Faith, Phillip is typical of the cry babies who call “foul” …

Comment on Dr. Geraty Affirms the Literal Creation Week? by Bill Sorensen.


Phillip is typical of the cry babies who call “foul” when they are exposed for what they are.

Several years ago I was head elder in a conservative SDA church. We had a change of pastors and his wife especially felt it was her duty to push her spirituality on the church in the way of music and other “celebration” ideas and activities.

When she could not “force” her will on the church, she cry-babied all over the church about how the elders were against her and her husbands ministry. She split the church.

The conference supported her and her husband and that church, like many others today, are in serious financial difficulty.

My wife and I attend a different SDA church today. Several families left as well. Good conservative financial supporters of bible Adventism.

The point is this, the liberals are good at cry-babying all over the church when they are exposed and reproved. Nobody cries “unity” more than the [the opposers of the truth] once [error] has begun to infiltrate his philosophy and doctrine in the church.

Ellen White once said….

Instructing New Converts

A laborer should never leave some portion of the work undone because it is not agreeable to perform,
thinking that the minister coming next will do it for him. When this is the case, if a second minister follows the first, and presents the claims that God has upon His people, some draw back, saying, “The minister who brought us the truth did not mention these things.” And they become offended because of the word. Some refuse to accept the tithing system; they turn away, and no longer walk with those who believe and love the truth. When other lines are opened before them, they answer, “It was not so taught us,” and they hesitate to move forward. How much better it would have been if the first messenger of truth had faithfully and thoroughly educated these converts in regard to all essential matters, even if fewer had been added to the church under his labors. God would be better pleased to have six thoroughly converted to the truth than to have sixty make a profession and yet not be truly converted. {CS 104.3}

I don’t know if the percentage is even that good today. About 10%

And even this isn’t the worst part. The ill informed and half converted are pressed quickly into high places of influence and authority. They get up in church wearing jewelry, half clothed, and leading out in [inappropriate] music.

So, don’t worry about the cry-babies. Remember this….

The shaking of God blows away multitudes like dry leaves.–4T 89 (1876). {LDE 180.1}

Chaff like a cloud will be borne away on the wind, even from places where we see only floors of rich wheat.–5T 81 (1882). {LDE 180.2}

Soon God’s people will be tested by fiery trials, and the great proportion of those who now appear to be genuine and true will prove to be base metal. . . . {LDE 180.3}

When the religion of Christ is most held in contempt, when His law is most despised, then should our zeal be the warmest and our courage and firmness the most unflinching. To stand in defense of truth and righteousness when the majority forsake us, to fight the battles of the Lord when champions are few–this will be our test. At this time we must gather warmth from the coldness of others, courage from their cowardice, and loyalty from their treason.–5T 136 (1882). {LDE 180.4}

The church may appear as about to fall, but it does not fall. It remains, while the sinners in Zion will be sifted out–the chaff separated from the precious wheat. This is a terrible ordeal, but nevertheless it must take place.–2SM 380 (1886). {LDE 180.5}

As the storm approaches, a large class who have professed faith in the third angel’s message, but have not been sanctified through obedience to the truth, abandon their position and join the ranks of the opposition.–GC 608 (1911). {LDE 180.6}

It is going to get tougher, not easier.

Keep the faith,

Bill Sorensen

Bill Sorensen Also Commented

Dr. Geraty Affirms the Literal Creation Week?
Greg said…..

“At some point we have to ask whether we have gone too far at this website.”

Most people who post on the various threads will not agree with you, Greg.

I could not know if the leaders acted in less than a perfect way in dealing with the issue. It is not likely anyone who posts here could know if this were so or not.

In my opinion, and maybe some others as well, it is better to take some action and even make some mistakes in doing so, than to do nothing.

The leaders allowed a major problem to develop and now to deal with it is far more difficult than if they had been more careful in the beginning to avoid it.

This website has been highly instrumental in stimulating some responsible action and should continue to inform concerning past, present and future.

So, no, this website has not gone too far in the opinion of the majority who post here.

Let me explain the liberal mentality in discipline. Like indulgent parents who refuse to discipline their children with the hope that somehow they will turn out all right is how our church deals with rebels against the church doctrine and teaching.

Parents who refuse the responsibility in disciplining their children shouldn’t have any. Just so, leaders who refuse to accept their job in discipline shouldn’t take the job in the first place.

If you accept a position of responsibility and influence, then by all means, do your job. In a Christian way? Yes. But it is not “Christian” to do nothing when it is more than apparent that some disciplinary action is needful.

And finally Greg, when the leaders refuse to discipline evil and unrighteousness, it is inevitable that in the future, they will surely discipline honesty and truth. The Jews hated the prophets and finally Christ Himself based on this principle. So, Just as Cain will always kill Abel, even so, the liberals will “kill” anyone who reproves their sins and lack of self disciple.

We honor those who are at least putting forth some effort to deal with the situation.

I think you will find people who agree with your view on web pages like Spectrum and A-today. They tend to be the “I’m OK, you’re Ok” crowd. Anything goes as long as you say you believe in Jesus. With one big “swish” they throw the bible and standards out the window all in the name of love and the so-called “gospel”.

How everyone has a great and blessed Sabbath.

Keep the faith

Bill Sorensen

Dr. Geraty Affirms the Literal Creation Week?
Greg said…..

“I don’t understand the contempt this website promotes toward church leadership. Talk about undermining the church! It’s sad, really.”

I Greg, I assume most church members throughout history have generally taken your view of the church. It is a very comfortable view and let’s everyone sleep as negative forces move in and take control.

Shane and Sean have endeavored to bring out to the public what would never be known generally if they did nothing. Even when they, and others, were aware of a situation that demanded attention.

If church members don’t demand accountability of church leaders, who will?

The “Tea Party” in civil politics came about precisely for this same reason. And now at least some politicians are trying to deal with a less then acceptable situation in our civil government today.

Are these not loyal Americans simply because they protest and demand accountability? And are we not faithful SDA’s because we also demand some responsible action by a leadership that would simply do nothing unless these issues were being agitated in the church today?

We would like to preserve the great fundamental bible principles of faith that our founding fathers worked earnestly to discover and defend.

Pluralism and business as usual will not get the job done. Sin will not heal itself. If the church is to be preserved as a viable means of grace that God has ordained, we can not simply sit by as Satan and his principles are being advocated more and more and generally without protest.

I am sorry you see little to be concerned about and think we should all, “get in, sit down, shut up, and hang on.”

We think God can and will use various instrumentalities to challenge His people and thus the shaking will surely intensify more and more as we near the end.

Keep the faith

Bill Sorensen

Dr. Geraty Affirms the Literal Creation Week?
Many don’t know how “the church” has arrived at its present spirituality. The modern apostacy began with the book Questions on Doctrine. The book has a lot of truth and defends much of basic Adventism. None the less, it began the process of obscuring certain basic truths and left false implications of what we teach and why.

The Brinsmead awakening challenged some of the false ideas coming into the church. And was opposed and labeled a Shepherd’s Rod type ministry by church leaders to undermine the ministry and the truths it presented.

The liberals were on the move and gaining influence and authority year by year.

Dr. Ford was supposedly the champion of the church in theology and would “save the church” from the Brinsmead awakening. He was endorsed and published continually as others were as well, to save the church.

In the end, Ford revealed himself as an anti EGW influence and attack the Investigative judgment and much of basic bible Adventism.

From there, our leaders decided on Pluralism to avoid being exposed as ignorant and less than qualifed to lead the church in doctrine and bible teaching.

On the heals of this decision came the endorsement of the celebration movement and all that it implies.

From that time to this, we have been fragmenting and polarizing and our identity has been obscured or even lost in the shuffle.

In 2005 the Review published an article by Kevin Ferris on the judgment which endorsed the liberal interpretation of scripture. Bible Adventism was denied and it was claimed that Jesus went into the Most Holy Place at His ascension and began the service typified by the High Priest on the day of atonement on Yom Kippur.

Never has church leadership ever admitted or acknowledged at any time that they have ever made a mistake except in some generic less than meaningful incident.

In spirit, the church becomes more and more like Rome every day. Andreason opposed the printing of Questions on Doctrine, and they did all in their power to destroy his influence in the church when he demanded accountability for their actions.

So, Shane and Sean’s ministry is not likely to be well received. Not because they support the biblical account of creation, but because they are challenging the church leaders with accountability to act and do something to “stop the bleeding” in the false doctrine being presented continually at LSU and other institutions of learning.

Don’t be surprised at the outcome. It may not be what we have hoped.

Now you know, at least in part, the how and why of the present spirituality in the SDA church of today.

Bill Sorensen

Recent Comments by Bill Sorensen

The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
” That’s what I’ve been saying (and what Morris Venden and MacCarty have been saying)”

Well, I did not do a complete search on all the MacCarty says or believes. But in the case of Venden, I did do such a study and Venden had a doctrine of “sanctification by faith alone” that was totally outside the bible teaching.

“Faith alone” by definition means we play no part in it. If so, it is not “faith alone”. But Venden’s view of sanctification was definitely “faith alone” and we play no part in it but believe. At any rate, there is more confusion than bible definition in his definition of sanctification, and I think this applies to MacCarty as well. Like I said, I read his book a couple years ago and it was circular with no real definition of what he meant.

But basically, he equated the old covenant with legalism which is bogus. We agree a misapplication of the old covenant is not the same thing as a clear understanding of the old covenant and its purpose. So let’s not take a misapplication of the old covenant, and then claim this is the old covenant.

As you have defended the Sabbath against a misapplication of the new covenant and not called it the new covenant we must do the same with the old covenant. Our conclusion should be that a misapplication of any truth does not equate to the truth that is being misapplied. The confusion continues on many levels in the SDA community today.

Your defense of creation against the liberal agenda is a classic illustration of how the liberal agenda misapplies the new covenant on every level from false teaching to simply denying the bible outright. And all this from a misapplication of the new covenant that creates a false “spirit ethic” that takes the place of the bible and the ten commandments.

I appreciate the dialogue. Some may see the point eventually and some never will. Since we don’t know who’s who in this context, we leave it up to God to sort out the various issues and determine who “gets it” and who don’t.
Bill Sorensen

The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
“You honestly think that you can simply choose to do good through your own willpower.”

I never said any such thing or even suggested it. Did you even read what I wrote. If so, you decided to impute to me something I never said or suggested. Let’s at least try to be objective in our evaluation of what the other person said.

I said the Holy Spirit liberates the will and by the power of the Holy Spirit, we can choose to believe, repent and obey. How then is this your false claim that I think “You honestly think that you can simply choose to do good through your own willpower.”

You rightly point out that without the Holy Spirit, we have no way to know God’s will, let alone do it. And yes, Jesus “puts enmity between sinful beings and the kingdom of Satan.”

But “putting the enmity by Christ” will save no one until and unless they choose to respond in the God ordained way He has stated in the bible. Each individual must choose to first accept the atonement, then repent, and then obey the law. Thus, the Holy Spirit empowers the will, but it is the sinner who must respond. And this is not “doing it on their own” as you seem to imply. Jesus said, “Without me, you can do nothing.” But as Paul said, “I can do all things through Christ which stengthenth me.”

Paul states what he can do by the power of God. And it is not God doing the believing, or repenting or obeying. It is Paul. EGW makes this very clear to refute the mystics who try to claim that Jesus or the Holy Spirit gets in them and does the willing and doing.

” While these youth were working out their own salvation, God was working in them to will and to do of his good pleasure. Here are revealed the conditions of success. To make God’s grace our own, we must act our part. The Lord does not propose to perform for us either the willing or the doing. His grace is given to work in us to will and to do, but never as a substitute for our effort. Our souls are to be aroused to co-operate. The Holy Spirit works in us, that we may work out our own salvation. This is the practical lesson the Holy Spirit is striving to teach us. “It is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” THE YOUTH’S INSTRUCTOR
August 20, 1903
Lessons From the Life of Daniel—9
This concerning Daniel and his friends.

She refutes the modern day mysticism that would destroy the will of man and interpret “Christ in you, the hope of glory” totally outside the biblical context.

But “Christ in you, the hope of glory” is the same thing reflected in the words of Paul, “For me to live is Christ.” Meaning, I love Jesus so much my whole life is dedicated to His glory and will.

Our “own works” that she refers to, are those people do outside a biblical relationship with Christ. It does not refer to the works of a true believer who conforms his life to emulate the life of Christ. Where does Skip MacCarty point out this difference?

Much, if not most of modern spirituality in Adventism is pure mysticism that convolutes the identity of Christ and the believer to the point the believer has no identity. It was highly stimulated by Morris Venden who tried to show that “faith alone” applies equally to sanctification as it does to justification. It was and is totally bogus. But it has infiltrated the church by him and others to the point that mysticism is rapidly becoming the major spirituality of the church.

You may mean well, Sean. But like so many others, you don’t take the time to carefully consider the implications of what you say nor explain it is a clear definitive way so that it fits the bible context. If the true bible position on sanctification is clearly presented, then it is obvious we “save ourselves” by the way we respond to the word of God. In which case, the law is salvational, but only in the biblical context. Simply put, we are “saved” by doing what God says and this includes faith in the atonement.

Many are so “hell bent” to avoid what they think is legalism, they wrest the scriptures to their own destruction and not only deceive themselves, but others who do not carefully consider the implications of the conclusion of their false idea and theory.

But to claim that those who reject your view think they can “do it on their own” is a false representation that prejudices others who don’t carefully follow the conversation. Having said all this, I am more than willing for anyone to explain and qualify and re-qualify as many times as necessary to make it very clear what they mean by what they say.

So I agree, sanctification is by faith, but not by “faith alone” in the same context that justification is by faith alone. Without a clear explanation, all we have is ongoing confusion on sin and salvation and the divine factor vs. the human factor in a full and complete view of what the bible teaches about the issues.
Bill Sorensen

The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
“We “work out our own salvation” by simply opening to the door the Spirit of God. That’s our only “work” to do here. That’s the only “work” we can do. The rest is beyond human power.”

Your whole theory is pure mysticism as the rest of your explanation affirms. The purpose of sanctification on the part of God is to liberate the human will for self government. It is the believing sinner who chooses to have faith and repent, and obey the law of God.

Neither is it “automatic” but by careful evaluation of the will of God and the implications of the outcome if we chose not to accept the free offer. You undermine and in the end, destroy the human factor in salvation and the moral accountability of man.

So when we are confronted by the gospel, we must choose to believe, choose to repent and choose to obey. God will not do this for us. Neither will the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the “holy motive” as He inspires and empowers us to “save ourselves” by responding to the word of God exactly as it is stated in the bible.

Much of the SDA church has opted for some mystical non-biblical explanation of the plan of salvation that has no affinity to the true teaching of the bible.

So sanctification is not “just give yourself to Jesus and He will do the rest.”

Basically, you convolute the divine factor and human factor in such a way that you end up negating the human factor altogether.

I doubt anything I would share with you would challenge your thinking, since in the past you have rejected other clear biblical concepts on sin and salvation like the doctrine of original sin. At any rate, if you post my response, perhaps one of your readers will actually see the point and consider the implications of our dialogue.
Bill Sorensen

The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
Yes, as EGW and the bible affirm, we are justified by obedience to the moral law. Not in a legal sense, but in a moral sense. And this is what the Investigative judgment is all about. The word “justification” in the bible has a more comprehensive meaning than people perceive today. Like the word “atonement” and “salvation” the word “justification” has been limited to a non-biblical meaning and application that foreign to the bible and the full meaning the bible gives to these words.

And yes, we save ourselves by the way we respond to the word of God. No, we don’t save ourselves by meriting heaven and earning the favor of God. “If you will enter into life, keep the commandments.” Jesus

This is too plain to be misunderstood except by those who convolute the bible to support their false doctrine. No one is justified by “faith alone” except the special context used by the Reformation to oppose Rome when Rome taught legal merit in the believer’s response to the conditions for salvation.

“Faith alone” in this context was “Christ alone” who stands in the presence of God in our behalf as the meritorious cause of salvation and eternal life. This is not sanctification nor is sanctification “by faith alone” as some faulty teachers try to present and defend. Sanctification is always by faith and works on the part of the believer as we “work out our own salvation with fear and trembling.”

And justification by faith in the bible, is the believer’s faith in Christ, not Christ’s faith in the believer. This subject is so confused and warped by SDA scholars it has no affinity to bible teaching and doctrine. So it is the believer’s faith in Christ that justifies. This is the whole theme of Paul and the new testament emphasis and message.
Bill Sorensen

The Sabbath and the Covenants (Old vs. New)
” “All that the Lord has said, we will do.” (Exodus 19:8).”

That’s right Sean. And the Lord said, “The people have well spoken there commitment.” But then added, “Oh that there was such an heart in them to do it.”

The issue was proper motivation based on a clear understanding of sin and all that this implies. God never chided them for their statement of faith but their lack of understanding the sinful human heart.

How is that any different than today in the new covenant era? How many are baptized making the same valid commitment and confession of faith only to find the difficulty of living out the Christian experience.

Neither will Jesus get into anybody and obey the law for them. The motivation will ratchet up as our understanding is increased and the love of God that motivates works in a more dynamic way with the increased knowledge.

But many assume the old covenant was a system of legalism and then contrast the new covenant as a true system of faith. This is bogus. True believers in the old covenant era trusted in Christ. These are the old covenant experience people and not Cain or anyone else in that era who either refused the offer God provided or convoluted it. So those who imply that the old covenant was in and of itself a system of legalism like MacCarty does, have a false idea of old and new covenant that is simply not biblical. And then they try to explain how in the new covenant God writes the law on our heart and not in stone.

God wrote His law on the heart of Abel, Noah, Abraham and every true believer in the old covenant era as Jesus “put enmity between Satan and man” by a revelation of the love of God in His willingness to make atonement for fallen man. The new covenant era simply means God will finish writing His law on the heart of every true believer and this is not some “new” covenant different than the old.

Only in the sense that the atonement promised in the past is now a reality in the present. And this ratchets up the motivation in harmony with the life of Jesus more fully revealed by way of the new covenant writers. It is false doctrine to present the idea that no one had the law “written on their heart” during the old covenant era. Did you ever read the words of David in the Psalms, “Create in me a new heart, and renew a right spirit within me.”?

This is not the new covenant in the old covenant era. There is no “new covenant believer” in the old covenant era. This is impossible. The new covenant is after the fact of the atonement and is based on the time element of the two covenants. The first covenant (old covenant) is based on a future event. The new covenant is based on a past event. This is the whole spirituality of Paul and repeated and affirmed in the book of Hebrews. What God had promised during the old covenant era, He has done.

There is certainly an affinity in both covenants as both are based on Jesus and His sacrifice. Everyone in heaven will have trusted in the atonement of the cross whether it was before Jesus made the atonement or after He made the atonement. Again, I say it is bogus to claim Cain represents an old covenant experience and Abel a new covenant experience. And it is equally false to claim anyone who is a legalist in the new covenant era is an old covenant experience. Namely this, the old covenant is not legalism and never was. Just because people corrupt the old covenant does not equate to claiming they were legalists by virtue of being in the old covenant era.

This is MacCarty’s error and he speaks for more than a few SDA scholars who are as confused as he is. God made no legal covenant with anyone with the exception of His Son. God’s covenant with all is based on the moral law and this is not legalism unless, like the Catholic church, you think you can merit heaven by keeping the moral law.

The moral law, like I said, is a family law and those who refuse to enter into this moral covenant to “obey and live” will never be in heaven. Children in a loving home don’t obey their parents to merit and earn the favor of their parents or earn a place in the family. None the less, they are in covenant relationship with their parents and if they rebel enough, can be disinherited, just like Adam and Eve who rebelled against the family law.

Adam and Eve in a state of sinlessness were not meriting the favor of God. Nor do the sinless angels merit the favor of God. Nor do the redeemed in heaven merit the favor of God. None the less, all are under obligation to obey the family law of God or forfeit eternal life like Adam and Eve in the garden. Love for God never releases anyone from the moral obligation to do God’s will and submit to His authority. This issue is so intense even in the SDA church that many now assume if you love God you have no obligation to obey and that you simply do God’s will because “you want to, not because you have to.” This is bogus and the lie of Satan that he advocated in heaven. We better get it straight and if not, “Spiritualism is at the door deluding the whole world.”
Bill Sorensen