Once again Adventist Today gets it wrong. With the recent controversy involving Conrad Vine most of those criticizing him purposely misrepresent what he said. The Sept 3 article on Adventist Today says:
...A recent example is Conrad Vine’s presentation at a Maine camp meeting, where he called for the resignation of any leader involved in the COVID-19 mandate. Vine suggested that traditional Adventists should form parallel congregations and divert their tithes to traditional conferences if the General Conference issued any further mandates. This would contradict Ted Wilson’s stance against congregationalism, and in favor of an enforced church unity.
Did Vine suggest that Adventists should form parallel congregations and divert their tithes? No not at all. At 57 minutes Conrad puts up this slide
At 1:02 Vine says:
I recognize this is when you touch the question of tithe this is the sacred nerve in the Adventist Church but Elder Wilson did say in his first sermon hold your leaders to account so we're going to hold our leaders to account and if more mandates are imposed that override your conscience and the church throws us under the bus once again I believe that someone somewhere will take the first steps to establish a parachurch movement and we'll say with modern Banking and modern legal systems we don't need the conference Union division GC hierarchy we can collect the tithes ourselves and allocate them to the conferences that are faithful to scripture it's a revolutionary idea it's kind of Crossing the Rubicon from many administrators perspective but it's what we can do as members because we were encouraged to hold our leaders to account by our current GC president when he was elected.
This is about the only way we can do it so this may well happen if the GC supports future mandates over the consciences of members and the fourth thing we're not there yet is migrates to an underground house Church movement led by bivocational elders and pastors that's where we're going to be when the mark of the beast is imposed. the mark of the beast is imposed the conferences cannot bank because they won't receive the mark of the beast if they're if they're faithful to scripture that means the conferences cannot employ pastors they cannot employ teachers they cannot receive tithes and offerings therefore the conferences when the mark of the beast is imposed are basically history. so when the mark of the beast is imposed we will be in underground house Church movements led by bivocational house Church movement led by bivocational elders and pastors
16:01 a religious liberty objection a religious liberty objection by definition is where the Holy Spirit convicts you not to do something when the church says that the holy spir that you cannot say that the holy spirit is convicting you not to do something this small group of men here are assuming the rights to override the holy spirit this is wrong doesn't matter what the issue is doesn't matter whether it's vaccinations or pork or beer or anything else in this passage here our church leaders assumed the right to override the convictions of the Holy Spirit upon each of your consciences and if they assume the right yesterday they've established a precedent that can be used tomorrow once again to hurt the members that is why we're talking about this.
He compares the GC session vote to the ADCOM statement
19:16 statement here if you put this statement this vote of the General Conference in full session next to the October reaffirmation statement you put them side by side the statement on the left is what we voted in full session and according to our constitution what is the highest Authority in our church is it the Adcom or is it the GC in a full session okay so therefore every decisions of the adcoms which are lower committee than the GC in full session must be consistent with the GC votes in full session and cannot overturn or undermine the votes of the GC in full session does that make sense absolutely so our GC vote in full session of February 1893 says we are and of right or to be free and independent of all connection Direction dictation interference or control of the government of the United States in matters of religional or religious observances or religious institutions of any kind or degree that would include offering your body as a living sacrifice for holy God that statement there overrides the October reaffirmation statement of 21 which says claims of religious liberty are not used appropriately in objecting to government mandates that statement by our ADCOM goes directly against what our full session voted in 1893 therefore it's null and void because the Adcom cannot override a vote of the full Church in full session
This is all pretty straight forward and easy to understand by why did the writer at Adventist Today get the story so wrong? Why did the others who wish to restrict Vine get it so wrong as well? The answer is in part 2 which deals with the underlying problem of this authoritarianism and the disregard to the truth. Look for Cultural Marxism and Conrad Vine in the next blog post.
