North American Division Responds to False Claim

Fulcrum7 traffics in bigotry against women, immigrants, refugees, ethnic minorities, LGBT+ persons, Catholics, Muslims, scholars, and scientists. The website’s worldview is informed more by The Camp of the Saints than Scripture. The anti-Trinitarian heresy of neo-subordinationism is boldly advocated in the apologetics section of the website. The website caters largely to marginalized and aggrieved elderly white Seventh-day Adventists who bitterly resent that we are no longer living in the 1950s.

Fulcrum7 is run by two such individuals. In contrast to Adventist Review, The Compass Magazine, and Spectrum Magazine, Fulcrum7 enjoys no breadth of public support from our Seventh-day Adventist Church administrators, pastors, and educators. Fulcrum7 is truly a two-man show.

But we need to understand that Fulcrum7 represents a small faction of outliers in our faith community. We need to converse as much as possible with these troubled souls, but there is little opportunity for us to do so because Fulcrum7 bans all commentators who voice expressions of disagreement. If we can succeed in persuading the two men who run Fulcrum7 that reasoned debate rather than political agitation is what should define Seventh-day Adventist discourse, then we will be able to take a major step toward church unity.


Hi Gina,
Thanks for trying to bring some clarity however I’d like to add some clarity to your statements. Regarding the claim that the NAD is in compliance…

Thus the NAD is not in compliance.

Secondly, since the GC decided that women may not be ordained the only way for those against the GC vote is simply to change the word, to commission. Now they are in compliance. Or are they? Giving a woman the exact same role as what we voted against 3 times and simply changing the word is not compliance. No one is fooled by this. Some may say “well that is your opinion but i disagree”. Fair enough. Let’s look at the Bible then it says that in Numbers 16 two hundred fifty individuals offered incense much like a priest would do. They were not officially priests yet, they were not officially ordained but were doing the same roles. God considered this disobedience and judged accordingly. The same applies to the NAD’s commissioning stance here. Everyone knows its simply a word change to get around the three GC votes.


The intent is “to hire 1,000 women for pastoral ministry positions…” not to ordain. Should some women qualify to be ordained, then they should be ordained. The fake news “is to ordain 1000 women” because I do no see any evidence that the NAD intends to ordain 1000 women. It is similar to getting married in the sense that the couple comes a high risk for getting pregnant but they do not have to get pregnant.

1 Like

Well if one is hiring 1000 women as pastors and the church does not ordain or commission until after several years, I would assume that if one hires pastors and they don’t wash out they would be ordained or commissioned. That you do not see any evidence that the church is going to follow their normal practices seems to be questionable.

"The Seventh-day Adventist Church does not ordain or commission its pastors upon
their graduation from college or seminary. The work of the pastor is seen as more than
a profession - that it is, in fact, a calling from God - and that the individual should
demonstrate that calling prior to receiving the sacred rite of ordination or
Therefore, an extended period of four to eight years has been developed to enable each
pastor to both learn and develop skills as well as to practice and to demonstrate
capabilities in fulfilling those functions necessary for pastoral/evangelistic ministry.
Thus it is expected that each pastor will be able to understand his/her own commitment
to pastoral ministry and to demonstrate his/her calling prior to ordination or
commissioning. The first two years of this period are the internship years.


Hiring 1000 women pastors.
Perhaps our August President of North America is saying TO THE UNIONS.
“I am not telling you, you HAVE to begin the Ordaining of Women if you have
NOT begun. BUT, if you HAVE Begun to Ordain Women to the ministry you
have my blessing to continue.”
REMEMBER – HOW something is said IS important. And what is NOT said
is ALSO instructional.
Sometimes something NOT said IS PERMISSION TO DO, to GO!

I LOVE President Jackson. He is a GREAT politician. A GREAT Leader in
the church. That is WHY he is NOT always appreciated by BOTH underlings,
AND the higher ups.
He has great wisdom and understanding.

PS: 2 years of Practical Training after Graduation – Internship. Working under
others BEFORE the offer of a Leadership position. This occurs in most professions.
In the SDA church, After Internship, one may apply anywhere for a Leadership
position. Either pastor of a small congregation, or Assist Pastor of a very large one.
Depending on the Union, whether one will be Commissioned, whether one will be
Ordained. Depends on where one is hired and allowed to Practice Independently.

Yes! “Hiring” is the Correct Word!
Fulcrum7 tends to, most of the time, see the Dark Side of Issues and comes out
“swinging”. It did so again on the word “Hiring”.
I am surprised Doug Bachelor does not write for them sometimes.


Elmer, what do you not understand why they barred you?
That is a very radical Adventist environment, right? Asking ONE question could be the maximum quota they would allow, provided the question was not tough of challenging.

Now, you went there and “asked too many questions.” And you expected exactly what again??? Knowing you, I am sure every single question required some rational thinking or at least common sense. How long did you expect being allowed to participate there presenting such a “bad behavior?” :sunglasses:


Elmer –
“Naughty” “Naughty”!


Good question.

I have no doubt that the church will not follow normal practices. But what if some or the majority of those women refuse to be ordained? Will they still be forced to be ordained? I hope not but I’m not so sure because I have counseled a number of ordained ministers who should not have been ordained.


Oh yes? When did that happen Sir?
You come here accusing the NAD of false statements regarding F7, well, let’s see how truthful is this statement of your. Please indicate exactly when the “three GC votes regarding this” happened.

On this site, we too say that, “Nobody is being fooled by [these} false statements.”

Regarding Fulcrum7, I think that any open minded person who ever visited that place came to the same conclusion I did: cannot express open minded thoughts there. No tolerance for diversity of ideas. Extreme criticism of any idea that does not conform to their obtuse views. Who wants to interact with people like that? Only…, people like that!!!


WOW!!! That was so very well said! 100% accurate.

One of them is David Reed. He used to participate here, but since he cannot tolerate diversity of ideas, he created his own site where he can impose his restrictive rules. Like the teenager that takes his ball and goes home before the game finishes just because his team is loosing.

Anyone who cannot tolerate freedom of thinking and expression is a looser.
@WillFults @elmer_cupino


Hi George,
Please see my statement regarding Gina’s comments here for clarity…

Also in my original post I mentioned that the fulcrum7 staff did not call directly for tithe to be diverted, they had a clear disclaimer before they posted various opinions in their articles. Thus the NAD is overstepping in this statement.

1 Like

What if both men and women everywhere refused to be ordained? Rebellion, eh? :astonished::exploding_head:


Could you share this with us?

Hi Harrpa,
Yes great question. Their three part series on tithes can be found here in my original comment - North American Division Responds to False Claim

In the beginning of that article it says “We are allowing various viewpoints on the topic of tithing and Divisional rebellion to be discussed, in an effort to bring a previously esoteric conversation out into the open. The first two articles have generated robust discussion. While we are hosting the conversation, Fulcrum7 is not necessarily endorsing every viewpoint expressed in this series. Fulcrum7 has (of course) no interest in receiving tithe. We strongly recommend that people pay tithe.”

They simply posted three different opinions on tithe. I’m confused as why the NAD thinks that fulcrum7 is promoting tithe diversion, if fulcrum7 did I would stand against them.


This is what Fulcrum7 should do in response to the NAD’s statement:

  1. Fulcrum7 should thank the NAD and express a humble willingness to be further guided, corrected, and disciplined in the future.
  2. The website should announce that it will no longer ban commentators who voice expressions of disagreement but attempt to cultivate a reasoned and intelligent conversation.
  3. The website should also announce that it will no longer publish anonymous news stories, articles, and essays except under extraordinary and clearly-explained circumstances.
  4. Instead of promoting a conservatism that is in the mode of Donald Trump, the website should instead promote a biblical conservatism that rejects the bigotry and nastiness of Trumpism.
  5. The website should immediately implement a major shift in tone.
  6. Finally, a journalist should be engaged to run the website. Fulcrum7 is what happens when people with expertise in journalism are nowhere to be found.

Phil -
a number of persons at Fulcrum7 used to comment here.
I believe your list of 6 will be ignored.


How would you feel if your pastor were to use the pulpit to call out one of h/er members for passing false information? Might a face-to-face meeting between our pastors at the NAD with the people behind Fulcrum 7 not be a better approach than reacting and calling them out via social media? What if Elder Ted N.C.Wilson were to invite the leaders of The One Project for a heart-to-heart conversation in the privacy of his office?

Your comments regarding the NAD response to Fulcrum7 is right on target. Be proactive. Be honest and truthful.


I know that Spectrum is just reprinting an article but it would have been good to have links to the “incriminating” Fulcrum7 articles. So far, we only have the declarations from one side.

Also, it is no secret that the NAD would like to ordain women pastors. So, no wonder that some people may be alarmed when they said that they want to specifically hire 1,000 women to be pastors.

And finally, even If Fulcrum7 may have jumped to conclusion to fast, Spectrum also published information that was not accurate once. As far as I know, those criticizing Fulcrum7 today did not display the same reactions back then. And they certainly never said that Spectrum was an unreliable source in spite of that misstep.

Mistakes and misunderstandings happen. In the case of Spectrum, they apologized for it (and I have to confess that I was really impressed). If Fulcrum7 made a mistake, let’s hope they would have the courage to apologize too.

One can go to Google, Microsoft Edge, Firefox and type in
“Fulcrum7” and it will come up.
On the edge of the topics listed, use your curser to click on
the article you would like to read.

For all the offensive things that Fulcrum 7 has endorsed, the NAD takes issue with the statement that it would be ordaining 1,000 women instead of merely “hiring” them? So the NAD will not be engaging in ordaining women and will be “complying” with the GC?

As Dan Jackson so nobly stated and apparently subsequently backed away from, “Hooey!!!”

What’s wrong with these people? I’m actually thankful for F7’s apparent exposure of President Jackson’s own “Hooey!”

In choosing this response , the NAD is far more annoying in its response than the issue (among a garden of legit issues with Fulcrum 7).

Great job, Dan Jackson. Now we know who is really full of Hooey. The NAD is apparently not going to be moving toward the ordination of he 1,000 women it wants to attract to the ministry. Yes, I know ordination is a “Union” thing not an NAD thing, but what was all this dog and pony show at the annual council if the NAD isn’t going to back up the Unions that allow ordination in their conferences?

Forget Fulcrum7, the NAD’s odd response to what it intends to do about ordination is the real story here. Also it seems the NAD is more concerned about keeping conservative (anti-WO) tithes than pushing the WO issue which it apparently intends to pursue with all the conviction of a wet noodle.