JESUITS DOMINATE THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH AND CAUSE AN IDENTITY CRISIS!
Updated 10/13/2007; Two links added to the text. First is a link referencing thorough documentation of the DIVERSITY issue of attack against the Adventist Church. Second is a link to the Alligator Riverboat Story, and what was the purpose of its creation.
We are here revealing certain things that happened within the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Because of this, we have noticed a rather preoccupation with these issues among Adventists, and a neglect of their required service to the world. We are urging all such to realize that TIME IS RUNNING OUT!! We only reveal these things of what has happened within the Seventh-day Adventist Church so that you can possibly understand how the Jesuits work, and be ready to accept opposition from the official church when you move forward to warn the world about what is about to happen to them. You are not to assume that the things we are describing happens everywhere to every church under the denominational domain. Neither are you to even focus on all leaders assuming that they commit such things or are even in favor with such things. The same thing applies to leaders who have witnessed all these things and have done nothing. This does not mean they are loyal to Rome, and you are not to pass judgment against them. You must understand what is now required of you as you learn more about what is actually going on in global affairs! Ultimately, you have to plan and move forward without a human command to do so from your church!
We have already suffered quite an adventure as we realized that the Jesuits were more and more dominating all of our society. But this adventure we suffered wound up having different sectors or different areas and levels of experience. We met different people in the process who were working for the same treasonous goal, and as time progressed they became bolder and bolder and even more absurd to this date. The boldness they exhibit gets stronger as their victims more and more succumb to their wiles either through even innocent ignorance or, worst of all, the grossest stupidity. Yet surprisingly, the first area we noticed that was horribly infiltrated by the Jesuits was the Seventh-day Adventist denomination. The next area was the Adventist internet discussion forums. After that came the newsgroups. Ultimately all of the characters we met from all these areas proved to be extremely dishonest and extremely unscrupulous, and used the same tactics against us.
|"The first Protestant groups they [The Jesuits] moved on were the 7th day Adventist and the Full Gospel Businessmen." -- Dr. Alberto Rivera, late Ex-Jesuit Priest.|
As we look back now, we realize that we had been attacked for a long time and through different stages by the leaders of the Adventist Church. We are not talking about all the leaders. There are some good leaders there, though few in numbers. All that we had learned came from good leaders in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, but they were the leaders of yesteryear. Many of those leaders have died, or are in retirement. They are now replaced by very different leaders indeed that wound up attacking the church in every way internally, even inconceivably! What they were attacking besides us, was Seventh-day Adventism, or the actual concept that undergirded its very existence. They started attacking us because we worked to defend the concept. We compared them with the majority of the political leaders of the United States. The American political leaders were constantly attacking the concepts that underlined America: the Constitution of the United States. So we see that there is already a similarity between them. Church and state are being attacked using the same principles. It is obviously being done by a religio-political system: church and state falling the same way using the same methods. None of the Protestant Churches we know of, fits that classification.
What soon first happened in the Seventh-day Adventist Church was the fact that the leaders were calling for the people to DEBATE! Does that sound familiar? The history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church first and for the most part was marked with concern that the church never be confused. We have already shown you that a major agenda for the Protestant movement historically was the need for clear information and guidance from the scriptures. If it is true then, as had been mentioned by Rome before, that Seventh-day Adventism is the strongest form of Protestantism, how would we be surprised that throughout her history it was a high priority for her to have clear and concise information, doctrine and beliefs?
In some of the most tumultuous times of the past, the most renowned leaders of the faith labored to make sure that disputes were cleared up. There was a time in our church history where people had to remark that they can go to an Adventist Church anywhere from South Africa to Anchorage Alaska and always notice that they were saying and preaching the same things. The conclusion was that we had the truth. Disagreements were a great concern to the leaders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church historically. After time that concept changed because different people wound up capturing position in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. These different people made sure they never rested till the Seventh-day Adventist people were debating or arguing about most everything possible concerning their doctrine, church standards, and even mission. We noticed this first in the church media.
We noticed since the 1970s that the Adventist Church has been making great and special efforts toward acquiring new members. We were even a part of evangelistic efforts that were staged throughout North America and soon noticed that there were problems. Many were invited into membership without clearly being made aware what Seventh-day Adventist doctrine and rules were all about. They were literally being crammed or crashed into church membership. We had clearly read through historic records that this is a mistake: prospective members were always to be trained to clearly understand what the church doctrine and church standards were, and they were not to be accepted into membership unless they clearly showed evidence that they fully agree with it. Soon we noticed a signal change taking place.
Some protested because of this violation even of historical order. We remembered that the typical response at that time (and as usual) was that souls must be admitted to safety immediately because it is the only right thing to do, and that once they are inside, we can take care of what they don't know or what has not been presented to them at a later time. Ultimately, such protesters were told that they don't have church credentials nor church education. They therefore cannot assume that they know more than church leaders on that or any other religious matter even though documentation from leaders of history was clear on the point in contention. In other words, we didn't have to present credentials to know what our leaders of credentials of yesteryear decreed. They said no one was to be admitted without fully knowing what the church was all about and FULLY agreeing to it.
At first, we didn't understand what the agenda was. Many of us assumed that the leaders were merely greedy for new members who would be encouraged to pay their tithe (10% of their income for the church support), and the church would become richer and more powerful. We couldn't conceive that there was any other reason for this. But soon after, clues we did not fully comprehend were hitting us all the time based upon what had happened since. We now recognize what they were doing all the time and why.
The major publication of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is called The Adventist Review. Although many people read that publication, the majority of Seventh-day Adventists don't. As far as we know, that condition always was, but not because they despised the publication. It either just didn't capture their attention, they didn't think of buying it, etc. We began to read that publication in the mid to late 1980s through libraries that belonged to the denomination. We were shocked at what we were reading. We noticed that concepts foreign to and at war with the concept of Seventh-day Adventism were all throughout it consistent enough to cause alarm.
At the beginning of that publication was the section called, "Letters to the Editor." This section adopted the "pro and con" format. To encourage debate, the editors published letters intentionally that had widely differing views on almost every subject concerning the doctrine of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. As they did that, they then added throughout their articles the idea that none of these differing ideas can claim to be truly right. Other Adventists they said might disagree with a statement that may be published. Because someone would disagree with any statement, that proved that the statement can never be called TRUTH, nor must we expect everyone or anyone to believe it. Soon, ideas that challenged the longstanding doctrine and practice of the church were given prominent exposure in "Letters to the Editor" and the whole publication in general. First with subtlety, and then progressively more bold. Ideas that supported the doctrine and longstanding practice then began being suppressed and consistently never given equal billing.
They were getting complaints about this condition all along, but pretended to be dumb. Then at times they would comment that those who didn't like the articles were merely "dogmatic" and that, thinking they are "God," they just wanted all the articles written to follow "their own self-made opinions." As they kept doing this, the articles they were publishing began to more and more change: getting worse and worse. In the process of time, virtually the whole page was dominated with chosen articles that attacked longstanding Adventist doctrine or practice, demanding or supporting that the Adventist Church CHANGE. Then we would see a lone article that finally supported the positions the church always took. Then that article will be followed by at least one final article that was designed to attack it. This was done many times enough for anyone to understand that it was a pattern. Ultimately, in response to further complaints about that publication being unfair, the response boiled down to, "THAT'S YOUR OPINION!" Uh oh! Does something sound familiar? They therefore concluded that they will continue to run the publication how they saw fit.
[Click on this link to see the series on DIVERSITY, showing more documentation on how the leavening process by the Jesuits work.]
Many disputes arose because the new members that were crashed into the denomination did things that were contrary to the longstanding doctrine or practices of the church. This is to be expected because they were never taught these things. These wound up being reproved by veteran members of the church who informed them that Seventh-day Adventists don't allow what they were doing. These new members then insisted they would keep their way of doing things and not submit. What then would naturally happen? The veteran members then took the issue to the church leaders, confident that they would know what the standards of the church always were and would inform the new members. Unfortunately, they were startled with the results.
The leaders began to say that the old or veteran members acquired their opinions about these matters through the Holy Spirit. They then said that the new members acquired their beliefs about these matters from the Holy Spirit also. They therefore said that they cannot figure out who is right about these situations and therefore cannot rule on the matters in question. The conclusion was that they were going to leave these touchy questions up to the individual judgment of the members. They claimed that they cannot rule on these issues lest they offend great numbers of the body of Christ. These leaders who then copped out on doing their usual duty in this matter then had to make appeals to those protesting their now strange behavior. Appeals later emerged touching on the so-called hard jobs that leaders have to cope with deciding between differing contentious issues. We heard one minister saying that to be a leader in the '80s is like sliding down the blade of a double-edged knife. He said that you get Hades if you DO, and Gehenna if you don't (both names meaning HELL). You may think that from this response they were copying the actions of Paul in Romans 14. But that actually is not correct. This website shows this on the link that explains Romans 14 that you can read when you have a chance.
You can see what is being said here. They were claiming that the Holy Spirit can inspire people to support conflicting beliefs and ideas. They completely ignored even informing the new members about the fact that the Adventist Church always supported what the old members were telling them. If therefore longstanding doctrine or practice within the Seventh-day Adventist Church must discontinue, or if people hated the way the church always worked, how can they change it, stop it, or destroy it? Make an announcement first and alert the people before the decision is made? Or would they understand that if they made such announcements, they would encounter too much opposition so other means need to be put into operation as what we just described? They therefore rush new members in!
"THE STICKMAN CONCEPT!"
|The historic leaders pointed all the members to the right and told them how important it is to have sure informa-tion so that there would be no divisions among them.||Leaders who always opposed the Adventist Church taught principles that were clearly against its doctrine with no patience for disagreement.||New strange leaders came along to tell the members that it is great to have every conflicting idea in tension with each other, and that God was pleased with this.|
Time after time with doctrinal position after position now suddenly in dispute, headquarters came out with the same answer shown from articles in our publications and from our pulpits, "We leave this question up to the individual judgment of our members." Then followed a tremendous barrage of the concept of DIVERSITY. From our publications and the pulpits also came the concept that, "DIVERSITY IS THE SECRET OF OUR STRENGTH!"--exactly the same our national leaders have long been pushing on the United States. Now when there are disagreements, leaders went on the pulpits in order to convince us that this is a very desirable condition. The Adventist membership were deluged with the idea that it is good to have many conflicting ideas. They gave sermons talking about the virtue of each snowflake being completely different from any other, teaching us about the horrors of bigotry. Those who didn't like these movements (hiding the fact that this group was actually the majority: certainly no intention to make a vote) then found it impossible to go up against the bigotry of those who were pushing them. The members were deluged with the idea that the natural byproduct of FREEDOM is people entertaining every conflicting idea. They refused to rest until as many Adventists as possible sat on every conflicting seat and dabbled upon every conflicting view. This arena of conflicting ideas we always knew to be confusion. The bible also substantiates that fact:
Acts 19:32 Some therefore cried one thing, and some another: for the assembly was confused; and the more part knew not wherefore they were come together.
As in state issues, trouble first started with this concept being inserted. It was not long till most of the foundations of Adventism became questioned in every way and strange doctrines Adventists never believed were entering the faith. Adventists knew the time would come when their foundations would be challenged, but they expected that people would be like the second man in the box to the right, who would just openly tell them that their beliefs are silly and must change. They never expected to meet the third man giving them all kinds of question marks, who secretly had the same agenda as the second man, but using a deceptive means to bring it about over the process of time through confusing their enemies. And yet that third man had a message that was appealing. How can we get into trouble with people who just wanted everyone to be free to believe what they want? They seemed so cautious about hurting anybody's feelings! They seemed so tolerant and so docile.
While we called it what it was (confusion), they worked to have confusion prevail among the people by mislabeling it. They called it, DIVERSITY. They then did everything to make the people to believe that God Himself wants them to debate freely about everything, and once the people accept this, then starts the inevitable: EVERYTHING begins to be questioned, then they lead the people in subtle ways to begin questioning the actual doctrine that undergirds the very foundation of the church. That is what actually happened.
We then found that a primary door of entrance for heresy was through the youth of the church. Our educational institutions were training them in the same way: first to accept conflicting and variant ideas, claiming that to do otherwise would be bigotry, then more and more false beliefs and impressions were taught. Developing outward, soon they began to use the techniques of Neuro-Linguistic Programming against their congregations. These were techniques of literal hypnotism used to actually control the members and make them go along with illegitimate movements. Independent Seventh-day Adventist ministries eventually arose in protest and did heavy documentation on these issues and showed that those techniques were created by a controversial heavy drug-user who was even on trial for murder.
It was virtually impossible for those who discovered these things to tell other faithful Adventists what was happening. Faithful Adventists were in a high spirit of denial, and that spirit continues to this day. It was not long then before a growing internal movement that exists to this day arose demanding that the youth lead the church. They were imbued with much of the false concepts. Just as in Nazism and Communism, it then became important that those who were soaked in the "new" theories were constantly recommended to be put in leadership positions. Just this year (2005) was a major session of the Seventh-day Adventist Church that is held every five years. This year it was held in St. Louis, Missouri. At that time much emphasis was put upon making the church accept leaders and ministers that were younger and younger. Not long before that for some years, they were also pushing that women become pastors and elders.
You might not understand these issues if you don't know what the Protestant mission was. Where are you going to find in the bible ANYWHERE that young people should lead the Christian Church? The bible itself says that men beyond reproach who are filled with experience and who are actually FATHERS should be in authority in the church. In those days the older a person became was the more he was respected based upon his own experience with life. Where does the bible say ANYWHERE that women should become pastors or elders? In order to defend their position, they began quoting the Apostle Paul, where he said, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." (Gal. 3:28). We then asked them when Paul allowed women ministers or elders in authority over the church. They dodged around the question and resumed their push for a movement that never confused the Christian Church for its entire history until now. I am talking about the ENTIRE Christian Church. And yet what we are presenting here is very crucial in getting a correct understanding of what truly is a Seventh-day Adventist. The official denomination itself has been pushing these movements. Those who do not accept what they are pushing in their constant demands for CHANGE, are labeled, "offshoots" and "cults," yet the official church, by their actions, are completely weird to the entire history of even all the churches, and even the Catholic Church. The independent ministries never suffered from these debates!
Our historic church leaders provided us even with documentation telling us that the time will come when the denomination will be targeted with attacks from the INSIDE also and will give itself over to apostasy. Because of these concerns, honest members have been protesting against all the illegal activities. They brought appeals of every type to deaf ears. When they realized that the denomination itself was not listening, these members took their appeals to the members at large. In response to this the denomination went to the members at large and told them what they had already told the concerned members. Among what they said was that they see the problem and they acknowledge it, but that they need not worry. They said that the members were not to do anything about the situation, but they were just to trust in God. They claimed that God raised this church and that God Himself will see it through. They told us that Christ said that the wheat and the tares are to grow together until the harvest, meaning that if there are bad members or movements, they are to be tolerated, but that God will ultimately handle the situation. The members were then told that they were not to look at the church nor at each other, but they were to keep their eyes on Jesus.
After they were told this, the problems escalated day by day, week by week, month by month and year by year. The time then came when a monumental change was taking place. Music that had never been accepted into the SDA Church (nor any other Christian church for that matter) was then being pushed. It sounded like Rock, Jazz, and every other form of popular music, but then the words were upon sacred themes. Although similar attempts all throughout history caused nothing but trouble and was rejected outright, it was now being pushed in a very strange way, THROUGH DENOMINATIONAL SANCTION. With this movement ministers began to teach in the most subtle of ways that the denomination must unite with all the other Christian Churches. They would even hold workshops where they would divide the congregation into groups of some say five people for each table. They would then give them a story just like the Alligator Riverboat Story that was designed to yield different judgments about moral circumstances from different groups and different individuals within each group. They would then go to each table and ask them what they thought about the moral situation that was discussed. When they got any difference of judgment, they then began to teach that we are all Christians and that we have different judgments, but that doesn't mean we cannot worship together nor unite together.
What they were doing was teaching ECUMENISM: a movement consistently rejected by all the Protestant Churches until the recent infiltration of all of them, and just as much consistently supported by Rome. It said that all the Christian Churches must unite together, but always left out that this would naturally include Rome. Though it is pressed with rosy themes that this uniting is for fellowship, brotherhood and love, it is actually to control the masses, for it involves destroying the principle of Separation of Church and State so that persecution can be revived as a common practice. The actual object is to restore the Inquisition. All history attests that when you unite with Rome on ANYTHING, SHE WILL RULE THE AFFAIRS AND THE MOVEMENT. Strange Adventists will NOW argue all day long on this issue, but the Seventh-day Adventist Church was ALWAYS adamantly opposed to any form of ecumenism, for they understood it was always a call to unite back under the banner of Rome and to build a One World Church: something very akin, most Adventists know, to WORSHIPPING THE BEAST, 666. It is one step in building a One World Church that is necessary in order to build a One World Government or New World Order. Anyone understanding the message of the book of Revelation against the Antichrist "Beast" and his "image" cannot possibly join into anything like this. But as more and more strange people infiltrated even among the general members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, this movement began to get stronger and stronger, more and more relentless to this day. Can we disagree with this movement? Can we disagree with the people who told us about debate? They tell us YES, and then act out NO! They now argue that there are ecumenical Seventh-day Adventists. Fact is, it is impossible to have an ecumenical Adventist. All who accept ecumenism can never actually be a Seventh-day Adventist. Just read the most prominent selling Adventist books of all time and the truth will come out above their typical relentless babble. If all the members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church were point blank told that they were uniting with all the other churches, there would be pandemonium. Knowing this, the leaders are pushing it in secret ways and the church media, if they don't falsify the issue, they will not inform the members about this at all. Therefore Adventists are adamant that the church have absolutely nothing to do with ecumenical bodies. That definitely includes THE WORLD COUNCIL OF CHURCHES.
Those who then pushed this movement began to more and more overuse the word, "CELEBRATION." The independent ministries eventually opened up to the members that this was a new and pre-planned movement. They called it the "Celebration Worship Style." They showed documentation showing that the whole concept was developed at Vatican II for the changing of the LITURGY or worship format of the churches. It's purpose is to serve and fulfill the agenda of ecumenism. These ministries showed how everywhere the word celebration was being overused in order to condition the people into accepting the results of the treason, and they showed even at least one publication accepted by the church that was named after the word. It was soon obvious that the ministers, church leaders and even participants in worship service have been ordered to use this word often in all that they did in order to sell the concept.
Independent Ministries informed those Adventists who would listen about the treason taking place behind their backs for years!
1990: An invitation was issued by the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists for the Vatican to send an official observer, "Reverend" Thomas J. Murphy, Director of the Office of Ecumenism for the Diocese of Indianapolis, to the 55th Session of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, held July 6-14, in Indianapolis. . . . After some of the true and faithful protested this blatant treason, Shirley Burton, Public Relations Director for the General Conference, published an official statement saying that these people were "just a small group of dissidents, and there were probably less than a thousand people in the entire denomination that felt this way."
[According to Shirley, it was so usual to invite officials from the Vatican to address our major assemblies, as she claimed, that it was unprecedented to the very date! The following is another example:]
"It should be made crystal clear that the Seventh-day Adventist Church has never been, nor has plans to become, a member of the World Council of Churches--despite any and all rumors to the contrary." -- Dr. B. B. Beach (the one who gave the gold medal to the Pope reportedly in an effort to witness to him), Adventist Review, June 23, 1994, pg. 10.
"Uppsala, Sweden - The World Council of Churches Thursday admitted nine Roman Catholic theologians to membership in its principal theological arm, the commission on Faith and Order. This is the first time Catholics have become full participants in a major branch of the Council, which represents most major Protestant and Orthodox churches throughout the world.
Leaders of the Council said the move could eventually prove to be the first step toward FULL CATHOLIC MEMBERSHIP. . . .
The Action was taken by UNANIMOUS VOTE of the 720 delegates to the Fourth Assembly of the 20-year old ecumenical organization. The assembly is the council's HIGHEST POLICY-MAKING BODY.
ALSO admitted to FULL MEMBERSHIP were six representatives of other non-member churches, including the SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH, the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod, and various Baptist bodies." -- San Jose, California "Mercury," July 12, 1968, "Council Admits Catholics", (rec'd NY Times News Service)
Knowing that consideration for the special doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist Church that separated her from all others went contrary to ecumenism, Adventist leaders did everything possible to suppress the teaching of those doctrines. In our publications and radio shows even, the crucial and pointed doctrines that were specially given to the Seventh-day Adventist Church were being suppressed or neglected for radio shows talking about issues of health or many other issues that were not as crucial. In response to complaints about this, the denomination attacked those who complained and then suppressed the doctrines more.
It had then reached the point where many of the veteran members had just had enough. They just couldn't take anymore of the lies. Some key ministers within the denomination, realizing what was happening then started some private ministries of their own. They began to give prominent exposure to the special doctrines the Adventist church had always held that separated it from all the others. This greatly increased their popularity. Some published written materials exposing what was going on behind the backs of the Adventist people, while others also featured VIDEO TAPED ministries! What they would do is investigate the issues, showing what was happening behind the scenes. They went even to authoritative bodies such as the World Council of Churches in order to find out what even the Seventh-day Adventist Church was doing behind the backs of their members. They would then do the research and forward the information TO THOSE MEMBERS WHO WOULD LISTEN. Members who would listen: that is the key! Many refused to listen, accepting a spirit of denial that the denomination took advantage of to the fullest extent. The box to the right is just one example of much documentation.
Members, knowing that the Seventh-day Adventist Church was never to join with the World Council of Churches, have often asked the church leaders if they made any attempts to join, and they were told that it was not true. Often these ministries would then contact these bodies themselves and ask them if the Seventh-day Adventist Church was involved with their organization. They would then get back information proving that involvement was a reality. These ministries then began to document the evidence showing that the Jesuits had largely infiltrated the denomination. In response to this, the denomination kept telling them they were crazy. What then would the denomination do after more and more being accused of heavy Jesuit infiltration? In the present state of affairs on civil issues, what would a strange president do if he is accused of pandering to large corporations? You think it through!
The most effective of these ministries were those that provided video-taped documentation. These ministries would even show the publications coming out of the denomination on video where we would all recognize them since we subscribe to some of them. They would then go into the individual pages and show what was being taught. At times they would show occult symbols all over the graphics of our publications, even going into occult documentation to show what the symbols meant. They would show that occult symbols were placed in our publications so often that no one was able to defy the idea that it was done deliberately. Our hairs would almost literally stand on end! Picture after picture in the graphics of our publications showed people bowing before the sun or facing it strategically. With the denominational leaders then hounded with the growing belief that many of them are infiltrators from Rome, what would they do if they truly were infiltrators?...
Then many publications were shown where pictures of Catholic nuns and priests were placed in strategic places over and over and over again on the covers or title pages of our publications. The more complaints were raised was the more this was done also. Then authors began to attack some of the major doctrines of our church in the most defiant and amazing ways. For example, Adventism holds that the Papacy is the Antichrist or 666 Beast mentioned in the Revelation just as the entire Reformation believed. Leaders would then boldly print articles such as (paraphrasing) "Is the Papacy still the Beast of Revelation?" Adventist understanding of what the Papacy would do in the last days through infiltration claims that she will force a global Sunday law upon all. Leaders would then publish articles to the example of, "National Sunday Law Come and Gone?" constantly and boldly struggling against the doctrine and our pillar beliefs and swearing how they cannot understand why they are being attacked or why people would know they are jesuits. Just as they were complaining about all the distrust, they continued to misbehave more and more. Soon pastor after pastor that were moved to pastor other churches (for it is customary that one pastor never always stays with a church: they are to be reappointed ever so often) wound up bringing ultimatums to their new churches, telling them that they need to change, that they need to accept new music to their "new" worship services, that they need to have drama being performed behind their sacred pulpits during the divine services on their holy days.
Ultimately these video cameras would enter into Church business sessions where faithful members were being kicked out of the church for protesting against the illegal changes and movements. This turned out to be a turning point in the then strange battle between Seventh-day Adventists and "Adventists" who silently took control of the denomination. The denomination then became very paranoid about video cameras. Ministers openly remarked that having video cameras even during periods of worship was disrespectful, among other things. They complained about people having video cameras in business meetings where those protesting the "new" movements were being defrocked. One particular independent ministry leader remarked that the official church should be glad to have video cameras in their meetings, even providing their own, for it would openly demonstrate the justice of their cause and what they are doing, as opposed to acting as if the denomination had its own Patriot Act.
Because of all these things and viewing that the pure and true doctrines that separated the Seventh-day Adventist Church were only coming from the independent ministries (they were in the denomination also, but you had to fish for them and study on your own), soon, just out of a matter of conscience, members found it impossible to give financial support to the denomination anymore. The mission of the Seventh-day Adventist Church is COMPLETELY different from the mission of ECUMENISM. Since the denomination refused to turn from this treasonous path, these honest members began to send their financial support to these independent ministries. It got to the point where the denomination suffered a financial drop in support that was noticeable. Something then needed to be done, for things began to get desperate. What did they do? Well just take a look at what they told the honest members how to handle problems within the church. The honest members were told not to do anything at all, but just trust in God. They were told that God Himself can handle any problems within the church. They were then told not to look at the church or its members or its leadership: they were to keep their eyes on Jesus. With this problem now facing them, what is a denominational church that taught these things to do? Want to take a guess? The answer is, act like Jesuits!
THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
If strange incidents like cover-ups, false wars, lies, etc. increase, and the people are upset, and there's no conspiracy what would happen?
They immediately began a public counter-reformation campaign within the church. Their publications began a relentless campaign of attack against the independent ministries. Every form of indignity was heaped upon them. They were criticized and condemned at every turn. The members were told that they only started themselves because they wanted to sell their publications and their videos in order to get rich. All this was in print and was heralded from the pulpits as plain and obvious fact. The members were told that these ministry leaders were "dogmatic" "bigots" who merely wanted the church to go their own way. Minister after minister, publication after publication urged the members to throw any literature or videos that were not sanctioned by the official church in the garbage! Their diversity then didn't matter. Ministers in their sermons will say that they personally, when they see such publications or materials would throw them in the garbage, and they urged the rest of the members to follow their example instead of being diverse. These pleas persisted so much that these cries actually came in the weekly divine study periodicals, urging the members not to give any heed to these ministries. The official ministers tiraded from the pulpits the dangers of being "critical" or making accusations. Sermon after sermon trumpeted a great threat to the church they claimed was "criticism." These ministers then even went on the pulpits and, in their sermons, claimed that they didn't know for the life of them why they are constantly attacked by the "critical" and "hateful" independent ministries. The accusation of hate so common to the strange people we had to contend with on the internet were already in the Adventist Church before we met the same people on the internet! What did the denomination do after each of these sermons were done? They sent out more and more ministers to other Adventist churches to demand that they change and change their "style" of worship. These ministers complained even that the lack of funds coming to the Seventh-day Adventist Church is threatening their very existence. They actually appealed to the members to give them the financial support EVEN THOUGH THIS FINANCIAL SUPPORT ALSO WOUND UP BEING USED TO SEND PROPAGANDA AGAINST, ATTACK AND DESTROY--EVEN BY LEGAL MEANS--THESE INDEPENDENT MINISTRIES. What did they do after each of these appeals? They again sent out more and more ministers to different churches with the same demands.
Notice that the major charge against these independent ministries was that they were "critical" and were dogmatic or bigoted. The denomination claimed that a major difference between itself and the independent ministries was that it was not one-tracked. It offered many ideas and many views and beliefs about even its own doctrine. If that were true, why did members seek out the independent ministries? They did this because they could hardly find any of the true teaching and preaching of the doctrines that used to be taught in the Adventist Church. If those teachings were not attacked with subtlety or even openly, they were intentionally neglected.
Though the denomination knew this and understood that even financial support was leaving the denomination because of this, their mission, in total disrespect of their credentials, was to still make sure that the special doctrines that separated the Seventh-day Adventist Church from all others WERE STILL SUPPRESSED by whatever means. Even to the point of publishing articles and preaching sermons telling the members that if they think the denomination suppresses the special Adventist message or doctrines, they were imagining things despite their diverse view on the matter. At other times they preached that those doctrines were not important. That's the case to this date in answer to the constant complaints they received. They can't say they were not shown what the people want, can they? YES THEY CAN! Once you know who they are, any lie is fashionable!
Ultimately the denomination is going to fall. I didn't say that "the Church" will fall! I said the denomination will!...
The Lord has a controversy with His professed people in these last days. In this controversy MEN IN RESPONSIBLE POSITIONS WILL TAKE A COURSE DIRECTLY OPPOSITE TO THAT PURSUED BY NEHEMIAH. They will not only ignore and despise the Sabbath themselves, but they will try to keep it from others by burying it beneath the rubbish of custom and tradition. IN CHURCHES AND IN LARGE GATHERINGS IN THE OPEN AIR, MINISTERS WILL URGE UPON THE PEOPLE THE NECESSITY OF KEEPING THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK. -- RH, Vol. 1, pg. 405.
This is saying that our ministers will be urging us to keep Sunday in the denominational churches. It said nothing about this being done in independent ministries or home churches! It is impossible for our ministers to do this without denominational sanction!