THE
TRADEMARK
NAME
The matter of a name has been and continues to be significant
to the human race. What
is so important about a name? It appears that God Himself places
great emphasis on
names. Let us consider a few examples from the Bible for illustration.
In Genesis 2:19,20 and 3:20, we read how Adam named God's creatures
and even the woman. We notice that names in the Bible were determined
by events of the time (Gen.30:8), prophetic position (Gen. 25:26,30),
fondness of hope (Gen. 29:32-35), change of character (John 1:42),
innate character (1 Sam. 25:25), coming events (Isa. 8:1-4), and
divine mission (Matt. 1:21). God warns His people not to take the
name of YAH in vain
(Ex. 20:7). In Revelation 2:9 Jesus speaks of a people who take a
name which is not
rightfully theirs. "A GOOD name is rather to be chosen than great
riches...(Prov. 22:1). A GOOD name is better than precious ointment
...(Eccl. 7:1)". One's "name" is intimately
connected to one's reputation. When the reputation is blemished,
the "name" suffers loss.
It is no wonder that Calvin Rock wrote the following in the
Adventist
Review, June 9, 1988:
"The name Seventh-day Adventist carries special meaning. If its
significance
is to be retained, the church must protect it from those who would
misrepresent it."
In Ministry, December, 1988, the article "General
Conference trademark
policy" contains the following:
"Questions have been asked regarding efforts by the General
Conference to protect the name of our church through the use of the
trademark laws . . .
Q:Is it true that the General Conference has federally
registered trademarks for
the name 'Seventh-day Adventist'...?
A:Yes. The General Conference Corporation of Seventh-day
Adventists, on behalf of the
ENTIRE DENOMINATION, has registered under the United States
trademark laws the
name 'Seventh-day Adventist' and a variety of the church's programs
and services..."
What was the original reason for needing "protection for
the name"? We cannot be
certain, but there are indicators. For example, in the March,
1991 edition of SDA Kinship
Connection, Ron Lawson reports in "The General Conference of Seventh
-day Adventists
vs. SDA Kinship International" that the General Conference "purpose
in proceeding with
that case [prosecuting the little "Congregational SDA Church"
in Hawaii] was to give the
GC legitimacy in its attack on us [SDA Kinship]". (Brackets supplied.)
Notice how
Lawson, a practicing homosexual, responds to the GC vs. Kinship
lawsuit:
"Our church, which claims to believe in religious liberty
(when its own liberty is
threatened) here chose to attack the religious liberty of some
of ITS OWN
MEMBERS. Its leaders, whose prophetic interpretation identifies
the United States with the
lamb-like beast of Revelation 13 that will someday 'speak as a
dragon,' were
THEMSELVES FLEXING THEIR MUSCLES AND BEHAVING AS A DRAGON."
Let us digress for a moment and establish an historical
back-drop. It is very
likely that the Adventist Denomination reaped a "trademark name for
protection" as a result
of sowing homosexual church membership in the United States.
Let the following
citations lend credibility to my suggestion:
1) Ministry, February, 1982; "Homosexuals and the
church":
"Perhaps you
will be surprised to know that in China we are not aware of
homosexulality as a social
problem; much less is it a problem in our church . . . Because
of this background, you can
perhaps understand my shock when I first heard the term
"homosexual Adventists". It
offends me that the name of our church should be associated with
homosexuality. What if
another group should call itself Seventh-day Adventist adulterers?..."
2) Andrews University Student Movement Oct. 20, 1982;
"Facing the gay dilemma":
"The first significant action [of responding to the
Adventist homosexual issue] was General Conference approval of Adventist scholars
and pastors meeting with homosexuals for a special "Kampmeeting" organized
by Kinship in the summer of 1980 . . . The Adventist Review,(May 21, 1981),
published a statement by the GC Spring Council that said although it was not
possible for the church to condone practicing homosexuality, they
felt it necessary to develop a ministry that will meet homosexual needs...Kinship, as stated in their 1981 Statement of
Beliefs, thinks people of the same gender can be Christians and at the same time have a positive
and healthy relationship."
3) SDA Kinship Connection,May, 1986; "What's Been Said & Done":
"Even in the late 1970's, when the gay liberation movement had thoroughly
intruded on the consciousness of the general population, few in the church gave any thought
to the possibility of homosexual SDA's. After all, they assumed homosexuality was
antithetical to Adventism . . . had always been sin . . .
In assessing what subsequently happened and what did not, it is helpful to keep in mind that in 1980/81 homosexuality was not the only
problem facing the church. Places and names such as Glacier View, Desmond Ford, Walter Rea and
Dr.Donald Davenport were much in the minds of administrators as well as the laity.
In addition, the unofficial Adventist press attacked the church leadership for having
'recognized gay lifestyle.'. . .
The equanimity of the church leaders was shaken. . .at the time of the 1983 Fall
Council when the president of Andrews University was arrested and charged
with having propositioned an undercover policeman. Before the full effect of that
development had been absorbed, the associate pastor of "the General Conference church" in
Takoma Park also was arrested on charges of illegal homosexual activity. Both men resigned
their posts. . . .
(The generally accepted estimate [of SDA members with "homosexual problems"]
is about 50,000 to 70,000 gay and lesbian Adventists in the North American Division.) . . .
Accounts of openly gay and lesbian Adventists who remain active in their congregations
are increasing. Contacts by Kinship with Adventist college and university administrators
and teachers have increased . . . The official position of the church has not significantly
changed, but the attitudes of individuals within the church are steadily changing. It still isn't
easy growing up gay and Adventist, but it is generally a much less painful and solitary experience
today than it was..."
4) Adventist Review, February 4, 1988; "SDA Church Moves Against Homosexual
Support Group":
"The Seventh-day Adventist (SDA) Church has asked the United States
District Court for the Central District of California to issue injunctions
to prevent a support group for homosexuals from using the church's name . . ."
5) Church and State Observer, Special Edition, Summer, 1990:
1980" . . . General Conference hires Catholic attorney to trademark the
name "Seventh-day Adventist."
1981 . . . SDA name trademarked. General Conference remains silent
during a "five-year"
waiting period: a time when the trademark could have been contested had it
been known.
1986 . . . General Conference took legal action against one hundred
thirty-five different cases charged with violating trademark laws."
When one examines closely the foregoing references, a picture
develops. It appears
that homosexuality became a church problem in the late 1970's when
in the North
American Division local churches allowed the influx of homosexual membership.
Before the church
realized her condition, Kinship had taken root and become a formidable
organization (by
1980).
In 1886 Ellen White warned the church concerning sexual sin
in the following way:
"We must as a people arouse and cleanse the camp of Israel...
We are in
danger of becoming a SISTER to FALLEN BABYLON, of allowing our
churches to
become corrupted and filled with every foul spirit, a cage for
every unclean and
hateful bird; and will we be clear unless we make decided movements
to cure the
existing evil?" (Testimonies on Sexual Behavior, page 188).
More specific counsel was written in Review and Herald, Nov.
10, 1885:
"The
Sodomitish practices which brought the judgment of God upon the world,
and caused it to be
deluged with water, and which caused Sodom to be destroyed by fire,
are fast increasing. We
are nearing the end. God has borne long with the perversity of mankind,
but their
punishment is no less certain. Let those who profess to be the light of
the world, depart from
all iniquity."
If homosexuality "brought the judgment of God upon the
world" in Noah's day,
and "caused Sodom to be destroyed by fire", is it not possible, or
more likely certain, that
the "Sodomitish practices" would bring the judgment of God upon
the SDA
Denomination?! Concerning judgment, read the following:
"In the
balances of the sanctuary
the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged
by the privileges and
advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not
correspond to the advantages
that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings
conferred have not
qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced
the sentence: 'Found
wanting.' By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged."
(Testimonies for the Church,
Vol. 8, page 247).
And again Ellen White writes in Testimonies for the Church, Vol.5, page 83:
"The [SDA] church cannot measure herself by the world nor by
the opinion
of men nor by what she once was. Her faith and her position in the
world as
they now are must be compared with what they would have been if her
course
had been continually onward and upward. The [SDA] church will be
weighed in
the balances of the sanctuary. If her moral character and spiritual
state do not
correspond with the benefits and blessings God has conferred upon her,
she will be
found wanting...If her talents are unimproved, if her fruit is not PERFECT
before God, if her light has become darkness, she is indeed found wanting."
According to the testimony of the 19th century Seventh-day
Adventist Church
"fathers", judgment has been pronounced on the present General Conference of
Seventh-day Adventist Denomination. I will cite their testimonies as
proof-positive.
1) A. T. Jones, Christian Patriotism, 1900, page 33:
"Whenever the church forms ANY CONNECTION with any State or
kingdom on the earth, in the very doing of it she REJECTS GOD."
CONCLUSION: In employing the federal and state governments for church name protection, the SDA Denomination rejected God.
2) A. T. Jones, 1895 General Conference Bulletin, page 28:
"I need not undertake to give a definition in detail of what the IMAGE of
the beast is; we all know well that it is the CHURCH POWER using the government, the CIVIL POWER,
for church purposes . . . And of all Christians, SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS CANNOT DO
IT [start any procedure in connection with civil government].The very KEEPING OF THE
SABBATH FORBIDS IT."
CONCLUSION: The SDA Church under the General Conference has not only made an "image to the
beast"; she has become guilty of making void the law of God and exalting a spurious sabbath in place of Jehovah's
Creation 7th Day, by her unholy union with the civil government and bringing suit in the civil courts.
3) Ellen G. White, The Great Controversy, page 581:
"Let the principle once be established in the United States that the church may employ
or control the power of the state; that religious observances may be enforced by secular
laws. . . and the triumph of Rome in this country is assured."
CONCLUSION: The General Conference Trademark Policy has assured the triumph of Rome in this
country by the alliance of church and state. Trademark laws provide for the control of "religious observances"
through the magistrate.
4) W. W. Prescott, The Protestant Magazine, Nov. 1915:
"When a church in alliance with the state employs the secular power to
enforce its doctrines by punishing heretics, it repudiates the essential idea of
Christianity."
CONCLUSION: The SDA Denomination repudiates the essential idea of Christianity by
punishing Sabbathkeepers through the "strong arm" of secular power.
5) International Sabbath School Quarterly, First Quarter,1896:
"It has ever been true that a backslidden body--one that has turned from
God's word to men, from God's power to the state--was never reformed in itself.
Invariably God's message has called out those from the fallen church who
would do His will and preach His gospel. . . The Jewish church failed, and God
called out the apostolic church to do His bidding. The Roman Church failed, and out of it
God called the churches of the Reformation. Some of these churches failed in
advance, and God called out others. . . Adventists. His last 'called-out'
people will know no standard but His word, no power but His Spirit."
CONCLUSION: The General Conference of SDA's will not "go through to the end".
She is fallen by her rejection of the truth from Heaven, and Revelation 18 is calling God's remnant out
to the "highway of holiness".
6) International Sabbath School Quarterly, First Quarter,1896:
"When the early church departed from God and imbibed pagan
errors, she became Babylon. When she united with the state, she fell, and
as an organization, was the body of Christ no longer."
CONCLUSION: The organized body of General Conference SDA's is not the body of Christ any
longer. She allowed Sodomitish Pagan errors to infiltrate by baptizing homosexuals prematurely, and
then, sealed her fall by uniting with the state.
7) Ellen G. White, SDA Bible Commentary, Vol.7A, page 976:
"FORCE IS THE LAST RESORT of EVERY FALSE RELIGION . . ."
CONCLUSION: THE TRADEMARK SDA CHURCH intends to force Sabbath-keepers to cease worshiping in the liberty of
their conscience by freely using the sacred name of their faith-- "Seventh-day Adventist."
RELATED LINKS
SDA Trademark Wars
1988 Hawaii Trademark Case
RETURN LOCATIONS
The Creation 7th Day Adventists, Who Are They?
| The Creation 7th Day Adventist Church
This page accessed
times.
Page maintenance:
crmin@ix.netcom.com