As with so many other perversions of God’s truth that have at times tarnished the witness of God’s people, we can’t deny that inordinate fear of the final crisis has been a problem with certain ones among us.  But we have to remember it was Christ Himself who encouraged His disciples to follow the signs betokening His return. 

This week our site is publishing two articles in response to the recent renunciation of the Sabbath doctrine by a now-former Adventist pastor. As the final crisis nears, it is imperative that truths many have perhaps taken for granted be repetitively reinforced, objections old and new repetitively answered.

When God’s people exhaust their energies fighting over culture and politics, labeling each other with nasty epithets arising from agendas unknown to the Sacred Writings, they and those around them could easily find themselves growing so tired of controversy that the craving for peace at any price will gain increasing traction in the weary minds of spent believers.

A recent online report illustrates yet again how lies regarding the construct known as Last Generation Theology continue to proliferate in various circles of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. It is important that these falsehoods be answered.

The suggestion has lately been voiced that lay Seventh-day Adventists consider establishing a parachurch organization for the purpose of withholding financial support from certain entities within the denominational structure and channeling such support to other, presumably more worthy entities. Is such a practice in harmony with inspired counsel?

God created our minds. He fashioned our intelligence. He designed our ability to ask, to analyze, and to probe. But what is true of our bodies is equally true of our minds. If God made them, He has the right to tell us how to use them.

The influence of the Holy Flesh movement of more than a century ago continues to affect certain devout Adventists. Only as we keep the inspired consensus constantly in view can such pitfalls be avoided.

Why the "majoring in minors" allegation often flung at classic Adventism makes no sense.

What the world witnessed on the tarmac at Andrews Air Force Base was just a fleeting glimpse, a small foretaste, of the great loosing of history’s captives which will soon take place when Jesus fulfills His promise to come again and take His children home.

The compelling logic between particular controversies in the church is often, and unfortunately, missed.

The events of the past week in the United States have evoked calls for “lowering the temperature” in political discourse, urging grace and civility in social dialogue, even making effort to contact friends with whom one differs on such issues and letting them know how much they are appreciated.  Bible-believing Christians, of course, shouldn’t need politicians or journalists to remind them of such responsibilities.

Last month the U.S. state of Louisiana enacted a law requiring the posting of the Ten Commandments in all public schools within its territory, from kindergarten to state-funded universities. How should Seventh-day Adventists respond?

Much of the current debate over LGBT issues among conservative Christians has focused on the perceived need to change one’s orientation. But Biblical sin is not about orientation. Like righteousness, sin in the Bible is all about choice.

This week I was informed of a colleague in ministry who has embraced the mantra, “Leave religion to follow Jesus.” How does this notion compare with the picture of Jesus found in the Bible?

When we see the idolatrous veneration of the most corrupt of men blatantly practiced by Christians claiming to be guardians of Biblical morality, we can know for certain that the spiritual collapse of all but a faithful remnant of Christ’s visible body (Zeph. 3:13; Rev. 12:17) is well under way.

The pillar doctrines of the Seventh-day Adventist faith remain thoroughly Biblical, and this fact merits repetition as often as possible. 

The faultless character required of those who would meet their Lord in peace at His return encompasses both personal and collective responsibility.

There are those in contemporary Adventism who urge that doctrinal, moral, and ecclesiastical differences be transcended through “oneness in Christ.” But the Bible presents two visions of Christian oneness—one in John 17, the other in Isaiah 4. Which one will we embrace?

Ellen White’s repetitive insistence that First John 3:4 (“Sin is the transgression of the law”) is the only definition of sin found in Holy Scripture, is both consistent with the overall Biblical message and compellingly logical.

Let us pray for and encourage our leaders to take a decisive though compassionate stand for the teachings of God’s Word relative to gender and sexuality, and to hold all accountable at every level for their adherence to the same.  Nothing less is possible for the great end-time movement of whom God will one day soon declare, “Here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus” (Rev. 14:12).