3abn Political Influence?, how does this factor in? Options

[Clay]

Found this while browsing for those who might be interested.... I found it interesting because it speaks to not the ministry per se of 3ABN but how those in power at 3ABN begin to influence the church at large..... with humans, power corrupts.....

Nomination Process of NAD President Appears "Less Than Clean"
What was whispered

It appears that some individuals may have tried to exercise influence behind the scenes at the General Conference Session in Toronto.

Seven different sources (all nominating committee members) told AT’s one anonymous source that Jan Paulsen told the NAD nominating committee members when they were in caucus that if they nominated Chuck Sandefur for NAD president, a prominent member of the Adventist Laymen’s Services and Industries (ASI) would oppose that nomination on the floor and present incriminating information regarding the partnership of the Adventist hospitals in Denver with Catholic hospitals.

According to AT’s source, three nominating committee members indicated that Paulsen also implied "problems" of a similar nature with Tom Mostert. This made the NAD nominating committee members feel that Paulsen left them no choice but to go with the name Paulsen seemed to recommend, Don Schneider. In fairness, it appears that the votes were there to give Schneider a majority in any case.

Four individuals confirmed with AT’s source that Phil Follett, the general Vice President of the GC who provided administrative oversight for communications and broadcasting, was not re-elected because ASI and 3ABN leaders pressured Paulsen to make a change.

Paulsen met with each of the VPs months prior to the GC session to inquire about their intentions. Both Follett and Kloosterhuis told Paulsen they would like to continue to serve but would be happy to step aside if he wished since they are eligible for retirement. They asked to be informed of any change as early as possible so that they could prepare their families and make plans for the future.

Apparently, Follett and Kloosterhuis were not informed of any change until a few hours prior to the nominating committee report, which proposed different individuals for their jobs. The time frame for what appears to be a last-minute change on the part of Paulsen is contiguousl with that of the time frame when conversations relative to NAD president were going on.

Three sources told AT’s source that Follett has been involved in a series of conflicts with 3ABN over the past several years. These have mostly been situations in which 3ABN wanted to use programs which the denomination paid to produce under its own terms instead of the general guidelines under which those programs were available to all broadcasters.

According the AT’s sources, 3ABN has repeatedly expressed an unwillingness to accept the editorials and production decisions of most denominational media organizations. For example, when Robert Folkenberg was GC president he attempted to negotiate an agreement with 3ABN in which 3ABN would be given direct access to all of the programming that it wanted from denominational TV ministries. 3ABN refused to sign this agreement because it did not want to release Faith for Today nor promise to continue to release Breath of Life after C.D. Brooks’ retirement. Only It Is Written was entirely acceptable.

3ABN also wanted dominance of local church programming and broadcasting around North America. AT’s sources suspect that pressure to block Follett’s re-election came from issues of this kind. Two of them described Paulsen’s agony over not wanting to be influenced by major donors but that he was feeling great pressure.

The GC officers used the provision in the GC bylaws permitting additional at-large delegates to be appointed by the GC committee to invite Danny Shelton, president of 3ABN, and others to come to the GC session as delegates even though they were not selected as delegates by the union conference where they reside.

[Denny]

If tis true, the leaders at GC have a nerve to ask the Holy Spirit to lead at these sessions whilst another spirit has already done it's work?

I think tis time after 100 plus years for a GC restructuring

[Guest_wesleysimpson_*]

Found this while browsing for those who might be interested.... I found it interesting because it speaks to not the ministry per se of 3ABN but how those in power at 3ABN begin to influence the church at large..... with humans, power corrupts.....

Nomination Process of NAD President Appears "Less Than Clean"
What was whispered

It appears that some individuals may have tried to exercise influence behind the scenes at the General Conference Session in Toronto.

Seven different sources (all nominating committee members) told AT’s one anonymous source that Jan Paulsen told the NAD nominating committee members when they were in caucus that if they nominated Chuck Sandefur for NAD president, a prominent member of the Adventist Laymen’s Services and Industries (ASI) would oppose that nomination on the floor and present incriminating information regarding the partnership of the Adventist hospitals in Denver with Catholic hospitals.

According to AT’s source, three nominating committee members indicated that Paulsen also implied "problems" of a similar nature with Tom Mostert. This made the NAD nominating committee members feel that Paulsen left them no choice but to go with the name Paulsen seemed to recommend, Don Schneider. In fairness, it appears that the votes were there to give Schneider a majority in any case.

Four individuals confirmed with AT’s source that Phil Follett, the general Vice President of the GC who provided administrative oversight for communications and broadcasting, was not re-elected because ASI and 3ABN leaders pressured Paulsen to make a change.

Paulsen met with each of the VPs months prior to the GC session to inquire about their intentions. Both Follett and Kloosterhuis told Paulsen they would like to continue to serve but would be happy to step aside if he wished since they are eligible for retirement. They asked to be informed of any change as early as possible so that they could prepare their families and make plans for the future.

Apparently, Follett and Kloosterhuis were not informed of any change until a few hours prior to the nominating committee report, which proposed different individuals for their jobs. The time frame for what appears to be a last-minute change on the part of Paulsen is contiguousl with that of the time frame when conversations relative to NAD president were going on.

Three sources told AT’s source that Follett has been involved in a series of conflicts with 3ABN over the past several years. These have mostly been situations in which 3ABN wanted to use programs which the denomination paid to produce under its own terms instead of the general guidelines under which those programs were available to all broadcasters.

According the AT’s sources, 3ABN has repeatedly expressed an unwillingness to accept the editorials and production decisions of most denominational media organizations. For example, when Robert Folkenberg was GC president he attempted to negotiate an agreement with 3ABN in which 3ABN would be given direct access to all of the programming that it wanted from denominational TV ministries. 3ABN refused to sign this agreement because it did not want to release Faith for Today nor promise to continue to release Breath of Life after C.D. Brooks’ retirement. Only It Is Written was entirely acceptable.

3ABN also wanted dominance of local church programming and broadcasting around North America. AT’s sources suspect that pressure to block Follett’s re-election came from issues of this kind. Two of them described Paulsen’s agony over not wanting to be influenced by major donors but that he was feeling great pressure.

The GC officers used the provision in the GC bylaws permitting additional at-large delegates to be appointed by the GC committee to invite Danny Shelton, president of 3ABN, and others to come to the GC session as delegates even though they were not selected as delegates by the union conference where they reside.

what is AT? I see reference to it and I didn't see it defiined....

[Clay]

AT is Adventist Today... they use to be a forum now they just post articles of interest.... do a google and you will find them... I don't have the web addy at the moment...

[tarduke]

It is important to check the source and indicate it here for us to know how much weight to attach to posts like these.

Just because you see something on the Nt does not mean it is true and does not mean it passes some of the Bible's simple tests for appropriateness. Having said that, I thiink this post raises some very interesting issues, if true.

Did this come from Adventist Today..?

[Clay]

Trevor... as much as I am tempted I do not peddle in rumor... yes it came from AT here is the web site:
http://www.atoday.com/

Go there, click search, type in 3ABN and the article will pop up... now how true is everything AToday publishes, I cannot nor am I in a position to know that....

[tarduke]

Thanks Steve.

[Guest_statrei_*]

If tis true, the leaders at GC have a nerve to ask the Holy Spirit to lead at these sessions whilst another spirit has already done it's work?

I don't know, but what makes you say that they do?

[pmorris68]

Now why am I not surprised by this.

My questions are - What can we expect at the upcoming GC session?

Do we have any true representation on behalf of the members of the church at large?

Who can we trust to make sound decisions on behalf of the members of the church at large?

Is the deck stacked?

Does this process need to be revamped?

[Jvat]

Interesting question, Mrs Josey. I have been of the opinion myself, that the number of delegates representing countries should be based on how that country is engaged in evangelism and not simply on the population of these countries. In this way the real mission of the church will get to be a greater focus at such GC sessions as people will be able to better share how successful they are at reaching people for the Lord and there will be more focused discussions in that regard.

Just some thoughts which I had and discussed with the President of my SDA mission here, (who did not seem to udnerstand me), which I was pleasantly surprised to see that George Knights hinted at, in his thought provoking book, "The fat lady and the kingdom".

[onamission]

Interesting question, Mrs Josey. I have been of the opinion myself, that the number of delegates representing countries should be based on how that country is engaged in evangelism and not simply on the population of these countries. In this way the real mission of the church will get to be a greater focus at such GC sessions as people will be able to better share how successful they are at reaching people for the Lord and there will be more focused discussions in that regard.

Just some thoughts which I had and discussed with the President of my SDA mission here, (who did not seem to udnerstand me), which I was pleasantly surprised to see that George Knights hinted at, in his thought provoking book, "The fat lady and the kingdom".

I like your point, Jvat. Much more effective means of doing things. Too bad more people higher up don't see it htat way.

[Guest_statrei_*]

I have been of the opinion myself, that the number of delegates representing countries should be based on how that country is engaged in evangelism and not simply on the population of these countries.

That would be more problematic than the present system. How would you measure engagement in evangelism?

[Jvat]

How did we know that the early church was engaged in evangelism? Because the Lord added daily such as should be saved to their number?

Similarly, how do we know that SDAs in countries are engaged in evangelism? Because the Lord adds to the number of believers that an SDA congregation has. And these congregations should also show evidence that these believers are continuing in the apostles' doctrine, in breaking of bread and in prayers. In other words, that these congregations are making disciples of these new believers. Seems easy enough to measure to me, Darius. You see as a church we just need to focus more on our mission, that Jesus gave us, which is to MAKE DISCIPLES of men and women, of course.

Do you also know Darius, that the GC has a list of countries as to how they fit into the evangelism expoitation scheme of things, according to the best first and then the rest? They usually do it according to how much of the population is SDA which by itself is not an accurate refelction of things. But they can find out how much of these members are active SDAs. They just need to update the list very regularly. So I posit here, that my suggestion is not all that farfetched which I am happy to see that Onamission understood. Thank you Onamission.

And my country St. Lucia was about fourth place on that old list of 2000 which perhaps should be changed by now.

[Guest_statrei_*]

Anita, I think your post aptly demonstrates that such a scheme would present more problems than it could solve. I don't need to debate measuement issues with anyone on this list.