Skip to content


  1. Elizabeth Wilson
    05 February 2015 @ 12:01 pm

    Similar to a secret ballot, this technology may increase the likelihood of results that reflect the conscience of the voters. As Iseminger suggested, electronic voting can help ease the peer pressure and superior pressure that some delegates may feel. I think it’s a good idea.

  2. Pastor Ken Lockwood, Retired 2007
    06 February 2015 @ 8:51 pm

    Well-spoken, Elizabeth.

  3. Patricia Harvey
    07 February 2015 @ 3:33 am

    IF PEOPLE DO NOT REALISE THAT AS DELEGATE, THEIR DUTY IS TO stand for truth regardless of who is around, then the wrong person was chosen. Many of us are just spineless wonders and even in a church setting cannot stand for truth. God’s way is open and honest and from the time we began to operate in secret, we were in the devil’s territory. The trouble is, we persist in it at all times to the detriment of the church. Each man should be apprised of his responsibility to make BIBLICAL decisions and stand alone in doing so.

    • Elaine Nelson
      07 February 2015 @ 11:35 am

      What about lots that were thrown for decisions? That ws very secretive.

      • Pete
        09 February 2015 @ 4:42 am

        What is so ‘secretive’ about casting lots? All gathered beheld the casting of the lot and its result with their own eyes. There was absolutely nothing secretive about it. Let us not attempt to grasp at straws which do not exist simply because we disagree with an idea.

        Patricia is correct. Jesus was clear about transparence. He did not thing in secret. And if the delegates have no moral fibre and are able to be pressured and influenced simply because of a higher administrator’s position and favor, then these should be removed as they have failed the call for “men who cannot be bought or sold.” If we cannot vote openly with honesty, then any vote cast will bring harm to the global body.

  4. Patricia Harvey
    07 February 2015 @ 3:38 am

    The greatest want of the world [and the church]is a want of men; men who will not be bought or sold; men who are as true to duty as the needle is to the pole; men who will stand for truth though the heaven’s fall. Sis. White. She was sooo right!!

    • Brad Litchfield
      07 February 2015 @ 6:34 pm

      Doesn’t this “greatest want of the world” speech come from Rudyard Kipling (sp?)??? Not EGW.

      • Ervin Taylor
        08 February 2015 @ 3:54 pm

        Mr. Litchfield is absolutely correct. At least, EGW or, more correctly, her editors were reading good literature at that time and “borrowing” good quotes.

        • Trevor Hammond [22oct1844]
          08 February 2015 @ 8:14 pm

          It is very rarely that Dr. Taylor will say that something is “absolutely correct.” So the onus is on him to prove that Rudyard Kipling said all the words in this “greatest want of the world” quote. Mr. Litchfield’s guessing on something like this should also be put to the test. Prove it sirs…that “Kipling” was the original author of the words quoted and that EGW’s “editors” “borrowed” from Kipling. As you are both so sure of this, it is very likely something that is very easy to prove. No?

  5. Les Sturgis
    07 February 2015 @ 10:10 am

    Great News that this will be used ! I have be a participant with this method at several national meetings and this works great.
    This will reduce the appearance of a delegate being cohearsted by others to vote a “certain” way and vote their “heart” on matters that will have great importance on the world-wide church. There will always be individuals / groups that are unhappy with the decision made, but we ALL will follow what WE as individuals believe is RIGHT and JUST !

    • Brad Litchfield
      07 February 2015 @ 6:47 pm

      It is about time! An e-voting system has been used for many years by the US House of Representatives,and it only has 435 voting members.

      However, the US Senate, with 100 members does not use e-voting. (I think Senate still has ceremonial brass spittoons; not needed for GC session, however.)

  6. RT1C
    07 February 2015 @ 9:28 pm

    Maybe each vote will be traceable to an individual and a record kept? Is there a reliable guarantee that this won’t happen? Will delegates trust it?

  7. Trevor Hammond [22oct1844]
    07 February 2015 @ 10:16 pm

    The prospective delegates should be allowed to make the decision on whether this form of voting should be used: 1] after they are fully briefed on the voting procedure, 2] how it works, and 3]making sure they know how to use the voting devices correctly. If this new e-vote process has delegates inadvertently making mistakes when voting takes place or leaving them confused for whatever reason, it will not be worth their while using this method.

    If the delegates aren’t allowed to decide, then Administrators should make pretty sure that the three points made above are properly carried out. The last thing we would want is to have the voting turn out to be a farce.

  8. George Tichy
    08 February 2015 @ 8:46 am

    Are the hackers done with their work yet? … LOL

  9. Oliver Smith
    09 February 2015 @ 5:00 am

    The problem is not an eventually glitch of electronic devices, but the way the GC delegates are chosen.