Conference Trademark Emails

Some have wondered how the Conference, or those within would justify the trademark or sueing of brethren by the Conference. There have been other correspondances by Pastor Chick and his wife Barbara, as well as David, but just to make the record full I sent out an email to various Conference sources. Below is the original email, and once more, all emails are posted as they were received.

[Sent 9 18 03]

Hello!

I was hoping that you could explain something to me. I have heard Adventists in several circles always teach that the second beast of Revelation is the U.S. government, the lamblike beast which gives power and life to the image of the first beast (Rome).

I have also heard of Adventists who are extremely against the concept of taking someone to secular court over anything, due to the Scripture-given principles of turn the other cheek, bless those that curse you, if you are taken to law for your coat give your cloke as well, and, of course the most direct, 1 Corinthians 6:1-9.

Also, I know that the reason a sunday law is taught to be the coming mark of the beast's image, is because it would be a church joining to the state, and using secular power to persecute Christ in the personage of His people.

So, needless to say it seemed a bit, excuse the harshness, hypocritical to find out that the General Conference of Seventh Day Adventists has taken people to court over use of the name Adventist, as well as the acronym S.D.A.

I would like to ask firstly, why a trademark? Why could not a simple public statement have sufficed? Asking for a retraction in the newspaper? Stating clearly those involved had no part of the Conference church?

I would also like to ask, why has the Conference done exactly what they teach Protestantism will do, by joining to the second beast and using worldly power to serve its ends?

Has not Christ given us sufficient examples regarding His name? When the apostles came to Him telling Him of someone casting out demons in Christ's name, but was not a part of their group, and did not travel with Christ, The Lord told them to "Restrain Him not."

Again in Acts, an even more express example. People who falsey professed to be Christ's followers attempted to exorcise a demon, to bad ends. They were not of the Spirit of Christ, and the demon gave no heed to them. It was made clear who the true followers of Christ were, and His name was magnified.

May I ask then, two questions in summary.

1) Why has the General Conference felt it is justified to take the protection of the churches name out of Christ's hands and into its own, by means directly opposed to scripture?

2) In what way are the actions of the Conference not in complete accordance with its own teaching on the image to the beast?

I hope to hear from you soon, and may God bless!

Your servant in Christ,

Luke Chartier

Replies

Adventist Review (Ella Rydzewski)
Amazing Facts