Editorial: Go Set a Watchman

While this is true, it could also be the dawn of full development and maturation where the relationship is introjected instead of remaining concrete. As in Jeremiah 31:33 "But this is the new covenant I will make with the people of Israel on that day,” says the Lord, “I will put my laws in their minds, and I will write them on their hearts. I will be their God, and they will be my people.”

In our case with my wife and I, we spend Sabbath afternoons visiting with friends, group outings going to parks, biking and with organized potlucks about monthly.

Hopeful, I have long been an admirer of your positive outlook on almost every issue. I’m really not understanding your change to negative views such as this.

It is not the “links to Adventism” that may be broken for many “long-time members” that concern me nearly so much as the “links” that are currently being broken… or not even formed… by the current generation.

I dare say that many… maybe most … of the generation of “long-term members” recall a time when the “connection” to be valued and sought and formed was to Christ Himself… not simply to a denominational entity. Those of us who did that are not overly disturbed by what “pretenders to the throne” do … or teach.

God will prevail. It is in that that I place my trust… not in a legal entity based in Silver Spring, Maryland. What I do not know is how he will act, nor even what He prefers to happen in this church as a whole. What I do know is that “what is written is for our ensamples” and “what is written” is a history of God turning his back on an established legal entity as having His special favor as “His chosen people”… and new entities being formed who are willing to reflect His ideals of love and acceptance of all people more closely.

It is on this basis that I stay hopeful… though whether a separate church or many churches spring from the ashes of our founders; dreams… I know not.


Looking forward to a Big NAD Priesthood of ALL Believers National Conference celebrating spiritual gifts and God’s calling.

1 Like

I believe that you’re emphasizing my point. This understanding of the relationship is about what it means to be the Body of Christ in the world, rather than affiliation w/ a denomination. This is exactly what some are affirming as they distance themselves from official Adventism. The Adventist church is in trouble.


Honestly, how is this different or more “positive” than what you label “negative” by me? I feel that you’ve rushed to reject what I’ve written without understanding it.

Thank you, Carmen, for the cautionary analysis and the last line, “You can’t stop the dawn.” The night may get very dark, but we do know that morning will break.

It feels as if half our body has been cut off with the institutionalization of gender discrimination and rejection of the Priesthood of ALL Believers to be called to the Gospel ministry. Surely, not printing Sandra Roberts’ name in a directory is a dark low point.

Hopefully, as you have suggested, Light will obliterate the darkness and a new day will dawn. May it be soon.

1 Like

I don’t see why they have to talk, everyone was suppose to already have studied the issue and come to their own conclusions before meeting up at GC, so the talking before the vote is totally useless, in my view as well.

I take this back. Read below, :point_down::point_down::point_down::point_down:, she makes good points.

The U.S. Senate is a deliberative body, meaning they discuss, give speeches, bring evidence, documentation, charts, and research into a longer back-and-forth discussion before a vote is taken.

Maybe some minds are made up before the discussion, but maybe not. The Senate recognizes the “marketplace of ideas,” as a good method for allowing truth to emerge through discussion back and forth.

While this is an American (and British and many other countries’) ideal, I understand that other cultures arrive at votes having been told how to vote and without any discussion.

As an Adventist and independent thinker, I prefer the opportunity to hear all sides of an issue before making up my mind and voting. I appreciated the discussions and speeches from all parts of the world when I was a delegate to General Conference as well as to my local conference constituency meetings.

Deliberating, discussing, speaking to an issue does impact how one votes. To forbid discussion seems authoritarian and dictatorial, especially in a world church where we may not have considered the impact of a policy issue on some other part of the world.


You make a good point. I’ll have to take back what I said before. Thank you for presenting your point in the way you did. It made me see things in a different way.

I just wish it could have been been organized better and more time allowed for everyone who wanted to speak on the issue. I don’t know how that would have been arranged but I’m sure it could have been done. That’s where those with the organizing events talents come in.

True, @harrpa makes a good point. But then, they have to allow EVERYONE to speak out. Would they? I support the talking, but without those interruptions by points of order or whatever they call them.

And not only when certain issues are voted. I wonder how much the delegates are allowed to talk before voting for the President - by the way, only one person as a candidate??? Hmmmm, to “fishy” …

This voting process is insane for a Church that claims to be democratic.

Do ALL delegates have the same right to speak or not?


Yes! But not all have the right to be heard. :laughing:

1 Like

If you haven’t already seen this article, I found it to be excellent.
Lie down on the couch and enjoy!



I believe the answer to your final question would be “no.” Alternate systems will not win/keep a second generation.

1 Like

They should all have the right to speak and vote on everything since I believe that’s the point of the GC, is it not? Maybe each speaker needs to be timed otherwise, there’d be no end though.

Organization is sadly lacking and it has 5 years to prepare, and its a shame with so much time, they still can’t get it right. And this is not the 1st GC. It’s frustrating. :anguished:

1 Like

Perhaps if they had an attorney stationed at the mic where the “points of order” lined up to “screen” the points of order, we wouldn’t have had so many speakers who did NOT actually have a point of order, interrupting and interfering with time allotted for short 2-minute comments.

1 Like

Is that a roundabout way of saying that there is no God? As I recall, it was God who established the first religious exercises in the form of animal sacrifices and eventually the sanctuary service. And Jesus gave directions on how to worship Him. The worship of God is a form of religion. The church was not a man-made convention, but was founded upon the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone. Eph. 2:20.

1 Like

Hey, George, I think I offended the powers that be. My post (and your response) from this morning seems to have been deleted. I didn’t think it was that offensive, but obviously my opinion was not shared by Big Brother.

I guess I’m really getting crotchety in my old age. :smile:

Sort of looks like E. Scrooge, doesn’t he? But I have a beard and don’t like hats.

1 Like

I am glad they deleted it.
You can write better things than that, can’t you? :wink:

1 Like

I’m wondering as to what you base your “no” conclusion on? It is a fact that “alternate systems” are already being put in place in many SDA churches… and they are being successful both in winning some from “this generation” and in retaining ties and identity with the official SDA church organization.

Well, I thought it was an accurate portrayal, but I’ll let it rest.