By the end of Elder Figuhr's term as G. C. president, some of the modern Bible versions had become highly popular with many Adventist scholars and writers. The N. T. Greek of Westcott and Hort had long become the authoritative text in our colleges. The writer recalls that this was the Greek N. T. used in the training of ministers at the Australasian Missionary College (now Avondale College) as far back as 1937.

Consequently, when a question arose over a controversial text in the modern versions, the Jesuit-corrupted text of Westcott and Hort from which most modern versions derive, was appealed to as the best arbiter. Such fallacious reasoning is commonly used to this day.

But it appears that the Washington "Curia" was not content to rest on its laurels. There was a whole wide world of Christendom out there and it was lagging behind, burdened with the "archaic" Bible of King James.

Elder R. H. Pierson succeeded Elder Figuhr as G. C. president. Although he was considered to be conservative and fundamental it was perceived that in his writings he was an enthusiastic supporter of modern versions. (Later, in his book We Still Believe (1975) we witness the anomaly of a "Defender of the Faith" having to gain permission to use scripture from the owners of four modern versions.)

So in 1969, the SDA Church seriously launched its career as Rome's Little Helper per medium of their public outreach journal, Signs of the Times (May 1969). The question, "Can We Trust Modern Bible Versions?"* was answered by A. Graham Maxwell:

"You can trust the modern versions. Read as many as you can." (p. 31).

*This article, "Can We Trust Modern Bible Versions?" must have been regarded as a masterpiece by successive admirers of Roman inventiveness for it has occasionally reappeared in Adventist publications, e.g. Adventist Review, November 1985.

Unfortunately, Maxwell seeks to instill trust in the modern versions by denigrating the Authorized Version to the status of a "revision." He calls it the "1611 revision." But it is apparent that the translators of the AV would not appreciate Maxwell's designation, for they regarded their work as a translation. Read their offering to the "Most high and mighty Prince James":

"That out of the Original Sacred Tongues, together with comparing of the labours, both in our own, and other foreign languages of many worthy men who went before us, there should be one more exact translation of the holy Scriptures into the English tongue."

As for the Revised Version, it is claimed that it is dishonestly named, for it is not a revision of the KJV. It was supposed to be, and it is claimed to be, but the fraud was quickly exposed by Dr. John William Burgon, Dean of Chichester. He comments on the New Testament:

"The English (as well as the Greek) is hopelessly at fault.... But the "Revised Version" is inaccurate as well; exhibits defective scholarship, I mean in countless places.

"It is however, the systematic depravation of the underlying Greek which does so grievously offend me; for this is nothing else but a poisoning of the River of Life at its sacred source." (Dedication to Revision Revised, 1883, p. vi).

Burgon comments further on the intrusion of the underlying Greek text of Westcott and Hort (as opposed to the Greek text of Erasmus used by the King James translators):

"For if the underlying Greek text be mistaken, what else but incorrect must the English translation be.... To my surprise and annoyance, it [RV] proved to be a new Translation rather than a Revision of the Old." (ibid., Preface p. xii).

Bible teacher, J. J. Ray simply shows the fallacy of Maxwell's argument:

"The Revision of 1881, the American Standard Version of 1901, the Revised Standard Version, the Amplified, Expanded and Paraphrased Bibles are in no true sense a revision of the King James of 1611. If they were, they would follow the same Greek text, the Textus Receptus. All that they should have done, was to replace the obsolete words.... Instead of doing this, the Revision Committee yielded to human arguments, and permitted the new radical changes to be secretly forced upon them." (God Wrote Only One Bible, p. 30).

It is also sad to note the pathetic attempt by Maxwell to invest the RV and the ARV (1901) with the aura of "authorization," describing the latter as the fifth "Authorized Version" of the English Bible.

"It must be obvious to God-fearing Christians that the only truly Authorized Bible is that which was given by God to man. The King James Bible has become known as the Authorized Bible simply because it was commissioned by royal decree.... But to call the ARV an authorized Bible is incredible for it was authorized by none other than those who financed the venture and kept the American cash registers ringing. As for the RSV, which claims to be a revision of the ASV, it was authorized by vote of the National Council of Churches of Christ." (Preface to RSV, p. iv).

Such semantic adventures by Maxwell can only be regarded as a strained association of ideas calculated to present the modern versions as healthy descendants of the KJV.

But interestingly, Maxwell's claim is also refuted by none other than the translators of one of the modern versions which he recommends:

"The Revised Version, which appeared in 1881, makes a new departure, especially in that it abandoned the so-called Received Text, (Erasmus) which has reigned ever since the printed editions of the New Testament began." (Introduction to NEB, New Testament).

And, as if to put the lid on Maxwell's specious argument, we read this astounding admission in the New KJV:

"A growing number of scholars now regard the Received Text far more reliable than previously thought.... The New King James New Testament has been based on this Received text, thus perpetuating the tradition begun by William Tyndale in 1525 and continued by the 1611 translators in rendering the Authorized Version." (Preface.)

Wilkinson's contention that his reviewers had failed to acknowledge the corrupted stream of Romanism in the new versions is still valid today. Certain influential people in the SDA organzation prefer to promote Constantine's illegitimate offspring of church and state. The aforementioned series of articles by A. J. Ferch in the South Pacific Record (1989) is an example.

Among the various Bible Societies is one based in the United Kingdom, known as the Trinitarian Bible Society. New Testaments based on the Greek New Testament of Westcott and Hort are notorious for their degradation of Christ's divinity. Therefore, the Trinitarian Bible Society promotes and distributes only Bibles based on the Received Text, the most shining example of which is the KJV. This is in stark contrast to the various national Bible Societies which come under the umbrella of the United Bible Societies (UBS) and under the spell of Rome. The SDA Church has long since become one of UBS's loyal supporters.

The United Bible Societies are very active in translating Scripture into various languages. Mostly they are ecumenical projects which produce interconfessional Bibles. The October 1985 quarterly Record of the Trinitarian Tract Society sheds some interesting information on ecumenism which involves the SDA Church:

"The work of the Bible Society [UBS] acquired a new dimension with the setting up of a conservative committee made up of three representatives from the Roman Catholic, the Anglican and the Seventh-day Adventist Churches. This committee will supervise the translation, reproduction and distribution in the Seychelles (UBS Report, 1984).

"Monsignor Alberto Ablondi, who in 1985 was an executive member of the European Regional Executive of the UBS, sees these ecumenical projects as "one of the most important advancements of post-Vatican II ecumenism-an important step toward unity" (Ward-Event No. 57, p. 6, 1984).

As interconfessional Bibles must of necessity be of the variety acceptable to Rome and her Babylonian daughters, and in view of Adventism's newly-demonstrated preference for Roman corruptions of Scripture, surely it is correct to assume that the SDA denomination has now joined with Rome in their Jesuit-inspired plan to produce as well as to disseminate Bibles of anti-christ.

But the "Curia" of Washington has gone much further than this. They are now foisting Rome's Bibles upon their hapless Adventist church members by the mandatory use of the Seventh day Adventist Hymnal (1985).

This hymn book contains a section of responsive Scripture Readings for corporate worship, together with a selection of canticles and prayers. They are taken from eight Bible versions. From the following table it will be seen that our official hymn book denigrates the Protestant Bible of our pioneers to a minor position among the versions used. The Roman Catholic Jerusalem Bible is used over two-and-a-half times more frequently than the KJV. The NIV used 68 times The Jerusalem Bible used 38 times

The NKJV used 34 times

The RSV used 28 times

The NEB used 22 times

The TEV used 15 times

The KJV used 14 times

The NASB used 3 times

So, by this Trojan-horse device, people who normally would use only the KJV are placed in a position where the pastor can maneuver them into reading from the new versions.

Dr. Alberto Rivera, who claims to have been trained by the Jesuits to infiltrate Protestant churches, has written a booklet, Sabotage, explaining the Jesuit plan to subvert Protestantism by the use of Roman-tainted Bibles. He says,

"In the last eighty years we've had about eighty-one new English Bibles (all Roman Catholic) based on Origen's corrupted text, all trying to push the King James Bible out of the picture. Soon there will be an ecumenical bible (one common bible for all religions) preparing the way for the anti-Christ." (Sabotage, 1979, p. 29).

Predictably, the Roman Catholic church denies Rivera's priestly training. But surprisingly, many SDAs join with apostate Protestantism in slavishly repeating Rome's denials! In so doing they indicate their refusal to recognize the role of Jesuits as destroyers of Protestantism. But more particularly, such denials are designed to protect versions of the Bible which are seen as providing a semblance of authority for the teachings of apostate Adventism.

Of particular interest is the trans-denominational popularity of the NIV. Its meteoric rise to favor with SDA educators, writers and pastors, and as we have just seen, its overwhelming predominance among the scripture readings of the SDA Church Hymnal, is nothing short of phenomenal.

Undoubtedly, this is the ecumenical Bible to which Dr. Rivera referred as "preparing the way for anti-christ." (It is available in most Roman Catholic bookshops.) As we consider the doctrines so destructive to Adventism as discussed in the two-pronged dagger aimed at the heart of Adventism, can an honest Seventh-day Adventist deny the truth of Rivera's prediction?

As we note the insinuation into the SDA Church of doctrines favorable to Rome, we marvel at the fervor and dedication with which the Washington "Curia" has expedited the Roman plan to replace the Protestant Bible of King James with their own corrupted bibles. Such actions would be entirely consistent with a Jesuit-controlled church. But if Rivera's claim of Jesuit infiltration is incorrect, then surely it is reasonable to conclude that certain people in the Adventist "Curia" are every bit as competent, and dedicated in the work of Roman subversion as the Jesuits themselves.

But there remains another powerful witness to the church's desire to emulate Rome. It is the confessions and actions of leadership itself which conform to A. T. Jones' description of a "kingly ruling" church power:

"The Seventh-day Adventist denomination is more like the Catholic Church than is any other Protestant church in the world." (see chapter 13).

As the year 1974 drew to its close, the General Conference found itself in a United States District Court as the defendant in a lawsuit brought against the Pacific Press Publishing Association (PPPA) by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) of the United States.

The case centered on the PPPA's treatment of two of its female employees-one a secretary to the editor of the Signs of the Times, the other an editorial assistant to the book editor. It appears that the Church's treatment of these people in pecuniary matters fell considerably short of what was considered fair and equitable by the EEOC.

For the purpose of this chapter, we will not concern ourselves with the rights and wrongs of the case, but rather we shall note the tactics of the General Conference, through its Brief, in its desire to successfully contest the suit.

The opening Brief sought to confuse the real issue by claiming that this was a "head-on confrontation between church and state" and that the government was seeking an injunction which would control the affairs of the Church and dictate the manner in which the Church carries on God's work: (CIV NO.74-2025 CBR, Opening Brief).

This, Brief saw as a violation of the First Amendment to the U. S. Constitution, and as the General Conference was the Church, it should be above all laws of the land. In describing the meaning of the term "General Conference" it was said to have three overlapping meanings:

a. The embodiment of the remnant church as a Christian denomination.

b. The actual quadrennial meeting of delegates, which body alone has authority to alter Church structure in doctrine or organization.

c. The permanent staff at world headquarters in Washington D. C. which, acting through the executive committee, attends to the Church work between quadrennial conferences (ibid.)

So we see that the Washington headquarters staff takes upon itself the status of "the Church." The Brief described Elder R. H. Pierson, president of the G.C. as "the first minister" of the SDA Church, while Elder Neal C. Wilson, vice-president for North America, described himself as "the spiritual leader" of SDAs in North America (ibid.).

For the purpose of defending the suit, it appears that Brief for the defendants sought to establish the supreme authority of the General Conference in the organizational structure of the Church:

"The plain and undeniable fact is that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is most assuredly not a "congregational" one . . . but it is clearly of the "representative" or "hierarchical" variety." (Reply Brief for Defendants 74-2025 CBR).

But it will be noted that a "hierarchical variety" of church government is akin to the Roman Catholic variety, where the "spiritual leader" of the church also is a man. It is not surprising then that Brief sought to categorize the two female employees as nuns, and by implication, they should be happy to receive whatever reward the hierarchy saw fit to pay them. This is borne out in Neal C. Wilson's affidavit where he quoted from the North American Division's Working Policy, p. 36:

"They [employees] shall never appeal to any court of law for redress from such adjustments as may be made by the denomination concerning any personal claim they may make." (Affidavit of Neal C. Wilson 74-2025 CBR).

So it was pointed out that one employee had attained a status of a licensed missionary of the Church and the other, a credentialed missionary which, according to Brief, made her a "minister of the Church." Therefore:

"Those who work for the Seventh-day Adventist Church respond to a religious vocation in exactly the same sense as does a cloistered nun." (ibid.).

But it is evident that the two ladies, both of whom were married, had a decidedly different view of their relationship to their employer. This, Elder Wilson saw as their main problem:

"The primary reason for the conflict is that these workers in the Church have been unwilling to recognize and accept the authority of the Church in determining internal policies governing the ecclesiastical nature and mission of their employing organization." (Affidavit of Neal C. Wilson 74-2025 CBR).

Lest such authority appear to show papal-like overtones in defiance of state laws, Wilson closed his affidavit by revealing his source of authority:

"Finally, being conscious of the full weight and burden of my responsibilities as the spiritual leader of approximately one half million souls, it is my duty to God and to my church to reaffirm that, with all respect and veneration for the secular laws of the United States of America duly and justly realized and rendered, we the church owe and must render our first obedience and service to the Divine Law of Jesus Christ that the will of God may be done "on earth as it is in heaven"; and this we solemnly and reverently do, even should the carrying out of our sacred obligations result, in the words of St. Paul to the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 6:4, 5 [RSV] "in afflictions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments."* (Sworn 27th day of November 1974 and signed, Neal C. Wilson.)

* Many in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, especially those in Hungary, must wonder "\what happened to our president's solemn resolve to render first obedience to God amid afflictions, hardships, calamities, beatings, imprisonments."

In his affidavit, president R. H. Pierson described himself as "an ordained minister of the Gospel and president of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, which is the Seventh-day Adventist Church." He stated that he was its "first minister for the time being," and proceeded to outline the order of the hierarchy:

"The orders of ministers in the Seventh-day Adventist Church include ordained Ministers, credentialed Missionaries, licensed Ministers, licensed Missionaries, and credentialed literature Evangelists." (Affidavit of Robert H. Pierson, No. 74-2025 CBR).

Elder Pierson explained:

"All denominational employees in the Seventh-day Adventist Church are regarded as church workers placed in one of two harmonious categories and designated as ministers or missionaries" (ibid.).

But one of the interveners, Lorna Tobler, who was employed as an editorial secretary found such claims very extravagant. During her twenty-five years of connection with Adventist-related institutions she had never been called a pastor or elder, never been ordained, performed a baptismal or marriage ceremony or presided at the Lord's Supper.

In spite of her considerable denominational experience, and that she was married to an Adventist minister, she had never heard or seen the term "first minister" applied to a General Conference president:

"I have frequently heard the term "hierarchy" used among Adventists when reference is made to the Roman Catholic system, of which I have always been taught that Adventists strongly disapprove. . . . I have never heard of Adventist religious "orders" or "orders of ministry" . . . among Adventists, I have always heard this term used to apply to Roman Catholicism, which I have been taught to reject. I have never heard any employee of Adventist-related institutions, or any Seventh-day Adventist at all, compared to "a cloistered nun" and believe such a concept to be alien to Adventist thought and practice.... I have never heard any belief that everything Adventist ministers or administrators do is "sacramental" .. . I have never heard it said among Adventists that the church claims exemption from all civil laws" (Sworn on February 18, 1975 by Lorna Tobler).

In the Reply Brief for Defendants appears a startling but significant statement which probably indicates the underlying philosophy behind present attitudes manifested in the Seventh-day Adventist Church:

"Although it is true that there was a period in the life of the Seventh-day Adventist Church when the denomination took a distinctly anti-Roman Catholic viewpoint, and the term "hierarchy" was used in a pejorative [deprecatory] sense to refer to the papal form of church governance, that attitude on the church's part was nothing more than a manifestation of widespread anti-popery among conservative Protestant denominations in the early part of this century and the latter part of the last, and which has now been consigned to the historical trash heap so far as the Seventh-day Adventist Church is concerned."

So there we have the witness of modern-day leadership in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. When the chips were down and the dollar signs were up, the truth came out. The Adventist "Curia" showed its true colors and the banner of Protestantism was trampled in the rush to deny the message of the third angel. What would our prophet have to say about such crass apostasy?

And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. Luke 21:28

As our tired world staggers toward its rendezvous with the twenty-first century after Christ, we are reminded that some day along the way, we shall probably silently slip into earth's seventh millennium of history. To some the notion, that the seventh millennium should coincide with a millennium spent in Paradise, is so appealing as to make it a desired expectation.

Certainly we have lived to see the day when the world can be seen to have waxed old as a garment (Psalm 102:26). Man's insatiable quest to improve his standard of living has brought us to the place where the very oxygen needed to sustain life is running out. His success in some areas of planet earth is causing him to flounder in his own garbage.

We have societies where people battle with their appetite in order to reduce weight, yet a large section of the world's population rarely experience the sensation of a full stomach. They are the main contributors to a population explosion.

In practically every field of man's endeavor, we find conditions that seem to indicate a fast-approaching climax. For instance: how long can the moral depravity of man continue to worsen before civilization as we know it becomes no longer tenable? With the vast buildup of nuclear and biological weapons and the technology with which to deliver them to any point on earth; with the continuing breakdown of law and order through corruption of traditional law enforcement agencies, a scenario develops that could plunge part or all of the world into utter chaos. This has happened in limited regions of the world with increasing frequency over the latter half of this century.

When we look at the world's financial affairs, we see a situation where in spite of all the post-war plans to bring about equity among nations, the have-nots have slipped further into debt, while others have reached a state of prosperity rarely seen in earth's history. Yet today, some previously prosperous nations have reached a situation where they can no longer service their debts, let alone reduce their principal borrowings.

In the past, such were the ingredients of which wars were made. How long before man's fear of an exterminating war is overcome by his perceived need for greater wealth? From whatever viewpoint we look upon man's modern dilemma, all roads seem to be leading toward an inevitable climax-a situation where we are nearing the end of the line. And all lines seem to be converging toward the close of the twentieth century.

The apostle Paul had foreseen some of the perils of the last days. He lists their causes for posterity:

For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud ... (2 Timothy 3:1, 2).

As he continues in succeeding verses he outlines the characteristics of those who have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof. That's right. He is talking about people who profess to be followers of God. They're an unthankful and unholy lot, some are false accusers and think nothing of breaking their word. They are fierce people who actually despise those who are good. Some have even lost all natural affection! Paul is not talking about a bunch of ignoramuses. Not at all! Some are highly intellectual. They have degrees from the top universities. They are "ever learning" he says, yet "never able to come to the knowledge of the truth" (verse 7).

What a tragedy! Yet, we are told that there will be some who will not be deceived. They are those who continue in the things that they have learned from the Holy Scriptures- the things "which are able to make us wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus" (verse 15).

Particularly in Western society do we see Paul's predictions as reality. Here are civilizations where laws are based on the Judeo-Christian ethic. They have prospered as a result of the Protestant Reformation and its attitude toward work. They have arrived! So countries like Australia don't need Christianity any more. Australia has been removed from the United Nations' list of Christian countries! Just contemplate that! We have discarded the very foundation on which our society and prosperity have been built. No wonder politicians have described Australia's course as leading to a "banana republic"!

But just as Western society is suffering because of its abandonment of true Protestantism, so the Seventh-day Adventist Church, to whom the flickering torch of Protestantism was handed, is sliding back into the arms of Rome. It is called apostate Adventism. Think about it, dear reader-the heresies propounded by our leadership find favor in the eyes of Rome; every suspect and corrupt practice followed by our leadership harks back to a type of organization described by A. T. Jones as "papal-like," and the methods used to promote and enforce such practices are the methods of popery.* Instead of preaching the message of 1844 and calling people to come out of Babylon (Roman error) and prepare for the judgment, we appear determined to be counted with Babylon.

* Some half-century later, Andreasen concurred with Jones: "Here I was, for fifty years an honored member of the church, having held responsible positions. But if l dared hold "views divergent from that of the responsible leadership of the denomination," I became a member of the "wild-eyed irresponsibles" who constituted the "lunatic fringe" of the denomination; and without a hearing I was ordered to cease my activity or feel the "brakes" applied.... Rome went but little further" (Letters to the Churches, no. 6).

Loyal Adventists will recognize these signs as those which must precede the return of Christ. They could not appear until after the close of the last great time prophecy as outlined by Daniel the prophet, which culminated in the commencement of the investigative judgment in 1844, for it was upon the discovery of this great truth that the remnant church was founded.

Our situation was foretold by John in the Revelation of Jesus Christ: "And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (Revelation 12:17).

Which is the church that has traditionally claimed to be the remnant? Which advocates the keeping of all the Decalogue and has the testimony of Jesus in the manifestation of the Spirit of Prophecy? Only one church has ever made this claim- the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

But John tells that "the dragon [Satan] was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God and have the testimony of Jesus Christ." Today, having failed in his attacks from outside the Adventist denomination, Satan is attacking from within. He can do this quite easily because he has successfully insinuated a type of organization into the Seventh-day Adventist Church that is geared to meet the demands of a papal-like government as defmed by A. T. Jones. It happened in 1903 when, against the wishes of the church's prophet, A. G. Daniells allowed himself to be elected as president of a church government by men and for men.

This followed hard on the heels of the leaders' rejection of the 1888 message of righteousness by faith, which, although they may not have realized it, was probably the rejection of Jesus Christ as the head of the Seventh-day Adventist Church.

And so our leaders plunged headlong into a behavioral pattern that to this very day, continues to vindicate Mrs. E. G. White as a true seer of God. Listen to her predictions and see how they have come to pass:

"A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced." (1SM 204).

A "new order" has certainly been promoted with the publication of books like Questions on Doctrine and Movement of Destiny. They have ushered in a new order based on the intellectual philosophy of men who wish to meet the requirements of apostate Protestantism.

And what of the General Conference's latest official pronouncement on our doctrines? "Seventh-day Adventists Believe. .. "-a book written and published under the patronage of world president, Neal C. Wilson: Is it a book of a new order as predicted by our prophet?

In some respects, this book is a more subtle attack on our 1844 sanctuary message than its predecessors. As previously mentioned, it is a consensus explanation of a consensus statement on our fundamental beliefs. But as also pointed out, it goes further than previous books in drawing the logical conclusion that if the atonement was completed at the cross, then "the penitent believer can trust in this finished work of our Lord" ("Seventh-day Adventists Believe. .. ", p. 315).

This, then, makes an investigative judgment completely redundant; but this book is not honest enough to come out and openly deny the judgment that started in 1844. It tries to get around it by removing the professed followers of God as the subject of the judgment and, to use the expression of one Adventist minister, puts God in the "hot-seat." It claims: "The issue is with God and the universe, not between God and the true child" (ibid. p. 326). But as we have already noted, this goes against the historic beliefs of Adventism and the inspired writings as shown in the SDA Bible Commentary.

And what of Mrs. White's claim of the introduction of a system of intellectual philosophy? As with the modern Sabbath School Quarterlies, "Seventh-day Adventists Believe. .. " quotes extensively from non-Adventist theologians along with the Spirit of Prophecy as though all were equally authoritative. God's Messenger was awake to such a ploy:

"There are men among us in responsible positions who hold that the opinions of a few conceited philosophers so-called, are more to be trusted than the truth of the Bible or the Testimonies of the Holy Spirit." (5T 79).

One theologian in question is the late Dr. B. F. Westcott. On page 48, he is quoted in an attempt to explain the nature of Christ during His incarnation. Again he is cited on page 320 as an authority on the cleansing of the heavenly sanctuary.

Now, for our purpose, we are not much interested in what Westcott believed on Christ's nature, or on the sanctuary service either. It is the fact that the ministerial department of our General Conference regards his credentials as fitting him (and his ilk) to instruct us on Adventist beliefs.

Dr. B. F. Westcott and his colleague, Dr. Hort, were the two Cambridge professors who secretly produced a Greek New Testament based largely on the Roman Vaticanus and the Sinaiticus.*

* These two famous manuscripts represent the relatively rare, corrupted Western text; yet they figured largely in the Westcott-Hort Greek N.T. which was used in producing most of the modern versions. See Wilkinson, Our Authorized Version Vindicated, available from Harland Publications, P 0 Box 1, Rapidan, VA 22733, USA.

They secretly led the team of "revisers" of the Authorized Version to accept their New Testament, so that instead of ending up with a revision of the KJV, Protestantism was cumbered with a new translation and a Roman Catholic-inspired Bible (see chapter 25). Said Dr. John W. Burgon, Dean of Chichester, in his Revision Revised concerning the revisers:

"Our Revisers ... stand convicted of having deliberately rejected the words of Inspiration in every page, and of having substituted for them fabricated Readings which the Church has long since refused to acknowledge, or else has rejected with abhorrence and which only survive at this time in a little handful of documents of the most depraved type." (Dedication, pp vi-vii, 1883).

It is not surprising that Westcott, although professing to be a Church of England clergyman, should cumber Protestantism with a Roman Catholic Bible, for he was already an ardent admirer of Romanism. In 1847 he wrote from France to his fiancee describing his idolatrous visit to a Roman Catholic monastery:

"Fortunately we found the door open. It is very small, with one kneeling place; and behind a screen was a "Pieta" [statue of the Virgin Mary and dead Christ] the size of life. Had I been alone I could have knelt there for hours." (Life of Westcott, vol. 1, p. 81).

While writing to the Archbishop of Canterbury on March 4, 1890, Westcott commented:

"No one now, I suppose, holds that the first three chapters of Genesis, for example, give a literal history." (ibid., vol. 2, p. 69).

It is no wonder that he displayed little inhibition when tampering with the Scriptures, for he was able to write:

"The battle of the inspiration of scripture is yet to be fought." (ibid., vol. 1, p. 94).

The authors of "Seventh-day Adventists Believe. .. " then call on Dr. F. F. Bruce to help explain Christ's nature (p. 48). This is the man under whom Desmond Ford studied theology at Manchester University. He is reputed to follow the Plymouth Brethren persuasion, and his system of prophetic interpretation lets the Roman Catholics off the "beastly" hook of Revelation 13. In his Foreword to Ford's book Daniel, Bruce says:

"The Gospel which he [Ford] proclaims is the Gospel which I acknowledge; may it continue to speed on and triumph."

But that's not by any means all the non-Adventist theologians who are called upon to confuse us on the nature of Christ.

It is difficult to find out from "Seventh-day Adventists Believe ... " just what SDAs do believe or even are supposed to believe. Dr. R. Larson claims that this book is now teaching the post-lapsarian nature (Our Firm Foundation, September 1988), while S. R. Buckley claims it is teaching holy flesh. (Omega of Apostasy, p. 7).*

* It is apparent that the authors of "SDAs Believe. .. " have moved away from the dogmatic Position taken in QOD and MOD, that Christ took the unfallen nature of Adam. The author takes the view that after such indisputable evidence as recently given by R. Larson, D. Priebe and L. B. Kostenko, upholding the "fallen nature," thinking students would hesitate to put their credibility on the line by appearing to refute them.

Yet, if "SDAs Believe. .. " were to come out for the "fallen nature," the very basis of apostate Adventism would be removed, and the credibility of those who recommended and upheld Froom's work would suffer. Hence the obfuscation. As N. C. Wilson was the chairman of the guiding committee for MOD and highly recommended the book in his Preface, and is given credit for authorizing and encouraging the ministerial association to produce "SDAs Believe ...p.v), we can see the predicament in which such people find themselves.

The historic SDA biblical position could easily have been made clear by quoting a few strong statements from the Bible and the Spirit of Prophecy, e.g. Romans 8:3; Hebrews 2:16-17; Hebrews 4:15; The Desire of Ages, pp. 49, 112, 117).

Now, they call upon Dr. Philip Schaff to throw in his ideas (p. 48). This is the man who brought his "historical development" theory from Europe to America, which gave rise to what became known as the "Mercersburg Movement"- seen by some as a counterpart of the Oxford Movement in England. It was seen by the New Brunswick Review, May 1954, as a defense of Romanism and an attack on American Protestantism (see chapter 24). In short, the authors of "Seventh-day Adventists Believe. .. " seem to find it prudent to use the thoughts of another Protestant traitor in an effort to aid their cause.

Yes, friends, we are talking about the books of which Mrs. White warned-the "books of a new order" based on a "system of intellectual philosophy." It is produced, recommended and distributed by a type of government resembling that "new order" type which God's Prophet condemned.

It is this type of organization, allowed to remain in place since 1903, which has continued to restrain the outpouring of the latter rain and to delay the consequent return in glory of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ. The futility of such a form of government was a foregone conclusion in view of the dire consequences predicted by Mrs. White back in 1904:

"The enemy of souls has sought to bring in the supposition that a great reformation was to take place among Seventh-day Adventists, and that this reformation would consist in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith, and engaging in a process of reorganization." (1SM 204).

Although God's Anointed specifically mentioned the attack on our sanctuary doctrine and the messages of the three angels of Revelation 14, she also indicated that such messages vital to Adventism would not be lost:

"We are God's commandment-keeping people. For the past fifty years every phase of heresy has been brought to bear upon us, to becloud our minds regarding the teaching of the Word-especially concerning the ministration of Christ in the heavenly sanctuary, and the message of Heaven for these last days, as given by the angels of the fourteenth chapter of Revelation. Messages of every order and kind have been urged upon Seventh-day Adventists, to take the place of the truth which, point by point, has been sought out by prayerful study, and testified to by the miracle-working power of the Lord. But the waymarks which have made us what we are, are to be preserved, and they will be preserved, as God has signified through His Word and the testimony of His Spirit. He calls upon us to hold firmly, with the grip of faith, to the fundamental principles that are based upon unquestionable authority." (1SM 208).

How encouraging, then, to know that the great prophetic truths entrusted to God's remnant church are to be preserved! Our leaders may fail, but God's truth will prevail. Does this not suggest that God's truth will triumph without the present type of government, which has been in place since 1903? Our church's acknowledged authority on its sanctuary doctrine, Elder M. L. Andreasen, thought so back in the 1950s.

"This denomination needs to go back to the instruction given in 1888, which was scorned. We need a reform in organization that will not permit a few men to direct every move made anywhere in the world... .

"We need a reformation and revival most of all. If our leaders will not lead in this then shall there enlargement and deliverance arise to the Jews from another place." Esther 4:14 (Andreasen, Letters to the Churches, no. 6).

Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. Ecclesiastes 12:13.

As we look at the Seventh-day Adventist Church today, we have every reason to take courage. Never in its history have we seen such an upsurge of ministries by Seventh-day Adventists that are independent of the church organization. Never before have we seen the great truths contained in the books of the Spirit of Prophecy being printed and distributed at low cost by independent publishers. Many independent colporteurs, while selling low-cost copies of The Desire of Ages, Bible Readings and The Great Controversy, are deluged with opportunities to explain the three angels' messages to inquiring souls-especially those who have questioned the dogmas of Roman Catholicism.

Independent ministries are not new. Wherever and whenever God's appointed agents have faltered, there have arisen messengers of God, ready and able to fill the gap. When Elder Daniells and others showed their determination to organize in a way contrary to the instruction of Mrs. White, she began to encourage the setting up of self-supporting work. She actually helped to set up a self-supporting school near Madison, Tennessee, USA, and instructed the two principal founders, Brethren E. A. Sutherland and Percy T. Magan, to stay separate from the organization (refer Spalding-Magan Collection of E.G.W. Unpublished Testimonies, pp 411, 412).*

* Madison College was later absorbed into the organized work and eventually ceased to exist.

Today, with the understandable proliferation of independent ministries, Satan as ever, seeks opportunity to jump on the bandwagon and divert ministry from its rightful course. We should be aware that such ministries are particularly vulnerable through their Boards of Directors, which can be infiltrated relatively easily by imposters in the same way as institutions and sections of the organized body of the church have been diverted from their original purposes. It seems that the smaller the ministry and the simpler its type of organization, the less vulnerable it is to Satan's plans. That is why there is no substitute for committed men and women who, acting as individuals under the unction of the Holy Spirit, develop their God-given talents and allow themselves to be used of God to save precious souls.

Nowhere is such ministry more apparent than in lands where the Church has succumbed to the demands of state and abandoned those of its membership who refuse to bow to Baal. Today in Hungary, the largest single congregation of Seventh-day Adventists is to be found outside the General Conference and state-recognized churches. The unrecognized congregations are rapidly increasing because they have not abandoned the message as revealed to God's remnant people following 1844.

Independent reports from Christian organizations concerned with religious affairs in the [former] USSR indicate that the "underground" branches of Christianity are thriving. In the case of those calling themselves Seventh-day Adventists, it is estimated that there are more in the "underground" church than in the officially-recognized church.

Many sincere members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church have come to regard the church as Babylon. This they suppose to be true as they see that Babylonians have taken over control of some key positions in our work. But to accept such a proposition is merely to legitimize the position of those usurpers who have set up a papal-like form of government to promote heresies of the anti-Christ. In modern parlance, it's like accepting the authority of hijackers.

Such imposters are not new to Adventism. Mrs. White went to considerable pains to point out that the remnant church is not, and cannot be, Babylon. Such would be a contradiction in terms, for it is the remnant or last church which gives the call to come out of Babylon, and to keep God's commandments. It has the testimony of Jesus. Such an assumption would be self-destroying and illogical. In 1893, Sister White was constrained to write to a "Brother S" in Napier, New Zealand,

"My brother, if you are teaching that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is Babylon, you are wrong." (TM 59).

She had just explained to "Brother S" that:

"The second angel's message was to go to Babylon [the churches] proclaiming her downfall, and calling the people to come out of her. The same message is to be proclaimed the second time. "And after these things I saw another angel come down from heaven, having great power, and the earth was lightened with his glory. And he cried mightily with a strong voice, saying Babylon the great is fallen, is fallen, and is become the habitation of devils, and the hold of every foul spirit, and a cage of every unclean and hateful bird.... And I heard another voice from heaven, saying, Come out of her my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins and that ye receive not of her plagues" (ibid., p. 59).

And so, loyal Seventh-day Adventists today are faced with a dilemma. They see the church being controlled by some who, far from calling people to come out of Babylon, are deliberately misusing the resources of the Church to take us back to Babylon! Are we to stand idly by and support such subversive activities by our silence? As stewards of God, have we not been given the responsibility to see that the means entrusted to us are used fully to warn the world of the great judgment-hour message?

Fortunately, God in His great wisdom and mercy has not left His people without a prophet to guide us through end-time events. We shall turn to Inspiration for guidance and reassurance.

Contrary to what some of our leaders may wish us to believe, the General Conference does not constitute God's remnant church as claimed in the U. S. Supreme Court (see chapter 25). Paul defines the church of the living God as "the pillar and ground of truth" (1 Timothy 3:15). Seventh-day Adventists have traditionally believed that we have been entrusted with the truth for the last days of earth's history. Of this church, God's Messenger has said,

"God has a church on earth who are lifting up the downtrodden law, and presenting to the world the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world. The church is the depository of the wealth of the riches of the grace of Christ, and through the church eventually will be made manifest the final and full display of the love of God to the world that is to be lightened with its glory". (TM 50).

If the General Conference of SDAs circulates teaching contrary to the "pillars and ground of the truth," can it honestly claim to be the voice of God? Mrs. White was constrained to pass judgment on our General Conference leaders back in the year 1901, for less obvious heresies:

"That these men should stand in the sacred place to be the voice of God to the people, as we once believed the General Conference to be, that is past." (G. C. Bulletin, 1901, p. 25).

That is why God's Messenger called for, and got, a reorganization of the General Conference. But as we have seen, this reorganization was all too short-lived. How much more applicable are the words of the Prophet today:

"A strange thing has come into our churches. Men who are placed in positions of responsibility that they may be wise helpers to their fellow workers have come to suppose that they were set as kings and rulers in the churches to say to one brother, do this; to another, do that; and to another, be sure to labor in such and such a way." (TM 477).

Is not this the spirit which now motivates the actions of leaders who refuse to allow loyal Adventist veterans to travel around the conferences feeding the words of life to truth-starved souls? Are such so-called leaders able to transmit the will of God? According to Mrs. White, we place in peril our own salvation when we sanction or assist those who are not in harmony with truth and righteousness.

"I call upon God's people to open their eyes. When you sanction or carry out the decisions of men who, as you know, are not in harmony with truth and righteousness, you weaken your own faith, and lose your relish for communion with God." (TM 91).

As if this warning were not enough, God's servant warns of terrible woes against both those who carry on, and those who support the work of an unsanctified ministry.

"If God pronounces a woe upon those who are called to preach the truth and refuse to obey, a heavier woe rests upon those who take upon them this sacred work without clean hands and pure hearts. As there are woes for those who preach the truth while they are unsanctified in heart and life, so there are woes for those who receive and "maintain" the unsanctified in the position which they cannot fill." (2T 552).

Does Mrs. White have anything else to say about supporting those who are not upholding the messages entrusted to Seventh-day Adventists? Yes, she does:

"It would be poor policy to support from the treasury of God those who really mar and injure His work, and who are constantly lowering the standard of Christianity." (3T 553).

Do our leaders who have supported and continue to support such errors and/or fabrications as found in some of our official publications, come under the category of those who mar and injure God's work? Hear the answer from God's Messenger:

"The men who close their eyes to divine light are ignorant, deplorably ignorant, both of the Scriptures and the power of God. The Holy Spirit's working is not agreeable to them, and they attribute its manifestations to fanaticism. They rebel against the light, and do all they can to shut it out, calling darkness light, and light darkness....

"Those who entertain and speak this belief do not know what they are talking about. They are cherishing a love of darkness; and just as long as these Christless souls are retained in positions of responsibility, the cause of God is imperiled." (TM 284).

So we see that as long as such leadership are in position they are imperiling the cause of God (i.e. His church and its mission). These are the ones who are exploiting the "new order" organization about which Mrs. White warned. She gives the reason why such men are attracted to presidential types of government:

"But some men, as soon as they are placed in sacred positions of trust, regard themselves as great men; and this thought, if entertained, ends the desire for divine enlightenment, which is the only possible thing that can make men great." (ibid.).

Do we as stewards have a responsibility when it comes to determining how we should support God's work? Or should we leave it up to the "great men" to direct all the means which God has entrusted to us? The Lord's anointed laid down a very important principle of stewardship when she sent special instruction from Cooranbong, New South Wales, relating to the Review and Herald office and work in Battle Creek:

"But the Lord has made us individually His stewards. We each hold a solemn responsibility to invest this means ourselves. God does not lay upon you the burden of asking the Conference, or any council of men, whether you shall use your means as you see fit to advance the work of God in destitute towns and cities and impoverished localities." (Letter No. 68, 1896).

As for the ultimate destination and purpose of the tithe, she was very definite:

"The tithe should go to those who labor in word and doctrine, be they men or women." (Ev 492).

Now, as Seventh-day Adventists, we know what kind of doctrinal preaching Mrs. White is referring to, don't we?

Is it the kind of doctrine that robs Jesus Christ of His qualification to be our High Priest, by saying that He did not overcome while being tempted like us? (See Hebrews 4:15).

Is it the kind of doctrine that tells us that Christ's atonement was completed at the cross and thus gives support to the popular evangelical view that His work of salvation was also complete, and there is therefore no need for an investigative judgment?

Is it the kind of doctrine that appears to Adventists to uphold still the historic belief in the judgment, yet seeks to maintain some credibility with the evangelicals by putting God in the "hot-seat" and judging Him?

The answer, of course, is perfectly obvious. Such preachers are the ones that have got our church organization into bed with the popular evangelicals- the daughters of Babylon. They are not the people whom Mrs. White describes as being worthy of the tithe because they do not "labor in word and doctrine." They labor with "cunning" words and "craftiness" as described by Paul, to undermine our doctrines (Ephesians 4:14).

These are the leaders who, because they are the equivalent of biblical hirelings, will desert the cause of God. They will not stay in the church once they are deprived of their sustenance and experience persecution. Such a time is known as the "shaking time" and this shaking experience has already started in the Seventh-day Adventist Church, especially in lands where there is state and church intolerance of religion. Back in 1876, Mrs. White said,

"God is now sifting His people-testing their purposes and their motives. Many will be but as chaff no wheat, no value in them." (4T 51).

And in 1900 she warned about failure to obey what God has set before us as truth:

"We are in the shaking time, the time when everything that can be shaken will be shaken. The Lord will not excuse those who know the truth if they do not in word and deed obey His commandments." (6T 332)

God in His mercy has extended the time of probation in our fair lands of Australasia. But His servant warns us:

"Just as soon as God's people are sealed and prepared for the shaking, it will come. Indeed, it has begun already; the judgments of God are now upon the land, to give us warning, that we may know what is coming." (4BC 1161).

But God's followers must not be complacent, nor expect sanctification without obedience:

"As the storm approaches, a large class who have professed faith in the third angel's message, but who have not been sanctified through obedience to the truth, abandon their position, and join the ranks of the opposition." (GC 608).

Now is the time for every loyal follower of Christ, every committed Seventh-day Adventist, to encourage our fellow believers and warn those who have not as yet seen the light. To fail to do so is to sanction apostasy and invite spiritual disaster.

"When you sanction or carry out the decisions of men who, as you know, are not in harmony with truth and righteousness, you weaken your own faith, and lose your relish for communion with God." (TM 91).

Here is a warning and a promise:

"The work which the church has failed to do in a time of peace and prosperity she will have to do in a terrible crisis under most discouraging circumstances.... At that time the superficial, conservative class, whose influence has steadily retarded the progress of the work will renounce their faith." (5T 463).

So, as we of God's remnant people give the trumpet a "certain sound," we may take courage in the fact that those who are responsible for hindering the finishing of the work, and thus delaying Christ's return, will be removed from us. And again, the servant of the Lord says,

"In the absence of persecution there have drifted into our ranks, men who appear sound and their Christianity unquestionable, but who, if persecution should arise, would go out from us." (Ev 60).

"In the light of increased willingness shown in recent years for certain leaders of our church to assiduously promote heresy under the cloak of supposed truth, how much more relevant are the warnings of our Prophet to these closing days of earth's history! Only as we understand the sinister workings of the dragon's wrath against God's remnant people, can we interpret the signs in a way which will quell discouragement and enable us to fortify our minds and hearts for the great battle ahead. We will then be fully aware that the contest is between the commandments of God and the commandments of men. In this time, the gold will be separated from the dross in the church." (5T 81).

If, through faith, we will follow Christ in His great saving work of atonement, it follows that we will have a faith that also enables obedience. God's power will then energize even those of us who are retiring and reticent by nature.

"Those who have been timid and self-distrustful, will declare themselves openly for Christ and His truth. The most weak and hesitating in the church, will be as David-willing to do and dare." (ibid.).

The final stages of the Church's march to victory will not be characterized by timidity, doubts and despair. Memories of those who have led God's children into apostasy will, with their heresies, be reduced to mere asterisks in the great controversy between Christ and Satan. God's Prophet has dramatically portrayed the remnant church of Christ, when it has been purged of "dross," as a pure but militant army,

"fair as the moon, clear as the sun, terrible as an army with banners." (5T 82).

God's Messenger to the remnant is not describing an army of people who have been tricked into following the commandments of men. No! She is speaking of those who keep the commandments of God and proclaim the message of 1844 to Evermore.