Three Delegates Reflect on Ted Wilson's Re-election

For the sakes of people like you, I wish there had been another name on the ballot. Then you would have been silenced by the outcome of the overwhelming support for Elder Wilson.


You said it all!
I can’t see myself involved with all that politicking. I would blow it in 5 seconds.!
And about the paperwork… the application never came in the mail… :smile:


You are right that the world is moving forward at lightning speed. But is that really the train you wish to board? Look at what Mrs. White said about that train.

I saw the rapidity with which this delusion was spreading. A train of cars was shown me, going with the speed of lightning. The angel bade me look carefully. I fixed my eyes upon the train. It seemed that the whole world was on board, that there could not be one left. Said the angel, "They are binding in bundles ready to burn." Then he showed me the conductor, who appeared like a stately, fair person, whom all the passengers looked up to and reverenced. I was perplexed and asked my attending angel who it was. He said, "It is Satan. He is the conductor in the form of an angel of light. He has taken the world captive. They are given over to strong delusions, to believe a lie, that they may be damned. This agent, the next highest in order to him, is the engineer, and other of his agents are employed in different offices as he may need them, and they are all going with lightning speed to perdition." {EW 88.2}

You don’t get it! I’m not talking about the outcome. Whether we agree or disagree with it is not the point. The process itself is flawed, for the reasons I just stated. That’s the point! Even if it led to a different outcome. One name on the ballot sounds like the methods of every totalitarian regime out there. It makes the idea of representation sound like little more than a pretense, no matter who was selected.



I have participated here long enough to know that even if you were elected- the “tenure” would be brief :wink:

BTW, I know that I wouldn’t last too long either…I say what I think and that is a death-knell for any politician (but I am sure that you knew that already)…lol


Is there never more than one name on the ballot? It seems reasonable, at a time like this, to have just one. But I would not expect that this has always been the case.

You should use more “class” in addressing your issues. This is a bad habit, bombarding with the SOP those who disagree with you. Basically you are saying that those who disagree with you are in a train conducted by Satan. This is really awkward and cheap. Besides, the argument is really poor and cultic.


No, that’s not what I’m saying. I’m saying that those who are going with the world at “lightning speed” are on a train conducted by Satan. Whether or not I might agree with them. My agreement or non-agreement will not change which train such are on.


Exactly. This is the best way to play politics in a safe way. No threat, victory guaranteed.
When a Church with 18 mil members cannot come up with at least two names in an election like this, not much is worth discussing further.

Of course he was re-elected. The delegates had NO OTHER CHOICE!!!
(Probably my fault, I should’n’t have withdrawn my candidacy… :wink: )

Well planned, I must say!


I don’t know. That would be a good line of research. Any type of reformation would have to begin with a review of past practice.

If this has been the status quo, then a reforming of the process should be considered. If this, only one name on the ballot, is an aberration, then it really need to be questioned, and ensured that things will be done differently in the future. Although I think that it is probably the former, either way, a change seems in order.



Get a grip Pic. You are WAY out of line again. Stop the angry posts.


Fundamentalism on display…attack those who disagree with you. Needs to be stopped in my opinion.


And did you say the same thing when Paulson was elected with no push back or discussion or motions on the floor? Its interesting reading all the perspectives and see the dual mindedness of many commentators here.

That’s your perspective, Tong. Others of us this these very differently.

90%! Please accept democracy!

This is almost comical. I’m not angry at all, never have been here at Spectrum. Yet I get the sense that you are very angry. But, it could just be the limitations of this form of communication.


Are you realising it now, now that the result did not go your way?

I said nothing about a train. My implications is that of fast occurrences in culture, technology and understanding. It must be a great delusional comfort to know the world (which SDA’s claim evangelizing) is going in the wrong direction while SDA’s moving backward or just stagnant are the ONLY ones who’s perception is correct and moving in the backward in the right direction— ie.–20 years late major changes for both the Pacific and Review & Herald printing companies. What absolute and total blindness, simply because they could not figure out what a long dead EGW, who could not foresee digital printing and other major technological printing advancements, would have wanted done 100 year later. Absolute insanity!

One last thing, in the Adventist mindset anything fast moving or advanced must necessarily be suspect as your EGW train analogy suggests. So Adventist raise generation after generation to think backward and to look upon change, moving forward and advancement as somewhat evil.

1 Like

Tiberiu, when majority voting implies oppression and persecution of the opposition, the opposition has every right to not rejoice in that. I have no idea, how old you might be and how much of Romanian history you have experienced … But should you be too young to remember the days of communism - ask your parents.

And again - my point was: there are those who are happy about the re-election, and they obviously are in a overwhelming majority (nobody is questioning that). But there are those who are severely unhappy and concerned - and they have a voice as well - and an interest in this church.


Dear Steve,
Seeing you are quoting from religion sociology perhaps you would excuse if a sociologist is addressing your comment?
Some year ago there was a votation in the Nordic countries. In Sweden the political discourse went as following: The ones who were from north of Sweden, had low education and where a “little left behind” voted against EU. In Norway the discourse was different. The ones who were against EU was equal, the discourse, the debate was interesting and the outcome was satisfactory and democratic. Norway voted against. Sweden voted for. Now in Sweden one could not vote against if one were not a little left behind, had low education. The social pressure was large. Now whose debate was manipulated? The Norwegian or the Swedish? Now applying your reasoning above which country’s discourse does it reflect?
My brother I know you are disappointed but trust in God, He loves you. It is written, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity. We are all in the same boat.