Time has lingered through Inquisition and genocide, racial animus and economic injustice, gulags and global warming, calamities natural and unnatural, because the ultimate contrast between the two contending kingdoms in God’s universe remains to be demonstrated, ensuring once and for all the just and final extinction of rebels and rebellion.

A new appeal to reimagine the role of Ellen White in the church perpetuates the misunderstanding rampant among so-called “progressive” Adventists that it is possible to affirm one’s possession of the prophetic gift while simultaneously reserving the right to differ with a prophet’s counsel. But the Bible’s depiction of the gift of prophecy simply doesn’t allow for this option.

Spiritualism continues to attract thousands, even professedly born-again Christians. And contrary to a recent article on a liberal Adventist website, such manifestations cannot all be discounted as mere human trickery.

The new Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives claims his political philosophy is based on the Bible. But when we consult the pages of Scripture, it because clear he has overlooked much of what the Bible teaches regarding the relationship of church and state.

The present Middle East conflict has again excited interest in the role of Israel in the events of the last days and the overall divine purpose. What in fact does the Bible say?

The horror and tragedy now unfolding in Israel and Gaza have again proved the helplessness of humanity to make progress on its own where it truly counts. 

Do God’s people have the power, through active cooperation with divine grace, to hasten or delay the coming of Jesus?

A recent online article in a theologically liberal Adventist magazine purports the need for a “critique” of the classic Adventist understanding of the three angels’ messages of Revelation, claiming the church’s original perspective on these issues is no longer relevant in the twenty-first century. Is there any credibility to this claim—-Biblically or otherwise?

Not all conspiracies are bad. Indeed, the Bible talks about one that took place on a Sabbath morning, and which resulted in a great revival and reformation among God’s people.

The Bible says that Jesus “ever liveth to make intercession” for His people (Heb. 7:25). Does this mean Ellen White contradicts the Bible when she speaks of Christ’s intercession coming to a close before His second coming?

If a pastoral employee or candidate refuses to acknowledge one or more of the church’s Fundamental Beliefs, if a speaker is invited by a local church whose public witness denies one or more of these (e.g. the Trinity, the investigative judgment, Ellen White’s prophetic authority), local Conference officials are fully within their right to forbid such a person to occupy any pulpit within its territory.  Beyond these official limits, such prohibitions are out of bounds and injurious to the unity of the church. 

The distinction is as wide as eternity when it comes to the church’s retention of believers and the imperative of making one’s faith one’s own.

At one point in 1878, Ellen White found herself traveling by boat from California to Oregon.  An incident occurred during this voyage which speaks with powerful, sobering relevance to the continuing controversy in the Seventh-day Adventist Church over whether human beings can keep God’s law through God’s power here on earth.

Weakness and indecision in addressing spiritual rebellion are never justifiable.  But too often, in the struggle against apostasy in the church, it is assumed that because ungodly leaders at times overstep their rightful authority and use bullying tactics against the godly, that godly leaders are therefore justified in using the same tactics against the ungodly.