Contact us

Because of the large volume of e-mail that we receive daily, we have asked for help from individuals that are very informed on the subjects listed. Select the subject and click on the person with whom you wish to correspond.





William Hohmann

Former member of Worldwide Church of God and has a degree in Divinity from Ambassador College (never Adventist).

Church/Body of Christ

Dale Ratzlaff

Former Adventist pastor and academy Bible teacher. Founder of Life Assurance Ministries and Proclamation! magazine.


Kerry Wynne

Former Adventist with a B.A. in English from Pacific Union College, 1970; M.A. in educational administration, from Andrews University, 1977.

The Great Controversy
New Birth/Human Spirit

Colleen Tinker

Former Adventist, taught English and music in Adventism, formerly managing editor of Adventist Today, now Editor of Proclamation! magazine.

Adventist Institutions

Website Concerns (errors, formatting, etc.)

Richard Tinker

Educated from 1st grade through college in Adventist schools, worked for Pacific Union Conference, The Quiet Hour, and Loma Linda University. Now with Life Assurance Ministries.


For your consideration before you contact us

If you are a member of a particular religious organization, and are attempting to defend the organizations beliefs, you are therefore a biased witness and participant in those beliefs. Studies have demonstrated that once someone has become deeply involved in a religious organization, there becomes an inability to examine the beliefs of the organization critically due to the emotional and economic investment in the organization. In other words, the person becomes incapable of evaluating the teachings and beliefs of the organization objectively, seeing they have this investment in the organization. Proper cognitive skills such as critical thinking are supplanted with cognitive dissonance and its resultant accommodation.

The reader would be well served to read the book, "When Prophesy Fails" by Leon Festinger, The author also goes into the phenomenon of cognitive dissonance and resolution - accommodation which shows the defense measures people erect in their minds to shut out opposing views or evidence to the contrary of their beliefs, including the practice of totally ignoring out of hand any evidence to the contrary, as so many people who have written into us have done when we have answered their accusations and objections to the material available on this website.

We would also point out that rarely do people abandon their false beliefs and deceptions as a result of their personal studies. The motivation invariably is a result of the individual having been treated unfairly, to outright abuse by the organization, thereby creating a condition where the individual is no longer able to effectively accommodate and reduce the cognitive dissonance associated with the organization. In other words, the individual concludes that if the organization were truly of God, then God’s servants (ministers) could not possibly act and behave in a manner inconsistent with Scripture and their understanding and perception of God and His justice.

We have produced and provide irrefutable evidence that the teachings of the SDA organization are false and deceptive, but until such time a person is willing to examine carefully the evidence instead of desiring to defend the organization and belief system, it is utterly impossible for them to examine the evidence objectively.

Leon Festinger made the following observations regarding those who are in a false belief system:

"A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.

We have all experienced the futility of trying to change a strong conviction, especially if the convinced person has some investment in his belief. We are familiar with the variety of ingenious defenses with which people protect their convictions, managing to keep them unscathed through the most devastating attacks.

But man's resourcefulness goes beyond simply protecting a belief. Suppose an individual believes something with his whole heart; suppose further that he has a commitment to this belief, that he has taken irrevocable actions because of it; finally, suppose that he is presented with evidence, unequivocal and undeniable evidence, that his belief is wrong: what will happen? The individual will frequently emerge, not only unshaken, but even more convinced of the truth of his beliefs than ever before. Indeed, he may even show a new fervor about convincing and converting other people to his view."

There is an unspoken, irrational belief fostered within such organizations that the more people there are who are brought into the group, the more reliable and true the teachings must be. Yet force of numbers do not prove a belief to be true, no matter how many people believe it. The result of this phenomenon is that when a prophesy fails, such as the end of the earth or the return of Christ, which the SDA church has experienced several times during its tenure, the members become even more dedicated to their cause, and more aggressively preach and recruit new members into the organization.

It needs to be mentioned, even though it will most likely be ignored or dismissed, that the message of the gospel is one about the truth surrounding Jesus the Christ, and not the organization being the one and only bonafide representative of Christ. Doctrines are not the criteria given in Scripture as the means of recognizing those who are true Christians and those who are not. To the SDA member, a true Christian is one who keeps the sabbath. The cognitive dissonance associated with this belief is accommodated by letting the belief override and trump what comes about through critical thinking and the teachings of all Scripture.

Critical thinking requires we ask pertinent questions regarding this belief that true Christians keep the sabbath. Can a false Christian keep the sabbath? The answer is undeniably yes, but the implications are unacceptable. If a false Christian can keep the sabbath, then the sabbath is not the sign of true Christians, otherwise a false Christian would become a true Christian solely based on his or her keeping the sabbath.

The beliefs and belief system of the SDA can and has been deconstructed completely, but this knowledge is useless to those within the organization who still have an investment within the organization. They cannot comprehend of any other belief system as being valid, hence their belief system is given even greater validity. Bottom line; arguing your beliefs and defending them accomplishes nothing in any quest for truth or defense of what is believed to be true. A deceived person will not, and indeed can not accept they might be wrong on a choice that resulted in his or her total commitment to a cause and organization.

When it comes to deceptive, exploitative groups, most people were recruited at a time when their knowledge of Scripture was limited and where they were easily influenced with ideas and concepts that appeared perfectly logical, and when accompanied with proof texts in support, these teachings are easily internalized. The offspring of these people comprise the rest of the membership of these organizations, having been raised with that particular belief system and never having been exposed to outside influences.

The end result of deceptions and false doctrines is that a false gospel is produced as a result. Those within deceptive groups may well parrot the gospel without realizing their belief system is in conflict with the true gospel due to their conditioning regarding cognitive dissonance.

The gospel, simply put, is that salvation comes about for the individual through faith in Christ alone. Cognitive dissonance results when one believes this to be true, but also hold other beliefs to be true in relation to salvation that people deny as being in conflict with the gospel.

The SDA teaches and believes the Christian must keep the "law." The "law" gets redefined based upon need, but generally it is defined as the ten commandments, with an emphasis on the sabbath. To not keep the sabbath is a sin, and sinners are, according to Scripture, not going to be in the kingdom of God. Seeing as only those who attain to salvation are going to be in the kingdom of God, salvation is equated with the kingdom of God, and rightly so. But the cognitive dissonance here; the logical conclusion as a result of proper critical thinking is that one must therefore keep the sabbath in order to be saved; attain salvation, or maintain one’s salvation status. If it is true and believed that not keeping the sabbath is sin, resulting in the loss of salvation, then keeping the sabbath becomes a necessary requirement FOR salvation. The result? A falsification of the gospel, and the production and subsequent teaching and belief in a false gospel. Salvation is no longer based solely by faith in Christ ALONE; the sabbath has been added as necessary for the sake of salvation also. Faith in Christ alone is supplanted. It is now faith in Christ AND faith in the law; specifically the sabbath. The SDA member unwittingly believes a false gospel, and sets up two masters for himself; Christ and the law, and Christ will have none of it. But in the SDA theology, the law is equated with Christ; to obey the law is to obey Christ, and few recognize the subtle yet devastating deception associated with this addition to Christ and faith in Him.

The most common deception regarding the gospel is practiced by all deceptive groups, commonly referred to as the "one true church" belief. Whereas faith in Christ is redefined as obedience to Christ being obedience to the law, the concept of "church" is redefined to mean only those who are members of a particular church corporate, despite the way church is defined and used in Scripture. The deception is subtle enough to pass under the spiritual radar, yet still results in a falsification of the gospel.

For those within the SDA organization then, the individual’s faith and allegiance is shifted to the law and the organization, and away from Christ. The "investment" is not in Christ but rather the organization and its beliefs. If the individual’s investment were truly in Christ and not the organization, there would be no attempt by the individual to defend the beliefs of the organization "at all costs" including the truth, where truth becomes a casualty of the conflict.

Critical thinking requires one ask then whether the servant of Candace was truly saved, seeing as he returned to Ethiopia alone, with no group or church to associate with until such time later the gospel was preached in Ethiopia, resulting in more believers. Was he therefore "unsaved" until such time he met with, or associated with others of like mind? No, the idea is preposterous. Yet the proponents of the "one true church" concept will argue that only their organization preaches the truth (or the greatest degree of truth) and that true believers will naturally become a part of their organization. Their group is seen as the only group teaching the true gospel, never realizing this belief alone creates a false gospel. The "church" is a spiritual organism, made up of those who have believed the true gospel and as a result, received the Holy Spirit. The subtle shift from the church being a spiritual organism to a physical organization is again a small deceptive shift with devastating consequences.

If the reader truly seeks truth, then the reader needs to learn and understand the basics of proper biblical scholarship as well as proper critical thinking, along with understanding what the common methods of logical fallacies are and how they are commonly applied to religious beliefs. Of utmost importance is an understanding of the true gospel; what it is, what it is not, and the methods employed by organizations to falsify the gospel. Some of the material available on this website can assist you in this learning process.

If, after reading this far, you still wish to contact us regarding doctrinal beliefs, and you are working from the premise you are right because your organization is right, and we are wrong, then we ask that you answer the following questions before you do decide to contact us, and provide us with your answers.

  1. Explain from Scripture how you or anyone else can be held to the conditions of a covenant (legally binding agreement between two or more parties) that was made between God and Israel wherein is found the command for Israel to keep the sabbath. Understand that rationalization, inference, and assumption are not valid forms of proper biblical scholarship. If you resort to this line of reasoning in your answer, you can hardly expect us to take you seriously. For example, most SDA members will not answer the question but rather claim the sabbath was created and in force from creation week. This claim is not based upon facts but rather assumption. There is no example of God enjoining a sabbath rest on Adam and Eve, nor is there any evidence of anyone being commanded to keep the sabbath or anyone keeping the sabbath prior to Israel at Sinai. Resorting to assumption, rationalization, and drawn conclusions derived eisegetically are invalid forms of biblical study and scholarship.
  2. Explain how you or anyone else can be held to the conditions of the old covenant that has ended, having been replaced by the new covenant. Take into consideration that the prophesy in Jeremiah chapter 31 as reiterated in Hebrews 8:9 plainly state that the new covenant was not to be at all like the old covenant made with Israel upon leaving Egypt. Resorting to rationalizations, inferences, and assumptions is, again, invalid forms of proper scholarship.
  3. Explain why it is only valid to calculate the sabbath in the Americas traveling west instead of east from Israel. If you are having difficulty understanding the question, it is most likely because of the lack of proper critical thinking skills that are suppressed when one has an investment in the teachings of an organization that are false, as well as an unconscious desire not to think about anything that increases the cognitive dissonance regarding any subject that conflicts with one’s beliefs. If one travels east to the Americas, paying attention to sunsets, this person’s sabbath would begin on Thursday at sunset and continue on through Friday sunset, thus making Friday a valid sabbath day.
  4. Please explain how you or your ministry has the right to alter Scripture and its application, seeing as Scripture is the inspired Word of God.  God removed Saul from being King over Israel for not obeying what God had explicitly commanded him, and Jesus berated the Jews for attempting to keep the old covenant law, not according to how Scripture required compliance, but rather according to their own customs and traditions.  For example, you claim the Sabbath is kept by going to corporate worship services on that day, when in fact Scripture required the sabbath to be kept in one's dwelling place.  One of the deceptive claims of the SDA is that the early church gathered together on Sabbaths, and only much later did Christians abandon "sabbath keeping" according to this mode, for the observance of Sunday for corporate worship.  The SDA also teaches, or at least implies, that going to a synagogue on the Sabbath constitutes keeping the sabbath, again contrary to the old covenant law.  Synagogues did not exist prior to the return of the Jews from Babylon to Israel.  At that time, the synagogue was used solely on Sabbaths for the purpose of reading from the law, and discussing the law.  There were no "corporate worship services" in the synagogues. 

    Another example of the SDA altering Scripture and its application is tithing.  A tithe, according to the law, was a tenth of the increase of one's produce and/or livestock.  No one was ever commanded to tithe their wages.  Any and all excuses or rationalizations are just that.  The cognitive dissonance associated with how tithing is taught by SDAs is the contradictory teaching that the law remains inviolate even down to jots and tittles, citing Matthew 5:17-19 as a proof text.  So which is it?  Does the law remain unalterable even down to the strokes of the letters of that law, or can the law and its application be altered after all according to the dictates of the SDA organization?
  5. How does a wolf in sheep's clothing operate?  What are these wolves interested in?  Would they alter the Inspired Word of God for their own ends and benefit?  Would they change the tithing law in order to benefit them?  Would they teach you that their "church" is the one true church, or at least, the church where the most truth is found and taught?  How would you truly know this to be true?  Because they said so?

Thank you for taking the time to read and consider before contacting us.