Originally published on Tuesday, June 15, 2010, 4:21 pm in German at www.letztercountdown.org

When I was a Sabbath School teacher in the big SDA church, I could hear and read from brethren, elders, and pastors that “Jesus was like us in every way, but He just wasn’t tempted from inside like we are. He didn’t know self-temptation,” whatever that meant. I could not find any logic in it, and it was not clear to me what they wanted to say. So, they further explained it to me: “Jesus was tempted by Satan from outside, as he does with us, but Jesus did not have the inclination to sin like we have.”

Nicolaitans among us?

Today we know through the Orion study that they were wrong and that this is one of the worst doctrines of the Adventist church, marked in red by Jesus in Orion. He will not permit us to remain unclear on this point. No, He was tempted in every way like we are, and He knows all the temptation by our tendency to sin, without needing Satan to intervene. Tempted in all points like we are, means, tempted in ALL points like we are! He is our example, who suffered everything like we do, yet without sin. So, we can too, if we trust in His help and His strength, which He willingly gives us, if we just trust.

Let’s read on Word of Truth Radio what the sect of the Nicolaitans at the time of the apostles believed and taught:

Nicolaitans: One of the heretical sects that plagued the churches at Ephesus and at Pergamum, and perhaps elsewhere. Irenaeus identifies the Nicolaitans as a Gnostic sect:

“John, the disciple of the Lord, preaches this faith (the deity of Christ), and seeks, by the proclamation of the Gospel, to remove that error which by Cerinthus had been disseminated among men, and a long time previously by those termed Nicolaitans, who are an offset of that “knowledge” falsely so called, that he might confound them, and persuade them that there is but one God, who made all things by His Word” (see Irenaeus Against Heresies iii 11. 1; ANF vol. 1, p. 426)

There is also historical evidence of a Gnostic sect called Nicolaitans a century or so later.

The doctrine of the Nicolaitans appears to have been a form of antinomianism. (Antinomianism: A belief that is based upon a recognition of the mercy of God as the ground of salvation, but it makes the fatal mistake that man can freely partake in sin because the Law of God is no longer binding. It held the truth on the gratuitous reckoning of righteousness; but supposed that a mere intellectual “belief” in this truth had a saving power. The Apostle James refuted this error in James 2:19 with the admonition, “The devils also believe, and tremble”; reminding us that true faith is an active principle which works by love and it goes beyond a profession of belief. “But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?” (James 2:20) The Bible teaches us that salvation is a free gift, based upon God's grace alone (Ephesians 2:8-9) However, the very next verse tells us that “we are created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.” (Ephesians 2:10) True faith produce action, as well as a desire for holiness and obedience. (1 John 3:18, Titus 2:11-15, 1 Peter 1:15-16, Revelation 14:12)

Nicolaitans of the 2nd century seem to have continued and extended the views of the 1st century adherents, holding to the freedom of the flesh and sin, and teaching that the deeds of the flesh had no effect upon the health of the soul and consequently no relation to salvation. On the other hand, the Bible teaches that Christians are supposed to “die” to sin and the deeds of our “flesh”: “What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?” (Romans 6:1-2) “Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof. Neither yield ye your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.” (Romans 6:11-13)

Today, the doctrine is now largely taught that the gospel of Christ has made God's law of no effect: that by “believing” we are released from the necessity of being doers of the Word. But this is the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which Christ so unsparingly condemned in the book of Revelation. “But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.” (James 1:22) --Thanks to George Blumenschein for answering to this question!

Today, the “Nicolaitans” in our Adventist midst argue even a little trickier. They say that Jesus had a very slightly different nature than we have. Sure, He did not sin, but He was also not tempted like we “from inside,” because He actually had the nature of unfallen Adam. We “poor” humans, however, with an inherited nature corrupted by nearly 6,000 years of sin, are tempted by our own flesh. Hence our Nicolaitan-Adventist brethren think that we simply do not have to be as perfect as Christ, because He will in any case forgive us all our sins when He comes. He had an advantage we don’t have. For Him it was not as difficult as it is for us not to sin.

However, to establish this false doctrine in our community of faith, it was not enough just to strike out some words in a study book. It required increased efforts. A “manifesto of the new milestone of Adventist Christology” had to be launched and widely distributed so that everyone who comes to these questions sooner or later would get his brain “washed” with this false theology. This led to the widely known book “Questions on Doctrine” in the 1950s.

Therefore, we should consult the wonderful book of Jean Rudolf Zurcher again, “Touched with Our Feelings”, and let him explain where this belief in the unfallen nature of Jesus led in the Adventist Church and what the content of this book was, first published in 1957. After Zurcher explained what kinds of articles had been written in various Adventist media to introduce the new Christology, he turns to the theme of the book which cements the “Nicolaitism” in our ranks as solidly as the walls of Jericho, once deemed impregnable.

These articles were intended to prepare minds to receive “the new milestone of Adventism,” as it was to be developed in the book “Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine”. On the eve of its appearance, Anderson proclaimed it in the “Ministry” as the most wonderful book ever published by the church. Since it deals with the human nature of Christ in detail, we need to examine this book more closely.

Questions on Doctrine

This book is the result of the meetings held with evangelical representatives Donald Grey Barnhouse and Walter R. Martin. Martin was about to print his book “The Truth About Seventh-day Adventism”, published in 1960.

“Questions on Doctrine” does not deal only with the doctrine of the Incarnation. It is a response to the numerous doctrinal questions typically asked by evangelicals on the subjects of “salvation by grace versus salvation by works, the distinction between moral and ceremonial law, the antitype of the scapegoat, the identity of Michael and so on through a wide range of fundamental Adventist beliefs and practices, covering doctrine and prophecy.”

Martin and Barnhouse particularly objected to the positions taken by Adventist pioneers in relation with the divinity of Christ and the human nature of Jesus, which they quite frankly deemed to be erroneous and heretical. It was not at all surprising, then, that they asked if on these points the official position had changed. Specific questions in regard to the Incarnation were posed: “What do Adventists understand by Christ's use of the title 'Son of man'? And what do you consider to have been the basic purpose of the Incarnation?”

In response, almost all Bible texts relating to Christology were quoted. As to the explanatory rotes, they were generally made on the basis of quotations from Ellen G. White. The Adventist officials did their best to show that “the writings of Ellen G. White are entirely in harmony with the Scriptures on this.” It was not denied that Christ “was the second Adam, coming in the 'likeness' of sinful human flesh (Rom. 8:3)"; or that Ellen G. White had used expressions like “human nature,” “our sinful nature,” “our fallen nature,” “man's nature in its fallen condition.”

No one argues that “Jesus was diseased or that He experienced the frailties to which our fallen human nature is heir. But He did bear all this. Could it not be that He bore this vicariously also, just as He bore the sins of the whole world? These weaknesses, frailties, infirmities, failings are things which we, with our sinful, fallen natures, have to bear. To us they are natural, inherent, but when He bore them, He took them not as something innately His, but He bore them as our substitute. He bore them in His perfect, sinless nature. Again we remark, Christ bore all this vicariously, just as vicariously He bore the iniquities of us all.”

In brief, “whatever Jesus took was not His intrinsically or innately. . . . All that Jesus took, all that He bore, whether the burden and penalty of our iniquities, or the diseases and frailties of our human nature—all was taken and borne vicariously.”

This expression is indeed the magic formula contained in “the new milestone of Adventism.” According to the authors of “Questions on Doctrine”, “it is in this sense that all should understand the writings of Ellen G. White when she refers occasionally to sinful, fallen, and deteriorated human nature.”

The authors of the book published, in an appendix, some 66 quotations from Ellen G. White divided into sections with subtitles such as: “Took Sinless Human Nature,” or “Perfect Sinlessness of Christ's Human Nature.” Such phrases were, of course, never written by Ellen G. White.

It is clean that “the new milestone of Adventism” differs significantly from the traditional teaching about Christ's human nature in four ways. It claims that:

1. Christ took Adam's spiritual nature before the Fall; that is to say, a sinless human nature.
2. Christ inherited only the physical consequences of the sinful human nature; that is to say, His genetic heredity was reduced by 4,000 years of sin.
3. The difference between Christ's temptation and Adam's rested solely in the difference of the environment and circumstances but not in a difference of nature.
4. Christ bore the sins of the world vicariously, not in reality, but only as a substitute for sinful man, without participating in his sinful nature.

Presented as it was with the apparent seal of approval of the General Conference, the book “Seventh-day Adventists Answer Questions on Doctrine” was widely distributed in seminaries, universities, and public libraries. Thousands of copies were sent to members of the clergy as well as to non-Adventist theology professors. The almost 140,000 copies published had a distinct influence both outside and within the Adventist Church.

The publication of this book produced a shock effect to which the reactions were not long in coming. It had hardly come off the press when it became the object of a lively controversy, which continued in intensity through the years down to our days.

It’s just a relief that through Orion we now know who was right and how Jesus really estimates sin. All of these disputes would have been irrelevant if the leaders had relied on the Spirit of Prophecy and not lost themselves in their own perverse human imagination. Jesus has set this truth in His Word more than clearly, but it would have separated us from the world. The road to ecumenism would have been obstructed if we had continued as the only church to claim that Jesus came in sinful flesh and that we therefore also need to learn to live a sinless life with Him and through Him. This pill was too large for most “Christians” to swallow, and nowadays also for most “Adventists”. They prefer the milk and leaven of the Nicolaitans, offered today by all “Christian” churches, because it is far easier to swallow.

In my research on these topics, I came across an interesting group. They describe themselves as “Historic Adventists”. I found an excellent article on one of their sites, which I will reproduce here in full because it says exactly what I also found out through my research. On Steps to Life we read:

Alpha and Omega - Two Crisis in Adventism

If we desire to climb the last part of the road to heaven, we must learn our lesson from history. This is not only true for the part of history recorded in the Bible (see 1 Corinthians 10:11) and the Great Controversy (see the Preface of that book), but it is especially for the history of Adventism. It was in this context that Ellen G. White talked about the Alpha and Omega of apostasy. She wrote, “We have now before us the alpha of this danger. The omega will be of a most startling nature.” Selected Messages, vol.1, 197.

As we will see, in the following statement, the most startling nature of the omega apostasy consists in the extent of the crisis. While the alpha of apostasy stands for the beginning and was to be limited to a certain local area, the omega of apostasy would develop to a most startling degree until the end.

“One thing it is certain is soon to be realized,—the great apostasy, which is developing and increasing and waxing stronger, and will continue to do so until the Lord shall descend from heaven with a shout.” The New York Indicator, February 7, 1906.

Note: Thus, the apostasy will continue until the Lord Himself intervenes and descends from heaven with a “shout”! This is definitely not the loud cry, but something that comes before it. It sounds just as if this were now the case with Orion, since it is the VOICE OF GOD that calls out to us from there to wake up and cleanse our church.

If we want to know what course is to be followed in the days of the omega apostasy we have to heed the counsels and instructions given by Ellen G. White during the alpha crisis. We have to learn from history in order not to repeat the mistakes made in the past. “It is presented to me that in our experience we have been and are meeting this very condition of things.” Battle Creek Letters, 124.

In the alpha crisis we find a description of the future (or already existing) condition and experience of the Adventist people. Ellen G. White tells us: “Past history will be repeated; old controversies will arouse to new life, and peril will beset God's people on every side.” Testimonies to Ministers, 116. “We have nothing to fear for the future except as we shall forget the way the Lord has led us.” Testimonies to Ministers, 31.

How Did the Alpha Develop?

In the center of the alpha-crisis was one man, John Harvey Kellogg, an Adventist physician. Under his leadership, Battle Creek Sanitarium received worldwide fame at the turn of the century. But in the late 1890s, his zeal and energy were more and more mixed with a new idea—that God, not being personal, was in every living thing; in every flower, in every tree, in every morsel of bread. What Kellogg believed to be “new light” forced the prophet of God, even before 1881, to give him a warning message. “Those theories are wrong. I have met them before.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 5, 278, 279.

Since he was married to a Seventh Day Baptist, Kellogg came in contact with a Seventh Day Baptist minister named Lewis. This man held pantheistic views as well. In Kellogg's mind the pantheistic ideas were brought to maturity, so that, in 1897, he talked about this topic publicly for the first time. Others like Waggoner and Kress came to the same conviction and joined him in preaching this at the General Conference, of 1899, in South Lancaster, Massachusetts. One month before that conference, Ellen G. White had written and sent warning letters from Australia, which arrived just at the right time. But sadly enough, these warnings were not heeded. Pantheistic ideas continued to be spread over the land. They were taught, in Battle Creek, in both the College and Sanitarium. Ellen G. White had to send warning after warning. On February 18, 1902 the Battle Creek Sanitarium burned to the ground. To finance the new sanitarium, Kellogg was asked to write a book, the royalties of which were to be taken for the new sanitarium building. The book Kellogg wrote was entitled “The Living Temple.” The finished manuscript was full of his erroneous ideas that had their origin in spiritualistic, pantheistic philosophy. Many discussions followed.

Ellen G. White wrote about this book. “In the book 'Living Temple' there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given.” Selected Messages, vol. 1, 200.

Despite the reproofs from God's prophet, Kellogg was determined to print his book in the way he wrote it. So he gave a printing order to the Review and Herald Publishing Company, which they accepted. But God Himself interfered. After the printing patterns were finished and the book was ready to be printed, the publishing house, on December 31, 1902, caught fire and burned to the ground. This did not happen unexpectedly, but was mentioned by the prophet of the Lord more than one year before. (See Testimonies, vol. 8, 91.) The sword of fire had fallen and all knew that God had spoken. In spite of all this, Kellogg was not prepared to change his mind, and stubbornly went to another publishing house to get his book printed. He then took efforts to ensure that his book was widely circulated among Adventists and non-Adventists. So the pantheistic tares grew and became a danger for the whole work. Ellen G. White summed up the situation with these words: “Battle Creek has been the seat of rebellion among a people to whom the Lord has given great light and special opportunities.” Paulson Collection, 71.

What is the Omega?

In the context of the alpha crisis, Ellen G. White describes a vision about the soon coming omega apostasy among Adventists. “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. Were this reformation to take place, what would result? The principles of truth that God in His wisdom has given to the remnant church, would be discarded. Our religion would be changed. The fundamental principles that have sustained the work for the last fifty years would be accounted as error. A new organization would be established. Books of a new order would be written. A system of intellectual philosophy would be introduced. The founders of this system would go into the cities, and do a wonderful work. The Sabbath of course, would be lightly regarded, as also the God who created it. Nothing would be allowed to stand in the way of the new movement. The leaders would teach that virtue is better than vice, but God being removed, they would place their dependence on human power, which, without God, is worthless. Their foundation would be built on the sand, and storm and tempest would sweep away the structure.” Selected Messages, vol. 1, 204, 205.

A reformation inspired by the devil was to take place, and it would consist “in giving up the doctrines which stand as the pillars of our faith.”

What are the pillars of our Adventist faith?

They are as follows:

• The nature of Christ
• The sanctuary service
• The spirit of prophecy
• The Three Angels' Messages (exposing the papacy, Babylon, ecumenism, explaining the Sabbath-Sunday-question, exalting the law of God, etc.)
• The state of the dead and the exposure of spiritualism

What Happened to the Pillars of Our Faith?

In the 1950s a movement began which was to bring heavy consequences with it for the Seventh-day Adventist Church. Every possible effort was taken by men in leading positions in the General Conference to keep Adventists from being called a “sect” by evangelical Christians. The issue came to a head when Donald Grey Barnhouse, editor of the journal “Eternity,” and Walter R. Martin, evangelical theologian, wanted to write a book about Seventh-day Adventists proclaiming that they were a non-Christian “sect.” For this purpose they met with Adventist leaders to discuss the doctrines of Adventism, by which Barnhouse and Martin were convinced Adventists would be unmasked as a non-Christian sect. The central topic was the final atonement service of Jesus, in the second apartment of the sanctuary, during the judgment when He would blot out the sins of the truly penitent. Another topic was the nature of Christ. When the Adventist leaders were confronted with quotations from our books, they soon realized that their declarations would not be enough to convince Barnhouse and Martin that the SDA Church was not a sect, but a Christian church. So they decided to publish a new book on Adventist doctrines. That book was Questions on Doctrine (1957), and it marked the beginning of the effort to remove the pillars of our faith.

About the first pillar, the nature of Christ, they wrote: “He was without sin, not only in His outward conduct, but in His very nature. ... He was sinless in His life and in His nature. . .” Questions on Doctrine, 383

As God's end time people that are sanctifying themselves to be as pure in character as Jesus was during His life on earth (1 John 3:3), it is of saving importance to believe that Jesus could remain sinless with the same (sinful) flesh we have. Of what use is a savior that reveals that unfallen flesh could resist sin? We need a Savior who shows us that it is possible to live a perfect life (Hebrews 2:14, 17), in our sinful nature. And that is what Jesus did. He left us the example that sinful man does not sin when his will is surrendered entirely to God. Paul tells us of “God sending His own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh . . . " Romans 8:3. He who does not testify to this, reveals the spirit of Antichrist. (1 John 4:2, 3.)

A second pillar that was removed is the Spirit of Prophecy. Barnhouse wrote in his article “Are SDAs Christians?” what he was told by Adventist leaders about the prophetic gift of Ellen G. White.

“The Adventist leadership proclaims that the writings of Ellen G. White . . . are not a parity with Scripture. . . . They admit her writings are not infallible . . . Her writings incidentally are not a test of fellowship in the SDA church.”

Ellen G. White was shown: “The very last deception of Satan will be to make of none effect the testimony of the Spirit of God.” Selected Messages, vol. 1, 48. We see that the last crisis—the Omega—has already begun.

A third pillar that has been taken away is the sanctuary doctrine. Barnhouse wrote: “Mr. Martin and I heard the Adventist leaders say, flatly, that they repudiate all such extremes [that is the teaching that Jesus went into the most holy place on October 22, 1844, to make an atonement before His Second Coming]. This they have said in no uncertain terms.”

The rejection of this important doctrine has been confirmed in the book Questions on Doctrine. On page 381 it states: “Jesus . . . entered the 'holy places,' and appeared in the presence of God for us. But it was not with the hope of obtaining something for us at that time, or at some future time. No! He had already obtained it for us on the cross.” (See also 354, 355)

If Jesus completed the atonement at the cross, the question arises, what is Jesus doing up in heaven now that could be so important? If everything was done at the cross, then there is no closing atonement, no investigative judgment and no blotting out of sin. The result of such a theology is the idea that we never can become perfect. And if no one can overcome all sin, why should keeping the commandments be so important? Wouldn't it then be just as easy to be saved as a Sunday-keeper as a keeper of the Sabbath? Also the Three Angels' Messages would mainly consist of the message that Jesus has done everything for you. It is easy to see that here lies the cause for many of the wrongs and sins in the Adventist Church.

Are the fallacies presented in Questions on Doctrine still believed by mainstream Adventism today? Walter Martin gives the answer to this question in his book The Kingdom of the Cults. “On April 29, 1983, W. Richard Lesher, vice-president of the General Conference, responded in a personal letter. His reply read in part: 'You ask first if Seventh-day Adventists still stand behind the answers given to your questions in Questions on Doctrine as they did in 1957. The answer is yes.' " For this reason we find in later books, like 27 Fundamental Doctrines of SDA's, the same false doctrines presented.

In Germany's ministerial seminaries, the doctrines that make us Seventh-day Adventists are denied without shame. One instructor stated: “I believe that in 1844 nothing happened, neither in heaven nor on earth.” U. Worschech of Marienhoehe's Ministerial Seminary, as copied during his class “Sanctuary Service.”

On another occasion the same instructor said, “We have to Ford-develop our theology on the sanctuary.” U. Worschech on the occasion of Desmond Ford's visit at the AWA meeting, October 24-26, 1986.

That is the exact fulfillment of Ellen G. White's prophecies concerning the omega-crisis and truly describes the present situation: “The foundation of our faith, which was established by so much prayer, such earnest searching of the Scriptures, was being taken down, pillar by pillar. Our faith was to have nothing to rest upon—the sanctuary was gone, the atonement was gone.” The Upward Look, 152.

The Omega and the Three Angels' Messages

If the atonement being done in the most holy place is taken away, the whole foundation of the Three Angels' Messages has to collapse, too, because these angels point directly to Jesus' work of redemption in the most holy place. (See Early Writings, 256.) Ellen G. White says: “I was shown three steps—the First, Second, and Third Angels' Messages. Said my accompanying angel, 'Woe to him who shall move a block or stir a pin of these messages. The true understanding of these messages is of vital importance. The destiny of souls hangs upon the manner in which they are received.' I was again brought down through these messages, and saw how dearly the people of God had purchased their experience. It had been obtained through much suffering and severe conflict. God had led them along step by step, until He had placed them upon a solid, immovable platform. I saw individuals approach the platform and examine the foundation. Some with rejoicing immediately stepped upon it. Others commenced to find fault with the foundation. They wished improvements made, and then the platform would be more perfect, and the people much happier. Some stepped off the platform to examine it and declared it to be laid wrong. But I saw that nearly all stood firm upon the platform and exhorted those who had stepped off to cease their complaints; for God was the Master Builder, and they were fighting against Him.” Early Writings 258, 259.

When we go out doing missionary work and distributing pamphlets that contain the Three Angels' Messages, how often do we hear professed Seventh-day Adventists say something like this? “It is not good missionary work to be putting the beast, his mark and his image to the front. It's just not the right method. It's too hard.” Even though they claim only to reject the form or the method, it is obvious that they fear our message could be made known publicly. The public unmasking of popery as the whore and the professed Protestant churches as daughters of whoredom, makes them uncomfortable, lest these churches denounce the Adventists as a sect. They fear that the result would be to raise opposition and to lower the acceptance and influence of Adventism, and they are afraid that it might finally bring about persecution. People start finding faults with the platform, complain about it and wish to have improvements made. (See Early Writings, 258.) They claim, maybe not explicitly in their words, but by their deeds, that the foundation was built the wrong way. These are not just the feelings of a few Adventist individuals, but this is a policy which is penetrating the whole SDA-organization, as can be shown by the following example.

The former General Conference President, Neal Wilson, said in the Pacific Union Recorder: “Our work is not to denounce the Roman Catholic Church.” February 18, 1985. That sounds good, but what does he really mean? In a civil court case, Wilson said, “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 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 attitude 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 SDA Church is concerned.” EEOC vs PPPA and GC, Civil Case #74-2025 CBR, 1975.

How can it come to pass that the leader of a denomination that was called by God to warn of the efforts of popery, could “consign” that message “to the historical trash heap”? How can he reject God's holy trust so decidedly? Neal Wilson had to bear witness of his faith in the courtroom in times of peace, but he betrayed it. The astonishing thing is that this statement, apparently, did not cause widespread indignation. One gets much more the impression that the president just formulated an accepted point of view among Seventh-day Adventists. Ellen G. White describes this attitude in the following words: “The opinion is gaining ground, that, after all, we do not differ so widely upon vital points as has been supposed, and that a little concession on our part will bring us into a better understanding with Rome. The time was when Protestants placed a high value upon the liberty of conscience which has been so dearly purchased. They taught their children to abhor popery, and held that to seek harmony with Rome would be disloyalty to God. But how widely different are the sentiments now expressed.” The Great Controversy, 563.

If now, in times of peace, we deny our faith that openly, what will happen in the future when laws are made against God's commandment-keeping people? “If thou hast run with the footmen, and they have wearied thee, then how canst thou contend with horses? and [if] in the land of peace, [wherein] thou trustedst, [they wearied thee], then how wilt thou do in the swelling of Jordan?” Jeremiah 12:5.

Babylon, the Ecumenical Movement and the Three Angels’ Messages

Among Adventists, the clear understanding of the term “Babylon” is diminishing more and more and is giving way to confusion. A conference leader told me years ago that “Babylon is in us.” My question, of how would it be possible under these circumstances to follow the call to leave Babylon, remained without an answer. Some other definitions, from Adventist publications, are that Babylon is the “wickedness of my city,” “evil influences” and to “attempt to gain salvation through one’s own works.” Adventist Review, December 31, 1992; Signs of the Times, June 1992; Adventist Review, December 31, 1992.

Here in Germany, “Babylon” is a hot topic. The reason for this is the membership of both of the Adventist German unions in the ACK (confederacy of Christian Churches), the national ecumenical council. This membership was brought about secretly, and the people were only informed afterwards. Discussions were forbidden.

Note: Did you notice that the request for membership in the ACK was made in 1986, which is the Orion year, which points to the beginning of the Thyatira phase? And Thyatira means: Pact with Jezebel, the Roman Catholic Church, or Babylon. What harmony there is between those who study history and prophecy and open their eyes! When will these faithful few also recognize that Orion—God’s heavenly book—100% confirms all these terrible events, and come together to form the last church of Philadelphia?

To cover themselves, the Adventist leadership, here in Germany, has tried to show that our historic definition of “Babylon” cannot be true. R. Nickel, a high-ranking minister, said this about the Adventist’s membership in the ACK, in a sermon at the Adventist theological seminary of Friedensau. “In the classic exegesis of our denomination “Babylon” means the following: the mother whore of Revelation or the Roman Catholic Church. Her corrupted daughters are the fallen Protestant organizations of the different churches of Protestant faith. . . . The question is, Is what was once valid and present truth still valid? I want to come back to the discussion about the ACK, because here it can be shown: If the Protestant churches are truly a part of Babylon, how can one possibly unite with them and obtain membership in the ACK? If we would take the classic interpretation seriously, all of us would have to be against the ACK.” R. Nickel in a sermon held in Friedensau on November 2, 1996.

It is a fact that (nearly) all the ministers and leaders are in favor of an ACK membership. The logical conclusion therefore is that we cannot hold to the historic interpretation of “Babylon” and at the same time be a member in the ecumenical alliance. (See Luke 16:13; 2 Corinthians 6:14.) The content of the Three Angels’ Messages is opposed directly to the ecumenical movement, because we are warned explicitly of the image to the beast. The proclamation of this message is contrary to the rules of ecumenism, because no church is allowed to proselytize members of other churches. How then is it possible to proclaim, “Come out of her, my people!” if one is a member of that alliance? Of one thing we can be assured: neither Catholics nor Protestants accepted Adventists as a member in the ecumenical ACK without a prior confirmation from them that the historic understanding of the Three Angels’ Messages had been rejected. And that is precisely what happened.

In the ACK meeting, where the recommendation was given to accept the SDA Church as a member, the Adventist representatives were asked directly whether the historic interpretation of the Three Angels’ Messages was still valid. The protocol documents of the ACK meeting, on June 3 and 4, 1992, in Arnoldshain gives this report. “On request of the Roman-Catholic representative, Dr. H.J. Urban, it was asked concretely, whether the traditional Adventist interpretation of Revelation 13, to identify the beast as being popery, which was equaled with the Antichrist, was still held as true. The answer to that question was that this was a case of tradition which dated back to the Reformation and doubtlessly would still exist, but that they were for the most part cured of institutionally identifying the office of the pope with the Antichrist. Rather it is held that the Antichrist is characteristics, which possibly could also be found in the Adventist denomination. Therefore the traditional critique of Revelation 13 could, in principle, also be directed against the Seventh-Day-Adventist Church. This explanation satisfied the Catholic side. After that the leadership of the ACK decided to recommend the application of the Adventists approvingly to the united members to be voted upon.” 54 Fragen, Document 3, 3.

The president of the Northern German Union, Mr. Rupp, also denied our God-given message in his letters to the president of the ACK, Bishop Held, and in his personal communication with him. Babylon was only identified as a condition of things that could also be found in the SDA church. Bishop Held obviously interpreted the opinions in the union president’s letters as not a mistake, as can be seen in his answer:

“Dear Mr. Rupp. . . . Above the views are explicitly confirmed that you—as speaking at least for the leadership of the SDA Church—told us that SDA’s no longer believe that ‘in the historical development of the religious-political power of popery is seen the fulfillment of Biblical prophecies. (Daniel 7, Revelation 13 and 17.)’ " Document 1.

K. Schwarz, a high-ranking official of a Protestant Church in Germany writes: “For the guest-membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the ACK, it is understood that . . . the tensions you mentioned [the Adventist belief that the pope is the antichrist] . . . no longer exist as a part of SDA doctrines.” (In Kobialka, M. 1994. Ecumenical Movement and World Government, 100.)

The leaders of the SDA Church have always said that the affiliation with the ecumenical movement is a wonderful occasion to witness for our faith. They say that in that way the Advent Message can be given much more effectively to other churches. What a mockery and hypocrisy! Membership in the ecumenical movement is a betrayal of our message and means crucifying Christ anew. (“I saw that as the Jews crucified Jesus, so the nominal churches have crucified these messages.” Early Writings, 261.)

There are many inspired instructions concerning alliances with unbelievers or believers of a different faith. I just want to point you to two quotations from the pen of Ellen G. White:

“The wicked are being bound up in bundles, bound up in trusts, in unions, in confederacies. Let us have nothing to do with these organizations. God is our Ruler, our Governor, and He calls us to come out from the world and be separate.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 4, 87.

“Let the watchmen on the walls of Zion not join with those who are making of none effect the truth as it is in Christ. Let them not join the confederacy of infidelity, popery, and Protestantism.” Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol.4, 1141.

We should realize what the ACK really is and how the pope sees this ecumenical entity. While visiting Germany, Pope John Paul II declared in Paderborn on June 22, 1996: “Good ecumenical connections have been formed to the churches in this country. They work actively together with the ecumenical committees, especially in the ‘Alliance of Christian Churches in Germany’ (ACK). By that, some helpful suggestions for the formation of church community came to Germany. . . . The unity we aim for has to grow step by step. . . . Therefore, it is our duty to reduce barriers and to seek for a greater amount of communion, trusting firmly that the Lord will lead us to that glorious day when full unity of faith is accomplished and we are able to celebrate harmoniously the holy Eucharist of the Lord together.” Verlautbarungen des Apostolischen Stuhls, 126, Bonn 6/1996, 22ff.

What are Adventists looking for in the ACK? Do they want to celebrate the Eucharist together with the Catholics?

The Omega is already here. May the Lord help us to see it and to act accordingly.

What is to be Done?

How do we need to respond to this situation? Many Adventists are confused and do not know what to do. It seems as if no one expected the vast dimensions of apostasy, although Sister White wrote: “The omega will be of a most startling nature.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 197. As Adventists we have heard about the soon coming test and talked about it ourselves, but now it is present and only a few are aware of it.

The question of how we are to deal with the Omega crisis is answered clearly in the inspired writings concerning the Alpha crisis. In the Omega crisis the same principles have to be applied, for history is repeating itself. What advice did Ellen G. White give during the Alpha crisis? Here is one example: “Elder and Mrs. Farnsworth have been requested to spend some time in Battle Creek, laboring for the church. I encourage them to do so, and shall counsel them how to labor. It will be well for Elder Farnsworth and Elder A. T. Jones to stand shoulder to shoulder preaching the Word in the tabernacle for a time, and giving the trumpet a certain sound. There are in Battle Creek souls who need bracing up. Many will gladly hear and distinguish the note of warning. But Elder Farnsworth should not remain in Battle Creek long. I write these things to you, because it is important that they should be understood. God would have men of talent who will not deviate from the principles of righteousness to stand in defense of the truth in the tabernacle at Battle Creek. One man should not be stationed in Battle Creek for a long time. After he has faithfully proclaimed the truth for a time, he should leave to labor elsewhere, and some one else be appointed who will give the trumpet a certain sound.” Paulson Collection, 108.

In this testimony the inspired pen gives us an exact description of our duty in both the Alpha and the Omega crisis. Two aspects are explicitly emphasized. On the one hand we are called to give the trumpet a certain sound to warn our brothers and sisters. On the other hand we are warned not to expose ourselves to the influence of apostasy for too long.

The first aspect, giving the trumpet a certain sound, should be our first step if we are part of a church infected with apostasy. Over and over again Ellen G. White called for decided action during the Alpha crisis. Here are some quotations:

“I was shown a platform, braced by solid timbers—the truths of the Word of God. Someone high in responsibility in the medical work was directing this man and that man to loosen the timbers supporting this platform. Then I heard a voice saying, ‘Where are the watchmen that ought to be standing on the walls of Zion? Are they asleep? This foundation was built by the Master Worker, and will stand storm and tempest. Will they permit this man to present doctrines that deny the past experience of the people of God? The time has come to take decided action.’ " Selected Messages, Book 1, 204.

“The battle is on. . . . Where are His watchmen? Are they standing on the high tower, giving the danger signal, or are they allowing the peril to pass unheeded?” Ibid., 194.

“Will the men in our institutions keep silent, allowing insidious fallacies to be promulgated to the ruin of souls? . . . Is it not time that we asked ourselves, Shall we allow the adversary to lead us to give up the work of proclaiming the truth?” Ibid., 195.

“Vigilant action is called for. Indifference and sloth will result in the loss of personal religion and of heaven.” Ibid.

“If God abhors one sin above another, of which His people are guilty, it is doing nothing in case of an emergency. Indifference and neutrality in a religious crisis is regarded of God as a grievous crime and equal to the very worst type of hostility against God.” Testimonies, vol. 3, 281.

To help us really understand the horrible danger of this emergency we are in, God gave Ellen G. White a vision of an iceberg.

Note: Yes, dear brethren, we come full circle again. Without knowing exactly where my studies would lead, I started this website with the same quote from Ellen G. White! Do you remember? (Iceberg Ahead!)

“One night a scene was clearly presented before me. A vessel was upon the waters, in a heavy fog. Suddenly the lookout cried, ‘Iceberg just ahead!’ There, towering high above the ship, was a gigantic iceberg. An authoritative voice cried out, ‘Meet it!’ There was not a moment’s hesitation. It was a time for instant action. The engineer put on full steam, and the man at the wheel steered the ship straight into the iceberg. With a crash she struck the ice. There was a fearful shock, and the iceberg broke into many pieces, falling with a noise like thunder to the deck.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 205.

“I am instructed to speak plainly. ‘Meet it,’ is the word spoken to me. ‘Meet it firmly, and without delay.’ . . . In the book ‘Living Temple’ there is presented the alpha of deadly heresies. The omega will follow, and will be received by those who are not willing to heed the warning God has given. . . . I have an intense longing to see them standing free in the Lord. I pray that they may have courage to stand firm for the truth as it is in Jesus, holding fast the beginning of their confidence unto the end.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 200.

“They have seen wrong transactions and heard wrong words spoken, and seen wrong principles followed, and have not spoken in reproof, for fear that they would be repulsed. I call upon those who have been connected with these binding influences to break the yoke to which they have long submitted, and stand as free men in Christ. Nothing but a determined effort will break the spell that is upon them.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 197.

How possibly can a call to decided action be more urgent? Everyone who perceives the apostasy has the duty to protest against it without compromise. If there ever was a time to sit and keep silent and to listen to an erroneous sermon up to the end (which I doubt), so that the pernicious error can be addressed to the whole congregation, that time is over. It is not enough just to talk to the minister afterwards, privately, when error has made its way to the minds of the people.

“Let every man now arouse, and work as he has opportunity. Let him speak words in season and out of season, and look to Christ for encouragement and strength in welldoing. . . . My message to you is: No longer consent to listen without protest to the perversion of truth. Unmask the pretentious sophistries which, if received, will lead ministers and physicians and medical missionary workers to ignore the truth. Every one is now to stand on his guard. God calls upon men and women to take their stand under the blood-stained banner of Prince Emmanuel. I have been instructed to warn our people; for many are in danger of receiving theories and sophistries that undermine the foundation pillars of the faith.” Selected Messages, Book 1, 195, 196.

Save Our Youth

Ellen G. White many times warned that the young people should not be sent to the college in Battle Creek. She feared for the Adventist youth because of the pernicious influence prevailing there. “Those who have crowded into Battle Creek, and are being held there, see and hear many things that tend to weaken their faith, and engender unbelief.” Paulson Collection, 109.

But what about our colleges and seminaries today? Is the condition any better than it was then in Battle Creek? I do not have that much information about the condition of Adventist schools in the U.S., but I know something about the German seminaries. In these schools, the historical Adventist sanctuary teaching is rejected, Bible criticism is taught, the seven-day-creation period and the expectation of the imminent second coming of Christ are denied, etc. These things are well documented and confirmed by students of the German seminary.

What is the professed purpose of such a school? It is to pass on the truth of our faith to the next generation. But, if the school imparts error to the students today, the ministers of tomorrow will impart these errors to their churches. In this manner the truth is torn down and the people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.

This situation is very dangerous, especially for our young people. What is the condition of the Adventist youth today? I remember one night, when my wife and I had a season of prayer in which she prayed for the Adventist friends she had during her youth. Thinking about them, my wife sat down and cried and cried and could not stop. Very few of her old friends were still in the truth. Almost all had gone into the world; some as members of the SDA church, others having completely rejected their profession.

But is that surprising to anyone? What are the young people doing when they gather together on Sabbath afternoon? I have seen it so often: after an obligatory short devotion (if at all) they begin to play basketball, table tennis or whatever. Once I met a minister who gathered the young people of his church for a night session to watch videos. They watched movies with sex and crime scenes till morning.

I wonder how many Adventists think that they have fulfilled all their duty when they trust their children to ministers and Sabbath schools for religious education. How few consider how their children are effected by the influence of the church they go to every Sabbath?! Even in the Alpha crisis Ellen G. White warned over and over again that we should not expose ourselves to such a faith-destroying influence. That applies in a special way to the moldable youth. She wrote:

“I would say, be careful what moves are made. It is not God’s design that our youth should be called to Battle Creek.” Battle Creek Letters, 4.

“We protest in the name of the Lord God of Israel, against the calling of our youth into a place to which the Lord declared they should not go.” Battle Creek Letters, 4, 5.

“The light given me by the Lord—that our youth should not collect in Battle Creek to receive their education—has in no particular been changed. The fact that the Sanitarium has been rebuilt in Battle Creek does not change the light. All that in the past made Battle Creek a place unsuitable for our youth exists today, so far as influence is concerned.” Battle Creek Letters, 4.

When the faithful Elder Haskell and his wife received a call to come to Battle Creek, Ellen G. White counseled:

“That you should receive an invitation to go to Battle Creek, and give Bible lessons to the nurses and medical students, is not a surprise to me. I have been instructed that an effort would be made to obtain your names as teachers to the nurses at Battle Creek, so that the managers of the Sanitarium can say to our people that Elder and Mrs. Haskell are to give a course of lessons to the Battle Creek Sanitarium nurses, and use this as a means of decoying to Battle Creek those who otherwise would heed the cautions about going there for their education.” Paulson Collection, 108.

Some say that Ellen G. White’s calls to leave Battle Creek were given only to prevent centralization at that place. But this is only part of the truth. The following statement to Brother and Sister Haskell may sound incredible to many easy-loving souls: “There is a little hope in one direction: Take the young men and women, and place them where they will come as little in contact with our churches as possible, that the low grade of piety which is current in this day shall not leaven their ideas of what it means to be a Christian.” Manuscript Releases, vol. 12, 333.

If your protest against the apostasy is unheeded you have the choice: either you stay and tolerate the apostasy or you leave and save yourself and your family from these influences. The influence you allow to affect your soul will decide your eternal destiny. “Every one will reveal the character of the bundle with which he is binding himself.” 1888 Materials, 995. Ellen G. White brings this point home to us: "‘Out of Battle Creek’ is my message.” Paulson Collection, 111.

Application and Conclusion

Some might say: “In my church there is no pantheism being taught. I cannot apply these statements to my local situation.” Maybe you are right. Praise God for every local church that is still standing on the fundamental truths of the Three Angels’ Messages. There are still some of them, but their number decreases day by day. Remember, however, when you are evaluating your church, that pantheism alone is not the topic of the Omega crisis, it embodies many more principles. Ask yourself the question, How do they treat the Spirit of Prophecy? Is it upheld as the inspired and infallible word of God given to us through His last time prophet? How did the church leaders react when you tried to correct them? Did they understand and repent?

“Of those who are constantly working to undermine faith in the message God is sending to His people, I am instructed to say, ‘Come out from among them, and be ye separate.’" Review and Herald, July 23, 1908.

Is your church part of an ecumenical organization? How did the men in responsible positions react when you stood up to protest against it? Did they understand and repent? Maybe you can agree with me on being separated from the ecumenical movement, but not on being separated from professed Adventists who approve and uphold an ecumenical membership. You would do well to consider the example of faithful Nehemiah. “When those who are uniting with the world, yet claiming great purity, plead for union with those who have ever been the opposers of the cause of truth, we should fear and shun them as decidedly as did Nehemiah.” Prophets and Kings, 660.

Is strange fire offered in your church in the form of theater performances, worldly or charismatic music? Does your minister use NLP or anything similar? How did your church react as you protested against it? Did they understand and repent? “As the men of Israel witnessed the corrupt course of the priests, they thought it safer for their families not to come up to the appointed place of worship. Many went from Shiloh with their peace disturbed, their indignation aroused, until they at last determined to offer their sacrifices themselves, concluding that this would be fully as acceptable to God, as to sanction in any manner the abominations practiced in the sanctuary.” Signs of the Times, December 1, 1881.

The Story of Redemption 322-324:

“The great adversary now endeavored to gain by artifice what he had failed to secure by force. ... With some concessions on their part, they proposed that Christians should make concessions, that all might unite on the platform of belief in Christ.

Now was the church in fearful peril. Prison, torture, fire, and sword were blessings in comparison with this. Some of the Christians stood firm, declaring that they could make no compromise. ... That was a time of deep anguish to the faithful followers of Christ. Under a cloak of pretended Christianity, Satan was insinuating himself into the church, to corrupt their faith and turn their minds from the word of truth. ...

But there is no union between the Prince of light and the prince of darkness, and there can be no union between their followers. When Christians consented to unite with those who were but half converted from paganism, they entered upon a path which led farther and farther from the truth. Satan exulted that he had succeeded in deceiving so large a number of the followers of Christ. He then brought his power to bear more fully upon them, and inspired them to persecute those who remained true to God. None could so well understand how to oppose the true Christian faith as could those who had once been its defenders; and these apostate Christians, uniting with their half-pagan companions, directed their warfare against the most essential features of the doctrines of Christ. ...

After a long and severe conflict the faithful few decided to dissolve all union with the apostate church if she still refused to free herself from falsehood and idolatry. They saw that separation was an absolute necessity if they would obey the Word of God. They dared not tolerate errors fatal to their own souls and set an example which would imperil the faith of their children and children's children. To secure peace and unity they were ready to make any concession consistent with fidelity to God; but they felt that even peace would be too dearly purchased at the sacrifice of principle. If unity could be secured only by the compromise of truth and righteousness, then let there be difference, and even war. Well would it be for the church and the world if the principles that actuated those steadfast souls were revived in the hearts of God's professed people.

Will we learn our lessons from the past? Will we recognize the time of our visitation? Will we act upon right principles? May the Lord help us in this most crucial hour when our eternal destiny, and that of our families, is being decided.

The faithful few among Adventist ranks are suffering incredibly! I personally feel this as well. One gets the impression of tilting at windmills in our churches; you feel alone, abandoned, and powerless. Is it just a test of patience? Or is God waiting for the right moment and wants to give His people one last chance? When will He finally intervene and demand justice? What happened to allow our church to be taken over by the enemy? Was it our own indifference to the doctrines and incidents around us? To many questions will probably not get answered except in eternity, but some we can already understand. Let us continue to ponder!

So, who are these leaders who have not corrected and made right these false doctrines in 61 years of church history? Yes, my friends, the wonderful article from above states it very clearly: they are Ecu-Adventists! They wanted to sell us—and they have sold us—to the papacy, just like every other ex-Protestant church has also been sold to Satan. Thus, they are not even Adventists, but the disciples of Satan!

We have been talking the whole time about Pergamos, but we have finally to come to understand that we have already been in the Thyatira phase since the Orion year of 1986. At that time, what had begun in 1949 even became the terrible, all-pervading reality. The false doctrine of the unfallen nature of Jesus drove us straight into apostasy and the pact with Satan’s whore. Therefore, the condition of our church today is so bad that our very sad and worried faithful brethren sigh and cry day and night. The mail I receive speaks that language. The church is completely divided and dispersed, yet there is an incredible imbalance in favor of those who allow “that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols.” Our church, worldwide, went to bed with the papacy and committed fornication.

We spoke of Nicolaitans or Ecu-Adventists, but in the Thyatira era, we know exactly what these leaders are called who lead us to these doctrines and this behavior, because there is a special group that has exactly this job and these tactics and teachings: Jesuits. This combat unit of the papacy was established in order to reverse the Reformation. It is time, brothers and sisters, to wake up and stop these agents of evil in our own ranks. If you would like to read what the Jesuits swear at their inauguration, search for it on the web. When I published their oath recently in a forum, I found myself immediately and forever banished, because nobody wants to admit the truth. It is so terrible!

Hence, if you listen to someone teaching who says, “Jesus was tempted by Satan from the outside like we are, but He did not have the inclination to sin like we have,” then you know now, dear brethren, that you are listening to a Nicolaitan or a Jesuit (or their followers) and not to a sound Adventist, rooted in the faith of Jesus. And what does Jesus tell us to do with such? But this thou hast, that thou hatest the deeds of the Nicolaitans, which I also hate. (Revelation 2:6)

Hate the deeds of the Nicolaitans, but not the person! Perhaps they are simply one who has been deceived. However:

So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate. (Revelation 2:15)

Should we tolerate this doctrine among us according to this verse? No, they must be removed from their posts and replaced by others who hold on to the truth.

Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth. (Revelation 2:16)

How do we repent as a church? When did God fight with the sword of His mouth against this doctrine? Or is this still to come? If it has happened already, then why don’t we know anything about it? These are important questions that we should deeply consider.

Since Jesus’ promise to fight with the Scriptures against those who do not repent was given for the Pergamos phase from 1936 to 1986, and since we also know that the reproach to Pergamos started in 1949, we should expect that God started the war with His Word exactly at this time—in other words, shortly after 1949 when the church was in dire peril. Did we miss anything that happened in these years shortly after 1949 that fulfilled this prophecy? What we are about to discover now defies all description, dear brothers and sisters.

When I was dealing with the issues of 1950, I realized what Orion really is, because these years mark the suppression of the most important message to our church that God has ever sent. I have been praying a lot that God would help me to gather all the information which you would need to again form a unity of faith among all our factions and the “mother church” before the last Session of the General Conference takes place in June/July 2010 in Atlanta.

Researching this subject, I came across a lost collection of documents that could be identified only by the most intensive investigation. Only a few hidden hints on a few web sites of equally sad and faithful Adventists put me on the right track. Now, I would like to summarize for you what happened in the throne-line year of 1950...

In 1950, God sent two elders (who later became pastors of the SDA Church, serving for decades and highly regarded), Robert Wieland and Donald K. Short, to the worldwide Session of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists. They had already communicated with the General Conference beforehand regarding their highly important objections to certain issues, but had been instructed to guard the matter in strict secrecy and write their study results about this controversial issue in manuscript form. Therefore, these two elders, who came from the African mission field, put together a comprehensive book which they entitled “1888 Re-Examined”.

At the General Conference in Minneapolis in 1888, something terrible had already happened. I addressed this briefly in my articles entitled History Repeats. The light of the fourth angel had been rejected. The result was that the Adventist Church lost the candlestick, and like the Israelites before them, they had to wander “40” years in the desert again before Jesus could come to take them home. Elders Wieland & Short took up this issue again in 1950, since they had been studying the matter for years, and also wanted to raise objections to the “new” Christology. What came to light was a clear indication that the church could never come to Canaan without corporate repentance. They wrote their document “1888 Re-Examined” intending to awaken the General Conference members with this additional light they had received through their studies, and they tried to induce them to return to the old ways. That was a highly explosive topic, when you consider that in 1949 the church had just decided to turn even further away from the right path.

After submitting their manuscript to the General Conference, they were forbidden to pass on any information to any members of the church. The elders acquiesced without resistance, but the “terrible” situation had already happened. Before the ban on distribution was declared, some friends of the elders had already copied and made this vital document—which includes over 200 pages of highly explosive material—accessible to other members. The missionaries travelled back to Africa and patiently waited for a response from the General Conference.

They had to wait a long time. Some had already realized that Wieland and Short’s message was the second time that the light of the fourth angel of Revelation 18 was being sent to the General Conference. Impatience grew among God’s faithful, hoping that this time, God who was warring with His sword would win the battle, but the message had already been ignored in 1950. The General Conference took a long time to answer. In December 1951, the incredible and long-awaited reply came from the General Conference. The light of the fourth angel had been rejected for the second time, and this time in a way that can only be compared to an open insult to every faithful Seventh-day Adventist. It was said to be a betrayal of the brethren and that it should all be swept under the table.

In subsequent years, there was some correspondence between the (then) pastors Wieland and Short and the General Conference regarding their research. Through meticulous detective work I finally found all these documents, including the manuscript “1888 Re-Examined” in its original form from 1950. All the documents that relate to the events that began in 1950 had already been collected in a document collection called “A Warning and Its Reception”. A. L. Hudson, the head elder of the Seventh-day Adventist church of Baker, Oregon, had collected these documents and presented them one more time at the General Conference in 1959—without any success, as you can imagine.

When I began to study these documents, light shined into my heart. Light of God! The fourth angel had already come down twice, wanting to give his light. The quote from above thus gets a whole new meaning: “One thing it is certain is soon to be realized,—the great apostasy, which is developing and increasing and waxing stronger, and will continue to do so until the Lord shall descend from heaven with a shout.” {Special Testimonies, Series B, No. 7, p. 57}. The Lord already descended twice with a shout from heaven—the first time in 1888 and the second time in 1950.

His call remained unheard, however, but God’s patience is virtually inexhaustible. He is very patient with His children because He wants the sinner to come to repentance and ultimately to salvation. Our sick church could also be cured by this light. It only must finally be accepted. We must become mature children of God and induce our leaders to no longer reject the light.

Orion points to 1949 and 1950. These lines are framed by the three Persons of the Divine Council and in accordance with my current understanding, I interpret this to mean that God wants to tell us that the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit are fully behind the message of 1950. The Son and the Father form the 1950 line. Why?

The message of 1950 is indeed an extension of the message of 1888, “Righteousness by Faith,” but that message was never properly understood or taught. All these issues are addressed in “1888 Re-Examined”. It is ultimately about the plan of salvation and a proper understanding of our relationship to the commandments of God. The message should properly have been named: “No Righteousness by Faith, if Faith is Dead” or “Righteousness by Living Faith.”

The Father sent his Son to earth to fulfill the first part of that message, our justification. The Holy Spirit effects in us, together with Christ’s service in the most holy place of the heavenly sanctuary, the second part of the message: obedience and sanctification. The great controversy between light and darkness is about whether enough believers will be found who keep the commandments of God and confirm it by their testimony.

And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come. (Matthew 24:14)

It’s about witnessing for God the Father and showing that there are at least 144,000 faithful who keep and recognize His commandments despite the temptations of Satan. In the great controversy, it is God the Father Himself who must be justified. Those who go with the Nicolaitans slap God the Father in the face and defend the doctrine of Balaam, who caused the children of Israel to sin through worldliness and carnal temptation. Righteousness and obedience out of love—all three belong together. Everything makes sense only if we recognize this. And especially since God the Father with His commandments is concerned here, He marks together with His only begotten Son the year His message was rejected afresh: 1950.

This message is not welcome, it does not increase membership count and thus brings in little tithes, and it frightens away the papacy and the other fallen churches. Therefore, it was bound to be rejected again and again—twice so far!

Those who would like to download this document right now, please click HERE. I also appeal to any honest and faithful Adventist who speaks a foreign language to put his talent to use in God’s work to translate this collection of documents into his mother tongue and disseminate it by e-mail. We can also create as many web sites in other languages as we need, with the entire Orion study. It is up to you!

Some more advice… A new edition of “1888 Re-Examined” was published in the 1980s which is nicer to read but includes quite profound changes and deletions compared to the original version from 1950. This edition is advertised almost everywhere, but the original is very, very hard to find. The 1951 response of the General Conference to the objections of Wieland and Short are not included in it either. I got the impression that the pastors Wieland and Short retracted in later years, so I wrote to Robert Wieland, who is still alive and even has a website, in order to learn more from him. He did not even respond, however. I think if you keep reading, you will understand what happened with Wieland and Short. It is the same as with Waggoner and Jones. They compromised and left their first love, but as Ellen G. White clearly stated, this has no bearing whatsoever on the original message and the light given by it. We should, of course, read the original light indicated by God through the throne line of 1950, and not a new forged edition sanctioned by the General Conference and prepared by a pastor who depends on his pension.

In order to give you an idea of what awaits you and how explosive the materials are that I discovered through the throne lines of Orion, I publish the preface to “A Warning and Its Reception” by Elder Hudson, who compiled it all:

A Warning and Its Reception

Preface

The collection of documents contained herein has been prepared specifically for the study and guidance of the members of the Executive Committee of the North Pacific Union Conference of Seventh-day Adventists pursuant to a Motion lodged with this Committee on February 3, 1959, by the undersigned.

It is not intended that this collection shall have extensive circulation among all classes of our church membership but neither is it contemplated that it will be confined to the members of the Union Committee.

Our Motion requests the Committee to make the documents contained herein available to the membership of the North Pacific Union Conference and provide for an open, proper, just and sufficient examination of this matter in this field.

Obviously, this Committee cannot reach an intelligent decision and take a proper action upon the Motion until it has read the documents in question. These are not readily available otherwise hence the preparation of this collection. Also, the preparation of this collection will make it easy for the Committee to act favorably upon our Motion insofar as the physical availability of the material is concerned. Since the officers of the General Conference are opposed to having the church become informed on the matter, it would be somewhat embarrassing to have this material published in one of our regular publishing houses. But with the plates already made and the printing facilities under our personal ownership and operation it would be simple to furnish the Union Committee with sufficient copies at a reasonable price to comply with the request at hand.

Inasmuch as it may happen in time that this book shall fall into the hands of some who are not familiar with the facts of the controversy involved we are presenting herewith the Motion Lodged with the Committee and the remarks preceding the Motion.

At the time we made the Motion it was our opinion that the documents enumerated therein were all that would be necessary to a consideration of the subject matter involved. However, at the time of the filing of the Motion the General Conference president who was present represented to the Committee that the third report of the General Conference on the Wieland-Short presentations and the final letter of commitment written by Wieland and Short under date of January 21, 1959, would considerably alter the picture as contained in the documents previously mentioned. We are, therefore, including herein the third report of the General Conference entitled Wieland- Short Manuscript Committee Report and the letter mentioned above. A Preliminary Memorandum of 81 pages previously presented to the Committee contains other documentary material relative to the Wieland-Short representations covering the period preceding the manuscript, 1888 Re-Examined.

PRESENTATION TO UNION COMMITTEE

On February 3, 1959, this Petitioner appeared in person before this Committee making the following representations and Motion.

Preface to Motion

Mr. President: Comes now this Petitioner, A. L. Hudson, appearing in person and makes the following allegations and representations.

I am a lay member of the Seventh-day Adventist church with membership in the Baker, Oregon, body. I was born in the message, as we say, in this same church body and have served it in many different capacities from my childhood. I am now, and for many years past have been, first Elder of this church.

In common with all my brethren of our communion I believe the Seventh-day Adventist church corporation in all its various affiliated associations and corporations to be the legal and corporate vehicle for the promulgation of the three angels messages of Revelation 14.

I believe that unmistakable evidence in both the secular world and the religious world, including our own beloved church, indicates beyond a doubt to those holding the prophetic tenets of our faith that the good ship Zion is nearing the Harbor. We are now sailing between the reefs of infidelity and materialism in full sight of Home.

If we are to fulfill the purpose of God in our existence, we must now take aboard the Harbor Pilot and complete the journey. More than a hundred years ago a handful of God-fearing and Christ-loving men and women joined together in holy fellowship to establish what later came to be known in the world as the Seventh-day Adventist church. In humble dependence upon God for the accomplishment within them and through them of a humanly impossible task they fulfilled the prayer of the Divine Pilot, That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in Us: that the world may believe that Thou hast sent Me. John 17:21

With the passing of years and the accession of membership encircling the globe this unity of heart and mind has been lessened until in 1952, Elder R. A. Anderson, speaking at the Bible Conference in Washington, D. C., publicly expressed the apprehension of the leaders of our church to hold such a conference lest the meeting be broken up with adverse factions.

Today the bond of unity and fellowship within our ranks on the basis of unity with the same Christ and Lord is so weak that ecclesiastical authority and intellectual and spiritual despotism have largely taken the place of the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

The issue at hand today is the matter of religious liberty within the Seventh-day Adventist church.

Elder H. L. Rudy, Vice-president of the General Conference, has made the following pertinent observations in his article, The Gift of Freedom, which was presented in pamphlet form to church elders for Religious Liberty Day, Sabbath, January 17, 1959:

“Among all the freedoms men cherish and have struggled to obtain is freedom of conscience. This freedom gives dignity to man when he is in possession of it. Without it the quality of human living is absent. Man cannot refuse freedom for himself if he wishes to maintain his own dignity as a creature made in the image of God. Neither has he the right to deny it to others.

“Psychological compulsions brought to bear upon him by mass propaganda have caused him to cease thinking for himself, to cease thinking creatively. He has not been educated to freedom.

“Freedom is dear only to those who are not satisfied to think as they are told. Too many people have not become aware of themselves as free beings, bearing within themselves the dignity and aristocracy of freedom. The free man not only loves freedom but also affirms it for others.

“Truth demands freedom, both for him who reveals it and for others as well. Religious tolerance accepts the fact that truth is without limit, and is capable of opening boundless perspectives before the mind.”

In direct and distinct contradiction of these noble and lofty sentiments just expressed the facts I would like to present indicate that the Officers of the General Conference are violating the principles of religious liberty and vitiating the glorious propositions outlined by this vice-president.

Brief Resume of Wieland-Short Representations

Since you brethren have previously received copies of my letters to the General Conference Officers under dates of November 21, 1958, and January 9, 1959, and because of the shortness of the time which I have requested before you, I shall not make any lengthy recitation of the facts contained in those letters but merely take recourse to a short resume to lead up to the point of my appearance before you.

In June (July) of 1950, Elder H. J. Wieland and Elder D. K. Short made written representations to the Officers of the General Conference at the time of the General Conference session in San Francisco.

On July 11, 1950 , these brethren wrote in part as follows:

“The President's stirring address last night, calling upon us to guard the faith once delivered to the saints, and to speak forthrightly in defense of it, presents a challenge. With this in mind, it is imperative that we know exactly what it is that should be guarded, for certainly there is great confusion in our ranks today.

This confusion was evident in the “Christ-centered” preaching urged upon us repeatedly in the Ministerial Association meetings of the past four days. These meetings were supposed to set the stage for a mighty revival among God's people at this General Conference session. This “Christ-centered” preaching is expected by its proponents to bring great reformation among Seventh-day Adventist workers the world around.

No one for a moment would disparage the preaching of the true Christ as the center and substance of the three angels' messages. However, in this confusion, it has not been discerned that much of this so-called “Christ-centered” preaching is in reality merely anti-Christ centered preaching. It vitally affects the outcome of this General Conference session. To make such a statement to the General Conference Committee sounds fantastic. But startling things are not unexpected by the church in the last days.

At the time of the General Conference session no official consideration was given to the subject matter of the Wieland- Short representations. Subsequently in Washington, D. C. these men appeared before a committee at which time both written and oral material was presented.

Wieland and Short were asked to further write out their contentions and the manuscript, “1888 Re-Examined” was the result. They returned to their mission field in Africa and the Defense Literature Committee was asked to make an official report on the representations of Wieland and Short.

In this report which was released in 1951, the Officers of the General Conference rejected the analysis of the 1888 Minneapolis Conference episode which Wieland and Short had made in their manuscript and also rejected the false christ allegations of these men by labeling them as slander against the Adventist ministry.

In this report by the General Conference silence on the subject matter was enjoined upon Wieland and Short by the Officers.

Much to the annoyance of the brethren in Washington, copies of the manuscript were sold by Wieland and Short to some of their immediate friends before they left for their mission field and before the Committee had time to render its official report.

When the official decision was communicated to the authors they complied fully and desisted from any agitation of the subject. However, the few existing copies were multiplied many times in the ensuing years by substantial, loyal Seventh-day Adventists sometimes even under the noses of disapproving administrators and the message of the document got around. Its reception was varied, but at least a sizeable minority in the church have believed it to be a message of truth sent by God at a critical hour .

Concerning this document the Secretary of the General Conference wrote on January 16, 1959: “Many in the field and in our institutions have considered this matter and numerous opinions have been expressed to us.”

Relationship of Petitioner to the Problem

Some four years ago the paper came into my possession from a minister friend. Since that time I have been contending with the officers of the General Conference that their evaluation of the representations of Wieland and Short is erroneous and the first official report completely untenable.

On February 28, 1958, I filed a formal Complaint and Request with the officers of the General Conference relative to the matter of the Barnhouse-Martin episode and supported the Complaint with a short Brief. In this Brief I made reference to the Wieland-Short manuscript on p. 30 as follows:

“This manuscript was written some seven years ago and presented to the officers of the General Conference. The manuscript, the letters preceding it and the personal representations connected therewith were a potion too big for the officers of the General Conference to swallow; even as this statement of Jesus to Peter was too big for him to swallow. He could not deny the truth of the Saviour's words, but he did not understand them and thus did not believe nor profit by them. In like manner, the officers of the General Conference have not been able to deny the truth of the positions taken by Wieland and Short; they have not been able to correctly evaluate them and have thus refused to believe them and profit by them.”

The officers refused any type of hearing upon the Complaint but did essay to write a reply to the Complaint without giving an opportunity to plead my cause at all. Some of you have a copy of this alleged answer to certain points appearing in the Brief supporting my Complaint.

This purported answer, however, was only half the reply of the officers. The other half was to consist of a second consideration of the Wieland-Short manuscript.

In September, 1958, this second report was released and a copy was sent to me. It was entitled, “Further Appraisal of the Manuscript, 1888 Re-Examined”.

The second report was as unsatisfactory as the first, coming to some of the same conclusions as the first report and coming to other conclusions even less tenable.

Officers Refuse to Answer Questions

On November 21, 1958, I requested from the officers of the General Conference an official answer to the following threepart question:

“Is it the purpose of the General Conference (a) to suppress by considering improper, illegal and undesirable an open discussion of the Wieland-Short manuscript and its contents in the world field; (b) to force Elders Wieland and Short to abandon their positions or to keep silent concerning them by the weight of your ecclesiastical authority when you have not been able in eight years to sustain any substantial error in the same; (c) knowing that the statement referred to above from “Appraisal” is false, to force brethren Wieland and Short to take an open stand against the officers of the General Conference, their hiring agency, and to publicly state their true position?”

The officers have twice refused to answer this question as asked and the only pertinent comment they have been willing to make is this:

“The brethren feel that under present circumstances their dealing on this matter should be with Brethren Wieland and Short.”

This is, of course, a polite and diplomatic way of saying to us laymen in the field that it is none of our business what is going on in Washington and that a determination of truth and error will be made by men allegedly qualified to make such determinations and that henceforth we are to accept their decisions without question or protest. This position is unacceptable to us in the field. In the words of Elder Rudy: “Freedom is dear only to those who are not satisfied to think as they are told.”

Leadership does not Employ Flattery nor Coercion

In reply to our suggestion that coercion or flattery might be used upon Wieland and Short by the officers, they made the following significant reply:

“The leadership of God's cause does not employ flattery nor coercion in dealing with workers. Such an attitude is entirely foreign to our understanding of leadership responsibility. Brethren Wieland and Short are workers of experience and they will make their decisions as they feel they should. The field that employs them may want to come to some understanding with them, but this is in no way related to 'flattery' nor to 'coercion'.”

I do not believe the members of this Union committee would want any specific comments upon this statement by way of concrete illustrations contradicting it, but you are all aware that such evidence could be introduced. There are at least three conferences in this Union which have attempted to suppress discussion of vital truths relative to the matter at hand by coercion.

Now, by way of summarizing this short resume, we have the following situation. Ordained ministers of recognized worth and integrity have charged the Remnant church with worshipping in a substantial measure a false Christ. The officers of the General Conference are determined to ignore and discredit this allegation all the while under the pretense of considering it, in the darkness of camouflage, in the secrecy of private conference and committee meetings in Washington and submit the results for us laymen to accept without question.

This we cannot do.

Motion

The representations of Elders Wieland and Short are sufficiently contained in two documents:

(1) Their manuscript, “1888 Re-Examined”, and
(2) their Reply to the second report of the General Conference on their manuscript.

The official stand of the General Conference is contained in two documents:

(1) The first report rendered by the Defense Literature Committee in 1951;
(2) Further Appraisal of the Manuscript, “1888 Re-Examined”, released in September, 1958.

WHEREFORE, believing that the prohibition of discussion and investigation of this material which is believed by a considerable minority to be a message from God constitutes departure from the principles of religious liberty in the Remnant church, I MOVE this Committee make the above enumerated documents available to the membership of the North Pacific Union Conference and provide for an open, proper, just and sufficient examination of this matter in this field.

Respectfully submitted,

A. L. Hudson, First Elder Baker Seventh-day Adventist Church Baker, Oregon

When I started my work on the series of articles about the throne lines, I thought that I had almost reached the end of my work for you. Now I see that God has some more for me, and also for you, and I submit to His will with pleasure. This last article of the Throne Line series is published being one week before the General Conference Session in Atlanta. This is not by accident, but it was never of my planning. I think it was God’s plan.

After five years of study under the direction of God, I worked almost day and night for half a year to research and publish all this knowledge on websites in order for you to learn what Orion wants to teach us. You surely noticed that my attitude and understanding of the Orion message and the churches changed over time while working on it. All our churches and “offshoot” groups are in trouble, not just the big church. We all lack brotherly love, but also unity in our pillars of faith in particular.

How much I learned through the study of Orion—about Jesus, His character, and the plan of salvation! I see, however, that the interest in the Orion message has declined sharply since it became obvious that it is NOT just a pure time message, but a warning message to the church and every individual to prepare our characters to be Christlike and learn to live a sinless life. But I have also gotten to know many of you out there who no longer belong to the sleeping virgins, because the cry “the Bridegroom cometh” is now resounding a second and last time from Orion. God’s voice has spoken to many, and many have understood it and changed their lives and found their first love in Jesus again. At this point, I thank you for your testimonies and that you have always encouraged me when I needed it the most!

Now, I no longer want to hide the fact that there are some Adventists in Atlanta who dreamed some time ago that Atlanta would soon be destroyed. One couple even heard the “voice of God” during a prayer meeting in their house. They were all asked to sell their homes and leave Atlanta. This suggests that destruction could come over the General Conference that will be elected in Atlanta, and that it could lead to the long-awaited cleansing of our church.

I think that the Orion study is the third and last time that the fourth angel is sent to the General Conference. I began the Orion proclamation in January 2010, and I have shown the 1950 throne line in several forums and e-mail distribution lists since April. Each of the leaders should have recognized long ago what kind of warning God is giving here, because we “normal” members do not know anything about our hidden church history. However, there was never ever any positive reaction from the leadership—neither from any of the organized churches, nor even from any of the offshoot groups.

This time, the warning message was not given by two pastors like Waggoner and Jones, and neither by two elders like Wieland and Short, but by God Himself, who has placed a monument in the heavens, which astronomers even call the most beautiful place in the universe. To convey this final warning message, God used a sad farmer from South America this time—one who always hoped and prayed that his church could be healed so that those faithful to God could feel at home again in the church pews. I am convinced that if the General Conference and the church officers reject the light again, God will purify His house and others will lead His house in the last days. Ellen G. White said:

Every wind of doctrine will be blowing. Those who have rendered supreme homage to “science falsely so called” [theology, higher critics] will not be the leaders then. Those who have trusted to intellect, genius, or talent will not then stand at the head of rank and file. They did not keep pace with the light. Those who have proved themselves unfaithful will not then be entrusted with the flock. In the last solemn work few great men will be engaged. They are self-sufficient, independent of God, and He cannot use them. The Lord has faithful servants, who in the shaking, testing time will be disclosed to view. There are precious ones now hidden who have not bowed the knee to Baal. They have not had the light which has been shining in a concentrated blaze upon you. But it may be under a rough and uninviting exterior the pure brightness of a genuine Christian character will be revealed. In the day time we look toward heaven but do not see the stars. They are there, fixed in the firmament, but the eye cannot distinguish them. In the night we behold their genuine luster. {5T 80.1}

The last church is Philadelphia, and it consists of those who are active and do not allow this message to be rejected again—the message which now brings the light of the fourth angel down from Orion to earth a third and last time. If so, however, and unfortunately it looks quite like it, then God will intervene and the coals, which are under the wheels of the throne of God that are the Orion clock, will perform a work of purification in His church:

Then I looked, and, behold, in the firmament that was above the head of the cherubims there appeared over them as it were a sapphire stone, as the appearance of the likeness of a throne. And he spake unto the man clothed with linen, and said, Go in between the wheels, even under the cherub, and fill thine hand with coals of fire from between the cherubims, and scatter them over the city. And he went in in my sight. (Ezekiel 10:1-2)

This cleansing by the Orion message, which is nothing less than the divine confirmation of the message of 1888 and 1950, will take place soon, but for those who preside over the house of God and refuse all His messages and lead His people to the doctrines of Balaam and the Nicolaitans and betray us into the hands of the papacy and sun-worship shall suffer the following destiny:

And he brought me into the inner court of the LORD'S house, and, behold, at the door of the temple of the LORD, between the porch and the altar, were about five and twenty men, with their backs toward the temple of the LORD, and their faces toward the east; and they worshipped the sun toward the east. Then he said unto me, Hast thou seen this, O son of man? Is it a light thing to the house of Judah that they commit the abominations which they commit here? for they have filled the land with violence, and have returned to provoke me to anger: and, lo, they put the branch to their nose. Therefore will I also deal in fury: mine eye shall not spare, neither will I have pity: and though they cry in mine ears with a loud voice, yet will I not hear them. (Ezekiel 8:16-18)

The number “25” is no accident, just as nothing is mere coincidence in the Word of God. It is the exact number of the key decision makers in the Executive Committee of the General Conference since the beginning of the last century. Even more members officially belong to the Executive Committee, but almost all the decisions are in fact made by exactly 25 men. Our church structure is not, as Walter Veith recently said (whom I always respect as a bright scholar), structured from bottom to top, but strictly “Catholic,” built from top down as we learned from what elders Hudson, Wieland, and Short presented. The voices from the bottom have no weight. You can look forward to what you might read and learn from the highly explosive documents that will (hopefully) be available here soon. They include incredible messages and contain so much light!

Therefore, dear brothers and sisters, let your light shine and do not put it under a bushel! Receive the encouraging words of the Spirit of Prophecy, who once again states clearly that our salvation lies in the hands of Jesus, but we must actively participate. History repeats itself, and this time Heaven is certain. Our Jericho must fall now too, if we want to finally reach home...

The Light of Truth

Nevertheless, the foundation of God standeth sure. The Lord knoweth them that are His. The sanctified minister must have no guile in his mouth. He must be open as the day, free from every taint of evil. A sanctified ministry and press will be a power in flashing the light of truth on this untoward generation. Light, brethren, more light we need. Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound an alarm in the holy mountain. Gather the host of the Lord, with sanctified hearts, to hear what the Lord will say unto His people; for He has increased light for all who will hear.  Let them be armed and equipped, and come up to the battle--to the help of the Lord against the mighty. God Himself will work for Israel. Every lying tongue will be silenced. Angels' hands will overthrow the deceptive schemes that are being formed. The bulwarks of Satan will never triumph. Victory will attend the third angel's message. As the Captain of the Lord's host tore down the walls of Jericho, so will the Lord's commandment-keeping people triumph, and all opposing elements be defeated. Let no soul complain of the servants of God who have come to them with a heaven-sent message. Do not any longer pick flaws in them, saying, “They are too positive; they talk too strongly.” They may talk strongly; but is it not needed? God will make the ears of the hearers tingle if they will not heed His voice or His message. He will denounce those who resist the word of God. {TM 410.1}

< Prev                       Next >