July 1, 1993 - 12:00pm - David Mould

An Interview

James Walters for Adventist Today: Would you describe yourself as a theologian or a businessman?

David Mould: Neither. I am a lay evangelist.

Evangelist means “preacher of the gospel.” Your gospel seems to be anti-Catholicism.

The counterfeit righteousness is embodied in Roman Catholicism and apostate Protestantism. It is that aspect of the gospel which has been most neglected and therefore we have seen it as our duty to bring it out from under the bushel.

Your Orlando campaign isn’t pushing common Christian answers to the world’s gaping needs. In light of that, how would you deal with critics who believe that your effort is sectarian and negative?

Meeting the world’s “gaping needs” isn’t the purpose of the campaign. The purpose of the campaign was to educate the people in Orlando as to some of the true issues in the great controversy. Our campaign was fundamentally flawed in that it targeted Catholicism; it should have been broader at the outset and included the evangelical movement. But I felt that the rapidity with which Catholicism was moving to take over the judiciary, in the light of Catholicism’s boasts about an impending new world order with herself at the head, that certainly that issue, Catholicism’s claimed dominion, and the methods she would use to bring that about, had to be brought to light.

Do you plan to have an Orlando-type campaign in the city of Denver this summer when the pope visits?

At one time, we perhaps may have thought about doing that. However, I suspect that a lot of Adventist groups will be represented there, and I would rather not contribute to what I suspect is going to be confusion.

Can you say a word about what your upcoming national campaign will do?

No. That’s a closely held secret.

Would it be fair to say that you take The Great Controversy to be a literal description of exactly how earthly history will end?

Yes.

A related question. Do you think that the historical context of the writer is relevant in doing sound interpretation of that prophet’s writings?

Yes, largely because the imagery used by the writer will be imagery familiar to that writer.

Do you think that the church or you, yourself, as an evangelist, sufficiently study Ellen White in her historical context?

I believe Ellen White’s interpretation of the three angels’ messages given in the book of Revelation, one hundred percent.

A literal understanding of The Great Controversy perhaps could preclude the need for understanding context and the history of the time, isn’t that true?

I do not think that my belief precludes an understanding of the era in which Ellen White lived. I recognize that there were strong anti-Catholic sentiments in this country at that time, but I do not believe that those sentiments affected her balance or the truth of the message that she brought.

Do you believe in verbal inspiration of a prophetic figure?

No, but I believe God directed Ellen White’s choice of sources. For example, we know that D’Aubigne and others wrote much of the history from which she quoted. Her choice of sources, I believe, was inspired.

In chapters 40 to 48 of his book the prophet Ezekiel foretold the restoration of Israel’s temple and land. That never came to pass, but few Christians disbelieve in the prophetic ministry of Ezekiel because his clear words never were literally fulfilled. If what Ellen White foretold in The Great Controversy never came to pass—a hypothetical question—would she therefore, in your view, be a false prophet?

Well, neither were Jonah’s words literally fulfilled, but that didn’t make Jonah a false prophet. There were conditions attached to the prophecy that Jonah gave. Your question is akin to asking me if the events foretold in Matthew 24 didn’t come to pass, would that make Jesus a false prophet? There are some prophecies that are conditional, and there are some that are fixed in concrete. Jesus Christ shall return, period. Ellen While’s eschatology is not conditional. I don’t believe Matthew 24 has any chance of not being fulfilled, nor do I believe that Revelation 14 or 17 have any chance of not being fulfilled; I don’t see them in the realm of conditional prophecies.

You are taking in hundreds of thousands of dollars. How can donors be assured of accountability? Will there be an independent audit that’s publicly available?

Oh yes. In fact, we did one for “Jesus Behind Bars” [see p. 8] which the General Conference reviewed years ago. And their report was that we were better than 90 percent of the churches they audited, and the audit was done by the firm of Koivu, Ruta and Felsing. I think well be dealing with Koivu and Ruta, a reputable CPA firm in Orlando.