Demonize the Brother | Dismiss the documents; Addressing the Article “Response To Navigating Foghorn Rhetoric and the Reality of Global Mission.”
Seventh-day Adventists stand in a unique position in the world; we are messengers with a message that literally brings the end of the world. Jesus said, “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Mat 24:14. Adventists recognize this message as the same message contained in the first, second, and third angels’ messages of Revelation 14: the Gospel in the context of the final judgment.
We are harbingers of salvation and doom. As A.T. Jones put it,
“We are living with the fearful fact that, that is, if that message which we are now to give, is not received, it has attached to it the fearful consequences that the wine of the wrath of God will be received; so that when that message finishes, the wrath of God succeeds it.” (A.T. Jones, GC Bulletin 1893, sermon 4)
No other people have been given such a privilege, no other people have been given such great responsibility.
And it is because SDA’s are thus invested with the most crucial weighty trust ever given to mortals that it is fitting that we should examine, question, and critique position statements such as those made by the EXCOM and ADCOM[1] and unions and made by Church representatives with entities whose core values either do not match, or may be hostile, to the message and mission of the “Everlasting Gospel” that is to be given to all nations.[2]
Recently there have been several articles discussing the benefits and dangers of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists (GC), along with the Adventist Development and Relief Agency’s (ADRA) involvement with the United Nations.
1. Article one is a ludicrous pro-UN involvement article titled, “Why Adventism’s Presence at the UN Is Actually a Good Thing.”[3] (Sept 1, 2026, by ReligiousLiberty.TV, a legal journal site that is Seventh-day Adventist in its editorial tradition[4], edited by Michael Peabody).
2. Article two is a response article to article one, titled, “Response To A Torturous Pro-United Nations Article From Religiousliberty.TV.”[5] (Sept 23, 2026, by SDA Pearl, a group of lay SDA’s supporting ministries[6], published on Fulcrum7 website).
3. Article three, titled, “Navigating Foghorn Rhetoric and the Reality of Global Mission.”[7] (Sep 24, 2026, by ReligiousLiberty.Tv), is ReligiousLiberty.TV’s response to article two from SDA Pearl, featured on Fulcrum 7.
This article will limit itself to respond to article three.
In essence Peabody has two positions in responding to the article by SDA Pearl: demonize and dismiss.
Demonize: How to Win an Argument Without Answering it
The reader is asked to note the picture used to headline Peabody’s response. Take your time to read the various slogans and examine the message closely. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words, and the words of the picture speak loud and clear.
The messaging demonizes those who raise the alarm with respect to connections with the United Nations as tinfoil hat wearing, disheveled, wide-eyed Caucasian conspiracy nuts. It invites readers to despise this person. In contrast the UN connection affirming brethren are the sensible men of color in suits. The labeling is direct: those that would question institutional unions with the UN are of the same kind that believe in lizard people, flat earth, and fake moon landings. These are the same type that would have the church retreat from the world into the fog of isolation, true xenophobes.
Yet the article from SDA Pearl never ONCE mentioned chemtrails, moon landings, flat earth, and lizard people. It did not suggest that we should be xenophobes, retreating from all those not like us. Nor did it suggest that we should not participate in alleviating suffering of the poor and downtrodden.
The issue here is that this picture is used to poison the well: it makes light of actual SDA understanding of end time events. Our eschatology reads Revelation 13, 17, and 18 as real past, present, and future events where actual ‘satanic plots’ are laid in which religious agencies mix with big government and big business; these will collude to plunge the world into the literal worship of Satan in the place of Christ. This graphic teaches SDA’s to be ashamed of their eschatology by connecting it with fringe ideas that are foreign to our core mission and message. Charity would allow room to debate the place the UN may or may not have in end time events, without demonizing and ridiculing.
The picture sets up an ‘either or’ argument:
1. Either you have a seat at the UN table, and that is the only way to do good.
2. Or you are doing no good, you retreat from the world, blaring absurdities.
This is the kind of character assassignation, propaganda, and smear campaign that should be beneath true Christian deportment. Surely if Peabody and ReligiousLiberty.TV have the truth they could take the high ground and at least act as if they showed respect to their brethren’s concerns. Making a brother, or collection of them, look like fools unworthy of being listened to is not the fruit of the Holy Spirit; but that of one of a different kind of spirit. As James says, “This wisdom descendeth not from above, but is earthly, sensual, devilish.” James 3:15.
Dismiss: Kooky Conspirators Don’t Need Facts in Rebuttals
It may be that pliant readers of Peabody’s response to SDA Pearl are cowed by such imagery. It may be the hope that the opponents of ReligoiusLiberty.TV, having now been properly demonized, can be summarily dismissed by the article that follows the graphic. But I think the discerning reader will see that while Peabody’s response is strong on assertions it lacks much support. As one of my preaching professors would say, “weak thought, served hot.” Personally, it appears as if the reply article by ReligoiusLiberty.TV to the SDA Pearl article is relying mostly on the picture alone to do the heavy lifting of rebuttal.
Peabody diminished the connection between GC/ADRA and the UN as a ‘mere seat at the table’ that could not possibly compromise Adventist core identity. Yet at the same time insists that without that seat how could the Church deliver “crisis aid in a world of complex, hostile actors”; for to do so requires “a credible seat at the table where decisions are made.”
It is a mere seat, when one questions how much that seat costs in quid pro quo (favor for a favor); but it is a credible seat in importance; so much so that without it the Church cannot fulfill its humanitarian aims.
So, which is it: mere and unimpressive or credible and critical? But to ask such questions is obviously to be a kooky Caucasian with a bullhorn.
Peabody insists that critics of UN involvement want ‘a retreat into safe, sterile isolation’. Without quoting the SDA Pearl article. For that position is nowhere to be found by SDA Pearl. What is suggested by the Pearl article is that the Church can and should engage in charity without UN aid. But according to Peabody’s article graphic, that kind of thinking can only come from those who believe in lizard people. Only flat earthers would dare believe that Christ is the Lord of all Creation from whom all blessings flow, and by whom we can do all things.
Peabody asserts that the SDA Pearl article presents only two options “either the General Conference isolates itself entirely from global forums, or it is secretly submitting to a secular end-times agenda.” But it never asserts that. Organizations like Wisdom Pearl (not to be confused with SDA Pearl) have created open platforms where SDA’s and prominent non-SDA speakers (like Peter McCullough, Del Bigtree, Charlie Kirk) have shared the platform. None of that required a seat at a UN table. And that is certainly not retreating into isolationism.
The ReligoiusLiberty.TV article states that holding “consultative status with ECOSOC does not bind an organization to adopt UN doctrines or compromise its religious identity.” But a careful reading will reveal, as the SDA Pearl article does, that there are TWO different statuses for ADRA and the GC and to keep them there is most definitely a compromise.
· ADRA responsibility = operational partnership in relief and development; report how aid supported UN humanitarian aims; keep grant rules. BUT this prevents ADRA, the ADVENTIST Development and Relief Agency, from doing only PART of what their name suggests. Because ADVENTIST-DRA is forbidden from proselytizing, there is nothing ADVENTIST about the aid given, since there is no distinctive religious truth associated with the aid. For the person in the queue, it might as well come from any other “A”: Atheist, Agnostic, Anglican, or ActionAid. That is most definitely a compromise, and a big one at that.
· GC responsibility = representational partnership in the name of the church; report how the denomination supported UN principles and activities. Firstly, this particular relationship was sought out by the GC, it was not a Church in Session (Quinquennial) meeting that determined the necessity of this outreach to the UN. The SDA Pearl document rightly points out that when the ADCOM wrote that “The world membership of the Seventh-day Adventist Church requests that the governments concerned take steps necessary…to stabilize carbon dioxide emissions by the year 2000” it was speaking FOR THE WHOLE CHURCH when it had NO SUCH AUTHORITY to do so. It is not a tenant of the 3 Angels Messages that we need to stabilize carbon dioxide.
Peabody asks us to look past the headlines to behold “how global advocacy actually operates.” Well, we have a film about that. On my YouTube channel you will find our very first video is a recording of the GC 2000 Session that took place in Toronto between June and July. Originally it was then GC president Jan Paulsen who actively invited Kofi Annan (UN Secretary General of UN) to speak to the Church in session (why do we need secular men to speak to the assembly that God has given as HIS highest authority on the earth, I don’t know). In any case Annan could not come so he sent under-secretary general Joseph Reed, whom C. Neal Wilson (Ted Wilson’s father) introduced as a ‘close, personal, friend of mine’.[8]
Here are some excerpts from the speech:
Reed’s personal appeal, before Annan’s letter:
“I appeal to you… to continue to give the United Nations the support we need for our world organization… the United Nations is also your organization… our world organization… your United Nations… the only machinery we have for collective cooperation among all nations… the only worldwide institution for furthering development… the only universal mechanism for protecting human rights… the only shared framework for strengthening international law… not one of the luxuries of international life.”
The letter he then reads in Annan’s name:
“You may think that the United Nations, an inter-governmental organization, has no room for religion… I would ask you to think differently… The United Nations is a tapestry not only of suits… but also of clerics… nuns’ habits and lamas’ robes… at the heart we are dealing in universal values… To be kind, tolerant, just or merciful, no single religion can claim a monopoly on such teachings… As men and women of faith you are natural partners of the United Nations… Our shared vision of humanity, one that supersedes artificial constructs, is essential… Such a vision can foster dialogue where divisions persist…”
Read the lines, then read between the lines, there is no good that comes from a union with the UN. It requires acknowledging propositions such as egalitarian view of all faiths, a work to ensure human rights, admitting that the UN is the only mechanism for peace, and if one is not part of the UN then one is an ‘artificial construct’. This is what Peabody is supporting.
Peabody never faces the real question. The question is not whether Adventists may feed the hungry, of course we should. It is whether the price of a “credible seat” is the church’s mouth. A needed distinction: this reply does not argue that the United Nations is the beast, the image, or Babylon in Revelation 13, 17, and 18. That debate is for another day. What those chapters do require of us that we refuse to treat a warned-of union of worship, civil power, and commerce as a joke equivalent to lizard people. The cartoon does that. It is wrong whether or not one sees the UN in the symbols.
Finally the ReligiousLiberty.TV article does two things instead of answering the SDA Pearl article.
It demonizes: the objector is drawn as a crank so he need not be heard.
It dismisses: the seat is “mere” until it is indispensable; Peabody charges SDA Pearl with demanding isolation, which is untrue; GC status and ADRA status are treated as one; ADCOM is allowed to speak as “world membership”; and our tape from 2000 shows that non-UN entities are merely artificial constructs. Are the Seventh-day Adventist people just an artificial construct?
We lose our identity in the UN. We become one among many. But the Bible says of God’s people “For from the top of the rocks I see him, and from the hills I behold him: lo, the people shall dwell alone, and shall not be reckoned among the nations.” (Numbers 23:9). We are not to lose our identity among the nations, especially among the united ones.
****
BIO: Pastor Marko Kolić along with his wife Wanda is the founder-director of Profit From Prophets an online outreach ministry dedicated to proclaiming the Three Angels’ Messages, exposing end-time deception, and preparing hearts for Christ’s soon return.
You can contact us as markokolic@profitfromprophets.com
Our YouTube channel: www.youtube.com/@profitfromprophets2411
[1] The ADCOM is the administrative committee of the General Conference that has around 58 members and meets weekly and handles day to day operations at the General Conference office; EXCOM is the Executive committee of the General conference, which contains over 400 members from around the world meeting bi-annually to vote on major world policies, budgets, and departmental reports in between the quinquennial sessions that happen every five years.
[2] “6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people,” (Revelation 14:6)
[3] https://religiouslibertytv.substack.com/p/why-adventisms-presence-at-the-un
[4] https://religiousliberty.tv/why-religiousliberty-tv-is-unlike-anything-else-in-this-space-and-why-it-matters-right-now/#:~:text=The%20editorial%20tradition%20behind%20ReligiousLiberty.TV,site%20is%20denominational%20(it%20isn%27t
[5] https://www.fulcrum7.com/blog/2026/9/23/response-to-a-torturous-article-pro-united-nations-article-from-religiousliverty-tv
[6] https://sdapearl.com/index.php/faq/
[7] https://substack.com/inbox/post/217340540
[8] https://youtu.be/8kuDEKsY5Zg?si=tsRMNTUVKlhX-ep4 (the quality of the video is poor because it is taken off an old VHS tape). But it is enough to see the actions and hear the words clearly.
