Who Watches delivers a startling message: not nearly enough Adventists watch closely. Our church is big business, very big business. Excellent pastors may be disastrous executives. Wise spiritual leaders may fail to see bold indicators of looming financial disaster. Conflicts of interest may cloud the vision of decision-makers.

That is so true and, based on my own observation elsewhere, is not limited to the few high profile examples noted by the book's authors. Middle-management officials, between local congregation and central headquarters (GC), are not less culpable. Who watches? Internal and external auditors can only do so much. It's decision-makers up and down the hierarchy who call the shots still, don't they? Thus, few if any are punished or made to pay for their own mistakes.

This book is long past due. This should be in every conference employee's library and read by all the conference officials at all levels.

Not as large as the U.S. government, but in its increasing size, the church has far too long lacked almost any oversight to prevent such things from happening. This is why many members, on discovering such shenanigans, have walked away from leaders with no integrity. In state and federal government, it is not too surprising to find such fraudulent practices, but for a church whose mission is to demonstrate God's love and care for people is a complete reversal of all it should stand for. There is absolutely no excuse for this to have repeatedly occurred. But with no safeguards and whistleblowers who've been ignored, it has become almost usual and expected practices. Where is Babylon if not within the hierarchy of the church?

Where can we purchase this book? Amazon doesn't have it. ABC?

Elaine--Dr. Patrick had some trouble commenting, but wanted to answer your question about where you can find this book:

In answer to your question, Elaine: GOOGLE Members for Church Accountability, log on to the website http://www.advmca.org, or e-mail advmca@aol.com. This volume is well worth chasing!

Could not be a more apt issue, especially to the Church in Southern Asia Division (India). The SDA presence here in this region is registered only for business. There is no registration of this organisation as a church. It is represented by 17 or so privately held "companies" whose shareholders, directors and principles are not disclosed. This companies are registered to run hospitals, schools and real estate. At their whim and mercy, money is collected (even huge monies from outside the country), dispersed and used. Books are fudged and that is done to make it look legit in the eyes of the govt.

The leaders of this Division were so preoccupied with their "business" that when the headquarters of the division moved to another location approximately 1000 km from their old location, the forgot to plan for a church building. The church building was built almost 15 years after the headquarters moved after a major initiative by the local lay membership.

As a lay member, I then have to ask, to what organization is the tithe going to? If the church is not registered legally, then to what or whom do I belong, legally? I have absolutely no right to ask accountability from anyone because I am no one.

Sona

I noticed that in India instead of conferences (or missions), they're called Sections or Regions. Schools/collleges, hospitals, publishing houses also incorporate separately, like you said. I assume, just like in my country, each of them are registered and function as separate corporations in conformity with the requirements of the law in each state. Church is big, big business. Everywhere. In the eyes of the law (state), there's no distinction between a religious organization and a business corporation. Thus, churches/denominations incorporate, such as is true in my country.

Safeguarding the church's assets is one important function of the board of any corporation. Mostly clergy membership of boards, IMO, is not the best way of protecting the church's interest. What do you think? I believe there must be a mechanism of review, of checks and balances. As a preventative measure, we've suggested (though we haven't had much success in persuading the powers that be in my country) the formation of a group of legal experts - Adventist lawyers - and lay stakeholders who shall be assigned the responsibility of reviewing board actions and advising members of the board. The purpose of this is so we're somehow protected from bad decisions that might prove costly and disastrous in the short and long terms if these were not corrected sooner than later.

I apologize for posting this incognito, but I must say that this book is long past overdue. In general, at the local level, the church is more intune with its sense of mission, but at the higher levels, it is often big business. I could tell you stories of insider advantages taken church officers who supported NetAdventist without competitive bidding, and how some use exorbitant travel budget to justify $200+/night hotel stays. This is not across the board, but those who question these practices are quickly marginalized.

Of course, these practices are not practiced at all levels, and there are scrupulously honorable people at the highest levels, but in some tight circles within the hierarchy, some feel that they make up for relatively low salaries through some rather, to be frank, devious measures. In these areas, secrets are held against secrets, and mutual blackmail secures otherwise incompetent leadership. Things such as "unbiblical divorce" are not questioned until a leader needs to be quietly "taken out." All of this is done under the supposed guidance of the "Holy Spirit," but it comes from the accuser of the brethren. "Judge not" is the order of the day between leaders unless a competitive advantage can be gained.

When these stories break into the open, the whistleblower is, in no short terms, persecuted, particularly if they are in the employ of the organization.

The degree of one's "importance" in the church hierarchy is not proportionate in any way to "holiness." It simply means they know how to play the game and they do so with shocking ruthlessness.

The closer you get to conference leadership, the more you begin to feel like Luther when he went to Rome for the first time.

The effect of this spills over into ineffective evangelism, lackluster leadership, a dull "corporate" attitude that does not link with the enthusiasm of the membership, and a common deadweight feeling at the Union, NAD, and GC levels.

A trivial story that became prophetic. Shortly prior to WWII my dad build the Lake Union Conference Office Building just off the campus of old E.M.C. Since each of the officers to occupy the building had extensive travel, the Treasurer had dad put a large gasoline tank in the basement and a self-service pump at the side of the drive to the rear parking lot.

It was to be a honor system. Each officer had his own key to the pump and their was a log book in a secure box next to the pump. Each time an officer filled his tank he was to make proper entry in the log book. Well the tank went dry within a few days while the log book indicated that the tank should be more than half full.

In a quick curb side conference, the President and Treasurer decided to close the pump. They immediately changed the lock and called dad, now on another job, to come back and pull the pump and to cap the tank. Our breakfast table was great fun for days. It was a "pin the donkey" guessing game. We also had a version of calculating to what outer reachs of the Lake Union our good brethren had visited. Tom

The consideration that the Seventh-day Adventist Church is big business also suggests that maybe our prophectic mandate as a "church" that calls the rest of the world to "Come out of her my people" to the literal return of the Messiah has past. Were we not to call people to "come out" rather than to "go back" in. Our prophetic warning was to keep our institutions small and numerous not large and cumbersome. The "time of the end" visions of the prophets of Israel and Judah are are swirling around us and sweeping the world into a vast prophetic river as the Great Controversy between Messiah and Satan is coming to its final Dramatic Act. Institutions and "Isms" are crumbling and being challenged in a manner never seen in history. Messianic religous and political figures are rising over the international scene and today Adventism is in defense of its great storehouse of buildings and wealth that will vanish in a day. Where is the call to return to the "faith of our fathers" as Adventists like the rest of the world is "sound asleep" as prophetically envisioned in the "Ten Virigns". Are Adventists like all other religious institutions and "isms", now struggling to become like Babylon. Maybe we need spiritual accountability to our Lord and Master rather than business accountability? http://biblesearchers.com/

Truth is an ugly word in this lousy universe. It is so easily dismissed in every discussion with shrugs of "we must move on." Arthur's brilliant review and Doug H's magnificent report (where does anyone find such careful rhetorical precision these days?) point out that God's endorsement of His seal on people He can trust is not a theological subject on most anyone's agenda these days. Courage, Herb

Herb

Back to the Truth. The Truth is that Elder M. L. Andreasen
was the most prominent SDA scholar to promote your hypothesis on why Jesus Waits. Yet there is not one reference to his
momumental work and study on the subject. Yes, of course, he strongly objected to the Book Questions on Doctrine--but then again the Review during your tenure also wrote it was a book that never should have been published.

The question remains, why you chose authors with only peripheral interest in the topic to support your cause and failed to even mention M. L. Andreasen? His name still appears in the SDA Bible Commentary. Could it be that political correctness played a major role in your propositional presentations? Right or wrong, M.L. Andreasen was a man of God, a serious scholar, a devote SDA who was treated in a most unchristian, even uncivil manner by the very people advocating "reflecting Jesus Perfectly."

Just because, I disagree with a person doesn't mean I must consign him or her to oblivion or not give suitable reference where our thoughts are parallel, particularly when the other has published first and that work is well known in the same circles, I intend to present my work as original. Maybe you could tell us in what significant ways you differ from the basic premise of M. L. Andreasen. Tom

Tom

I met the author, Doug, briefly back in 2005? when I actually worked in the SPECTRUM office. What I appreciate about his approach is that it's not just critique, but the folks behind the book actually propose some provocative principles on how we all -from administrators to laity - be better stewards.

The bottom line for me is more openness. In fact, from my experience with some non-profit work, the more folks are clear about where the money goes, the more folks actually contribute. As a young person starting to really take my financial stake in the church seriously, I'm excited by ministry work that reflects my values of openness, social justice, and strong ROI.

We live in the mountains of rural America. Our pastor has 3 churchs all in excess of 100 miles from each other in mountaineous areas. Our conference helped him get his VISA as he is not a US citizen. We were told he was going to work part time as our pastor (pastoring 3 churches is full time but it wasn't in the budget) and part time canvasing books and once he proved himself . . . maybe he could be full time. We recently found out that he is actually classified as a Bible Worker not a pastor! I spoke with our conference president directly and nothing has been done. I told him I perceived this situation as a racial bias in our hiring practices and that he needed to look at his list of Bible Workers and Pastors to review this. He never called me back and initially called my husband to discuss the matter with him! This is awful. As a successful business person I would not work for a company with these types of business practices. Lose the pastors running our conferences - hire business people with business skills and have a pastor lead the spiritual growth initiatives in the conference.

I know I'm being needlessly defensive when I say that SOME ministers were better financial mnanagers than SOME who were educated in business schools because they cared enough to sacrifice and inspire others to do so too.

I watched this take place in another state which I visited several times each year as a bioethics consultant.

Over the previous century the nuns of one Roman Catholic order had established a whole chain of health care institutions that were serving their communities well. But then someone got the idea that the operation had become big enough to warrant some true experts.

So they arrived with their high salaries and impressive degrees. These MBAs, or whatever, ran the system into the ground financially. So they fired those MBAs and brought in some new ones who, thankfully, turned things around. But they never had the cache in the communities that the nuns did. And they never will. The people in the towns knew the difference.

The situation was more complex than this in many ways. But I've tried to highlight one factor that seemed important to me as I watched from afar.

The nuns did what they did because they believed this was what God wanted them to do and this was the big difference.

A glance around the SDA world will reveal some parallels, I wager.

One of our problems today is that we don't always have the kind of institutional leadership we once had, though very often we do.

Our pioneers did not ask whether so and so college or hospital "made sense" from a business point of view. Once they determined to their satisfaction that God was leading in a certain direction they did what needed to be done and more often than not they succeeded.

This bold but fiscally conservative spirit--no creative financing please--is not learned at business school. It comes from somewhere else.

This is why I sometimes feel distressed when I hear people wonder if AF/Spectrum can "make it." That's the wrong question. The right one is, "What do we have to do to go where God is leading?"

My guess is that one answer is that each of us must dig a little deeper into our pockets and open our wallets a little wider. If AF/Spectrum fails the most likely reason will be that we did not do our fair share.

Again, I apologize for my needless defensiveness.

Thank you for this excellent review of a very interesting publication that I will be sure to order right away--that is, just as soon as I can locate one of these things called a "check" and figure out how to "mail" it to an address. :-)

As to the topic at hand, in my travels I am familiar with several of these stories and have heard many others as well. As I see it these stories can serve as a basis for a rousing discussion about the traditional Adventist perspective that the corporate structure is the "correct" repository for the tithes and offerings. While the case could be made (and frequently is) that the modern SDA church structure is equivalent to the the Old Testament temple, what is often overlooked in making the case is that the priesthood was directly accountable for how they managed the temple and it's resources. As the book of Samuel records, when the priests began to take liberties with the resources and the members, they became the object of prophetic judgment and, when necessary, were directly removed by God. If you want to argue about bringing the tithes into the storehouse then be prepared to include the OT concept of priestly accountability and transparency. Otherwise, expect people to become disenchanted with the argument and the results.

It occurs to me that before accountability is possible, integrity is required. And a big part of integrity is actually believing what one says he believes (in other words, not being a hypocrite). Among life's many lessons for me (mostly learned AFTER leaving the Adventist belief system) is that actions always tell the truth, words often do not.

The actions of church members and the corporate church is that the vast majority of them do NOT believe what they claim to. If they did, they would act quite differently. I was at Andrews at the time of the Davenport scandal, and I remember very clearly the Seminary faculty member, who through family connections, had made a lot of money in the Davenport pyramid scheme. Do you think he was willing to give any of that back to those who had been robbed?

There are a few, however, who acted with integrity. And one of those was Bob Osborn, now deceased,in Treasury, no doubt the one referred to here. He always had my greatest respect, and I know that he paid a "political price" for his integrity as well.

The church's hypocrisy is at a very high level in what it calls "religious liberty," which really means liberty for themselves, but not necessarily for everyone else. Take for example the current California proposed constitutional amendment to ban same sex marriage. Would they sing a different tune if this amendment were to establish Sunday as the only true day of worship? Why are they so adamant about protecting their own beliefs while trampling those of others on the ground? It is this utter hypocrisy, and many others like it, that make an organization not worthy of respect.

But at the root of all of the problems of integrity, I believe, is that most members do not (for good reason, really) believe some of the foundational beliefs of the church, specifically those which reflect an eschatalogical vision of another time and place, and the authority of the "prophet" who did so much to establish those beliefs. There's no getting around it--there will be no Sunday law. Period. Indeed, the idea is so utterly ludicrous that it's hard for me to tell people with a straight face that Adventists actually believe this.

When an organization is built on what are essentially lies, it's not surprising really that people will just "take care of themselves." Integrity (and accountability) are not easily obtainable only in part.

As a member of the Davenport Commission I am proud of the work we did but not of the ultimate outcome. When members of the clergy have the audacity to argue in public that they should have been given preference in the bankruptcy action after having received outlandish interest on their investments makes one sad. Sad because of their ignorance but even more so because of the greed. As a former District Atttorney it is my opinion that criminal acts went unpunished. I will be interested to read the book.

Tom: Some people may think that reference to me and Andreasen in the string of comments regarding Hackleman's splendid book is quite a stretch! But I will bite! The "truth" is that your historical sources are pure fabrications. When I wrote WHY JESUS WAITS in the early 70s, I had never read anything by Andreasen except his seminar work on HEBREWS, seminal because he highlighted the work and person of Jesus that had not been done in biblical exposition. After my book was published, some immediately noted that it paralleled Andreasen's last chapter in his THE SANCTUARY. Immediatley I found a copy and saw the parallel. I don't know what one would expect when we let the same biblical texts and EGW comments rule our thinking. Too often we let, consciously or unconciously, the prevailing theological contours of the time rule our presuppositions. Your Dad and I would enjoy this conversation! Cheers, Her

Thank you Herb. (My dad and I would love to talk with you and with M.L. Andreasen.) I loved Andreasen's chapel talks at E.M.C. He didn't come often but when he did, he had something to share A man of great spiritual insight and Grace.

Now I have an urgent request of all the Spectrum family.

Betty and I have been married 59 years plus. She almost died five years ago from a ruptured gall bladder. And has never fully recovered. We ate at a five star resturant a few days ago. We had a micro-greem salad. Apparently, it was tainted. I had minor symptoms, Betty much more severe, even five days later. If ever we needed intercessory prayer it is tonight. Thank you all. Tom

Jeannieb43

First of all, Tom, I've prayed just now for your dear wife. God is all-powerful. We can confidently ask for healing, and I've done so just now. You are one of my favorite writers, on many of the Adventist boards. Please know she's being lifted up before the throne of God right now.

Secondly, I'm asking "Harvey:" Just what is your source for so very confidently announcing that there will be no Sunday law? That all we've been taught, based on EGW's writings especially, is now most assuredly false? You've come to this conclusion just because of the same-sex-marriage laws?? I fail to follow your line of reasoning here.

And, if you're so certain there will be no Sunday laws, what difference does that make in the Christian experience of each Adventist member?? Does it tend to make us more lax in our faithfulness in keeping the commandments? Or does it tend to make us unsure of the SDA Message as a whole? I fail to see just what your point is, in making such a prediction.

Please explain.

Jeannieb

Thank you for your prayers. At this moment Betty is resting the most peaceful in over five days. I know the God is working. There are hundreds of Veitnam soldiers and scores of graduate students who call her blessed as do I

I don't know if there will be a Sunday law or not. I just know that one cannot get to a Sunday law prophecy through Reve. 14.

My point was not on the Sunday Law. My point was that the Everlasting Gospel was announced preached, and believed far before 1844 and tha Babylon fell at the time that Jesus cried out: "It is Finished". Satan the Babylonian head was crushed.

To retroactively, abscond with Rev. 14 in order to bolster Dan 8:14 is not true exigesis. It is merely writing your own ticket which is known as eisigesis. Tom

Herb,

Since you bit...I am truly sorry that Tom and I pick on you every time you sign in. Welcome back.

As I read the Review in the 70's, I got very little assurance that I could be OK with Christ "Today." I appreciate the need for growth in sanctification...the fact that all who are justified are to by grace grow in holiness.

But I need a savior! I often find that His example overwhelms me and I see that I am yet a sinner. I need to know that blessed are those whom the Lord will not reckon ones sin against them.

This knowledge causes me to love Him rather than feel he has placed me in an impossible conundrum. It also causes me to have grace on others. So "leaders", continually give me a Savior that "seeks" me, "keeps me" and "finishes me" on His time schedule and He can come anytime He "darn well" is ready to deliver us.

And I am aware that a cultural Adventist, who was not always right also once said, the third angels message is "justification by faith in verity"...not the need of the perfect generation.

Cheers Herb...enjoyed our visit at the Review and I believe a Rotary club lunch about 35 yrs.ago.

pat

Herb

Since you have mentioned, favorably my dad several times, I must tell you my most cherished story about dad.

Dad and Mother moved to Loma Linda from the Illinois Conference where he had been the building supervisor, in order to be the inspector for the construction of the LL University Church. After the completion of that building, he became inspector of the LLU Hospital, until the height got too high for his heart.

Early one morning, the phone rang. It was dad on the phone. His voice was quiet but urgent. He said, "Tom, I think I'm having a heart attack. I lived five blocks away. I made that disance in record time. I found dad sitting up in his easy chair ashen with his hands over his chest. A few questions and I knew that I could not get him up to the hospital in my car. I called for an ambulance. While waiting dad asked me to pray for him. I knelt at his knee, like I was a kid again. I began my prayer: "Dear Father, I present to you my father. He is a wonderful dad, a fine husband, and a good--I was interupted. Dad said: " No, No Tom, and he became to pray: "Dear God, I am a sinner, I am need of forgiveness and pray for healing, Amen!" There was no need for further prayer. I got up from my knees, huged my dad wet cheek to wet cheek." The ambulance arrived, Dad was taken to the LLU San. He survived for six wonderful close years.

His final illness was in the New LLU Hospital. His cardiologist has been one of dad's workers on a project at E.M.C. The cardiologist took me into his office and showed me dad's EKG and said, Tom, your dad will not leave this hospital alive. He should have total bed rest. You and I know your dad. He won't tolerate that. I have written in his chart "Total Bed Rest" but I have told the staff, if you see him up in the bathroom, just watch don't interfer. I went into see dad just before returning to Augusta from a LLU Board Meeting. Dad said, "Tom, I'm sorry I will not be leaving you with an inheritance." I replied: "Dad, you made a man out of me, what more could a son ask?" We had a final wet cheek embrace and I walked out briskly just like dad would have me. Five Days later, I was giving a guest lecture at the University of South Carolina when Betty called me and told me that the nurses had found dad in the bathroom. He had gotten up at about 5:30 to shave and dropped dead.

I learned more about Christianity in those few moments at my father's knee than in 44 years. I thought you might like to know. Tom

Tom, all my thoughts and concerns are with you and your lovely wife for her recovery. We so enjoy your memories of the past and they have enlightened all of us about early SDA history.

Those who are convinced that there will be Sunday laws enacted here in the U.S., will you please tell us how your own reading led you to that position, and would you ever have arrived at that prediction totally on your own?

Because SDAs are unique in their doctrine of a future Sunday Law while no other Christian community has so interpreted those texts, what Scripture clearly tells of this impending law?

Posted by: Jeannieb43 | 12 July 2008 at 2:16:

"Just what is your source for so very confidently announcing that there will be no Sunday law? That all we've been taught, based on EGW's writings especially, is now most assuredly false?"

Here is my reaction to Jeannieb43 posting: I have no idea whether there will be a Sunday law or not, but I know for sure that the Time of Trouble is here without a Sunday law. I would like to cite the following from the Chapter entitled "VII. THE TIME OF TROUBLE" of my doctoral dissertation:

"Richard Fredericks, in an article published by Spectrum over a decade ago, made the following surprising declaration: 'Speculation about a future death decree should not make us actively participate in the present one. Surely, for the unborn of America, this is already a time of trouble such as has never been.' [2]

Many pro-life writers have stated that the most dangerous place on earth is not the Middle East, where people are being slaughtered by the hundreds, but rather inside the womb, where developing babies are exterminated en mass by the millions for the crime of having not seen yet the light of day. If this is not 'a time of trouble such as has never been,' [3] then the expression has lost its true meaning." [ http://sdaforum.com/page107.html ]

Like the Jews of old, our focus has been on the sacredness of the Sabbath. This is good, but the Jews, in their zeal for the Sabbath, overlooked the sacredness of human life. They killed the most innocent being in the universe, and hurried to keep the Sabbath holy.

As a church, we are repeating history. We have sided with the abortionists with our "Guidelines on Abortion" but worry about being some day persecuted for keeping the Sabbath holy. For the unborn, persecution and the Time of Trouble started back in 1973, but the enemy has blinded our vision to what is most important for God today.

We have been teaching that our final destiny will be determined by our attitude towards the Sabbath, forgetting that, according to Jesus, it will be decided on the way we have treated "the least." Can you think of any group of human beings more entitled to be labelled as "the least" as the unborn?

I would like to say much more, but this is not the main topic of this blog.

It is not ignorance on the part of conference leadership of business issues that leads to these problems - they are not idiots - they know that it is much easier to take full financial advantage of these situations from a "holy" perspective than an educated one. They also understand that they can argue "separation of church and state" if they are ever challenged a lot easier than a pure business leader could.

True, there are some true believers higher up, but the majority simply know how to play the political game very well.

"I would like to cite the following from the Chapter entitled "VII. THE TIME OF TROUBLE" of my doctoral dissertation...."

Just curious, Nic, what school granted your dissertation for a doctorate when you quoted Spectrum? Most schools would consider it to be a very apologist's position, not exactly what most accredited institutions would accept as citations or sources.

Admittedly, an SDA institution would accept EGW and other writers as sources, but would any reputable accredited insitution do so? Perhaps, depending on the thesis stated.

The book may be worth shipping over to Oz, seeing Folkenberg was the chief imprimatur for The Clear Word Bible, on ongoing scandal in itself. But first, does it deal with the GC's loss of millions in Lifepoint Inc? See http://www.sweenytod.com/rno/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=10... or do a search.

Nic

Thanks, I also received your greetings for Les Holmes recently.

My position is taken from the exigesis of Rev. 14 and the mark of the beast, which in historic SDA theology is the primary reference to Sunday Laws. I said in a blot that that was not a correct understanding of that passage. One therefore, could not get to Sunday Laws through that Scripture.

I have no idea if there will be Sunday Laws or not. I am sure that Rev. 14 does not tell us that there will be Sunday Laws.

The Christian right certainly seems bent on such an act--yet their political powers at the moment seems to be receding.
Here is the Blog as summitted:

Revisiting The Three Angels Messages
Revelation 14: 6-10

Rev. 14: 6And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters. 8 And there followed another angel, saying, Babylon is fallen, is fallen, that great city, because she made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication. 9 And the third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, If any man worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark in his forehead, or in his hand, 10 The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb: 11 And the smoke of their torment ascendeth up for ever and ever: and they have no rest day nor night, who worship the beast and his image, and whosoever receiveth the mark of his name. 12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus. KJV

1. Verse 6 tells us that the Everlasting Gospel exists. It existed before time “The Lamb slain from the foundation of the earth.” The Christ Event is now history. It is also presently Good News that salvation is offered to all those who dwell on the earth.

2. Verse 7 tells us that the Good News of Christ's victory over sin and death brings each one to the critical moment of decision or judgment. Is God who is says He is, or is God who the Devil says He is? The critical hour, the moment to decide for the good or evil side is now man's. The rest of the universe has come to consensus that God is Just and the Justifier of those who believe. The judgment addressed in Revelation 14 is the verdict of the outcome of the contest between Christ and Satan (The Great Controversy) was decided at Calvary. Now it is time for every rational creator to decide for or against Jesus Christ as the winner in that contest. The hour of His Judgment is come—now is the moment to decide for the good or evil side!

The point is simply: one cannot hear the Gospel—the full story of the Christ event without having to make a choice, a decision, a judgment. Is the Christ event "true" history? Was that event necessary? Was that event sufficient? That is, was the event sufficient not only to settle the Great Controversy but to settle my personal redemption?

3. Verse 7 goes on to declare that a decision in favor of God compels adoration, love, gratitude, and worship.

4. Verse 8 tells us that when Christ cried out: "It is finished" Babylon fell! The prince of this world had been unmasked and dethroned. His claim to and his hold on the earth has been broken.

5. Verse 9-10 tells us that to give support, honor, obeisance, allegiance, and/or worship to the adversary of Heaven is to share in his fate: be that support physical or intellectual, the fate is the same: symbolized by a “mark” in the forehead or in the hand indicating intellectual consent and/or material aid.

7. Therefore, the message of the Three Angels of Revelation 14 is a validation of AD 33 rather than some future date derived from complex numerology of Old Testament Apocalyptic literature.

8. Thus, Revelation 14:6-10 is not a proprietary Scripture, but an open invitation and assurance to any and all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior.

Thus the Investigative Judgment was built upon enthusiasm without proper exegesis and is sustained by a futuristic eisegesis by a few zealots unwilling to admit an error.

Even so Come Lord Jesus—

Praise be to God! He has made plain the way. We as His witnesses, man, woman, and child should be proclaiming with the Angels of Revelation 14 the finished work of Jesus Christ, our Lord and Master. When the judgment comes to your name and mine what will we say? What can we say except: “Jesus Christ is Lord, Master, and Savior” “Our hope is built on nothing less the His blood and Righteousness.”

Our task is to bring honor to the Lord of the Sabbath—the Author and Finisher of our faith. We are not time keepers we are Gospel speakers. Above the exit doors to the Emmanuel Missionary College Chapel were the words: “The Gospel into all the World in this Generation”. I am now 83 I haven’t done a good job.

Thomas J. Zwemer
Vice President Emeritus
Medical College of Georgia

I hope this help you understand my position on a key text
in SDA public evangelism. Tom

"THE JEWS" AND THE CRUCIFIXON

"The Jews" did not crucify Jesus, right? SOME of the Jews reportedly called for his death and it was the Romans who executed him for being a political threat.

"SPECTRUM" AND DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS

Including places like the colleges at Oxford, the world's finest universities accept dissertations that include material from "Spectrum." This is because for many events it is the journal of record. Also, its pages help one to trace the development of serious SDA thought on various topics, including abortion.

"SPECTRUM" AND "ADVENTIST TODAY"

Sadly, "Spectrum" is under constant pressure to become more popular in order to attract more readers. My view is that "Adventist Today" aims at mass appeal and should continue doing so. If "Spectrum" competes in that mareket, it may lose.

But "Spectrum" has a different mission. It is to provide longer and heavier papers that fewer and more academic people will read. In this market "Spectrum" has no rivals.

DOLLARS AND SENSE

Neither journal is likely to flourish only by selling subscriptions and publishing advertising. Both need donations from those who believe in their causes. I think that this will always be so.

This is why it makes sense to make financial contributions. We will be weaker if we have only one of the journals.

If you've already given, give again! If you haven't, there is still time to do the right thing.

Thanks!

Dave

Dave, I don't know if the Romans had bothered up to this point to give Jesus much notice. The question as to whether the Jews killed Jesus or not seems to always come around to someone wanting to assign blame and for what reason? So we can corner (nail?) the guilty persons or even race? This seems to completely miss the point. It was all pure politics and power. The Jewish masses loved Jesus and why not? He was good to them and taught hope. A great number of them could also be incited to riot. The world has not really changed.

Dick, Good points, so long as we do not think of "the Jews" as Christ Killers! Dave

The race is irrelevant. The warning is to authority and power figures large and small.

“Men of Israel, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, which God did among you through him, as you yourselves know. 23 This man was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross...
36 “Therefore let all Israel be assured of this: God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
37 When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”
40 With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41 Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

Acts 2:22,23;37-40.

The prior citations referred to contemporary Rabbinical Jewish leading writers and the Sabbath. I made two points:
1. The Rabbinical leaders of Christ day and well as today reject Jesus Christ as the Messiah, They even cried to have him killed in the Roman manner.

2. Jesus Christ rebuked the Rabbinical leaders of His day for their style of Sabbath keeping.

3. I should have added a third. one can find a host of praise articles on the peace, grace, and renewal found in Sunday keeping. None of the above validates any exclusive time for rest, worship,fellowship, and personal contemplation.

I have no argument with anyone over rest, worship, fellowship or personal contemplation. I have a strong adversion to those who would press their views on me as essential to salvation.

I rejoice with all who find renewal in their rest, worship, fellowship, and personal contemplation. Let us each and all accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior and soon coming King and let the Holy Spirit and our personal study indit us on consequential living. I think that is why this web site carries the banner of Spectrum--a full rainbow of Christian thought and behavior without any Pressure to conform to some arbibrary norm!. Tom

Ho, Tom and Pat: Amazing how a main theme becomes a magnet to attract unrelated subjects that, in themselves, are very important. Some themes just do not go away! Tom, when I have been at those margins of life and knew that others were praying for me (not much else could be done) I sensed I was resting on angel wings, and it made all the difference. I am sure that your life companion understands all this. And Pat, I do remember with pleasure our interactions in the 70s. Those were semeion times, crunch times for the Adventist church. I know you are right in saying that I devoted more time to answering the question of what God's goals are in this Plan of Salvation than in emphasizing only one part of that goal that certain Adventist spokesmen were playing on one string. Of course, forgiveness is part of the ellipse of salvation but so is the grace of empowerment. God does not leave us where He finds us. The Bible seems to hunker down on the fact that certain people can be trusted with eternal life. I can't philosophize that away. Both Pat and Tom--I expect to walk those treasured streets with you forever. Cheers, Herb

Thanks Herb

I'm looking forward to that day. Tom

Thanks Herb,

Ditto..........

Pat

Doubtless, we all will be surprised who are neighbors are in heaven if there is one and if we are there.

Posted by: Elaine Nelson 12 July 2008 at 6:26:

"'I would like to cite the following from the Chapter entitled "VII. THE TIME OF TROUBLE" of my doctoral dissertation....' Just curious, Nic, what school granted your dissertation for a doctorate when you quoted Spectrum? Most schools would consider it to be a very apologist's position, not exactly what most accredited institutions would accept as citations or sources. Admittedly, an SDA institution would accept EGW and other writers as sources, but would any reputable accredited insitution do so? Perhaps, depending on the thesis stated."

Elaine: Good question! It was Andrew Jackson University, in Alabama. At the time I signed up for the doctoral program in religon, it was the only university offering such a program online. It was the only way for me to do this, since I had to take care of my real estate business in Loma Linda. I did this at great financial cost to my business, and without ever hoping to recover my investment. I did it because I love my church and the unborn.

It took me ten years to complete the program part time. When I applied for the program I was informed that the university was applying for the acreditation. This did not materialize, but the university was allowed to issue the doctorate to me, since I had signed up in good faith. Said doctorate program was eventually discontinued.

The sourcess I submitted were accepted since they represented the best way to test my hypothesis. My use of these sourcess could not be contrued as belonging to an apologist's position because I was questioning the Adventist position on the issue of abortion. My intention was to test the hypothesis that the Adventist Church had veered from its pro-life position to a pro-choice/pro-abortion one.

The best way to test this was to delve into the published material found in SDA sourcess between 1970 up to the present. My main source was not Spectrum or Adventist Today, but rather the "Ministry Magazine." Of course, I utilized other sources as well. Please check my bibliography. Here is the Internet link to my dissertation: http://www.sdaforum.com/page13.html .

Posted by: Tom Zwemer | 13 July 2008 at 3:09:

"My position is taken from the exegesis of Rev. 14 and the mark of the beast, which in historic SDA theology is the primary reference to Sunday Laws. I said in a blot that that was not a correct understanding of that passage. One therefore, could not get to Sunday Laws through that Scripture.I have no idea if there will be Sunday Laws or not. I am sure that Rev. 14 does not tell us that there will be Sunday Laws."

Tom: Our historic understanding of the "Mark of the Beast" and the "Investigative Judgement" is based primarily on the writings of Ellen White. She did rely on other sources, and although I believe that she was God's instrument for the building of the Adventist movement, I do not accept the notion that she was infallible. She did state on many occassions that only God is infallible.

Your interpretation of Revelation 14 makes good sense to me. I am convinced that if we want to identify the "Beast of Revelation," it makes more sense to look at the character and behavior of people, organizations, and institutions; instead of trying to decipher enigmatic numbers like 666. People, organizations, and institutkions are live entities, and they tend to morphe with time into something they were not before. Take the case of the kings of Israel of old.

Hezekiah was a good king, whose son, Manasseh, did "evil in the sight of the Lord;" who in turn fathered a good king, Josiah; who became the father of another king who did "evil in the sight of the Lord." Likewise, there were cruel caesars in Rome like Nero, and friends of Christians like Constantine. The Lord did judge each king and each caesar on the basis of their own character and behavior instead of treating them on the basis of the behavior of their predecessors.

This means that if we want to determine the identity of the "Beast of Revelation" correctly, we need to find out what the "Beast" symbol means. What do predatory beasts do? They attack and kill their victims. When pagan Rome was in power, the label of "Beast" fit their character and behavior. When the Catholic church persecuted dissenters through their infamous Inquisition, the Church of Rome did deserve the symbolic name of "Beast."

Now the question: Is the Catholic church acting like a beast of prey today? I do not think so. Rome did apologize for their past "Beastly" actions on numerous occasions. Someone might point to the unchristian actions of certain local bishops, but the current popes have been in the forefront in defense of the unborn, for example.

What powers are behind the "Beastly" predatory practice of killing the weak, innocent, and indefense human beings today? I could name a few: China, the United States, and many other nations; and some institutions, including some Adventist hopitals which have been offering elective abortions to their patients. Contrast this with the character and behavior of Catholic hospitals which consider killing the unborn below their dignity; while we, the "Remnant church of God on earth" have issued pro-abortion guidelines justifying the killing of the innocents.

I realize that this blog is not the right forum for this side issue, but I felt I needed to respond to your comments!

Posted by: davidrlarson | 13 July 2008 at 5:43

"'SPECTRUM' AND DOCTORAL DISSERTATIONS

Including places like the colleges at Oxford, the world's finest universities accept dissertations that include material from "Spectrum." This is because for many events it is the journal of record. Also, its pages help one to trace the development of serious SDA thought on various topics, including abortion."

David: Thanks for your comments. I need to clarify though that the main source for my doctoral dissertation, as I posted above, was not "Spectrum," but rather "Ministry." Of course, I relied on many other Adventist sources.

hi
i have read above commentary about accountability over the money,and i have read also that many people are concerned about the money.but i ask to every one;to whom god has asked
you to give the money,what says malachi 3,10,bring ye all the
tithes into the storehouse,then i understand that god has been asking you to carry the money into the storehouse.is it
i sleep very nice every night because i am not worried about
what happens with the money when i give god's money to the storehouse.because the money does not belong me any more.the
money belongs to the god.that money which is in my bankaccount
belongs to me ,but that money which i have given to the storehouse is not problem of mine.if some one steals or happens some losses in my bank ,i shall want my money back,because that money belongs me ,then i shall take some attitudes to have my money back.but that money which i have given to the storehouse if some steals or happens some losses
it is not my problem and neither you problem eigther.this problem belongs to the god ,because god is the owner of the
money,and the god himself spoke tru malachi to every one brings the money into the storehouse,if some leaders are thiefs is not problem of mine i shall go on giving the money
which belong to the god to the storehouse.every one shall talk
to god about mistakes wrongs or sins what made against god.
pay attention the money is not yours the money belongs to the
god,therefore himself shall give to every one what every one
deserves.the tithes belongs to the god do not forget to
remember this,start always this principle.
thank you
laercio

Nic, Thanks for answering my question.

Dave,

Of course, for an apologetics' position, Spectrum, as well as the Ministry or other SDA publications would be accepted if they were absolutely pertinent to SDA positions on the dissertaion subject.

laercio, I kind of agree with you but I, myself am cautious about which "store house" I put it in.

Nic

Thanks

I reference back to the third temptation of Jesus. In which Satan offers Christ the world, if Christ will only bow to Him, Satan. Of Course, Christ rejected that offer. This Satan has claimed from Job on that he was king of earth. When Christ cried: "It is finished". Among the meanings of the poignant phrase was that Bablyon was fallen". Christ was now the second Adam and the King of this world. Not Satan, not Nero, not Hitler, etc, etc. Thus one must follow that message to its obvious conclusion. The validation of the Christ event and anyone persisting on giving aid to the enemy would be Marked. Tom

malachi 3,10 my brother in christ.
today is seventh day adventist church which we must give our
tithes ,god has asked us to give his money to the adventist church,what shall happens to this money is not problem of
mine.or i give this money to the church or i shall be a thief,
because i will be stealing god.seventh day adiventist church is the storehouse.
blessings
laercio

Hmmmmmmmm Iaercio, Since God has required us to bring our tithe into His "store house" then that store house becomes many things to many people. If I were 7th Day Baptist, or Nazerine that would also be God's "store house", am I right? To continue then, does God also expect me, in my church, to require those in charge of His money to be responsible and accountable for the money that I give them? Or should I just blindly, in faith, let the GC leaders do as they please with the finances while I sit, righteously believing that I have done all that is required of me? Let us not be blinded by our 'loyalty' to the extent that we do not feel we have any right to check up on those in charge of God's money.

laercia

Where do you find a command or even a suggestion that God requires us to give our tithe and offerings to the Seventh-day Adventist Church?

I have given lots of money to lost causes, that I thought were in God's interest at the time. Once demonstrated that that assumption was in error, why should I continue when the real need is so great?

I give a tithe and more to causes that I believe God has as much or more interest than I do. Seldom is that the SDA church although within the past six months I have given hundrends of dollars to specific SDA causes that appeared to be valid.

I think the prime charge of God is to be good stewards not blind marks! Tom

hi virginia
i shall speak you again,the money is not yours,this money belongs to the god.what will you check up,what will you take
care,every one knows that the tithes must be given to the
church,there are people responsible for the god's money and
is not YOUR money,when you start giving god's money at the church,your responsibility over here,because after you give the money to the church god is the responsible for the money.
if into the organization there is someone thief or someone that cannot get management the money,it is not my problem.
the problem belongs to the god,i must give the money to the god,then god has ordered to give to the church,i do that.
i must support the preaching the gospel and god has given me conditions to turn back the money which i have made with my job.ten per cent belongs to him,i do not care whether someone
steals the money,because i have made my part which is turn back the money which belongs to the god.where do you think
virginia giving your money back,i know only one place which is
the church,because this church has the true doctrine then
i must support her ,and this doctrine needs be spread for everywhere,and to spread the good news tru the world we need money,and the money god has given you,and you as a good stweards turn back the money which belongs to the god.
our organization yet must receive the money,when the time is
come to stopping to give money to organization god shall speak.there is no another place which i must give back god's
money besides the church.pay attention my sister ,the money is
not yours,and nor god has put you to take care of it.
god is the owner of money and i think god knows to take care
of it,better than you and me.
think well
tanks
LAERCIO
to support

hi tom
where do you find command to not giving money to the church
your money you make what you want,but god's money you must
give back to the church.the cristians must use the money for
three things.first,support himself or his family,second
to support preaching of gospel,third to support every one
that needs aid.you can't take the money of the tithes and
use it to support your family or to support need aid people.
i will give an example you,i am in debt you .then i intend
to pay you tomorrow ,and then you say me,give the money to
my friend sparrow,i say okay.so i give the money to your friend and your friend steals all the money.i ask,whom is the
guilt you or me,in old time whom received the money,always has
been an organization which received the money.
the tithes are to preach the gospel tru the world ,the tithes
are not to building temples,to help people in the world,or
everything else.therefore tom if you have taken the money
and used it to do another thing you have made mistakes.
if the tithes are not used to preach the gospel and people using it to do another thing is not my problem,because god has
ordered i give the money to the church,i do know nowhere besides of the church to give my tithes,i only know the church.the church is resposible to preach the gospel tru the
world and also is responsible for god's money,then if you take
this money and use it to do another thing you will be stealing
god,i know god will not save our organization god save people,
the church are ourselves,therefore god still has not become
our organization unable to receive the tithes,if you want search several books of hellen white and search the bible,
and you see god has ordered to carry his money to the store
house.
search ,because i search,and i hope you search too.
laercio

"There is no another place which i must give back god's
money besides the church.pay attention my sister ,the money is
not yours,and nor god has put you to take care of it.
god is the owner of money and i think god knows to take care
of it,better than you and me." Laercio...

Sorry Laercio, I cannot and will not accept your understanding of the situation. I do not believe that God made me stupid, dumb or idiotic so that I will not think of these matters.

1. As far as the "storehouse" is concerned, who and what consistitutes the storehouse is a very valid question. The OT temple had a special set of priests and no one else could take their place. they were specially called to perform that duty and it was the purpose of the community to support their daily living. In the NT times, when the priesthood of the church is given to all members who believe, who gets the benefit of using that tithe or sole control of the offering?

2. As a steward of the house of God, it is my responsibility to maintain the house of the Lord. All activities (including evangelism, policy, maintenance of equipment, faith and encouragement of it's members) is given to all members as a responsibility to maintain, just as God gave all of Eden to Adam and Eve to maintain and develop. It is only the propaganda of the organization that says that we should not be vigilant so that the corrupt can continue in their ways with the property of God.

Thank you Sona. I appreciate Iaercio and his loyalty to his God and his church. Again I repeat, along with you Sona and others here that OUR responsibility DOES involve keeping the leaders of the church, God's church, accountable. Accountable to God AND to His people that sit in the pews and give of their means.

This seems to be the year of 'accountability'. This book on "Who Watches----------", Dr. Douglass's book "A Fork in the Road" and a new one that just came out this month "We Suffered In Silence", a true story of pastor abuse. The authors are stating that church leadership (GC and Conf. Presidents) should require accountability and discipline for the actions of their pastors and employees who abuse their spouses. http://www.preyerplanning.com/book/velva-holt.htm This same accountability should also apply to the abuse of finances within the church.

Laerico

Who threw whom out of the temple?
What was the fate of Eli's sons?

That was then,
Now, we have so many avenues of philanphropy in which to do God's work, we are under no such order to give and then forget to demand accountability. I give to Liberty, Ministry, and Spectrum and also a large number of none Seventh-day Adventist organizations that I have investigated as to their stewardship. I always give a small free will offering to each church I attend as a visitor to at least pay for my space and my enlightenment.

I find no commend to give but to God through causes the releave human suffering and need be it spiritual or physical.

I was a member of the Board of Trustees of the Augusta United Way. In our community, I found the greatest greed in the Red Cross, Salvation Army, and the YWCA and YMCA. Of course during my tenure, the national leader of United Ways was exposed as a money spending fraud. Philanthropy and vigilence go hand in hand. I think I told this story before: "While on the Board at LLU, the President of Walla Walla poked me in the side and wisphered into my ear while pointing to Dr. Davenport--"Tom would you buy a used car from that man?" The answer was NO! Of course, I have made mistakes in my giving--I try not to repeat them. After all as you pointed out, It is the Lord's money and we should be wise stewards. Tom

We need to remember that Davenport mismanaged not only church funds, but also the funds of many Adventists who relied on the opinion of church leaders and invested not sacred money, but their own life savings with Davenport and lost. Personal life savings do not normally go God's "storehouse."

Nic

How does that change things. It was elected stewards of the Church that were conned by Davenport.

I recall back in the middle to lat 1930's the treasurer of the Michigan Conference "cooked the books" to his advantage and took about $3000.00. The Conference charged him under criminal law of Michigan and he spent the better part of 3 years in a Michigan prison. To my knowledge that was the last time the church went that route. The negative publicity was though to cost the church too much in bad press and in reduced tithes and offerings.

Explicitly Davenport did not mismanage church funds. Church leaders mismanaged church funds through Davenport. Those church leaders personally profited from the con--it was the John come lately that got hurt the most. Usually retired workers of lower rank.

Nic it is difficult indeed to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Tom

Nic said:

"Personal life savings do not normally go God's "storehouse."

That is a rather naive statement. All of us who are retirees, and those who will be some day, will live off our life's savings. I am living off SS and investments made earlier, all all retirees must, someday. I suspect Tom is doing the same.

All the money that we donate to church, other charities, will come from those "personal life savings." I am happy that I am able to pay at least a double tithe directly to the local church I attend. That way, I can oversee how it is spent, which good stewardship demands. The charities mentioned by Tom, and others, have in the past grossly mismanaged and profited from donations. One should investigate the administrative overhead before giving to any charities (the internet has plenty of sources).

The lack of transparency and accountability by the church has turned many givers to alternate charities.

Tom and Elaine:

My comment wa directed at Laercio who argued that all we have to worry is to return what belongs to the Lord to God's "storehouse." I wanted him to be aware that a good chunk of the money invested through Davenport came from private life savings of church members who trusted both Davenport and the church leaders who had they hands in the cookie jar.

I am not an expert about the Davenport affair, and I have not read the book, but my understanding is that both Davenport and the church leaders who participated in this financial scheme are to blame for the financial fiasco. And, of course, the always trusting nature of people with strong religious convictions who failed to see the danger. I have friends who lost quite a bit of their savings as a result of similar investment schemes orchestrated by SDA's. One thing I have learned in life, and that is that human greed tends to blind people to life's realities.

Nic

We agree. But my point was there was at least a three level scam. Davenport. Conference Presidents, Conference Field Officers all of whom profited from the "take" and then finally, retired workers and others "close" to the power structure of the Church yet naive enough to trust the power elite.

I was a member of the Georgia Cumberland Conference. The Conference called a constituentcy meeting in which I was a delegate. I read the financial report and found at least $500,000. unaccounted for. I call the President two days before the meetings. Saying, Des, I don't want to bring this up in open session but I can't follow the cash flow from one account to another. It seems to me there is $500,000. unaccounted for. I think for the benefit of those of us not familiar with higher finance you should have the treasurer walks us through the report so that we can feel comfortable.

I learned shortly thereafter, that Des lost it. He paced, he swore, he called down heaven upon me, and hell up to me and demanded that the treasur rework the report post haste.

I got a call back that said, that the 500,000 was part of the building costs of the new conference headquarters in Calhoun, Ga. That once build, the building was carried on the books at only 1 dollar. That accounted for the seemingly conflict in reporting. I like a naive fool accepted his explanation.

He had pulled his funds out of Davenport at a profit, and then to demonstrate faith and good will put about $15,000 back in. About a tithe of what he had "earned" as a "Finders Fee" using conference funds (God's funds). Some storehouse Huh!!!!!!

Even the God say: Come now let us reason together--To join the church doesn't mean one leaves reason at the door. Tom

Every church should have a Tom or Elaine...thinking and asking. Ignorance is not a virtue. Pious Zombies will not inherit the earth. CPA's, Bookkeepers, Audits, the right hand knowing what the left hand is doing...these are all good things. The theological and financial pot needs to be stirred constantly...to avoid sticky messes. Leaders should feed the flock...not fleece the flock. By the way...anyone want to buy an indulgence or a post-office?

Tom:

Thanks for the first-hand information about the shady financial dealings which resulted in the loss of investors' assets. My understanding is that the interest offered to those willing to take the financial plunge was above reasonable rates. This is why I stated that greed was a factor in these finacial schemes. Can you verify this?

A similar investment program organized by SDA's about the same time in California was offering an interest rate exceeding twenty percent to the participants, and the program was solvent when the real estate values were going up at a fast pace. But when the trend reversed, the people in charge were forced to use the new investor's funds to pay the high interest rate promised to the original investors, which is illegal, of course. Disaster followed, and the man who started the program was forced to flee the country for safety.

Ni

There was a sliding scale of returns on investments. It was a classic Ponzi scheme.

1. Big investors like Conference Presidents got an up front "Finders Fee" and a preferred rate of interest.

2. Conference Presidents would recruit Conference Departmental Leaders as runners. They would get a lessor finders fee plus a preferred rate of interest.

3. The Early Bird investors would get a higher rate of interest.

4. Finally the marks would get a higher rate than stable financial institutions were paying--for a time.

5. Of Course Davenport had to hide his take so when the fall came he would still be solvent--he also alerted some Conference Presidents and the like before the crash became open. Many got sizeable amounts back out. Naturally, the
little guys lost it all. Tom

Ni

There was a sliding scale of returns on investments. It was a classic Ponzi scheme.

1. Big investors like Conference Presidents got an up front "Finders Fee" and a preferred rate of interest.

2. Conference Presidents would recruit Conference Departmental Leaders as runners. They would get a lessor finders fee plus a preferred rate of interest.

3. The Early Bird investors would get a higher rate of interest.

4. Finally the marks would get a higher rate than stable financial institutions were paying--for a time.

5. Of Course Davenport had to hide his take so when the fall came he would still be solvent--he also alerted some Conference Presidents and the like before the crash became open. Many got sizeable amounts back out. Naturally, the
little guys lost it all. Tom

Ni

There was a sliding scale of returns on investments. It was a classic Ponzi scheme.

1. Big investors like Conference Presidents got an up front "Finders Fee" and a preferred rate of interest.

2. Conference Presidents would recruit Conference Departmental Leaders as runners. They would get a lessor finders fee plus a preferred rate of interest.

3. The Early Bird investors would get a higher rate of interest.

4. Finally the marks would get a higher rate than stable financial institutions were paying--for a time.

5. Of Course Davenport had to hide his take so when the fall came he would still be solvent--he also alerted some Conference Presidents and the like before the crash became open. Many got sizeable amounts back out. Naturally, the
little guys lost it all. Tom

Tom:

Thanks for the details! This looks much, a lot much worse than I had imagined! My question to you? Do you know how many of those in this criminal scheme landed in jail?

I would recommend this book to theology students as to use preventative textbook measures. If you haven't read this book yet you can preview and buy it at Hacksplace.com as well as other works by the author Douglas Hackleman.

It is rewarding for an author to find that in the comments posted above his intentions have been well understood. He welcomes your purchase of Who Watches? Who Cares?--and of several other Adventist books that are not now generally available--at www.hacksplace.com