Letter in response to Pr. R Monday February 15, 2016

Hello Mr. R,

Sister Guerline Bailey asked me to send a reply to your email response to her, quoted below:

Hi there, 

Please explain further. Is this Pastor in conflict with the SDA Church? 

I note, from the original message she sent you, that Guerline outlined in some detail the nature of the conflict, and provided you with a number of links outlining the issue.

I can, I suppose, give you a summary here, but it would probably be best if you go over the documents for yourself to form a firm opinion. We are dealing here with a matter of everlasting destinies, because the choice of who is "right" in this matter will determine whether or not we have the "mind of Christ" and operate according to Heavenly principles, or the "mind of the Beast," which is the operation of Satan through human agencies, in a very general sense.

The issue is one of religious liberty.  Ellen White tells us that "force is the last resort of every false religion," and that the reason why the Jewish Church fell in the days of Christ is that they went to the civil government - Rome in that era - and used it to accomplish their purposes, the silencing of the Messiah and His message.

The Bible tells us that Christians are not to settle their disputes in court, and the Spirit of Prophecy is even more explicit that those who use worldly courts to settle matters of religious disagreement are "numbered with the unbelievers," and acting contrary to the work of the Gospel.

What we have here is a Pastor, Walter McGill, who believes that he has received a calling to teach the Gospel to the world according to the Righteousness by Faith message presented to the SDA Church in the 1800s by Jones and Waggoner.  The essence of the message is that "whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin," as 1 John 3 tells us.  Those who are born again cease to commit all known sin, and thereafter life a life of sanctification, finding and putting away any remaining defects of character in preparation for the Heavenly Kingdom.

Ellen White's writings support this view of the Gospel, writing, "Not one should be buried with Christ by baptism unless they are critically examined whether they have ceased to sin, whether they have fixed moral principles, whether they know what sin is, whether they have moral defilement which God abhors. Find out by close questioning if these persons are really ceasing to sin, if with David they can say, I hate sin with a perfect hatred." [Letter 26d, 1887]

This is not merely a random quotation pulled out of context, but is a sample of a consistent pattern in Mrs. White's writings explaining a principle that, sadly, is no longer emphasized within the mainstream SDA Church.

In promoting a reform, Pastor McGill and others withdrew their membership from the mainstream Church, and organized under a name that God showed them, "Creation Seventh Day Adventists."  This is consistent with Mrs. White's statement that the name "Seventh Day Adventist' is a gift from God to latter-day Christians, and will be borne by the faithful until the close of human probation.

The mainstream Church, in response to this, did precisely what the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy forbid.  In an attempt to silence the voice of opposition, the sued McGill for infringing on their "trademarked" name "Seventh-day Adventist."  The language of the lawsuit is nauseating to a true Christian.  The Gospel is called a "product," the members of the Church are called "customers," and the basis of the lawsuit is an allegation that McGill, by using a "confusingly similar" name, is engaging in "unfair competition."

The human courts, of course, are entirely unfit to determine who a "true" Seventh-day Adventist is; nevertheless, judges with secular mindsets have taken it upon themselves to rule in the General Conference's favor, and McGill was imprisoned a few years ago as a result of refusing to give up his sincerely held conviction that the name "Creation Seventh Day Adventist" is one that must be used by the Christian in this generation.

Even non-Adventists who have no stake in the matter are appalled by the actions of the SDA Church.  In fact, the ONLY ones who seem to defend its use of the strong arm of the law to compel a citizen's religious observances are Adventists who have a vested interest in speaking well of the Church.  Those who are objective in the matter can clearly see the violations of both Scripture and their own Adventist beliefs in an attempt to quiet someone who is teaching that the beliefs of the modern SDA Church (such as that concerning ceasing from sin at baptism) are different from what the Pioneers and Ellen White once taught.

In signing the petition that Sister Guerline shared with you, an individual is saying that they believe the Bible should be the standard of Christians' behavior, not the traditions of men.  The individual is saying that, as a true Protestant, he/she rejects the idea that civil courts can dictate religious behavior, and that mercantile "trademarks" are NOT suitable bases for judging the names of Churches or other religious organizations that are not commercial in nature.

In refusing to sign, or ignoring the problem, one is supporting the SDA's use of force in attempting (by uniting with the state) to control the conscience of those outside of its covenant, and we as CSDAs do not consider this to be in line with the character of Christ.

This is, again, a very brief description of the problem.  Many have accused McGill of "stealing" the Adventist name, and therefore he deserves any imprisonment or persecution he believes.  However, as true Adventists, we say that the name "Seventh-day Adventist" is God's own creation, and cannot be legitimately trademarked as the "intellectual property" of a particular group that did not, in fact, create it in an act of intellect.  In choosing to trademark the name and call it their own, it is actually the Conference that has "stolen" from God; they have taken the authority to name the Bride of Christ, and have claimed it as their own before the world, an act for which they will not be held blameless in the Judgment.

But McGill and those who worship with him in the Creation Seventh Day Adventist religion believe that our faith comes from God.  We have made no attempt to mislead others into thinking we are the mother Church, and in fact the very courts that ruled against Pastor McGill have concluded that there is absolutely no evidence of anyone confusing the two distinct organizations. This litigation represents a spiritual conflict, not a legal one; it is the spirit of love vs. the spirit of force, and that is really all it comes down to.

I urge you, therefore, to devote the time to go over the material that Sis. Guerline has shared with you.  If, during the course of this, you should have any questions, I welcome your further conversation.  If you would like the sources from which I draw the various quotations I used in my letter, I would be happy to supply them for you.

Your servant in Christ,

David