Both baptismal vows listed in the Church Manual, the larger one and the shorter alternative, assume that the new believer has accepted the Fundamental Beliefs of the church, which include acceptance of Ellen White’s prophetic authority.

It’s usually a question of whose proverbial “ox” is being gored.

The secret of religious faith is not adaptation, but transcendence.  The Word of God addresses its cultural context, but it must remain the judge thereof, never its child. 

The new rapprochement between the papacy and Anglicanism offers fresh evidence of hands stretched “across the gulf,” as the modern prophet foretells.

Recent evidence demonstrates that despite the claim of certain ones that secularism is overwhelming American society, religious interest is presently growing, theologically conservative churches continue to flourish, and theologically liberal churches continue to decline.

“Christ calls for unity.  But He does not call for us to unify on wrong practices.  The God of heaven draws a sharp contrast between pure, elevating, ennobling truth and false, misleading doctrines.  He calls sin and impenitence by the right name.  He does not gloss over wrongdoing with a coat of untempered mortar.  I urge our brethren to unify upon a true, scriptural basis.”

Ellen G. White, Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 175.

The Bible condemns same-gender sexual intimacy without qualification, and is equally clear that in God’s paradigm, only two genders exist. But does this mean the inner urge to engage in such conduct must be obliterated from one’s fleshly nature in order to please God?

At the memorial service for conservative activist Charlie Kirk on September 21, 2025, White House official Stephen Miller declared that the assassination had “awakened a dragon.”  Unwittingly, we can be sure, Mr. Miller directed students of Bible prophecy to what we find in the 13th chapter of Revelation, how a beast power that begins as a lamb morphs into a dragon—Revelation’s symbol of Satan himself (Rev. 12:9; 22:2). 

A recent Second Coming date-setting fiasco reveals yet again the importance of understanding Biblical teachings regarding the return of Christ.

When words and phrases such as “legalism” and “righteousness by faith” are used in theological discourse, they must be defined by the inspired writings themselves, not distorted by scholarly speculation and experience-driven testimonies.

Our agenda is one of valuing all as the purchase of Jesus’ blood, treating them with respect even in moments of sharp disagreement, and through it all keeping in view the ultimate reality that this world is not our home, that our Savior’s kingdom is not of this world (John 18:36), and that only the government resting on His shoulders (Isa. 9:6) offers any hope of establishing the eternal peace promised in God’s Word.

Should the valueless void so pervasive in contemporary culture be honored in any way by the Lord’s end-time messengers?  Or, in the tradition of such as Enoch, Noah, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, and the Savior Himself, should it be denounced as the genuine evil it surely is?

A recent online article claims that a literal reading of the Bible is responsible for both the current slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza and the lack of Christian condemnation of the same. Is this true?