithe to the NEW GC (instead of all of it), while retaining 90% of the tithe for local work.
As Gladden notes, the 10 percent would be used for planting metro churches.
Some thoughts...
a. I think that as it currently is our system is far too top heavy, and a challenge to that system is great. In a day of modern communications we don't need the heavily heirarchal system of previous years. Conference, Union Conference, Division, GC...could all be folded to perhaps one or two entities saving resources for the field. I think this aspect of the plan is great. I even recall a statistic that somewhere around 40 percent of employees are office workers, not workers in the field. That obviously needs to change, and this, by default, will spur them to rethink.
b. Under Gladdens system the local church would pay for pastors. This COULD mean a few things....
1. variable pay (some worry about excessive pay in large churches, or nearly no pay in small). I see this as a negative.
2. More promoting ministers from within the local chuch who show that they have the blessing of God, and are successful ministers, independent of schooling, etc. I see this as a definite positive.
3. Less dictating by an authority removed from the local situation. In most cases I see this as a positive.
4. virtually no pastoral support for the large number of small churches scattered around much of the country. This could be bad...if not tranisitioned well. Or it could be a great blessing as they learn to work on their own as they are meant to. It could on the other hand lead to some churches who are better off buying multiple staff to in essence do their work for them.
5. Would tend to hurt forgein missions considerably as now there is no means for distribution of funds at a world level other than the metro US areas. This new movement appears to be aimed at only the US..
c. The issue of cooperation between these two entities is a difficult one. While they wish to be an independent ministry, their whole scheme is aimed at being an alternative framework. That is their goal. So it is in fact breaking off from the church to form a better model, since they feel the church WILL NOT reform itself I do not deomonize them for this. I agree that God is able to use more than one agency in his work. But we must be honest and say what it really is. It is a desperate attempt to spur local mission through radically altering the current structure. it is something that is needed, but difficult to bring about in a 150 year old institution which the Advent movement has become.
d. I too agree that the GC should not legally keep them from using the SDA name. But on the other hand I SUSPECT but don't know that they really don't want to use it that much. Just looking at the names of the churches planted by Gladden that I am familiar with, they tend to be more community church oriented names that are geared to be more accessible to the non-churched. Few of them plaster SDA logos or names or symbols all over simply because, as he notes in the letter, they are trying to reach an audience that is turned off by religious denominations.
What we really see in this letter is Ron Gladden suggesting what from the denominations veiwpoint is an untenable relationship, and from his is a perfectly reasonable one. The GC won't let the tithe go, and he won't let go of the idea of reform. It is therefore clear that sooner or later he will either force a reform of the SDA church, or will break off from it. I don't see many other courses of action being likely. I don't think it should HAVE to be that way, but it probably will be.
Do I think he is wrong for doing it? As he said, if God is telling him too, how could it be wrong. I don't intend to set myself up against God. If God is not blessing it, it will soon be clear. The larger question for me will soon become whether my individual churches will wish to join his organization or not.
Incidentally, I am sure it will become quite tense when churches do make that decision. As I am sure most of you know the Conference is the legal entity that holds the church properties. So if believers opt to join this other group and the GC does in fact view them as an off shoot (which all appearances seem to indicate they will), then they will sieze the property of all of those churches.
I hope that instead Gladden will see what he might not have before this, a genuine attempt at reform in the SDA church. If not, then perhaps this is the only answer. We will simply have to wait and see what it is that God is doing among us.
Posted: Sat Aug 28, 2004 11:32 pm Post subject: Breaking off
Dear Pastor Tall,
I was not infering that you were demonising those people. What you had presented was only a report of future intentions of a group and I do not see anyone going out into the highways and the byways preaching the gospel when moved by God the Holy Spirit as doing anything wrong.
In fact your report filled me with gladness to see that even in this dark and dreary time our God still has 7000 who have not bowed the knee to baal.
I was even more impressed a few minutes later when I somehow came onto www.sdadefend.com/Adventist-split.htm and the pages titled An Evangelical History of the Adventist Theological Split which was caused way back in 1954-58 when I had decided to give my heart to the Lord in earnest.
I had never had a chance to see a report on those meetings and it was quite a shock though not without interest and has had the effect of strengthening my resolve to stand against all sin and infamy.
Sincerely,
Ross _________________ R.R. Pollock
Here is the website of the organization, complete with reasonings, etc.
Here is the Newsletter of Leo Scriven, who, while agreeing with them, has not joined their new organization. It hints that the SDA GC is workng on changes to address the concerns.
Quote:
September 2004 Investing Wisely
Greetings from the city of sin, Las Vegas Nevada. We are enjoying an exciting seminar with the Nevada utah Conference starting a new church in the south end of Las Vegas with pastor Ken and Tammy Losey. The response has been wonderful, two nights ago 124 people checked for baptism. We are going into our final busy week of follow up and visitation so I wanted to get this Newsletter off while I have time. It will be a bit shorter than normal as my schedule is very stressed.
This is another special edition for pastors and church leaders.
For those who are new, I send this Newsletter free of charge to all pastors and church leaders. hundreds receive it each month and at times we share things that are particularly relevant to them. I appreciate your patience in this. You can skip this section if you want and proceed directly to the financial section.
It is time for an update. Since the controversial February newsletter, many things have transpired. Let me give you a quick overview.
The February Newsletter had a significant impact in raising the issues of the church structure. I had over 420 responses from pastors to the Newsletter in February and all but one was very supportive of the article. This represented about 1/4 of the American pastors and was quite significant. Many leaders took note of this and began to seriously address the issues which I was very glad to see.
The majority of church leaders were very cordial to me personally after the Newsletter. I know the majority of Conference presidents and secretaries after working for them for 22 years. Even the Presidents of the North American Division took the time to fly down to Florida where I was and we spent a day in good dialogue discussing the challenges and looking for alternative solutions. We have continued this dialogue over the last few months with NAD leaders and many Union and Conference leaders as well.
There were a few church leaders who were upset with me and took the Newsletter as a personal attack on themselves. They perceived it was anti-church or anti-leadership which is understandable. That was part of the risk I had to take. However the majority of leaders understood where I was coming form, and what my purpose was. They know my heart for evangelism and that my motivation was not to be critical but rather prevent what I felt would be a crisis if we did not take action. In April I issued a letter to all that I was exiting the battle field on this particular issue and would continue to put full time energy into what God has called me to do in evangelism. In the last 7 months we have worked in 10 conferences and have seen over 300 souls baptized and thousands impacted for Christ. Life is good.
What has sparked this issue again has been the recent announcement of Ron Gladden and his new church plant ministry, Mission Catalyst. (www.missioncatalyst.org) Hundreds of you have emailed me regarding this. First let me say that this is what I saw coming in February, and was the primary motivation in writing such an unusually strong Newsletter. Ministry structures such as Mission Catalyst will continue to be born to fill the need for more efficient ways to fulfill the gospel commission. Lets address two issues.
First is Ron himself. Ron is known and loved across the Division. He has been at the forefront of church planting and evangelism for years. His sincerity and commitment to the message and truth I believe cannot be questioned by any honest mine. He is a man of character and has served the church faithfully for many years. I believe that Ron is doing what he is doing out of a sincere desire to fulfill the gospel commission. I know him to be open and humble. I am writing all this for one reason. It is always easy to get into a panic when we face a challenge and begin to assassinate a person's character. It is a natural human reaction that I too am guilty of. When over 100 pastors called me in less than a month last January and they were angry, bitter, disillusioned and crying about being laid off, I too hit the panic button and assassinated character calling the church leaders names, and cutting them down for what they were doing, or not doing. I need to apologize for that and say I'm sorry. Yet, most leaders were very patient to me and treated me with respect and kindness, looking beyond my words to what was in my heart. It is my hope that the same grace and kindness will be extended to Ron as he begins what he believes God has called him to do. I want to encourage all to take the high road and let's impute the best motive to Ron's actions and dialogue with him with genuine Christian love and care.
Second we are dealing with a new structure issue. I continue to be deeply concerned about this. Everything I wrote in the February Newsletter was to prevent this very thing from happening. Over the last few weeks, several church leaders have spoken with me saying how they wished they would have paid more attention to the issues in February and this situation could have possibly been prevented. The structure issue is one I simply will not address any more. I made that promise to my wife and have to keep it. However, I recognize I have to put on paper where I stand on this at this point. So, let me summarize this as concisely as possible.
For 22 years I have served the church faithfully. Tamara and I have worked and sacrificed massively to build, strengthen and contribute time, money and talent to the church. I have been told that we are the #1 soul winning team in all North American for 14 years in a row. No pastor that I know of has baptized more new people or brought in more new tithe than we have year after year. We have never worked outside the body of Christ. In January we began a supportive ministry of the church called All Power and over the last 8 months have contributed tens of thousands of dollars to local Conferences across the Division for evangelism. Even as I sit here we are planting a new church in Las Vegas at a cost of $86,000 which has been raised with donations and no cost to the conference whatsoever. So our loyalty to the body of Christ can't be questioned.
Do I have concerns? Yes. Do I get frustrated trying to work in a church that could be doing things much more efficiently? Yes. Does my heart bleed for the hundreds of pastors we have laid off while budgets are slashed? Yes. Do I look around at other churches that are growing massively and chomp at the bit to do things better? Yes. Have I voiced those concerns with passion to see change that would make some think I was anti-church or anti-leadership? Yes.
But I too had to make a decision. That decision was made in April. I'm just not going to fight these kinds of battles anymore. I'm going to stay focused on one thing. Evangelism and leading people to Christ. And I am going to do it in the body of Christ like I always have. I choose to stay hopeful that the leadership will work to make the changes necessary.
There is one thing I need to say. Since February I have spoken to many of the church leaders. There is no question that the majority of them are very dedicated men who share the same concerns. They want to see this work finished just as much as I do. They too get frustrated at trying to turn a ship that size of the Titanic with a tooth pick rudder. But there are some changes in the wind. Various committees are now in place to deal with these issues and I find that encouraging. Leaders are talking and working on the problems and that is encouraging. I want to encourage all of you to pray for the leaders, and work together for positive change. Tamara and i are committed to continue working in the church body world wide as we always have. We look forward to working in all the conference in North America. In the next 12 months we are scheduled in 17 different conferences and will do all possible to make a positive impact for Christ.
I saw something about the Mission Catalyst Network a while back and looked at them for a little bit at first. I actually like what they are doing. I just wish, hope, and pray that they will try to return to the Church and cooperate with the Church leadership to create change.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in
