While our just-previous news article with three videos gives readers the material needed to understand the forging of the NAD decision, the final short video above comes from the final debate and vote to reject the 2018 General Conference decision on Compliance. Not only did those favoring WO and open opposition to the General Conference speak, but some also critiqued the NAD decision and pled for a different approach. Their remarks are so to the point that we wanted to bring them to you in this form.
The full text for the remarkable, exceeding-its-authority, and yes, rebellious, NAD decision, is as follows.
North American Division Response to GC Annual Council Vote
On November 6, 2018, the Executive Committee of the North American Division of the Seventh-day Adventist Church voted the following response to a General Conference vote taken at the 2018 GC Annual Council:
North American Division 2018 Year-end Meeting Response to the Regard for and Practice of General Conference Session and General Conference Executive Committee Actions November 6, 2018
As the North American Division Executive Committee, we, along with our brothers and sisters around the world, wholeheartedly affirm a shared commitment to the Seventh-day Adventist faith. Based on the Bible and the 28 Fundamental Beliefs, this faith is expressed through the church’s worldwide mission and prophetic role in fulfilling the commission to proclaim the gospel “to every nation and tribe and language and people” (Rev 14:6, ESV; see also Matt 28:18-20; Rev 14:6-12).
We also affirm a shared commitment to oneness in the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:12-13, 27). As a global church family comprised of all generations, we belong to each other, care for each other, and are called to treat each other with respect and trust (John 13:34, 35; 15:12, 17; 1 John 4:7-8, 11-12, 20-21; Eph 4:2, 32; Col 3:13). As Ellen G. White wrote, “There is no person, no nation, that is perfect in every habit and thought. One must learn of another. Therefore, God wants the different nationalities to mingle together, to be one in judgment, one in purpose. Then the union that there is in Christ will be exemplified” (Historical Sketches of the Foreign Missions of the Seventh-day Adventists, 137.1).
We also affirm that structure and organization bring value to advancing the mission and message of the church (1 Cor 14:40).
When the body of Christ functions as God intended, as exemplified by the early church, it derives its authority from Christ, the head of the church, who led through service (Matt 20:28; Mark 10:45; Eph 1:22; Col 1:18; 2:10). Servant leaders express and foster Christlike forbearance and humility (Matt 20:25-28; John 13:1-17; Phil 2:1-5). Such leadership creates healthy structure, which gives voice to all members of the body and respects the priesthood of all believers (Ex 19:5-6; 1 Peter 2:9).
The structure of the church is characterized by unity and diversity, as stated by Paul in 1 Cor 12:12: “For just as the body is one and has many members, and all the members of the body, though many, are one body, so it is with Christ” (ESV). Such st reflects a reality for which He prays in John 17. Honoring diversity in implementing the Seventh-day Adventist mission allows for effective response to specific conditions while still maintaining global values and identity, as exemplified in Acts 15.
We recognize Christ as the head of the church (Col 1:18). We are guided by the Bible as our only creed, the Holy Spirit who inspired and interprets it, the writings of Ellen G. White that shine light on it, and a resulting spirit of Christlike forbearance.
As such, we are compelled to reject the spirit and direction of this document voted at the 2018 Annual Council (hereafter indicated as “the document”), as it is not consistent with the biblical model of the church. We simply cannot, in good conscience, support or participate in the implementation of the process outlined in the document, as it is contrary to the culture of respect and collaboration taught in the Bible (Zech 4:6; Rom 14:13; 15:7; 1 Cor 1:10; 2 Cor 13:11; Phil 2:5; Eph 5:2).
Furthermore, we believe that the document moves us away from the biblical values proclaimed by the Protestant reformers and the founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church and, in so doing, moves us toward a centralized power and a hierarchical system of governance that overrides the policies and procedures already in place (1 Cor 12:12-27). We are alarmed that, in this document, church policies and voted actions are equated with Scripture. We are also deeply concerned by the use of shame as a punitive measure, because it is in violation of the spirit of the gospel (John 8:3-11).
Additionally, the document moves us away from the principles behind the 1901-03 reorganization, endorsed by Ellen G. White, which decentralized denominational authority.
The voicing of our objection is in alignment with the 1877 General Conference voted action, which allows for questioning any General Conference vote “shown to conflict with the word of God and the rights of individual conscience” (Review and Herald, October 4, 1877, p. 106).
Ellen G. White, in response to an 1888 General Conference Session vote she had counseled against, later wrote, “It was not right for the conference to pass it. It was not in God’s order, and this resolution will fall powerless to the ground. I shall not sustain it, for I would not be found working against God. This is not God’s way of working, and I will not give it countenance for a moment” (Letter 22, 1889, pp. 10-11). We believe the church should take heed of this counsel at this moment in our history.
Requests for Action
1. We respectfully request, in light of Jesus’ prayer for unity in John 17 and in harmony with the call for unity in the body of Christ in Fundamental Belief No. 14, that the General Conference Executive Committee at its 2019 Annual Council rescind the action approving the document.
2. We respectfully request that the 2019 Annual Council revise any policies that enable majority fields to dictate the management of non-doctrinal, non-biblical issues to minority fields (1 Cor 12:26) and create policies that protect the interests of minority fields.
3. We respectfully request that an item be placed on the 2020 General Conference Session agenda calling for a statement by the world church that: (1) affirms our shared respect for the richness and variety of the multiple cultures and practices in which we minister; and (2) empowers ministry that is sensitive to the local context (Acts 15; 1 Cor 9:19-23).
It is our sincere hope that the future will be characterized by continual prayer and open dialogue, empowered by “him who is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think” (Eph 3:20, ESV).
This response was voted during the Year-end Meeting of the North American Division Executive Committee on November 6, 2018 in Columbia, Maryland.
12 replies on “NAD Vote Rejects World Church Plan”
This saddens me to the core. Why then do you want to be Adventists? Clearly you don’t. In all walks of life there are policies and procedures associated with any entity or organization. If I don’t want to adhere to those guidelines, I am no longer allowed to be associated with that entity. Dan Jackson, you led this effort and it is squarely on your shoulders.
General Conference Executive Committee you are obligated to remove Dan Jackson from the position of NAD president. This is open rebellion.
I totally agree with Bob Kinsen’s Remarks.
It is unfortunate that an organized body like NAD can openly rebel against the church leadership and administration.
They need to review this stand because open rebellion is against thus says the Lord.
We need to be praying for NAD and her president who have consistently stood against the policy of the church.
Thank Pastor Stewart for what you said. I agree with you wholeheartedly.
Exactly. No more fooling around. Removal is in order. Jackson will not comply. He can’t be worked with. Reformatting the NAD with compliant Officers is now a must.
It seems like the NAD is attempting the impossible task “to have the cake and eat it too”. On one side they argue that WO is a cultural, non-biblical issue. However, on the other side they argue from moral principles (non-discrimination) and our fundamental beleifs.
If WO is a cultural, non-biblical issue there should not be necessary to go against a voted GC in session policy and risk disunity of the church. If it on the other hand is a moral issue which makes it necessary (by conscience) to go against the decision of the world church why argue that it is a non-biblical issue?
I agree with the NAD. We obey God rather than man. Let us hold on to biblical truth and uphold Gods standards.
Let us be wise and learn from our past mistakes.(i.e. Desmond Ford) It is not enough to remove Dan Jackson. All the leaders and pastors associated with Dan Jackson that partook of this strange fire need to be separated from our movement. Otherwise, we will continue to have individuals who side with this theory, as we still have some that side with D. Ford’s views.
“In all ages of the world there have been men who think they have a work to do for the Lord, and show no respect for those whom the Lord has been using. They do not make right applications of Scripture, they wrest the Scriptures to sustain their own ideas. Whatever may be the claims of those who draw away from the body to proclaim theories of their own invention, they are in Satan’s service, to get up some new device to divert souls from the truth for this time.”
Nov. 8, 1956. The Review and Herald, 4860.
Isaiah 3:12 As for my people, children (baby in faith) are their oppressors, and WOMEN RULE over them. O my people, they (women) which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths. 13 The LORD standeth up to plead, and standeth to judge the people.
God has ordained that the representatives of His church from all parts of the earth, when assembled in a General Conference, shall have authority Tvol 9 p26. Now we knew why proponents of WO are defiant of God’s voice thru GC. They would obey traffic rules & laws of the land but not the GC. Before the Lord’s 2nd coming, women will usurp the authority of men again like that of creation. Eve was beguiled by the serpent by eating the forbidden fruit. She has 2 sons, the bad one slew the good one then the earth becomes the kingdom of the enemy. Before the Lord’s 2nd coming, modern Eve, beguiled by the serpent, will usurp the authority granted by God to men only. God standeth up to judge. Said the Master to His servants for Eve offsprings, bundle up the tares & burn them, gather the wheat for my barn. Then the kingdom of God will be restored. These things are happening coz we are in the last days, our prayer ‘Lord help us to be always in Ur side’
They spirit of those who wrote and voted for this rebellious document show that they will stop and nothing to have their own way. They disregard the councils of their brethren, the Bible, Spirit of Prophecy, and church policy. They are following closely behind the first great rebel. We need to pray more earnestly, while the GC must act immediately.
This seems not to be a clear issue of right and wrong as both sides are able to quote EGW and scripture to prove their point. It does seem, however, that those calling for removal of the NAD leaders are falling into the trap of forcing others to believe as you do. God never forces. He told the disciples that the tares and the wheat would grow together. Only at the harvest are they separated. Watchman, the harvest is not yet. Let’s not be burning anyone as in the days of the little horn. We are not going to start a holy war. Put down your weapons and start spreading the gospel. Go help someone in need. This fighting is getting us nowhere and only serves to turn people away from the gospel.
Reread your Bible. For the NAD to go its own way on this issue destroys the unity of the church. They have gone too far. The most severe steps are actually in order. They are violting theconscientious decision of the delegates to 2015 General conference Session. An NAD left to its own ideas will certainly slither into LGBTland.