More on the Controversy About “The Great Controversy”, by Nic Samojluk

You might be aware that there are currently three competing projects aiming at the wide distribution of the “Great Controversy” book originally authored by Ellen White. Two of them are faithful to the original copy, and the third one is a shorter version in which all the historic chapters offensive to the Catholic Church have been removed.

The sanitized copy is sponsored by the General Conference and millions of books have been distributed already, especially in South America. Many Adventists are unhappy with the shorter version, in spite of the fact that the title has been changed to “The Great Hope.” David Mould, who published his own version of the book with a large collection of pictures documenting the close connection of Rome with paganism, is the one most critical of the GC project.

A friend of mine sent me a couple of links to videos recorded by David Mould asking my opinion of the same. Here is the answer I sent to him:

*********

Jack

What follows is my opinion regarding the content of the two videos you referenced in your email:

The first video

I got a rather poor impression about the first video. Mould seemed to have chosen a rather combative style. Besides, I had a hard time understanding what the two men were discussing. [Ref.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W2OtMethkF4]

Mould’s Second Video

Mould’s second video is easier to follow. Below is my reaction to some of the salient points contained therein. [Ref.: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oo57JnfQA0w%5D

Mould’s dream project

Mould wanted to print 100 million copies of his version of the Great Controversy book and he expected the General Conference to pay for this. When his dream project failed and he was forced to scale this down to a more modest size, he reacted like a spoiled child.

The GC has no obligation to sponsor every good and worthy project an Adventist member might have. The GC is required by law to have a reasonable amount of funds invested in order to protect the future income of thousands of retirees; jeopardizing said funds would be a dereliction of its sacred duties.

Right now 3ABN needs three million dollars before the end of this year in order to end the year in the black. Should Gilley and Shelton cry like a baby because the GC is not offering to empty its coffers on behalf of this worthy independent ministry? The same could be said about other independent ministries like Amazing Facts, The Quiet Hour, and LLBN?

Mould’s moral character

Mould is a very talented preacher, but should the church ignore his personal moral character? I used to be on his mailing list. One day, many years ago, I received a letter signed by all his staff members explaining why they had decided to resign from his ministry.

According to their testimony, he was living a double life. He was being unfaithful to his wife and unwilling to stop his adulterous escapades. If this is true, then should the church overlook this because he was a talented preacher? He probably repented of his alleged sin and the Lord must have forgiven him this misbehavior, but there are consequences for this misbehavior, and the church should not ignore this.

The publication of the Great Hope book.

I believe that his characterization of the Great Hope book as “thrash” is wrong. The book does not claim to be the Great Controversy original version published by Ellen White. Mould felt that his calling was to publish the full version of White’s book, while the church felt the need to publish certain portions of the GC. I see nothing wrong with this.

This is like the publishing of the New Testament in addition to the complete Bible. When the New Testament is published, we have no right to discard this and label it as thrash! Right now there are Adventists who are behind the publication of the original version of the GC in addition to Mould’s version of the same. Both projects should have the blessing of Adventists members.

The role of Rome in prophecy

The role played by Rome in the past and the future is rather clear. Nevertheless, this should not blind our eyes to what is taking place in the present. Right now Rome is the best defender of the right to life of the unborn, while the Adventist church has been profiting from the slaughter of the unborn for decades.

Rome did set aside the Sabbath Commandment and replaced it with Sunday. We have set aside the Sixth Commandment and replaced it with our Guidelines on Abortion. Which act is morally worse: worshipping God on the wrong day of the week or profiting from the merciless destruction of innocent human life?

Rome is wrong on the State of the Dead and other biblical doctrines, but Rome is right on the State of the Living! We are right on the State of the Dead doctrine, and wrong on the right to life of the unborn.

The role of our tithe

I believe that David Mould is right about the tithe but for a different reason. He stopped sending his tithe to the GC because the church leaders failed to fund his dream publishing project. I and other pro-life Adventists started sending our tithe money to worthy independent ministries like 3ABN instead of the GC because we do not want to be accomplices in the genocide of the unborn.