• • Peter Cay-ohen Salamat sa sagot ni Bro. Nestor. Ito ang kanyang sagot sa unang tanong ko: 1. As far as I know from what is written in the minutes they did not discussed and approved any name for the General Conference for legal purposes.Neither IMS of SDARM or SDARM GC. Pastor Peter Comment: I agree with him that the name IMS of SDARM was not the name approved in 1925 which he admitted. But I don;t agree with him that even the name SDARM was not approved as the name of the church in the 1925 GC session. MY COMMENTS HERE: IT’S Up to you, we will not force anyone to believe and accept what we have presented here. All is free to analize and decide for himself. I leave the matter to you. If you will continue to imagine the point 10,11 in the Resol. In 1925 and in the Resol. #37 in the year 1948 as strong evidence for you, to proved that your allegation is true, I think I am not responsi ble for that anymore after presenting concrete evidence from what is written the minutes. May the Lord be merciful to all of you. Amen. 13 hours ago • Edited • Like • Peter Cay-ohen My second question to the IMS regarding the name of the church: Was the name IMS of SDARM ever approved by any of the GC session after 1925 to 1948? I hope that Bro. Nestor will follow his own advice to me and answer my simple question without paligoy ligoy. MY ASWER TO PASTOR CAYONG:na walang paligoy ligoy I- Here is my Answer Yes decidedly yes and without any doubt. THE FOLLOWING IS THE Solid SuPPORT TO MY ANSWER. 1. In 1928 GC delegates Session they decided that they GC be registered as a legal organization. a. Here’s the Resolution # 30= GC Registration= The General Conference shall be legally registered as an organization; with this in view , a statute is to be worked out in the General Conference Committee. b. The GC delegates in 1928 decides that the Statutes is to be worked out in the GC Committee:It means that the GC Committee was duly authorized by the GC Delegates c. Who is the member of the GC Committee? 1. It is interesting to know that the GC Committee in 1925 -1928 and the GC Committee in 1928-1931 are almost the same persons.Like, Welp President 1925-1928-1931-1934 3 terms. And Maas Secretary 1925-1928-1931-1934 etc. 2. Who make the Resolutions that the GC shall be named IMS of SDARM GC and shall be Registered as a legal organization? a. It is the GC Committee elected in 1925 in Delegates Session who discussed and approved this according to the documents. I will quotes the words of Pastor Cayong/ Cay ohen; b. 2. Dapat nating alalahanin na yung pangalan na IMS of SDARM na ginamit sa registration ng General Conference ay pareho sa pangalan na GINAMIT ng German Union = IMS of SDARM din. Resolution of the GC committee in 1927 states: That the General Conference be registered in the same way [as the Union Conference], so that the same statutes filed at the registration of the Union may cover also the General Conference; and that in the future the German Union operate under these statutes, under the name of the General Conference. (Resolution no. 8). Ayun sa resolution na ito, hindi lamang yung pangalan ng German union ang gaminitin ng GC sa registration kundi pati na yung Statutes o By-laws ng Union ay gagamitin din ng GC. Kasi naunang na register ang IMS of SDARM German Union kaysa sa IMS of SDARM General conference. Hindi lang yun, pati yung office building ng German Union (Physical address) ay siya rin ang ginamit ng General conference. GC Resolution no. 25, (1925 GC Session) states: “The headquarters of the General Conference, for the transaction of business, etc., shall remain henceforth at the headquarters of the German Union, but separate from it.” c. It is very clear here and I now fully and completely understand that in the year 1925 Delegates Session there is no such Resolutions made like this in 1927 by the GC Committee Regarding what shall be the name the GC shall be used as a legal organization- pertaining to the Registration of the GC. d. And the most important thing I’ve learned here, is that this Resolutions made by the GC Committee in 1927, two year later from 1925, they did not actually done it immediately to register the name IMSof SDARM GC, without the proper approval or the decision of the GC Delegates in Session in the coming year and that was in 1928 GC delegates Session. e. So in 1928 GC Delegates Session we can see and read in the minutes that the delegates decided or approved to register the GC as a legal Organization and the one to do it is the 1928 GC Committee, of which some member of this committee is a member also of the GC Committee in 1925, who made the resolutions that the name of the GC is IMS of SDARM and not SDARM which only a partial of the complete name of the Reform Movement, which was approved in delegates Session in 1928. 3. My question to all SDARM leader and Minister; Can you show to me the clear Resolutions in the year 1925, like what I have presented here? a. The only Resolutions what the SDARM leader always presented is the point 10 and 11.to proved that the name SDARM was allegedly approved. b. The truth there is ,That resolutions is pertaining to the title of publication of the Newly adopted “Principles of Faith of the Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement and Constitution,” No mentioned of the name for the GC as being approved. Only in imagination to all SDARM leaders and members. c. That piece of resolution For them is a very strong evidence for the SDARM leader to support their allegations that name SDARM was approved according to them for it is written there the Partial name the word SDARM, from the whole name of the reformer IMS of SDARM. d. They said; oh see what is the name of the Church who owns that Principles of Faith? And they answer SDARM for it is written the in the title of the Principles of faith. e. But the question is; Does the SDARM has already a birth Certificate or I mean a registration at that time? No! There is not even a plan in1925 to legally register the GC as a legal organization. f. So it is like you Pastor Peter , according to you when you are a little child your parents Named you Cayong. I will ask you Do you have a birth Certificate or registration in the civil registrar? And I believed you will agree with me that the name registered is your agreed, approved, and real name and not Cayong. Am I right? g. Yes everyone who knows you from birth still will call you Cayong and not Peter ,especially your inmates. So likewise here in the Reform Movement .So one will object if we will write tha name SDARM in the Head letter, In the minutes, even in circular letter. Why? because we are accustom to use that part of the whole name IMS of SDARM. People inside will not object or questions if we use only SDARM or IMS, and most especially the Real name or the agreed and approved name of the General Conference IMS of SDARM for it is the only name duly discussed and approved in the GC Committee and was submitted to the delegates in 1928 GC Session and was decided to registered it as a legal organization.That is our Church birth Certificate registered in Jan.11,1929.,NAME ; IMS OF SDARM.(late registration) h. Another Post I will mention: Pastor said ; Halimbawa lang po. May nakita ka na libro at sa cover nito ay may nakasulat na Church Mannual of the Seventh-day Adventist. Tapos sabi ko na sa publication na ito ay makikita ang pangalan ng church naSeventh-day Adventist. Kung sasdabihin mo na hindi po pangalan ng church yan dahil pangalan po ng libro ang Church Mannual of the Seventh-day Adventist. Totoo po na pangalan ng libro pero sa pangalan ng libro na yan ay makikita mo rin yung pangalan ng church na nagmamay-ari ng church mannual at ito ay Seventh-da Adventist. Ganyan din po kapatid Ebie ang tungkol sa publication na “The Principles of Faith of the Seventh Day Adventist Reform Movement and Constitution.” It contain the name of the church which is SDARM. My comments to Pastor Cayong Example: 1. His comments is not true. That’s false idea. Another Inaccurate idea like what is in your pamphlet Pastor . Why? a. Consider this: Do you think the name which you saw and read in the Manual is the real and registered name of that Church who own that Manual? Certainly not. I don’t know if you agree with me. b. Ok let’s ask them for their registration and let’s see if what name registered there? And here we see and read; General Conference Corporation of Seventh Day Adventist . c. Have you see the difference? So please don’t mislead us by your examples. d. So if we want to know the real and approved name of one person is to ask for a birth certificate or the Civil registration. For now many are Impostor. So likewise with the true name of the Church of God it must be duly approved in a delegates Session legally. What I mean is with a resolutions from the GC Committee for approval in the GC delegates Session. And if it is approved it should be properly recorded or written in the minutes, and not in an imaginary one, like what I always heard and read from the post of all SDARM leaders and Workers. They always say regarding the true name in an imaginary bases for we cannot read it and as specific manner in the minutes. 4. I am challenging all SDARM leaders to please show us the Approved Resolutions from the GC Committee and submit it to the delegates in Session for approval of the proposed name to be legally registered as an organization and the name is SDARM GC in the year 1925 and in 1948? It should be Look a like in the first registration of the GC in 1929. a. Please show to us who decided or approved the registration of GC in America and using the name SDARM? For this very important matter to consider.
Posted on: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 12:51:34 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics