We need thousands more loyal bible believing SDA’s to come …

Comment on Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism by Bill Sorensen.

We need thousands more loyal bible believing SDA’s to come out of the closet and take a public stand. Liberals have inserted themselves into the church with considerable support by many denominational leaders.

Larry Geraty has been a leading apostate influence in the church for decades. [edit] But he has been employed by the SDA denomination in the past and not a few others as well.

Spectrum and A-today were “born” out of the Ford era and should be identified as non-supporting ministries of bible Adventism. Yet I assume both will have a booth at the GC sessions where it is implied they are viable supporting ministries of Adventism.

And the idea we can seperate knowledge from love is absurd. [edit]

While it is certainly possible for an individual to know truth and the bible and even the gospel and not respond. But it is equally evident that you can not biblically respond nor love, without a knowledge of the truth. You can not “love” what you don’t know. And to claim we are saved by love and not by knowledge is nothing but double talk that is not supported by scripture.

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge.” Hosea

And this means spiritual enlightenment. Geraty is a new age dispensationalist and his spiritualistic ideas should be exposed for what they are. It is an antinomian attack on the bible with the idea some spiritual enlightenment trascends the written word of God. Or that love has taken the place of the law.

We must understand that love has no true viable definition apart from the written word. Man in harmony with the devil has endeavored to define love in his own convoluted imagination ever since sin began in the world and originated in heaven by Lucifer.

We need some clear defined spiritual discernment in the church today to avoid the final deception and delusion of the devil. A biblical understanding of law and gospel has been lacking for years and again, as Solomon has well said, “The curse causeless shall not come.”

Keep the bible faith

Bill Sorensen

Bill Sorensen Also Commented

Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
Shane said…..

“This is nothing more than a continuation of LSU’s deceptive advertising practices.”

Shane, you should know that politicians play “word games” to cover their real intent and we have seen this for years in much of Adventism not only in administration, but in doctrine as well.

As a church, we have been so intent in identifying “Babylon” as both Rome and Apostate Protestantism, we have often failed to see the principle being emulated in the church.

While EGW spoke postitively about the final victory of “the church” she had much to say negatively as well. Those who ignore these negative statements and focus solely on the positive will miss the big picture.

Truth will eventually win out. And those only who cling to truth are “the church” in the end. Historic Adventism is “the truth” and those who abandon the historic message or try to change it, will not compose those who make up “the church” when Jesus comes.

Concerning the leadership of Adventism, she had this to say…..

” Let our publishing houses beware lest in their dealing with God’s workers, wrong principles be allowed to control. If connected with the institution there are men whose hearts are not under the direction of the Holy Spirit, they will be sure to sway the work into wrong lines. Some who profess to be Christians regard the business connected with the Lord’s work as something wholly apart from religious service. They say: “Religion is religion, business is business. We are determined to make that which we handle a success, and we will grasp every possible advantage to promote this special line of work.” Thus plans contrary to truth and righteousness are introduced with the plea that this or that must be done because it is a good work and for the advancement of the cause of God. {7T 179.1}
Men who through selfishness have become narrow and shortsighted feel it their privilege to crowd down the very ones whom God is using to diffuse the light He has given them. Through oppressive plans, workers who should stand free in God have been trammeled with restrictions by those who were only their fellow laborers. All this bears the stamp of the human, and not of the divine. It is the devising of men that leads to injustice and oppression. The cause of God is free from every taint of injustice. It seeks to gain no advantage by depriving the members of His family of their individuality or of their rights. The Lord does not sanction arbitrary authority, nor will He serve with the least selfishness or overreaching. To Him all such practices are abhorrent. {7T 179.2}
He declares: “I hate robbery for burnt offering.” “Thou shalt not have in thine house divers measures, a great and a small. But thou shalt have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shalt thou have. . . . All that do unrighteously, are an abomination
180
unto the Lord thy God.” Isaiah 61:8; Deuteronomy 25:14-16. {7T 179.3}
“He hath showed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?” Micah 6:8. {7T 180.1}
One of the very highest applications of these principles is found in the recognition of man’s right to himself, to the control of his own mind, to the stewardship of his talents, the right to receive and to impart the fruit of his own labor. Strength and power will be in our institutions only as in all their connection with their fellow men they recognize these principles, –only as in their dealing they give heed to the instruction of the word of God.


{7T 180.2}
Every power lent us by God, whether physical, mental, or spiritual, is to be sacredly cherished to do the work assigned us for our fellow men who are perishing in their ignorance. Every man is to stand at his post of duty untrammeled, each serving the Lord in humility, each responsible for his own work. “Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men; knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance: for ye serve the Lord Christ.” He “will render to every man according to his deeds.” Colossians 3:23, 24; Romans 2:6.


{7T 180.3}
Satan’s skill is exercised in devising plans and methods without number to accomplish his purposes. He works to restrict religious liberty and to bring into the religious world a species of slavery. Organizations, institutions, unless kept by the power of God, will work
181
under Satan’s dictation to bring men under the control of men; and fraud and guile will bear the semblance of zeal for truth and for the advancement of the kingdom of God. Whatever in our practice is not as open as the day belongs to the methods of the prince of evil.


{7T 180.4}
Men fall into error by starting with false premises and then bringing everything to bear to prove the error true. In some cases the first principles have a measure of truth interwoven with the error; but it leads to no just action; and this is why men are misled. They desire to reign and become a power, and, in the effort to justify their principles, they adopt the methods of Satan.


{7T 181.1}
If men resist the warnings the Lord sends them, they become even leaders in evil practices; such men assume to exercise the prerogatives of God–they presume to do that which God Himself will not do in seeking to control the minds of men. Thus they follow in the track of Romanism. They introduce their own methods and plans, and through their misconceptions of God they weaken the faith of others in the truth and bring in false principles that work like leaven to taint and corrupt institutions and churches. {7T 181.2}
Anything that lowers man’s conception of righteousness and equity and impartial judgment, any device or precept that brings God’s human agents under the control of human minds, impairs their faith in God, and separates the soul from Him. {7T 181.3}
God will not vindicate any device whereby man shall in the slightest degree rule or oppress his fellow man. As soon as a man begins to make an iron rule for other men, he dishonors God and imperils his own soul and the souls of his brethren.”

And this can work in reference to liberals or conservatives. We need to beware of such workings in the church.

Bill Sorensen


Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
I know that some have struggled with the tithe issue and how we can remain loyal to God in light of the LSU fiasco. How you tithe and exactly who you send tithe to is not a “cut and dried” issue. Even EGW used tithe outside the regular channels. But remember this, if you tithe any organization except the church you belong to, you have no official voice in how it is used.

You are not a member of an independent ministry. You must simply trust that they will do the right thing. And of course, if and when you think they don’t, you can tithe somewhere else. Also, if you fail to tithe the church you belong to, you have, at least to some degree, forfeited your right to protest. Of course, refusing to tithe is a kind of protest in and of itself.

If you feel the need to direct your tithe elsewhere, you can take comfort in these words by EGW…..

“Sins of Priests Caused Some to Offer Own Sacrifices.–As the men of Israel witnessed the corrupt course of the priests, they thought it safer for their families not to come up to the appointed place of worship. Many went from Shiloh with their peace disturbed, their indignation aroused, until they at last determined to offer their sacrifices themselves, concluding that this would be fully as acceptable to God, as to sanction in any manner the abominations practiced in the sanctuary (ST Dec. 1. 1881). {2BC 1010.4}

This principle shows the moral accountability of the individual over and above the organized religion of that day. How each of us deals with present church corruption will be judged by God. But to do nothing and continue with business as usual, may bring a more severe judgment by God than making a mistake in how and when and in what way you choose to protest.

And finally, beware of damaging your own spirituality by becoming too involved with church conflicts. When and how to stand is a sensitive issue and many have ended up abandoning the faith because their spirituality could not stand the conflict.

In the end, fear nothing from man, but fear God alone. Make your decision with much prayer and careful consideration. And then, “plunge at a venture” as James White challenged Ellen to do.

The shaking is a reality and will certainly intensify more and more. No doubt the church will get smaller before it gets bigger. People may abandon us, this is no sign we are wrong. Will persecution come? Don’t worry about Rome, or apostate Protestantism. It will first come within the church. I have personally heard the dragon roar, and it wasn’t Rome.

“That night I dreamed that I was in Battle Creek looking out from the side glass at the door and saw a company marching up to the house, two and two. They looked stern and determined. I knew them well and turned to open the parlor door to receive them, but thought I would look again. The scene was changed. The company now presented the appearance of a Catholic procession. One bore in his hand a cross, another a reed. And as they approached, the one carrying a reed made a circle around the house, saying three times: “This house is proscribed. The goods must be confiscated. They have spoken against our holy order.” Terror seized me, and I ran through the house, out of the north door, and found myself in the midst of a company, some of whom I knew, but I dared not speak a word to them for fear of being betrayed. I tried to seek a retired spot where I might weep and pray without meeting eager, inquisitive eyes wherever I turned. I repeated frequently: “If I could only understand this! If they will tell me what I have said or what I have done!” {1T 577.2}
I wept and prayed much as I saw our goods confiscated. I tried to read sympathy or pity for me in the looks of those around me, and marked the countenances of several whom I thought would speak to me and comfort me if they did not fear that they would be observed by others. I made one attempt to escape from the crowd, but seeing that I was watched, I concealed my intentions. I commenced weeping aloud, and saying: “If they would only tell me what I have done or what I have said!” My husband, who was sleeping in a bed in the same room, heard me weeping aloud and awoke me. My pillow was wet with tears, and a sad depression of spirits was upon me. {1T 578.1}”

Who does the persecuting? Historically, who were the worst enemies of truth? Why would we expect anything different today?

Keep the faith

Bill Sorensen


Dr. Geraty clarifies his “Challenge” to literal 6-day creationism
That no one has all knowledge is correct, Sean. But to divorce knowledge from salvation like you do is wrong. No one is saved without some knowledge and the knowledge they have and how they have responded will determine their salvation. Without true knowledge, their is no true love. And in the context you are defending, we are not saved by love either. We are saved by the atonement of the cross.

It is a false defense of Wisbey and others who embrace his error to claim we can not “judge” him or anyone else. If he will not and does not resign, isn’t it the responsibility of those over him to fire him?

And if so, isn’t this “judging” him as unfit to hold this position? And if he is out of harmony with the church’s position, we are also “judging” him as out of harmony with God.

As for his conscience, we are not solely judged by our conscience. Only if and when it is trained and enlightened by scripture can it be a safe guide. The church has a responsibility to “defend the faith” and seperate individuals who mis-represent it.

So we are “judged” by the bible. This is God’s standard of judgment. If and when the church defends the bible, it defends the judgment of God. And when the church acts according to the word, it “judges” good and evil, right and wrong, and in so doing, judges individuals.

If Wisbey and others can prove by the bible that the church has abandon scripture, then the church is “judged” by the bible on the same basis.

Can the church make a mistake? Yes. Can individuals make a mistake? Yes. Can the bible be wrong? No. Some things are so plain in the bible, that even the wicked can and will admit what it says and see what it means. They may not accept it for themselves, but they still know it is what the bible teaches.

God as the creator as stated in the bible is certainly one of those clear testimonies beyond misunderstanding. And the creation week is equally clear so that even the heathen could and would agree that this is what the bible teaches. They may not accept it, but will admit it.

The only way the bible can be the final test and authority for truth is if it can be substancially understood. This is one of the issues the reformers contended for. The clarity of the bible for substancial salvational truth. So much so, that even Rome had to finally admit they were abandoning the bible for church authority over the word.

EGW uses this prinicple in defense of the Sabbath.

“As the controversy extends into new fields, and the minds of the people are called to God’s down-trodden law, Satan is astir. The power attending the message will only madden those who oppose it. The clergy will put forth almost superhuman efforts to shut away the light, lest it should shine upon their flocks. By every means at their command they will endeavor to suppress the discussion of these vital questions. The church appeals to the strong arm of civil power, and in this work, papists and Protestants unite. As the movement for Sunday enforcement becomes more bold and decided, the law will be invoked against commandment-keepers. They will be threatened with fines and imprisonment, and some will be offered positions of influence, and other rewards and advantages, as inducements to renounce their faith. But their steadfast answer is, “Show us from the Word of God our error,”—the same plea that was made by Luther under similar circumstances. Those who are arraigned before the courts make a strong vindication of the truth, and some who hear them are led to take their stand to keep all the commandments of God. Thus light will be brought before thousands who otherwise would know nothing of these truths.” {GC88 607.1}

Wisbey and others are not ignorant as you suggest. Yes, they may repent and be saved. We can judge no one’s final salvation. But we can judge if they are presently in a state of rebellion and act accordingly. So your argument of ignorance is not valid.

They must be dealt with as enlightened individuals who are in rebellion against God. We don’t consign them to hell. We simply seperate them from the church. They may repent. Only God can judge their final outcome.

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