[Qinael]

Hello,

I suggest that you take a more careful read of our website (particularly the first page) before attempting to draw a sound conclusion about whether our separation was warranted.

There are two things that are worthy of pointing out in particular - one is that you said "as a matter of philosophy..." As a matter of philosophy there are groups that agree with us in word. As a matter of reality, we have found none. We do not say that Christians will someday cease to sin - we say this is the testimony to be born now. The Scriptures do not endorse those who talk about the commandments of God and faith of Jesus, but those who keep them. Of course, if you know of people who have this testimony now, that Christ keeps them from all known sin, I would be very happy to meet with them.

Second, we certainly we admit that our beliefs are directly in line with early Adventist doctrine. The reason we separated was not merely difference in doctrine - for as you implied, this would mean a time for reform from within, not without.

We were forced to separate, however, when the Adventist leadership on behalf of the denomination united with the U.S. government in applying for and receiving a trademark on the name "Seventh-day Adventist" (Which Ellen White said was given to us by God) and proceeded to, on behalf of every member, initiate lawsuits against those who used the SDA name outside of the denominational guidelines.

As a matter of SDA and Biblical doctrine, any time a church uses civil power to punish heretics or settle religious differences, whatever auspices they may set it forth under, they have fallen as a church, and the faithful are called out as per Revelation 18:1,2 lest they be held accountable for the corporate sins of the body.

There are many, many references I could cite (that are available on the aforementioned site), but I will use only two here for brevity's sake: