Advent Talk
Theology Category => Doctrinal Discussions => Topic started by: Murcielago on March 22, 2010, 10:11:10 PM
-
http://www.atoday.com/content/doug-batchelor-preaches-against-women-pastors (http://www.atoday.com/content/doug-batchelor-preaches-against-women-pastors)
Pastor Doug Bachelor preached against women as pastors or elders. He took the stand that they are to be subservient to men. The world church has voted in session several times against ordaining women to ministry. There are a number of women who have been ordained and work as SDA pastors in a few areas (in defiance of the GC) and women function as elders in many parts of the world.
-
DB is right on, glad he did ..a woman's greatest work and help is in other areas. I do not consider woman or their talk that like wearing the pants of the pulpit. Most women give up their best talents to the home, children and security of well being of family to this big notion. They have given up greater talents to enter into masculine duties. EGW was a teacher, a "chosen" messanger and complier of the "Holy Spirit". She was willing to use her talents as "instructed". I never considered her a preacher. She was used to write.
-
EGW was ordained as a pastor in 1886 by the GC. She accepted the ordination and all of its subsequent renewals over the years.
-
She makes comment on that
-
Her acceptance of the ordination would seem to imply that she approved of the ordination of women as pastors, wouldn't it?
-
You will also see in this where church sometimes do their own thing and not the writing of EGW as shown below with quotes around "preaching credentials". Just like the wearing now of wedding rings in church manuel. No, EGW did not except preaching credentials although it was voted to give to her. Unless I am reading something wrong here. This came from voting and not EGW suggestions or writings.
Appendix C - Exhibits Relating to the Ordination of Women
From the Lifetime and Experience of Ellen G. White
A PAPER PRESENTED AT THE MINISTERIAL MEETING AT THE 1990 GENERAL CONFERENCE SESSION. PREPARED BY THE WHITE ESTATE STAFF. {DG 248.1}
1. A RESOLUTION TO ORDAIN WOMEN WAS DISCUSSED AT THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1881. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. THE MINUTES INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING LINES: {DG 248.2}
"RESOLVED, THAT FEMALES POSSESSING THE NECESSARY QUALIFICATIONS TO FILL THAT POSITION MAY, WITH PERFECT PROPRIETY, BE SET APART BY ORDINATION TO THE WORK OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. {DG 248.3}
"THIS WAS DISCUSSED BY J. O. CORLISS, A. C. BOURDEAU, E. R. JONES, D. H. LAMSON, W. H. LITTLEJOHN, A. S. HUTCHINS, D. M. CANRIGHT, AND J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH, AND REFERRED TO THE GENERAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE."--RH, DEC. 20, 1881.{DG 248.4}
ELLEN WHITE DID NOT ATTEND THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1881. HER HUSBAND DIED ON AUGUST 6 OF THAT YEAR. TWO WEEKS AFTER HIS DEATH SHE LEFT BATTLE CREEK, BOUND FOR CALIFORNIA. SHE DID NOT RETURN TO MICHIGAN UNTIL AUGUST OF 1883.{DG 248.5}
2. FOR MANY YEARS ELLEN WHITE WAS VOTED MINISTERIAL CREDENTIALS BY THE MICHIGAN CONFERENCE (SEE E.G. RH, SEPT. 10, 1872),
249
AND THEN LATER BY THE GENERAL CONFERENCE. HOWEVER, SHE WAS NEVER ORDAINED BY HUMAN HANDS, NOR DID SHE EVER PERFORM A WEDDING, ORGANIZE A CHURCH, OR CONDUCT A BAPTISM.{DG 248.6}
3. IN 1895 ELLEN WHITE RECOMMENDED THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN WHO WOULD GIVE THEMSELVES TO A DEACONESS-TYPE OF WORK:{DG 249.1}
"Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service of the Lord should be appointed to visit the sick, look after the young, and minister to the necessities of the poor. They should be set apart to this work by prayer and laying on of hands. In some cases they will need to counsel with the church officers or the minister; but if they are devoted women, maintaining a vital connection with God, they will be a power for good in the church. This is another means of strengthening and building up the church."--RH, July 9, 1895.{DG 249.2}
A NUMBER OF WOMEN WERE ORDAINED AS DEACONESSES DURING ELLEN WHITE'S AUSTRALIAN MINISTRY. ON AUGUST 10, 1895, THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE AT THE ASHFIELD CHURCH IN SYDNEY RENDERED ITS REPORT, WHICH WAS APPROVED. THE CLERK'S MINUTES FOR THAT DATE STATE: "IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE ELECTION, THE OFFICERS WERE CALLED TO THE FRONT WHERE PASTORS CORLISS AND MCCULLAGH SET APART THE ELDER, DEACONS, [AND] DEACONESSES BY PRAYER AND THE LAYING ON OF HANDS."{DG 249.3}
SEVERAL YEARS LATER, IN THE SAME CHURCH, W. C. WHITE OFFICIATED AT THE ORDINATION OF THE CHURCH OFFICERS. THE MINUTES OF THE ASHFIELD CHURCH FOR JANUARY 7, 1900, STATE: "THE PREVIOUS SABBATH OFFICERS HAD BEEN NOMINATED AND ACCEPTED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, AND TODAY ELDER WHITE ORDAINED AND LAID HANDS ON THE ELDERS, DEACON, AND DEACONESSES.--AR, JAN. 16, 1986.{DG 249.4}
4. WOMEN "LICENSED TO PREACH" BY THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH DURING ELLEN WHITE'S LIFETIME INCLUDED THE FOLLOWING:
1878 ANNA FULTON MINNESOTA
ELLEN S. LANE MICHIGAN
JULIA OWEN KENTUCKY-TENNESSEE
1879 LIBBIE COLLINS MINNESOTA
HATTIE ENOCH KANSAS
250
LIBBIE FULTON MINNESOTA
LIZZIE POST MINNESOTA
1880 ANNA JOHNSON MINNESOTA
1881 IDA W. BALLENGER ILLINOIS
HELEN L. MORSE ILLINOIS
1884 RUIE HILL KANSAS
1886 IDA W. HIBBEN ILLINOIS
1887 MRS. S. E. PIERCE VERMONT
1893 FLORA PLUMMER IOWA
1894 MARGARET CARO NEW ZEALAND
1895 MRS. S. A. LINDSAY NEW YORK
1898 SAREPTA IRISH HENRY GEN. CONF.
LULU WIGHTMAN NEW YORK
1899 EDITH BARTLETT BRITISH CONF.
1900 HETTY HASKELL GEN. CONF.
MINA ROBINSON BRITISH CONF.
1901 CARRIE V. HANSEN UTAH
EMMA HAWKINS IOWA
MRS. E. R. WILLIAMS MICHIGAN
1902 MRS. S. N. HASKELL GREATER NY
MINNIE SYPE OKLAHOMA
1904 ALMA BJDIGG FINLAND MISSION
MRS. J. E. BOND ARIZONA
BERTHA E. JORGENSEN SOUTH DAKOTA
1910 PEARL FIELD NEBRASKA
MRS. URA SPRING NEBRASKA
--GENERAL CONFERENCE ARCHIVES AND SDA YEARBOOKS {DG 249.5}
SOME OF THE WOMEN LISTED ABOVE WERE EMPLOYED BY THE CHURCH. OTHERS, SUCH AS MARGARET CARO, WHO WAS A DENTIST, WERE SELF-SUPPORTING.{DG 250.1}
5. ELLEN WHITE MADE THREE STATEMENTS WHICH ARE SOMETIMES CONSTRUED AS EVIDENCE THAT SHE SUPPORTED THE CONCEPT OF WOMEN AS ORDAINED GOSPEL MINISTERS.{DG 250.2} IN 1898 SHE DECLARED THAT "there are women who should labor in the
251
gospel ministry" (Ev 472). THE CONTEXT OF THIS STATEMENT SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT SHE IS SPEAKING OF MINISTERS' WIVES. SHE WROTE:{DG 250.3}
"Letters have come to me from several, asking my advice upon the question, Should ministes' wives adopt infant children? Would I advise them to do this kind of work. To some who were regarding this matter favorably, I answered, No; God would have you help your husband in his work. The Lord has not given you children of your own; His wisdom is not to be questioned. He knows what is best. Consecrate your powers to God as a Christian worker. You can help your husband in many ways. . . .{DG 251.1}
"There are women who should labor in the gospel ministry. In many respects they would do more good than the ministers who neglect to visit the flock of God. Husband and wife may unite in this work, and when it is possible, they should. The way is open for consecrated women. But the enemy would be pleased to have the women whom God could use to help hundreds binding up their time and strength on one helpless little mortal that requires constant care and attention."--5MR 325, 326.{DG 251.2}
IN THE YEAR 1900 ELLEN WHITE PUBLISHED TESTIMONIES, VOLUME 6, WHICH INCLUDES A SECTION TITLED "THE CANVASSER A GOSPEL WORKER." HERE THE AUTHOR STATES:{DG 251.3}
"All who desire an opportunity for true ministry, and who will give themselves unreservedly to God, will find in the canvassing work opportunities to speak upon many things pertaining to the future, immortal life. The experience thus gained will be of the greatest value to those who are fitting themselves for the ministry. It is the accompaniment of the Holy Spirit of God that prepares workers, both men and women, to become pastors to the flock of God."--6T 322.{DG 251.4}
FINALLY, IN SEPTEMBER 1903 ELLEN WHITE WROTE:
"The Lord calls upon those connected with our sanitariums, publishing houses, and schools to teach the youth to do evangelistic work. Our time and energy must not be so largely employed in establishing sanitariums, food stores, and restaurants that other lines of work will be neglected. Young men and young women who should be engaged in the ministry, in Bible work, and in the canvassing work should not be bound down to mechanical employment. {DG 251.5}
252
"The youth should be encouraged to attend our training schools for Christian workers, which should become more and more like the schools of the prophets. These institutions have been established by the Lord, and if they are conducted in harmony with His purpose, the youth sent to them will quickly be prepared to engage in various lines of missionary work. Some will be trained to enter the field as missionary nurses, some as canvassers, and some as gospel ministers."--8T 229, 230.{DG 252.1}
6. ELLEN WHITE MADE TWO STATEMENTS ABOUT HER OWN CALL TO SERVE THE LORD AS HIS MESSENGER. SHE DECLARED:{DG 252.2} "At the age of 78 I am still toiling. We are all in the hands of the Lord. I trust in Him; for I know that He will never leave nor forsake those who put their trust in Him. I have committed myself to His keeping.{DG 252.3}
"And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry."--RH, July 26, 1906.{DG 252.4}
"In the city of Portland the Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my first labors were given to the cause of present truth."--RH, May 18, 1911.{DG 252.5}
IT WILL BE RECALLED THAT ELLEN WHITE WAS GIVEN HER FIRST VISION IN DECEMBER 1844, IN PORTLAND, MAINE. SHORTLY THEREAFTER SHE WAS PROMPTED BY THE LORD TO TELL OTHERS WHAT SHE HAD SEEN.{DG 252.6}
7. ELLEN WHITE DID NOT CONCERN HERSELF WITH WOMEN'S RIGHTS MOVEMENTS. WHEN SHE WAS URGED TO JOIN OTHERS IN THE CRUSADE FOR WOMEN'S SUFFRAGE, SHE DECLINED THE INVITATION. SHE WROTE TO HER HUSBAND:{DG 252.7}
-
Very interesting documentation. Thank you for posting it, Tinka. It represents a lot of our history. I still don't see where EGW disapproved of the ordination of women, though. She apparently didn't seek ordination, but she obviously didn't decline it either. She was notorious for reproving and stopping the men of the church when they took an action of which she disapproved, and she never did that over over her own ordination, and I am unaware of any instance where she did it regarding the ordination of any other woman.
-
There is tons of places she states what the sons and daughters best abilities are for the work or ministry of God. It always states teacher, deaconesses, help their husbands ministry but never does she state it is ok. If she did she would have to contradict herself in placing the women of highest regard for the welfare of family. She did state if it took going away to help her husband and if you had very good caregiver for short time was exceptable. Think of this scenario, her husband was a minister. God gave her the visions and abilities to write as God knew her humbleness and determination to help her husband as he had the labor end of it and her the messages and by doing with that attitude gave her more and more light. Never did she go for the limelight. She gave her messages. Her husband labored hard for it.
-
Some questions to stir up your pure [poor] minds:
1. Where in Scripture does it say that a pastor should be ordained?
2. What Scripture do we use when we ordain deacons?
3. Does it say that the deacons should be ordained?
4. What is the Scriptural difference between Apostles, ministers, deacons, deaconesses, elders, pastors, bishops?
5. From where do we get the distinction?
I have some more questions, but I'll wait. . .
-
Right on Johann,
It's man that seeks the titles, EGW did not nor even give hardly any recognition to any maybe a time but as we watch the church does many things that are not as we are supposed to do. We cannot look to the church organizations always being right on their boards when our last messages are not used.
That is what I am starting to see on Hope Channel too along of course mixed with good.
3abn made up their own thing to do and look what happened!!!
-
Yes, good points, and questions, however, George's question has still not been answered. Not to mention that at the time that Sis. White was ordained, there were also no less than 30 other women who were "ordained to preach" at the time. The church only took it's present stance after all these women had passed away. You won't find where Sis. White spoke out against the ordination of women either. She just didn't, and if she had you know the likes of DB would have found it and used it by now.
Also, one more question. if God was agianst the ordination of women, then why would He choose a woman to rule Israel as a judge? Deborah was directly under His authority.
I think we have it completely backwards, this time. The world has entered the church in the form of sexism.
-
No answers to these questions yet?
Some questions to stir up your pure [poor] minds:
1. Where in Scripture does it say that a pastor should be ordained?
2. What Scripture do we use when we ordain deacons?
3. Does it say that the deacons should be ordained?
4. What is the Scriptural difference between Apostles, ministers, deacons, deaconesses, elders, pastors, bishops?
5. From where do we get the distinction?
I have some more questions, but I'll wait. . .
-
Yes, good points, and questions, however, George's question has still not been answered. Not to mention that at the time that Sis. White was ordained, there were also no less than 30 other women who were "ordained to preach" at the time. The church only took it's present stance after all these women had passed away. You won't find where Sis. White spoke out against the ordination of women either. She just didn't, and if she had you know the likes of DB would have found it and used it by now.
Also, one more question. if God was against the ordination of women, then why would He choose a woman to rule Israel as a judge? Deborah was directly under His authority.
I think we have it completely backwards, this time. The world has entered the church in the form of sexism.
Like Deborah and so was EGW. He does the choosing
Di, read again very carefully, The SDA boards did the ordaining. Not EGW. That brings on the church not following her messages clearly and doing their thing. again they did not follow her direction. The same she finally had to come down on their fanaticism on the Health message. There is a constant history she had to write about concerning what people chose to do and justify under her messages. She was not there to except ordination or had hands laid on her on nothing to the effect. Read the red print again and then evaluate without adding any justifications where the church was in order to do that. Even tho they did it..it was not her entire instructions through out. Women should be deaconesses and teachers helpers and bible workers. She made many many times comment on the work of women. Also, Johann has asked very legit questions of actual answers in biblical scripture of which at the moment I have not run down. Maybe you can.
There are many many instances where the organized church has made their own rules away and against the SP.
Look at the effects of the man made rule for the church manual now for the wearing of gold, for marriage. I think it might be in volume 1 where this is not what we are supposed to be doing.
Now turn your TV on to Hope channel and watch the "Family Reunion" and tell me who on there follows SP as they flaunt the gold, jewelry, red fingernail polish, cherry berry lips of a clown, vanity fingernails, vanity hussy looking hair spiked and bleached with the roots all a show-en and if you really want to be entertained into laughter, just turn the sound of them off and watch the distorations of funny faces with their vanity of heathenistic reaching their hands up in disrespect to the God of heaven after we have been solemnly told about how to worship Him, even the angels veil their faces in His presence. We got a good laugh at the soundless funnies. Then they stood and clapped and clapped for theirselves. and you call that worship for God. Then a high five was given to completment theirselves after the "Dixie Chics" did their thing. What is this? What are we to portray to public view that Adventist are no different then anyother church in off the wall worship. Shall we imitate the public of all faiths and jerk them in that way. I do not think so. As this example will lose more souls then you want to be accounted for. I am just sick over this when I know that SDA's somewhere are capable of the best. I have heard them and I have seen them. One other thing, I see the camera men really catch all glimpses of these glamor points for viewers to see. Is it on purpose to show folly or show finally all goes and come on in??? It appears it is from the most liberal west coast gang. Would you like to read about hand clapping and bring on the dancing? Just click it in the White EState Express. Hmmm, but who follows anything anymore it appears.
-
Was Ellen G. White ever ordained?
Not by man!
Seems like she claimed herself that she'd been ordained by God. The Brethren acted on that and gave her the needed credentials as an ordained minister.
-
That's maybe a good summary of it. But I would have to see where she claimed herself ordained as the only thing I remember is that she calls herself a "messenger". I would have picked up on that immediately as it would have went against all else I had read. I do not think she "needed" credentials. But they did do this as a gesture of her being a true messenger and their belief in her vision and revelation of understanding she presented. In her humbleness a way provided her not being there to except or have hands laid on her and her family said never did she do the duties of an ordained minister. So that pretty well sums it up. A pastor baptizes, marries, etc. She never did this. She made her duty very plain for herself and woman and men. Nothing can be presumed, added or taken away or justified under what the church did or did not do because they respected her as God's chosen. She relates herself quite different then an "ordained preacher". There is a reason for that and I must start to find some verses. Like Johann says in his questions. But we are given some directions for the organized church. There are some reservations though biblical that tell us about what leaders should be and do and that is about it more about how they should be. I believe they should be educated enough with hard work of study as too many non educated first emotional feelings thinks this brings on the calling and they should get the job with hardly any understanding and then you get the snake handlers. I think in this day we have to have ordained ministers for other purposes. For legal marriages, and legal churches for tax reduction purposes and for the law of the land. But many a lay person does well if he is a well studied well versed student of the Bible. Then the people choose their leader instead of the leader choosing himself. EGW message was to bring on the 3rd angels message and this did not take ordination from the church by no means.
-
"And I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that He counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry."--RH, July 26, 1906.{DG 252.4}
"In the city of Portland the Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my first labors were given to the cause of present truth."--RH, May 18, 1911.{DG 252.5}
-
EGW had no problem with reproving the men of the church when they did something wrong, yet she never reproved them for ordaining her or any of the other women who served as ordained pastors of the SDA church during her life. Indeed, it was not until after her death that the men of the church proceeded to officially bar women from ministry and other positions of authority, based upon their gender alone. I think it is somewhat hard to show that she disapproved of something that she accepted for herself and many other women, and that she never said she disapproved of.
-
Thank you Johann for putting that up there. I was about wore out yesterday. But here again, we must watch the wording exactly and what it means. "She was chosen, she was ordained for a "messenger" it does not say the word "preacher", "pastor". She performed as she was instructed. I believe she was too humble to decide what "God would have or instruct somebody else". So she stayed away from direct comment as she was shown another way. I wished I could say words better to what I mean.
The only thing I can read into this is for the words available is that she did not reprehend or give embarrassment back for a believeling good gesture on the part of the church even tho through out she told of a higher calling for women and their God given abilities that backed their family, husband, home wellfare. The church alone did this as a good gesture but you saw then after this document the reasoning why the church did finally take the stand they did. She did not blast them or condemn them but steadily gave a soft continual answer to what a woman should be doing. Now the church or woman want to go back and try it again.
also, look what the church approves today that is seen and completely discarded by woman doing their thing again. Most of our woman now dress like men. What happened there too? Most woman after a certain age look awful and no one tells them that their lines from behind is outright vulgar. Women have discarded SP worse then the men. If you do not believe this, here is another point why. the woman today run after all the equal woman's rights in the job place...and look what it did to the younger generation. Has anybody noticed?? EGW then comes straight out and says. She does not run after the woman's movement that is then taking place. this is her direct comment! I understand what she is saying. That is good enough for me and I could fill the posts up with all statements. I thought she handled it well. The Church did follow for a time period but look at it now. Watch Family Reunion. What in the world are these woman thinking?
I have lived my life to the best I can for the service of my family, and many many others and have taught my children the same. I have been mostly a homemaker, and helped my husband in business with all book work and actual labor for the business when needed and many people that worked for us. I have been taught by my mother, worked in dorcas for many years and my life has been very fulfilling. I do not like men's jobs. I do not know which is worse. Men not supporting their children and causing women to work or women having the children and putting them away with a husband that does work. i take care of my husband so he looks good and feels good as my children love him very much. and with todays menu in the market it is best to grow and prepare your own things. So we have had heavy date time in the garden. I will never forget. A Son in Law wrote a funny poem of us in the "Garden" I posted it on here in the recipe section. Never really spoke out except in Sabbath School as I have been too busy until I have looked up and saw it seems apostasy happening in almost all directions and within. But I know what time it is but now inspired as "He is coming".
Thanks again Johann and I want to look where your coming from in questions maybe tonight. Garden time is almost here again (smile)
-
Exactly, George. I had all of this information somewhere. I will have to check BSDA. Included in that was at least one letter written to EGW for her counsel on the ordination of women, to which she never had chance to respond. She was effectively silent on the issue. and seeing as there were quite a few women serving as ordained pastors,she had plenty of time and opportunity to give her thoughts on it.
Also, Tinka, you cannot limit God. I talked about Deborah, but there was also Miriam who was a prophetess. God chooses whom he pleases to serve and how. God chose EGW, and we believe that she was in spiritual authority even over GC itself. The church made it's doctrines from her words. Why would God care about a woman being a pastor? Why would He place a woman at that level of authority, and then have no women be pastors? it makes no sense. I believe we miss man blessings, signs and guidance from God, because we are stuck on what manner or package the message comes. Effectively, telling God we will only accept his Word coming from this person, or that person.
EGW had no problem with reproving the men of the church when they did something wrong, yet she never reproved them for ordaining her or any of the other women who served as ordained pastors of the SDA church during her life. Indeed, it was not until after her death that the men of the church proceeded to officially bar women from ministry and other positions of authority, based upon their gender alone. I think it is somewhat hard to show that she disapproved of something that she accepted for herself and many other women, and that she never said she disapproved of.
-
Di,
sorry to differ but she in no way claimed that the doctrine of the church was made by her words or ever intended it. Those are peoples accusations. She was enlightened to give finer detail to the doctrine that was Biblical already for better understanding. When people come across with this I automatically know they have not read in consistency. I have spent years getting to know her from her writings, and made it my duty to understand her sentence after sentence, book after book and cover to cover. I either had to believe or disbelieve. One can make any kind of theory of opinions and cannot be out spoken on the matters unless they have done the homework on it. This is no time for guessing at this late date. I know when she is misquoted or misstated instantly. The Reformers are very good at that. She had some humor at times and so did I think the angels did too.
Her "ministry" was given for her faithfulness,and humbleness. It is like the word "ministry" ordained for her ministry. Her ministry could have been anything. Like LS ministry is music. She was ordained to be trusted with visions, writing and presenting what was shown. She did not claim to be a prophet, but the church and myself included feel for sure she was and state it. So our statements do not reflect anything that she claims because the church viewed it that way. The church claimed to give her credentials but no where does she claim she is that nor takes the position of doing a pastors duties. You must understand her or you can't begin to put it all together. The Churches from all different cultures and area does a lot under either liberal or conservative or cultural beliefs without even caring really what she has said in the history of the beginning of the SDA faith. It is obvious to just look around and see. I know one church that does not believe in having any thing at all brought up in church of any SP. So when it gets down to it, women just need to go out and do their thing and don't worry about any ones recalling what was written in inspiration -- as this is the new age --please the public and forget the ol ways as you see the people do what they want regardless and it is evident to be seen. We or they have had enough years already to get it together- but justifications of our own ways is prevalent. all you do is sit in SS and hear it. I think the time is about done for opinionated theories and where women should be preachers. In this age anything goes and women can do and be anything they want. even lady boxers, and wrestlers. It's all justified by ones own view.
If you can say that you read every book cover to cover and in all the right context that she speaks then maybe you can bring to lite how she agreed to this. I do not make my own justifications of any theory,and yet do not claim that my every theory of what I read is right but always I am all ears to listen or study or see new connections that match.
Doug B. is correct in his presentation beyond doubt. and I have listened to him before but did not get to hear him this time. The scripture was enough evidence he presented before. There is also another fact, you cannot change a liberal in justifications of trying to find ways to make all things right to their wants or opinions. If women are supposed to be preachers I want documents, biblical reference other then what I know is there. Just because God used women in Biblical days, as leaders, judges or whatever you can find He chose to use EGW in our day does not state anywhere that women are to be ordained preachers. When I got into her writings, I went in with open mind to accept what was truth as she fills in the finer details. I never ever found her to contradict and backtrack. and took slowly what she presented and how she did it. She made me laugh at times for the common sense she used. I love her writings and grew to almost think I know her as her trials and everyday applications were very vivid to me.
-
To my knowledge, EGW never specifically stated that women should be ordained, nor, have I ever seen where she says that they shouldn't. That, in the context of her own ordination and that of many other women during her time says a lot, imo, in addition to the fact that the church didn't take its stane againt women until after her death.
-
Just because she does not make a statement that "we shouldn't" ordain women does not change her stance as she simply states "what is" the best direction and why. and she was right as now in this age you can see where women movement has taken this cockeyed generation. The first time I heard DBatchelor preach on this he was right on as he presented it Biblically and years ago EGW was correct in future views the reason not to do it. But you know women do what women want to do!!.
8. IT IS LIKELY THAT ELLEN WHITE DID NOT SUGGEST AT ANY TIME THAT THE SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST CHURCH SHOULD COMMENCE THE PRACTICE OF ORDAINING WOMEN TO THE GOSPEL MINISTRY. HER SECRETARY, C. C. CRISLER, SAYS THAT SHE WAS VERY CAUTIOUS ON THIS POINT. HERE IS THE CORRESPONDENCE RELATING TO THIS QUESTION:{DG 253.2}
"MARCH 12, 1916
"MR. CLARENCE CRISLER, SANITARIUM [CALIFORNIA]
"DEAR BROTHER: WILL YOU PLEASE INFORM ME IN REGARD TO THE SETTING APART OF WOMEN WHO CAN GIVE SOME TIME TO MISSIONARY WORK, BY LAYING ON HANDS IN PRAYER, FOUND IN REVIEW AND HERALD, BACK IN THE EARLY PART OF THE NINETIES, PROBABLY BACK IN ABOUT 1892 OR 1893, FROM THE PEN OF SISTER WHITE.{DG 253.3}
"THE REASON I ASK FOR THIS, I WAS IN A RECENT MEETING WHERE ELDER ANDROSS SET ASIDE WOMEN BY THE LAYING ON OF HANDS, AND WHEN I ASKED HIM FOR THE AUTHORITY FOR SO DOING, HE REFERRED ME TO YOU, AND AS I HAVE BEEN A BIBLE WORKER FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND HAVE RECENTLY BEEN GRANTED A MINISTERIAL LICENSE, I WANT THIS INFORMATION. {DG 253.4}
254
"PLEASE ANSWER AT ONCE, AS I WANT TO HEAR FROM YOU BEFORE I GO TO THE SOUTHWESTERN UNION CONFERENCE, WHICH CONVENES APRIL 7. PLEASE SEND ME TWO OR THREE COPIES OF HER STATEMENT, AS THE PRESIDENT OF OUR CONFERENCE WANTS ONE."-- MRS. L. E. COX, 134 AGARITA AVENUE, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS.{DG 254.1}
"MARCH 22, 1916
"MRS. L. E. COX, SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS
"DEAR SISTER: I HAVE YOUR LETTER OF THE TWELFTH, MAKING INQUIRY REGARDING THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN WHO GIVE SOME TIME TO MISSIONARY WORK--PARTICULARLY TO SOME STATEMENT WHICH YOU BELIEVE TO BE FOUND IN A REVIEW EARLY IN THE NINETIES, FROM THE PEN OF MRS. ELLEN G. WHITE.{DG 254.2}
"AS THIS QUERY WILL REQUIRE SOME STUDY ON MY PART, AND SEARCHING, AND AS I MUST GO TO MOUNTAIN VIEW IN THE MORNING FOR A FEW DAYS, I AM UNDER THE NECESSITY OF ASKING THAT YOU EXCUSE ME FROM ANSWERING FOR A FEW DAYS. UPON MY RETURN, EARLY NEXT WEEK, I WILL ENDEAVOR TO SEND YOU A REPLY, ACCOMPANYING SAME, IF POSSIBLE, WITH THE EXTRACTS CALLED FOR. HOWEVER, I MIGHT SAY THAT I HAVE NOT UNDERSTOOD THESE EXTRACTS AS TEACHING POSITIVELY THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN AS MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL. I HAVE SUPPOSED, RATHER, THAT THEY REFER PRIMARILY TO THE ORDINATION OF GOD-FEARING WOMEN AS DEACONESSES IN LOCAL CHURCHES. BUT OF THIS I WILL SPEAK MORE FULLY WHEN I WRITE AGAIN.{DG 254.3}
"I HOPE TO WRITE YOU ABOUT THE TWENTY-EIGHTH, AND WILL ADDRESS YOU AS ABOVE. IF YOU ARE LEAVING SAN ANTONIO FOR OTHER PARTS, IT WOULD BE WELL FOR YOU TO LEAVE A FORWARDING ORDER, SO MAIL ADDRESSED AS ABOVE WILL REACH YOU IN DUE TIME AT THE UNION CONFERENCE."--CLARENCE CRISLER.{DG 254.4}
"JUNE 16, 1916
"MRS. L. E. COX
"DEAR SISTER: IN MY ANSWER UNDER DATE OF MARCH 22, I WAS UNABLE TO FORWARD YOU COPY OF THE REVIEW ARTICLE CALLED FOR, BUT VENTURED TO SAY, 'I HAVE NOT UNDERSTOOD THESE EXTRACTS AS TEACHING POSITIVELY THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN AS MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL. I HAVE SUPPOSED, RATHER, THAT THEY REFER PRIMARILY TO THE ORDINATION OF GOD-FEARING WOMEN AS DEACONESSES IN LOCAL CHURCHES.'{DG 254.5}
"SINCE WRITING THE ABOVE, I HAVE FOUND THE ARTICLE IN QUESTION AND
255
HAVE HAD SAME COPIED. ENCLOSED FIND A COPY OF THIS ARTICLE. [RH, JULY 9, 1895.] I AM ALSO FORWARDING A COPY TO YOUR LOCAL CONFERENCE PRESIDENT, ELDER E. L. NEFF, AND TO THE PRESIDENT OF YOUR UNION, ELDER J. W. CHRISTIAN, THAT THEY MAY KNOW WHAT I AM SENDING TO YOU.{DG 254.6}
"WHILE I DO NOT MAKE IT A PART OF MY WORK TO PRESUME TO INTERPRET THAT WHICH HAS BEEN WRITTEN, YET I MAY BE PARDONED FOR EXPRESSING AS MY CONVICTION THE THOUGHT THAT THIS ARTICLE PUBLISHED IN THE REVIEW DOES NOT REFER TO THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN AS MINISTERS OF THE GOSPEL, BUT RATHER TOUCHES UPON THE QUESTION OF SETTING APART, FOR SPECIAL DUTIES IN LOCAL CHURCHES, GOD-FEARING WOMEN IN SUCH CHURCHES WHERE CIRCUMSTANCES CALL FOR SUCH ACTION.{DG 255.1}
"AND MAY I ADD THAT SISTER WHITE, PERSONALLY, WAS VERY CAREFUL ABOUT EXPRESSING HERSELF IN ANY WISE AS TO THE ADVISABILITY OF ORDAINING WOMEN AS GOSPEL MINISTERS. SHE HAS OFTEN SPOKEN OF THE PERILS THAT SUCH GENERAL PRACTICE WOULD EXPOSE THE CHURCH TO BY A GAINSAYING WORLD; BUT AS YET I HAVE NEVER SEEN FROM HER PEN ANY STATEMENT THAT WOULD SEEM TO ENCOURAGE THE FORMAL AND OFFICIAL ORDINATION OF WOMEN TO THE GOSPEL MINISTRY, TO PUBLIC LABOR SUCH AS IS ORDINARILY EXPECTED OF AN ORDAINED MINISTER.{DG 255.2}
"THIS IS NOT SUGGESTING, MUCH LESS SAYING, THAT NO WOMEN ARE FITTED FOR SUCH PUBLIC LABOR, AND THAT NONE SHOULD EVER BE ORDAINED; IT IS SIMPLY SAYING THAT SO FAR AS MY KNOWLEDGE EXTENDS, SISTER WHITE NEVER ENCOURAGED CHURCH OFFICIALS TO DEPART FROM THE GENERAL CUSTOMS OF THE CHURCH IN THOSE MATTERS."--C. C. CRISLER.{DG 255.3}
At the conclusion of this you have C.C. Crisler the sec. giving opinion. So therefore I came up with this same scenario of EGW stand on ordination but fail to take in consideration of an opinion other then EGW wrote on.
The people who obey God's commandments are now the light of the world, the preserver of the Word of God in its purity, and they are elevating and exalting the law of God,--the only true, infallible standard of character in our world,--therefore every man and woman whom Heaven has intrusted with this most sacred truth are required to be active instruments to diffuse the light to others. The church who obeys God's law is to send forth her sons as missionaries and preachers, and her daughters as teachers.
-
Man (in the generalized sense) is the one who places limits on God. Man assumes to know what God meant in every word He has uttered or has guided the hand of man to write. One can not know the heart of God. The church knows only the truths that God has revealed, each time at a point where man was ready to comprehend.
The easiest way to "prove" Mrs. White's position on the ordination of woman would be to provide contextually framed quotes from her writings that indicate her position against the practice. If they do not exist, then one must look at her actions in regards to the act. In this instance she did not reject, by word or act, the ordination conveyed to her by the church. That was in a day and age when woman in our society didn't even have the right to vote. Her actions are a strong statement. She did not take the cloak of ordination of her own volition as that would have been placing herself above church leadership (leaders who were called of God to serve and accepted), but accepted the act of church leadership when it did. To call into question that act of the church is to insinuate those men acted without spending time on their knees in communion with God and at their desks in study. I have no doubt they sought the Lord's guidance and acted accordingly. One, today, can question their motives or the way in which they arrived at their decisions, but that is a judgment that is not ours to make. Only God sees the hearts of man (and he looks past the wedding rings and pants in doing so) and can know intent.
Women can powerfully present the word of God in the home or in the pulpit. Being called of God is not something man can question - that is a conversation between the called and God.
-
While EGW was ordained in her calling as prophetess/messenger, there were still others that the denomination ordained as pastors, "ordained to preach". So essentailly after the deaths of EGW and these other women the church deemed that women had no more to say. No one has ever said they changed because they recieved new light, or anything. they just stopped and adopted the world's sexist view. Is it not Paul who says, there is neither male female, Jew or Gentile...........?
Thank you Johann for putting that up there. I was about wore out yesterday. But here again, we must watch the wording exactly and what it means. "She was chosen, she was ordained for a "messenger" it does not say the word "preacher", "pastor". She performed as she was instructed. I believe she was too humble to decide what "God would have or instruct somebody else". So she stayed away from direct comment as she was shown another way. I wished I could say words better to what I mean.
-
Man (in the generalized sense) is the one who places limits on God. Man assumes to know what God meant in every word He has uttered or has guided the hand of man to write. One can not know the heart of God. The church knows only the truths that God has revealed, each time at a point where man was ready to comprehend.
The easiest way to "prove" Mrs. White's position on the ordination of woman would be to provide contextually framed quotes from her writings that indicate her position against the practice. If they do not exist, then one must look at her actions in regards to the act. In this instance she did not reject, by word or act, the ordination conveyed to her by the church. That was in a day and age when woman in our society didn't even have the right to vote. Her actions are a strong statement. She did not take the cloak of ordination of her own volition as that would have been placing herself above church leadership (leaders who were called of God to serve and accepted), but accepted the act of church leadership when it did. To call into question that act of the church is to insinuate those men acted without spending time on their knees in communion with God and at their desks in study. I have no doubt they sought the Lord's guidance and acted accordingly. One, today, can question their motives or the way in which they arrived at their decisions, but that is a judgment that is not ours to make. Only God sees the hearts of man (and he looks past the wedding rings and pants in doing so) and can know intent.
Women can powerfully present the word of God in the home or in the pulpit. Being called of God is not something man can question - that is a conversation between the called and God.
Well said.
And again, it was not until after the death of EGW that the church took its stance against women being in ministry leadership.
-
In this instance she did not reject, by word or act, the ordination conveyed to her by the church.
When was Ellen White ordained by church leaders, and to what was she thus ordained, if she was?
-
Where in Scripture do you find the term "ordination"?
-
Ordination is a tool to organize workers, create a credential so people have some means, whereby, to identify those who are sanctioned by the church. The one thing it doesn't do, is indicate whether or not the individual has been called by God to preach, minister, or teach. It is a human construct in a world where power is established through the development of hierarchies.
The Bible does not indicate that any should be kept from preaching the message of "Love God with all your heart, and everyone else as much as you love yourself." All are to be called. If God is willing to call the rocks to cry out (because man refuses to share God's love) will men stand in the way and deny ordination to the rocks? God calls men and women to preach his word. He always has, He always will. It is arrogant of man to think he knows better than God does.
-
No it is arrogant to add, take away and justify opinions that never have been written or stated. Many times the church does not have rules of the SP. They went against the jewelry, wearing of the gold, diamonds, and their whatnots. How will you now justify wearing a ring in church manual just because the church did it when she gives her statement that it is just "vanity" in all reasoning.
Anyman, all vanity will keep you from the gates. Do you realize how that is not a drop in the bucket like you are sounding off with.
EGW above all -worried about being chosen for this "task" thinking it would cause her the least "vanity".She infact made a bargin with God, did you know that?? That is she did this task requested of her that a promise that she would not gain "vanity" and lose her soul. How about that? Then you treat this so lightly and come off with the opinion that God looks beyond "vanity". I really wonder why some on here even call themselves SDA other then to "jest" against what the actual language she was inspired and used. It is very plain to me and I have no problem with complying or finding excuses why I should copy brazen women running after all women's movements. She not only was faithful, but set an example, and she explained it well at her baptism. Did you grasp that??
The example of the stumpling blocks are now in view through out. and very few so called Adventist will enter (not my statements either) and I totally understand it. The worst place to be in on that great Day is in the class of the unjust. Volume 5. The unjust seems to be the very worst class as they had the message (Sanctification)went to church but failed in their "Justification" (actions)and then lost "Salvation" You need to read Vol. 5. The Just are people before the 3 angels message. As like Miller and some of the others mentioned from generations raised with the "just" the unjust--(the church goers,) That will have the most terror. The wicked who never wanted or cared about religion or knew will be more like they never were. That is too vivid to me to think I can change words and statements and examples given. Not from the church but from EGW and her example.
-
No it is arrogant to add, take away and justify opinions that never have been written or stated.
Would that include the opinion that women are not qualified to be ordained pastors and elders? Nowhere does EGW or the Bible state that. It has certainly been added and justified, but never written or stated.
-
Anyman, all vanity will keep you from the gates.
I see no where in Scripture where it says the wearing of a wedding ring (or if I were female the wearing of pants) will keep me from heaven. What will is the failure to accept the free gift of salvation and allowing God to work His will in my life. I can not work my way into heaven and that truth was given to us clearly through the lives of the Reformers. If in my ever growing relationship with God, He convicts me that there is an area of my life that needs change He will lead me in changing my life. To focus on jewelery is to miss the point of God's acceptance of each who diligently seek him.
Your insistence on these superficial issues reminds me of a "parable" a pastor once shared during a sermon.
It seems that there was a man who met Peter when he arrived in heaven. Peter offered to show the man around, excited the man accepted. As they walked the streets of gold they passed numerous churches. The first was filled with song spilling out of the windows and the man asked Peter who that was, to which Peter responded, it was the Southern Baptists. Further along the road was the sound of the most sincere prayers floating from the open doors. Peter explained that those were the Quakers. They continued to walk and Peter continued to share who was worshiping in the churches along the way. After awhile Peter turned up another avenue and as they did he told the man that he couldn't speak until Peter indicated it was okay. They walked in silence past another church. A few blocks down the road Peter told the man he could once again talk and of course he asked who was worshiping in the last church they passed. Peter said, "That was the Seventh-day Adventists. We had to be quiet because they think they are the only ones up here."
A very powerful story about the triumphalist mind set. No man has all of God's truth. God has revealed all that man is capable of comprehending. We have no idea who will be in heaven. What will you do if Osama bin Laden is standing next to you as you step onto the streets of gold? If you can not love him and accept him as he is here on earth, how will you ever do so in heaven? You won't, you will be miserable there. We are called to love all and grieve the sin that controls their lives.
There is a reason God directs us NOT to judge another man. We can not know the heart. We do not know the place in their spiritual journey they occupy when we meet them. There is nothing wrong with modesty and simplicity. Your concept of that however is not definitive for all others, and rightly so - that is a conversation between each of us and God. The heart is where God find's His home and we can not know what He is doing there with each individual. I am reminded of three of quotes from Brennan Manning:
"But when we are securely rooted in personal intimacy with the Source of life, it will be possible to remain flexible but not relativistic, convinced without being rigid, willing to confront without being offensive, gentle and forgiving without being soft and true witnesses without being manipulative."
"The love of Christ embraces all without exception."
"None of us has ever seen a motive. Therefore, we don't know we can't do anything more than suspect what inspires the action of another. For this good and valid reason, we're told not to judge. Tragedy is that our attention centers on what people are not, rather than on what they are and who they might become."
God knows who we are in our hearts and that is all that matters on that great day. We are lucky He isn't like we are - filled with judgment and arrogant righteousness.
-
No it is arrogant to add, take away and justify opinions that never have been written or stated.
Would that include the opinion that women are not qualified to be ordained pastors and elders? Nowhere does EGW or the Bible state that.
I think some common ground for all of us is the position that men are not qualified to give birth to babies. So we can agree that there are some differences in roles between the sexes that are impossible to bridge.
The Bible does place men in the role of spiritual and family leadership rather than women, and it seems that most women want men to fill those roles.
Some might characterize the office of prophet as being an office of leadership, but there appears to me to be some differences between the two.
The problem is that one cannot ordain women as ministers/elders without making of none effect certain passages in Paul's writings, passages which utilize logic based on creation and God's curse after man's fall.
-
Men cannot give birth, but neither the Bible or EGW state that women cannot pastor, and although men cannot give birth, women do succesfully pastor, as they did throughout EGW's career. And the church did not take it's stance against women until she was gone, as she took no such position. And at no time did she rebuke the practice, forbid it, state that that it was wrong, or in any manner suggest that her female contemporaries who were pastoring should stop or be stopped. I could be wrong, but from everything I have seen brought up by Bachelor and on here, this seems to be a very clear example of man adding and taking away as no one has been able to show any statement forbidding women from the ministry.
Bachelor did make the statement that women are less intelligent than men by an average of 5 point on the IQ scale as part of his argument against women, but I found that to be nothing more than reaching for straws in a lost argument, and utterly offensive at best.
-
Hmm, I never can say that I ever gave examples of St. Peter jokes and they are simply foolish. and do not waste my time with such rhetoric in simpleton nonsense examples.
It is also quite obvious that there is no need for some to read SP. It is not essential or important for a self made Christian. Self made are symptoms of total liberalism in all things and this could be fatal for one thing.
EGW secretary made very clear how careful she was in her statements and why. True she did not make the above statements as her given intelligence gave the correct view on what woman "should do". You missed the part where the letter was written back explaining to where and whom had the authority and she gave the correct meaning of what she meant in a previous article. She corrected their view. and the church for sometime did likewise....until it raises its head again.
If that was her stance she would have stated that woman should get into the movement. But she did not tell them to get out and go be preachers and get into the women movements. She gave very sure pictures of what they should do. and yes, women can prove they can do anything a man can do ..until there is not difference. So how far do you want to go? I agree with Batchelor on the intelligence of women in these matters.
You see it made no difference putting the exact writings on here as wording was not carefully read word for English word or there would be no come backs or doubts. She writes in clear distinct message. Justifications are just not between the lines.
-
And at no time did she rebuke the practice, forbid it, state that that it was wrong, or in any manner suggest that her female contemporaries who were pastoring should stop or be stopped.
In actuality, what she did was rebuke the practice of having ministers simultaneously serve as settled pastors of churches as a general rule. In other words, she allowed for some exceptions, but she opposed making the exception the rule, as it has become today.
Can you cite some examples of female contemporaries that were pastoring in Ellen White's day?
-
Some years ago I was challenged to do some research on the development of some of our local churches in Denmark. I plowed through old church records and read articles in our church magazine. Officially it seemed like some of the brethren got most of the credit for the progress, and yet I discovered that one of our most successful evangelists in the beginning of the 20th century was a woman. She preached as much as the male pastors or evangelists, both on Sabbath and at public meetings. She played the guitar and sang as well. She prepared groups of people for baptism. The reports indicated she went to different places alone to establish new churches. The new members were baptized by the conference president.
Her official title was "Bible Worker" although she did the work of pastors and evangelists. I have actually seen her guitar which probably still exists.
-
Tinka,
Mrs. White would be appaled that you require women to look at her for how to live a Christian life. I don't doubt that she would correct you and remind you that every Christian is to keep their eyes on the life of Christ for the only example of how a Christian should live their life. His ways are to be our ways. His Father calls whom He will to be ministers. Man on the other hand has decided that he knows best who should and should not be recognized as being the service of the Creator. If men are to be the only ones ordained to spead the Gospel "officially" then why did two men reject the call that Mrs. White accepted. God then chose a women, setting the example for us to follow - He calls men and women to preach and we dare to second guess Him. Christians do far more to slow the work of God than non-Christians do.
-
The appaling would come in view of your directions. In fact you should know why that EGW was the 3rd that excepted. Since you are such an expert on the in between scenes of her writings. I absolutely know why so what is your answer as your statement would not be of that if you knew what you were talking about.
-
I am very clear as the the sequence of events that led God to call Mrs. White. Numerous church history classes at an SDA institution give me a very deep background in the subject. However, I am not sure you are clear on the subject. If you would like to dig deeper I can offer a couple of titles where you can find the details.
Again, you have failed to respond to any questions and provide any references that support your position. To date in this thread you have nothing more than your "say so" as a means to support your position. You have offered no Scripture or Spirit of Prophecy references to support your position. You have based your position on nothing more than your "take on things." Why don't you begin by answering Johann's very pertinent question in regards to where one might find Biblical support for man's institution of the ordination process. Provide some Scriptural references and Spirit of Prophecy corroboration to support your claim that women should not be ordained preachers of the gospel. Then provide quotes from Mrs. White where she tells anyone that women should not be ordained. Provide references where she expressly rejected the churches official recognition of her as a minister of the gospel via ordination.
Again, it is God's place to call men and women to the ministry of preaching. Man can not second guess God. You can either trust Him or not. I choose to trust Him and hear His message whether it be delivered by a man or a woman. Church ordination is not required of God.
-
are you blind or something? look back on pages where inserts are posted. Just your usual manner as in all that you say and do. Its halarious in your statements to Bob and your misunderstandings. You do do not read his words proplerly either and come back with entirely a whole different secenario then what he said. Sounds like you could do better at housekeeping or something or stay in the business of maybe real estate ??besides stating your own opinion what somebody else is actually saying.
-
I have read every post in this thread and have yet to read anything in your postings that unequivocally indicates that Mrs. White spoke against the ordination of woman. It appears it is you who is reading intent between the lines. You have not provided any quote from Mrs. White where she expressly speaks against the act of ordaining women. The reason you haven't is because you can't. Your own postings say she was cautious with the subject. That alone indicates that she did not speak against it. She realized it would be a touchy subject and must have felt the time was not ripe for dealing with the subject. Her caution could have been as much because the social climate of the time was not advantageous for woman to be accepted as preachers of the Gospel as your speculative interpretation.
You can continue to insult but that doesn't make your case. Oh, and I've never been in the real estate business in my life and I do quite well keeping my house clean along with all my other responsibilities. As for RJP, you are more than welcome to partake of his folly . . . but Scripture doesn't have much positive to say for those who engage in evil folly.
Now, again, if you can provide a definitive quote from Spirit of Prophecy or verse of Scripture that supports your claim that woman should not be ministers of the Gospel there are many here who would like to read it. Until then, your position is unsupportable.
-
I did and you just can't grasp it. nor the legal documents your so confused about. I really do not understand the time given you back on any post by anyone. end.
-
Full document: http://www.scribd.com/Ordination-Final/d/28999707
"Recently a nationally known television personality in Adventist circles spoke at some length on this subject in a public forum. His remarks were televised, have traveled far and wide on the internet, and have reopened discussion of this important subject.
It would be very easy to view his remarks as nothing more than an emotional polemic designed to galvanize his base to support his particular position at the upcoming meetings and to dismiss them out of hand. His arguments, though, bear careful and thoughtful scrutiny because they are the major arguments put forth by the Jewish spiritual and national leadership in Old Testament times and by the New Testament Church’s leadership in the dark and middle ages and even today when it is argued that women should not be ordained to gospel ministry.
One thing we do not wish to do is to “muzzle Paul!” At the same time, we need to use good hermeneutics as we seek to determine just what he meant in certain places and instances. As Peter said so eloquently, “ . . . our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking . . . as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand . . .” 2 Peter 3:15-16
Using the conservative Historical-grammatical method, it is fair to try to determine what of Paul’s statements are personal and cultural and what are based on sound theology. Even when he is talking about clearly held beliefs we need to ask which are his opinion and which are a clear “thus says the Lord.” The statements most often used to combat the notion of ordaining women are as follows:
Colossians 3:18-20 - Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.
This passage sounds pretty clear-cut. In the family, wives are to subject themselves to their husbands. In the original Greek it is even clearer - wives obey your husbands!
What those who like this verse rarely do is to quote the parallel passage in Ephesians 5:21-33 where Paul says, “Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Ephesians 5:21 (In fairness, the speaker referred to above did, albeit very much out of context.) The identical word is used in both passages. Paul goes on to describe what he intends in Ephesians 5:33 when he says that each one should love his wife as he does himself and the wife should respect her husband. The meaning of the subjection Paul admonishes wives to have for their husband is not blind obedience, but respect. Men are challenged to give up themselves (their pride, power and desire to control) for their wives as Jesus gave up himself for the church. Love always gives up it’s desire to dominate and serves. Paul clarifies his meaning when he says that husbands are to spiritually lead their wives to God by giving up themselves and becoming servants in love to lead them to a relationship with God.
This is far from the power and pride of position that evidences many who wish to use this passage to exert their predominance over women."
-
EGW statement is more then sufficient for me. I read all your link and find the continual efforts of denial, replacing and making it justified with a person that seems to use all the justifications in page after page of opinions in between lines of Paul & similitude's or links that would change church's beginning foundations.
She gives Direct why answer --reasoning and Statement of EGW:
SHE HAS OFTEN SPOKEN OF THE PERILS THAT SUCH GENERAL PRACTICE WOULD EXPOSE THE CHURCH TO BY A GAINSAYING WORLD; BUT AS YET I HAVE NEVER SEEN FROM HER PEN ANY STATEMENT THAT WOULD SEEM TO ENCOURAGE THE FORMAL AND OFFICIAL ORDINATION OF WOMEN TO THE GOSPEL MINISTRY, TO PUBLIC LABOR SUCH AS IS ORDINARILY EXPECTED OF AN ORDAINED MINISTER.{DG 255.2}
gainsay
"to contradict," c.1300, lit. "say against," from O.E. gegn- "against" + say. "Solitary survival of a once common prefix" [Weekley], which was used to form such now-obsolete compounds as gain-taking "taking back again," gainclap "a counterstroke," gainbuy "redeem," and gainstand "to oppose." Related: Gainsaid; gainsaying.
gain·say (g?n-s?', g?n's?')
tr.v. gain·said (-s?d', -s?d'), gain·say·ing, gain·says (-s?z', -s?z')
To declare false; deny. See Synonyms at deny.
To oppose, especially by contradiction.
So what do you have here??? Her exact answer and fact written way back then.
With one word "Peril" up against another man's opinion pages long against one word. A word that used by her to superseed all opinions. A word to me that meant trouble, evil or bad problems.
One word that I understood was good for all ages and generations or eras.
I believe her and sealed in my belief. She was God's messenger. Each word important and each word "guarded" with Holy SPirit at the helm.
DB referenced in the article was a cut down within but not really mentioning his name. DB studies words and parallels but not in the way this person does to bring in new doctrine or change the old foundations.
Rev.22:19 And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life....
that means the Book including what Paul wrote. and to whomever that "read between the lines for their own unsupported opinions for the church to follow".
-
Full article: http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/wo/haloviakchapter.htm
"Lulu Russell Wightman
Lulu Russell Wightman was the most successful minister in New York state for more than a decade. Her ministry began when she was licensed as a minister in 1897 and continued even after she left New York state to engage in religious liberty work in Kansas and Missouri in 1908. The results from Mrs. Wightman’s ministry rank her not only as the most outstanding evangelist in New York during her time, but among the most successful within the Adventist Church for any time period. As a licensed minister, Mrs. Wightman pioneered work that established companies or churches in a number of places in New York where Adventism had never gained a foothold before.
In 1901 the New York Conference president sent this note to John Wightman, Lulu’s husband: "Enclosed find a small token of appreciation from the Conference Committee for your work in assisting your wife. "2 Mrs. Wightman was the licensed minister, and the conference sent money to her husband in appreciation for his assistance to her. How is it that such a thing could occur? Mrs. Wightman was one of more than 20 Seventh-day Adventist women who were licensed as ministers in the 19th century. Was there something wrong with the 19th century Adventist Church? After all, there is no scriptural authority for licensing women as ministers, but that is precisely what happened in the church during Ellen White’s day."
"Ellen White’s 1895 Statement Concerning Ordination
Here’s what Ellen White said in 1895—and it is truly a landmark statement:
Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service of the Lord should be appointed to visit the sick, look after the young, and minister to the necessities of the poor. They should be set apart to this work by prayer and laying on of hands. In some cases they will need to counsel with the [local] church officers or the [conference] minister; but if they are devoted women, maintaining a vital connection with God, they will be a power for good in the church. This is another means of strengthening and building up the church. We need to branch out more in our methods of labor. Not a hand should be bound, not a soul discouraged, not a voice should be hushed; let every individual labor; privately or publicly, to help forward this grand work.12
No matter how one interprets that statement, it is clear that Ellen White is proclaiming that it was possible for Seventh-day Adventist women to be ordained "with perfect propriety." The act of ordaining women had not occurred prior to that time. If we look closely at the statement, I believe we will see that it resolves the dilemma we seem to be in today. It seems to me there are two major aspects to consider: (1) can a woman truly be a minister, as we understand ministry, and (2) would we be acting against Scripture to ordain a woman?"
"Once it was recognized that a woman could be ordained to something, the ordination question was resolved, because women were already licensed as ministers and defined by Mrs. White to be appropriately involved in the most relevant ministries then embraced by the church. They were doing the vitally necessary pastoral labor; they were working along Christ’s lines of ministry; they were preaching the Word; they were ministering in the fullest sense as defined by Mrs. White.
Indeed, she observed: "We need to branch out more in our methods of labor" and we should neither "bind" nor "discourage" those who embraced this kind of ministry either as ordained lay workers (those who labored "privately") or as ordained conference employees (those who labored "publicly"). Notice again her statement: "Not a hand should be bound, not a soul discouraged, not a voice should be hushed; let every individual labor, privately or publicly, to help forward this grand work."16 The nature of the Christian Help Work ministry, to which her statement clearly refers, had both lay and official aspects; and women clearly were eligible for ordination to it."
"We can see that Ellen White considered women as ministers during her time and that she favored the act of ordaining women. Women were "pastors of the flock of God" during the time when "pastoring" was a newly emerging vital ministerial concept. And ‘‘men and women’’ who acted as the ‘‘Lord’s helping hand,’’ and who were working as Christ did in combining a pastoral-evangelistic ministry to the "oppressed, rescuing those ready to perish," would be considered "priests of the Lord" and "ministers of our God," according to Ellen White’s analysis of Isaiah 61:6.30 Obviously Ellen White did not believe that because there were no women who served in the Old Testament priesthood, women were forever prohibited from the organized ministry.
The nineteenth century Seventh-day Adventist Church, largely because of the influence of Ellen White, was remarkably innovative as it grasped opportunities to exhibit a dynamic and versatile definition of ministry. Ellen White consistently defined ministry by those relevant functions its ministers performed. And it is obvious that women were allowed to perform all those relevant functions, excepting those which the church defined as belonging solely to the ordained minister.
When the church seemed to founder on the question of whether women could be ordained, Ellen White, in 1895, resolved that issue. She went further as she described why the early Christian church ordained Paul and Barnabas. The principle she expressed has obvious relevance to the question of women and ordination to ministry: "In order that their work should be above challenge, He instructed the church by revelation to set them apart publicly to the work of the ministry. Their ordination was a public recognition of their divine appointment to bear to the Gentiles the glad tidings of the gospel."
"As Mrs. White reflected upon the post-1888 focus upon justification by faith, she clearly perceived its implications concerning the nature of ministry:
We must look more to the presentation of God’s love and mercy to move the hearts of the people. We must have a sense of both the justice and mercy of God. Those who can blend together the law of God and the mercy of God can reach any heart. For years I have seen that there is a broken link which has kept us from reaching hearts; this link is supplied by presenting the love and mercy of God.33
Nine days after that statement Mrs. White addressed the ministers at the 1891 General Conference session and conveyed the sentiments of that address to her diary. The statement transcends all arguments concerning the ordination question. Ellen White is not here espousing a cause, for she penned the following to her diary as her understanding of the nature of ministry:
The Lord has given Christ to the world for ministry. Merely to preach the Word is not ministry. The Lord desires His ministering servants to occupy a place worthy of the highest consideration. In the mind of God, the ministry of men AND WOMEN existed before the world was created. [The premise that God had a preconceived concept of ministry for both men and women before He created the world destroys ideas of subordination and offers very telling evidence about Ellen White’s concept of the role of women in ministry.] He determined that His ministers should have a perfect exemplification of Himself and His purposes. No human career could do this work; so God gave Christ in humanity to work out His ideal of what humanity may become through entire obedience to His will and way. God’s character was revealed in the life of His Son. Christ not only held a theory of genuine ministry, but in His humanity He wrought out an illustration of the ministry that God approves. Perfection has marked out every feature of true ministry. Christ, the Son of the living God, did not live unto Himself, but unto God."
-
An Outline of the History of Seventh-day Adventists and the Ordination of Women
by Kit Watts*
Updated April 1995
1844: Messenger for God.
Ellen Harmon, 17, receives her first vision and commences a 70-year public ministry.
1857: D. Hewitt states that the force of Joel 2 supports women’s public ministry.
Review and Herald, Oct. 15, 1857, p. 190.
1858: James White challenges Review and Herald readers.
Urges that Joel 2 be viewed inclusively, noting that men and man in Scripture "generally means both male and female." Review and Herald, Jan. 7, 1858, p. 69.
1859: B. F. Robbins decries rules in any church that invoke 1 Cor. 14 and 1 Tim. 2
to silence women. Review and Herald, Dec. 8, 1859, pp. 21, 22.
1860: S. C. Welcome supported women’s equality,
claiming the "authority of divine revelation that male and female are one in Christ Jesus." Review and Herald, Oct. 15, 1860, pp. 109, 110.
1861: J. A. Mowatt declared it "a woman’s right" to participate publicly in worship.
Review and Herald, July 30, 1861, p. 65.
1861: Editor Uriah Smith supports women’s public ministry.
He quoted with approval a long extract from the Portadown News, "Women as Preachers and Lecturers." Review and Herald, July 30, 1861.
1868: M. W. Howard said Bible women (like Priscilla) were viable role models
for modem women. Review and Herald, Aug 18, 1868, p. 133.
1868: First Adventist women evangelists.
Sarah A. Hallock Lindsey begins meetings in New York state with her husband John. Ellen S. Edmonds Lane and her husband Elbert begin a long career as co-evangelists.
1871: First woman General Conference treasurer.
Adelia Patten Van Horn holds office from 1871-1873. She and her husband later become missionaries to the Walla Walla Valley.
1872: First woman is licensed as a minister.
Sarah A. Hallock Lindsey is recognized for her effective evangelism.
1877: Minerva Jane Loughborough Chapman becomes General Conference treasurer,
1877-1883. Also editor of Youth’s Instructor, 1875-1879, and 1884-1889.
1878: Evangelist Ellen S. Edmonds Lane is a licensed minister, 1878-1889,
working in Michigan, Ohio, Indiana, Virginia, and Tennessee.
1879: Julia Owen, of the Kentucky-Tennessee Conference,
is a licensed minister, 1878-1895.
1879, January 2: Adventists exegete Bible in favor of women.
"May Women Speak in Meeting," Review and Herald, by J. N. Andrews. Briefly exegetes 1 Cor. 14:31-36 and 1 Tim. 2:12 and defends women’s public role in preaching the gospel. Reprinted in Adventist Review, Feb. 4, 1988, p. 17.
1879, May 29. In a Review and Herald article, "Women in the Church,"
James White comments on 1 Cor. 14:34, 35 and 1 Cor. 11:3, and compares with New Testament and Old Testament practice involving women in leadership (Ex. 15:20, 21; Judges 4:4-10; Rom. 16:1-4, 6, 12; Acts 2:17; and Acts 21:8, 9.) Reprinted in Adventist Review, Feb. 4, 1988, p. 17-19.
1881, December 5: General Conference Session motion to ordain women.
At the 1881 General Conference (GC) session a motion is made to ordain women to gospel ministry. "Resolved, That females possessing the necessary qualifications to fill that position, may, with perfect propriety, be set apart by ordination to the work of the Christian ministry." Reported in Review and Herald, Dec. 20, 1881. Item referred to the General Conference Committee.
1884: Second SDA Yearbook lists several female licensed ministers:
Kansas—Mrs. R. Hill, Mrs. H. Enoch. Michigan—Mrs. E. B. Lane, Mrs.G. K. Owen. Minnesota—Anna M. Johnson, Libbie Collins. Ellen G. White is listed among those given ordination credentials by the General Conference.
1892, May 24: Biblical exegesis favors women.
G. C. Tenney writes for Review and Herald, "Women’s Relation to the Cause of Christ." Regarding 1 Cor. 13:34, 35, and 1 Tim. 2:12, he argues that it is "manifestly illogical and unfair to give to any passage of Scripture an unqualified radical meaning that is at variance with the main tenor of the Bible." Reprinted in Adventist Review, Feb. 4, 1988, p. 19-21.
1895, July 9: Ellen White calls for women’s ordination service.
In a Review and Herald article she says some women should be set apart for service in the church by "prayer and laying on of hands."
1897: Williams and Wightman licensed
Helen Williams receives license as an Adventist minister (1897-1914). Lulu Wightman receives license as an Adventist minister (1897-1907, 1909- 1910. She is listed in 1908 as an ordained minister. (See Josephine Benton, Called by God, Smithsburg, MD: Blackberry Hill Publishers, p. 80.)
1898, March 30.
General Conference Committee issues ministerial license to Mrs. S. M. I. Henry.
1898, December 6: First women’s ministry department established.
S. M. I. Henry outlines her plans for "a woman ministry" in a four-page supplement of the Review and Herald. She traveled and spoke widely in the denomination and her weekly feature for women appeared in the Review.
1899, March 4: General Conference Session.
S. M. I. Henry addressed the GC delegates in a sermon, focusing attention on the need for a women’s ministry. She urged women first to serve in the home as Christian mothers and wives, and second, to minister to others who came within their sphere of influence.
1900, January 6: Adventists ordain deaconesses.
W. C. White participates in an ordination service for the Ashfield church in Sydney, Australia, that includes deaconesses. (The event apparently is not widely publicized and is not rediscovered until Arthur Patrick publishes an article in the Adventist Review, January 16, 1986.)
1900, January 16: S. M. I. Henry dies.
Former WCTU evangelist and founder of a women’s ministry within the Seventh-day Adventist Church.
1902: Minnie Day Sype receives license as an Adventist minister (1902-1956).
As an evangelist raises up churches in the Oklahoma Territory and Iowa, at times performing marriages and baptisms.
1904: Alma Bjugg, a captain in the Salvation Army who converts to Adventism,
becomes the first native ministerial worker in Finland. She receives a ministerial license.
1915, July 16: Ellen G. White dies.
According to the SDA Encyclopedia, White was "cofounder of the SDA church, writer, lecturer, and counselor to the church, who possessed what SDA’s have accepted as the prophetic gift described in the Bible."
1918: Louise Kleuser pastors churches in New Haven, Connecticut.
1921: Mary Walsh is an effective evangelist in New England.
Licensed as a minister from 1921-1981 when the church decides not to allow even those women who have carried the credential in the past to continue doing so.
1932: Maybelle Vandermark [Goransson] graduates
from Washington Missionary College with a ministerial degree. Becomes associate pastor and teacher, assisting Lester Coon in a district of churches in Virginia (Potomac Conference).
1933-1935: Woman serves as sole pastor.
Maybelle Vandermark [Goransson] pastors a district of Virginia churches alone from 1933-1935. From 1940-1952 teaches Bible at Washington Missionary College and is assistant dean of women.
1945: Jessie Weiss Curtis receives license as an Adventist minister (1945-1972).
As an evangelist raises up several churches in Pennsylvania.
1948: Madelynn Jones [Haldeman] graduates with a degree in theology
from Columbia Union College.
IdaMatilainen begins 40 years of evangelistic efforts in Kainuu, a sparsely populated area of Finland near the Arctic Circle.
1949: Maybelle Vandermark [Goransson] completes an M.A. in archaeology,
SDA Theological Seminary, Washington, D.C.
Madelynn Jones [Haldeman] graduates from SDA Theological Seminary with an M.A. in theology and biblical theology.
First woman sponsored to seminary.
Lucille Harper [Knapp] graduates from SDA Theological Seminary with an M.A. in biblical languages. She is believed to be the first woman ever sponsored to attend the seminary (North Pacific Union).
1950, May 3: General Conference Officers discuss ordination.
"A. V. Olson explained. . . A statement from the pen of Sister White, as found in the Review and Herald of July 9, 1895, has been understood by some to provide for the ordination of certain sisters in church service. After some discussion, it was
"Agreed, To recommend to the General Conference Committee following the session that a small committee be appointed to study and report on this question."—Minutes, GC Officers Meeting, May 3, 1950.
1955: Leona G. Running graduates with an M.A. in Greek and Hebrew
from the SDA Theological Seminary and joins the seminary faculty.
-
1961: Lucille Harper Knapp joins the religion faculty of Walla Walla College.
1964: Leona G. Running completes her Ph.D. in Semitic languages
from Johns Hopkins University. Continues teaching at the SDA Theological Seminary.
1966: Margaret Hempe joins University Church staff in Loma Linda as a Bible instructor.
1968: Margarete Prange graduates with a degree in theology
at Marienhoehe Seminary, Darmstadt, Germany. Becomes co-pastor in Biclefeld district 1970-1976.
1968, March 28: Letter from W. Duncan Eva,
President, Northern European Division toW. R. Beach, GC Secretary, requests counsel on ordaining women in Finland.
1968, April 8: Officers discuss Northern European Division request for counsel on ordaining women.
"The Northern European Division has requested counsel regarding ordination of women. The question has arisen in Finland. Historically, Seventh-day Adventists have not ordained women. Yet it is believed that the subject should be listed for the 1968 Council agenda. It was "Agreed, to list on the agenda for the 1968 Autumn Council the subject of ordination of women."—Minutes of GC Officers Meeting, April 8, 1968.
1968, September 30: GC officers appoint committee to study ordination.
"The Home and Overseas Officers briefly discussed the desirability of a study on the theology of ordination of women." Committee appointed: H. W. Lowe, Raoul Dederen, M. K. Eckenroth.
1970, June 5: GC officers discuss role of women.
GC officers agreed to appoint "an adequate committee to consider this large topic . . . and to submit a report for consideration at the 1970 Autumn Council."—Minutes, GC Officers Meeting, June 5, 1970.
1972: First woman ordained as local elder.
Josephine Benton ordained as local church elder, Brotherhood Church, Washington, D.C., by Potomac Conference and Columbia Union Conference presidents, W. G. Quigley and Cree Sandefur, respectively.
1972, June 21: Far Eastern Division requests counsel about ordaining women.
"The Far Eastern Division has requested counsel about ordaining women. The Biblical Research Committee has been assigned the task of studying ‘the place of women in the church.’ It is believed that the Far Eastern Division’s request should be referred to the Biblical Research Committee for study and counsel...
"Agreed, to refer the Far Eastern Division request about ordaining women to the Biblical Research Committee."—Minutes of GC Officers Meeting, June 21, 1972.
1973, July 19: Study on "the role of women" begins.
GC committee establishes an ad hoc committee on the role of women in the church with the goal of studying women’s ordination as well. W. J. Hackett, GC vice president, serves as chair; Gordon Hyde of the Biblical Research Institute (BRI) is secretary.
1973: In Takoma Park, Maryland, Kit Watts joins the Sligo Church
pastoral staff, as minister of publications (April 2) and Josephine Benton joins as an associate pastor (September 1). Benton is issued a ministerial license. Margaret Hempe at the University Church in Loma Linda, California, is acknowledged as a pastor.
Margarete Prange’s success as a pastor in Germany prompts her conference leaders to write GC leaders and ask about ordaining her as an elder, one factor that leads to Robert H. Pierson’s calling of the Camp Mohaven Conference.
1973, September: Camp Mohaven, Ohio.
The ad hoc committee convenes at Camp Mohaven in Ohio [junior campi and discusses 29 papers from men and women on the role of women in the church. The group included 13 men and 14 women.
Recommends, That women be ordained as local church elders, and those with theological training be hired as "associates in pastoral care" primarily in multi-member pastoral staffs. Also, proposes a pilot program that would lead to the ordination of women in 1975.
1973, October: Annual Council calls for "more study."
Annual Council votes to "receive" the Camp Mohaven report. It also votes "that continued study be given to the theological soundness of the election of women to local church offices which require ordination" and "that in areas receptive to such action, there be continued recognition of the appropriateness of appointing women to pastoral evangelistic work."
1974, October: Annual Council calls for "more study."
Annual Council votes to continue studying the theological issues. Says, "The time is not ripe nor opportune" to ordain women to gospel ministry.
1975, March: Spring Meeting—ends 100-year policy of granting women ministerial licenses.
ALSO adopts policy permitting the ordination of deaconesses and women elders.
Spring Meeting approves women’s ordination as deaconesses. Also permits women to be ordained as elders if "the greatest discretion and caution" is exercised. Urges women to become Bible workers, or even assistant pastors, but notes that the church will grant them only a missionary license, thus ending 100 years of granting women ministerial licenses. (Emphasis added).
BRI papers on women in the church.
A set of 13 scholarly papers, based on the Camp Mohaven work, is prepared by the Biblical Research Institute but is not released to church members for study.
1975.
Mrs. W. H. Anderson (Central Union), Mary E. Walsh (Pacific Union), and Mrs. Josephine Benton (Potomac Conference) are among the last women listed in the SDA Yearbook as having ministerial licenses.
1976, October 28.
Biblical Research Institute director Gordon Hyde summarizes the theological work done by BRI on women since Camp Mohaven in Review and Herald. Asks, "If God has called a woman, and her ministry is fruitful, why should the church withhold its standard act of recognition [ordination]?"
1976: European woman becomes sole pastor.
Margarete Prange becomes pastor of the Galsenkirchen, Bottrop, Gladbeck, and Dorsten churches in East Germany.
1977, February: First Adventist woman chaplain certified.
Frances Osborne, a chaplain for Huguley Memorial Medical Center in Fort Worth, Texas, is certified as a Fellow in the College of Chaplains at the annual national conference meeting in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
1977, March: Spring Meeting—discussion of women’s ordination dropped.
General Conference president Robert H. Pierson tells Spring Meeting that the role of women is under continuing study and a report will be given at the 1977 Annual Council. However, when a poll of the world field is taken and shows a negative response, women’s ordination is deleted from the Annual Council agenda.
1977: Annual Council votes for Associates in Pastoral Care.
The 1977 AC designates the term "Associates in Pastoral Care" to identify persons who are employed on pastoral staffs, but who are not in line for ordination (women).
1977, September.
The debate over ordaining women elders heats up in many churches, including Sligo Church in Takoma Park, Maryland, where many GC employees who oppose it are members.
BRI papers on women released to Sligo Church.
Responding to a request by James Londis and Kit Watts, NAD president Neal C. Wilson secures permission for Sligo Church to reproduce 13 papers which have been unanimously endorsed by the GC’ s Biblical Research Institute, and which find no theological obstacle to ordaining women. In October, Wilson and Raoul Dederen are among the guest speakers in a Wednesday night series as Sligo Church continues the debate.
1978, January: Sligo Church fails to endorse ordination of women elders.
Although 60% ofSligo Church members vote in favor of ordaining women as elders, the motion fails since the GC, Columbia Union, and Potomac Conference have stipulated a "clear majority" is necessary to settle the matter, (interpreted as a 66% or two-thirds vote).
1979, October: Annual Council votes internships for women pastors, Bible instructors.
AC provides special internship allotments for Bible Instructors and
Associates in Pastoral Care to be distributed by the North American Division
(NAD) beginning in 1980.
Unordained males authorized to baptize in NAD.
Changes in NAD Working Policy permit unordained seminary graduates (male)1 to baptize, etc., in their local church. New policy also allows them to qualify for certain U.S. tax benefits.
1979, Fall: Women’s newsletter published.
Women in the metro Washington, D.C. area, led by Viveca Black, produce an Update of news for and about Adventist women. Forerunner of The Adventist Woman.
1979-1982: American woman becomes sole pastor.
Josephine Benton becomes pastor of the Rockville, Maryland, Seventh-day Adventist Church.
1980, April 17: GC Session in Dallas. GC president calls for women’s involvement.
In his keynote address, as his fifth priority, Neal C. Wilson states that "the church must find ways to organize and utilize the vast potential represented by our talented, consecrated women." He said, "I am not only urging that women be represented in the administrative structure of the church, but also that we harness the energies and talents of all the women so as to better accomplish the task of finishing the work assigned by our Lord."
1980: First Adventist woman earns Th.D. from SDA Theological Seminary.
Margit Suring of Finland earns her Th.D. in theology and archaeology, from the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary in Berrien Springs, Michigan.
1982: First women pastors sponsored for M.Div. degrees under the 1979 Annual Council’s plan.
Walla Walla theology graduates Becky Lacy and Collette Crowell are sponsored by their respective conferences (Southeastern California and Upper Columbia) for the M.Div. degree at the SDA Theological Seminary.
1982: AAW organizes.
The Association of Adventist Women (AAW) officially organizes with the goal to encourage Adventist women to achieve their full potential.
1982.
Lang Van, who holds a B .A. in theology from Collonges in France, teaches Bible to Cambodian refugees in Thailand, 1982-1984, pastors Cambodians living in the north of France (1984-1991), and moves to southeastern California to pastor refugees there.
1983.
Helen Tyler, a chaplain with the New England Memorial Hospital, becomes the second Adventist woman to be certified as a Fellow in the College of Chaplains. She completed an M.Div. degree in 1975 and a D.Min. degree in 1978 from Boston University.
Olive J. Hemmings completes a B.A. in theology at West Indies College, and in 1989 an M.A. in New Testament studies at Andrews University. She teaches religion at West Indies College.
1983: NAD Women’s Commission established.
Responding to a proposal that originated with Otillie Stafford and Jan Daffern, Warren Banfield, director for NAD’s Office of Human Relations, receives approval to establish the NAD Women’s Commission. Alice Smith is the first chairperson. (She is succeeded in 1986 by Thesba Johnston.) The commission is instructed by the GC not to discuss women’s ordination.
1984, March: Women pastors perform baptisms in NAD.
Potomac Conference Committee votes to permit eight local elders to baptize. Three are women in pastoral roles—Jan Daffem at Sligo Church, Frances Wiegand at Beltsville Church, and Marsha Frost in Virginia. The action precipitates trauma, particularly at the Beltsville, Maryland, church where many GC officers attend. Potomac Conference is chastised for defying GC authority and policy.
1984, July: Second annual AAW conference.
Dialogue with church leaders sought but rebuffed. BRI papers on women released after nine-year wait.
The Women of Mission Conference takes place at Andrews University. Early in 1984, Dr. Richard Lesher, BRI director, okayed the release of the nine-year-old BRI study papers on women (which continued the work begun at Camp Mohaven). But when he is elected as Andrews University president, his successor at BRI, Dr. George Reid, rescinds the decision. Not until one week before the conference is the decision reversed.
The first 100 copies of the 1975 BR! papers on the role of women are officially edited and released to interested church members.
(Julia Neuffer, veteran editor of the SDA Commentary series, assists BR! in preparing the final edited version.)
1984, August: Women pastors ordered to stop baptizing in NAD. New study on women’s ordination promised.
The entire Potomac Conference Committee is summoned to Washington, D.C., to meet with the GC officers, and asked to rescind their action that permitted women pastors to baptize (as local elders). The GC promises to renew a study of the ordination issue.
1984, October: Annual Council.
Women elders’ ordination policy reaffirmed.
Annual Council reaffirms 1975 Spring Meeting decision that women may be ordained as local elders. Votes to "advise each division that it is free to make provisions as it may deem necessary for the election and ordination of women as local church elders." Thus the provision is extended from NAD to the world field.
Commission on the Role of Women in the Church voted.
Annual Council also votes to call a Commission on the Role of Women in the Church, with representatives from each division, to study women’s ordination. Vows to settle the issue "definitively" at the 1985 GC session.
1984: First Adventist black woman becomes hospital chaplain.
Wanda Grimes Davis becomes a staff chaplain in the Regional Medical Center in Memphis, Tennessee. She wanted to become a military chaplain but could not because the U.S. armed forces required that all chaplains be ordained by the denominations they represent.
1984.
Sally Kiasiong Andriamiarisoa, having earned a B.A. in theology, becomes associate pastor in Mauritius, 1984-1986.
1985, March 26-28: Washington, D.C.
Commission on the Role of Women in the Church—I.
A 65-member commission meets in Washington, D.C., including 15 women, and decides against "definitive" decision on women’s ordination.
Recommends,
(a) more study, especially on Pauline material and church history, to be reviewed by a representative group in 1988, with actions to be brought to 1989 Annual Council;
(b) affirmative action for women in church leadership roles not requiring ordination;
(c) reform of present ordination practices—that men not be ordained unless in true ministerial work;
(d)furt her study on the status of women pastors in NAD to be considered at the 1985 Annual Council.
Spring Meeting accepts the report.
1985, June 6.
Four deaconesses are ordained in the Geneva, Switzerland, church. The action comes as a culmination of a nine-month study and hearing speakers G. Steveny, J. C. Verrechia, V. Haenni, E. Zuber, and F. Hugh. The Swiss/French conference president asks the senior pastor in Geneva to stop the ordination of women, believing that the Euro-African Division has not authorized ordination of women to any post and will not until the world church comes to an agreement.
1985, July 4-7.
Women’s ordination discussed openly for the first time during the first French-speaking Adventist Women’s Convention.
1985, July: GC Session in New Orleans.
Votes for affirmative action, more study on ordination.
GC delegates in New Orleans accept the recommendations from the 1985 Spring Meeting (above) to give further study to women’s ordination as ministers, to reform ordination practices for men, and to provide "affirmative action" by placing qualified women in leadership roles that do not require ordination.
Deaconess ordination contested.
However, a motion to update the Church Manual to reflect the church’s 1975 decision to permit the ordination of deaconesses is protested by Hedwig Jemison, and tabled, although the policy is not nullified.
1985, October: Annual Council.
Annual Council discriminates between men and women pastors.
Annual Council rejects the NAD recommendation that women pastors with seminary training be allowed to baptize and solemnize marriages as young men (in the U.S.) with the same qualifications have been doing since 1979. Annual Council states that women may work as ministers but should not expect ordination.
GC Women’s Ministries Advisory (WMA) Committee established.
In an action to educate the church on acceptable leadership roles for Adventist women, Annual Council appoints Betty Holbrook as coordinator of Women’s Ministries, in addition to her work as director of the GC’ s Home and Family Service. An advisory committee of women employed at the GC headquarters is setup to assist her. Its members include: Shirley Burton, Jocelyn Fay, Beverly Rumble, and Marie Spangler. Soon after, Elizabeth Sterndale and Marjorie Felder are added. WMA is specifically asked to encourage denominational editors to include positive articles about women in their publications.
NAD Women’s Advisory Representative.
Two days later Elizabeth Sterndale is appointed as Women’s Advisory Representative for NAD in addition to her full-time responsibilities in the NAD Health and Temperance Department.
1985: Lydia Justiano is chosen chairperson of the Women’s Ministries Committee
for the South American Division.
1986: Three women’s groups at the GCINAD become more public in their work
to educate the church on various women’s issues, (but are told not to discuss women’s ordination):
(1) Shepherdess International (specific support group for pastors’ wives);
(2) the revitalized NAD Women’s Commission sponsored by the Office of Human Relations (which held its first Town Meeting at Andrews University in the summer; NADWC also agrees to gather material for a book on various women’s issues; and
(3) the GC Women’s Ministries Advisory Committee, which began encouraging denominational papers to publish more news about women.
1986, January 16: Deaconess’ ordination attested among early Adventists.
Adventist Review publishes evidence that W. C. White ordained deaconesses at the Ashfield church in Sydney, Australia, on January 6, 1900. This transcends objections raised on ordaining deaconesses at 1985 GC session.
1986, February 8: Hispanic women ordained as elders in NAD.
Robert H. Carter, president of the Lake Union Conference, ordains three women elders at the Spanish church in Berrien Springs, Michigan: Marcia Gomez, Antonia Elenes, and Vita Marquez. The church business meeting had already voted overwhelmingly in favor of their ordination by 250-4.
1986, March.
The Seventh-day Adventist Healthcare Chaplains Association meeting in Denver, Colorado (during the National Conference of the College of American Chaplains) urges the hiring of more women in ministry.
1986, April 5: Church at Andrews University fails to approve women elders.
Pioneer Memorial Church members (Andrews University) vote in favor of ordaining women as local elders by 56 to 44%, but the motion fails because the church board had stipulated a 60% majority to settle the issue. The vote comes after a series of Wednesday night studies including speakers Richard Davidson, Patricia Mutch, and Russell Staples. Samuele Bacchiocchi emerges as an outspoken opponent of women’s ordination.
1986, May 2-4.
The 15th annual meeting of the West Coast Religion Teachers’ Conference, meeting at Pacific Union College, vote 40-0 (with one abstention) to support women’s ordination.
1986, Fall: Southeastern California Conference votes for equality.
SECC votes to treat unordained men and women equally regarding the issue of performing baptisms. The effect of the vote, since the church allows unordained males who are pastors to baptize, is to give women that privilege also.
1986, October 25.
The Newbold College Church in England ordains its first women elders:
Aulikki Nahkola and Cynthia Bent.
1986, December: NAD Bible teachers support women’s ordination.
Roger Dudley of Andrews University reports that 83% of Adventist Bible teachers in North America support women’s ordination. Dudley surveyed the religion faculties of 11 NAD colleges and the SDA Theological Seminary. The number of questionnaires returned is 94 out of 131.
1986: Yvonne Oster becomes church pastor in Lintioping, Sweden, 1986-1989.
1986, December 20: Women pastors resume baptizing in NAD.
Pastor Margaret Hempe baptizes two candidates in the University Church, Loma Linda, CA, at the request of the pastoral staff and more than 100 members of the University Church board.
1987.
Helen Tyler is certified as a Fellow by the American Association of Pastoral Counselors.
1987, February: Bacchiocchi goes into print.
Samuele Bacchiocchi publishes Women in the Church, a book that strongly opposes women’s ordination.
1987, May 1-3.
The West Coast Religion Teachers reaffirm their call for women’s ordination during their meeting at Walla Walla College. In particular, they name Madelynn Haldeman and Margaret Hempe as suitable candidates.
1987, May 21: PMC votes for women elders.
Members of Pioneer Memorial Church (Andrews University) vote to elect and ordain women elders by a 62.5% majority. Prior to the vote, members had received a 12-page document containing two position papers, for and against.
Senior pastor Dwight Nelson reverses his prior stand against women’s ordination.
1987, June 4: Study shows that age affects opinion on women’s ordination.
Roder Dudley puglishes date in the Adventist Review showing that 46% of NAD pastors favor ordination of women to the gospel ministry. Age is a factor. The majority of those under age 50 favor it, and the majority of those over 50 oppose it.
1987, August: Adventist Bible teachers in world church support women’s ordination.
Roger Dudley reports in Ministry Magazine on a study of religion teachers throughout the Seventh-day Adventist world church. Overall, 69% agreed that it was appropriate for women who have demonstrated their calling to ministry to be ordained as gospel ministers.
1987, October 7-9: NAD sponsors first gathering of women in ministry.
Of approximately 40 women in ministry in NAD, 23 attend the first meeting for SDA female chaplains and pastors coordinated by Bob Dale, assistant to NAD President Charles E. Bradford. Facilitator of the meeting is Elizabeth Sterndale.
1987, October 8-11: Dialogue between church leaders and women facilitated by AAW.
During its 5th annual conference, AAW succeeds in organizing the first open dialogue between women and church leaders on such women’s issues as pastoral ministry, church leadership, and ordination. Among those participating:
Neal C. Wilson, Charles E. Bradford, Warren Banfield, A. C. McClure, and George Reid.
1988, January 22-24: AWl organizes.
The Adventist Women’s Institute forms during a meeting at McCormack’ s Creek State Park (Indiana) and officially incorporates in California on January 27 with Fay Blix as its chair. The group determines to pursue for women full and equal participation in the church.
1988, February: Audio tape, "Our Stories."
AAW produces a 67-minute tape and printed 10-page booklet entitled Adventist Women in Ministry: Our Stories, featuring women pastors and chaplains from Sweden, Norway, Korea, Great Britain, Switzerland, and the United States. The material is sent to the 77 members preparing for the GC Commission on the Role of Women in the Church.
1988, February 4.
The Adventist Review publishes its first "AR Seminar," focusing on women in early Adventism, including reprints of articles defending women’s public roles by James White and J. N. Andrews.
1988, March.
Neal Wilson appoints Karen Flowers to replace Betty Holbrook, retiring chair of the GC Women’s Ministries Advisory Committee.
1988, March 24-27: Washington, D.C.
Commission on the Role of Women in the Church—II.
80 persons (including 19 women) from the world church meet at GC headquarters in Washington, D.C.
They recommend:
Further study is needed before a decision can be made on ordaining women.
Women testify to commission members.
For the first time, women pastors are invited to speak for themselves to the commission: Delores Robinson, pastor from Southeastern California Conference; Penny Shell, chaplain at Thorek Hospital in Chicago; and Eva Nora de Monroy, from Mexico. (Marsha Frost, pastor from Potomac Conference, was a commission member as she had also been in 1985.) Several Adventist women teachers are also invited to speak against ordination including: Mercedes Dyer, Loretta Johns, and Launce Durrant.
1988, April: TEAM organizes.
Time for Equality in Adventist Ministry is founded in Maryland specifically to work toward the ordination of candidates to the gospel ministry regardless of race, social class, or gender. Patricia Habada is chairperson.
1988, May 10, 11: NAD calls for end to discriminatory practices.
NAD leaders call for an end to discriminatory policies affecting Adventist women in ministry. During the meeting in Loma Linda, California, they vote unanimously their objection to the current discrepancies in how the church treats men and women who have the same training and qualifications.
1988, May.
The Potomac Conference echoes the NAD stand and votes to cease discriminating against women in ministry and permit them, along with unordained males, to baptize and marry in the local church.
1988.
Madelynn Jones Haldeman graduates from the SDA Theological Seminary at Andrews University, the second woman to earn a Th.D. there. She is a member of the religion faculty of Loma Linda University (now La Sierra University), Riverside, California campus.
1988, Summer.
The Oregon Conference establishes a Women’s Ministries Department chaired by Marge Moreno.
1988, October: Study finds that nearly 1,000 women elders serve in NAD.
The Institute of Church Ministry (at Andrews University) presents its survey reporting on the status of women elders. Researchers Carole Kilcher and Gan-Theow Ng find there are 960 ordained women elders serving the 3,036 churches alongside 14,495 male elders. Seventy-eight percent of those churches having women elders felt they strengthened the church. The survey also revealed that women function as elders in churches of every size and racial and cultural background.
1988, November 1.
Newbold College religion faculty pledges support for women entering theological study and seeking a career in pastoral ministry.
1988: Chinese woman pastor performs baptisms.
Mrs. Hui Ying Zhou is reported to have baptized at least 200 persons in Wuxi, China. She attracts up to 1,000 to Sabbath services.
1989, January 29: Gender Inclusiveness Task Force organized.
Delegates to the Southeastern California Conference’s (SECC) special constituency meeting establish a 12-member task force "to plan and implement a broad spectrum of programs and materials on gender inclusiveness in family and church." The action also states that it is the will of SECC to ordain women in ministry as soon as possible.
1989, March 14.
Seventh-day Adventist Healthcare Chaplains Association meeting in St. Louis, Missouri, calls the church "into a full recognition, by ordination, of the ministry of women."
1989, April 30: Ohio Conference wants to ordain woman.
The Ohio Conference executive committee endorses Pastor Leslie Bumgardner as a candidate for ordination.
1989, May 4: Columbia Union endorses woman for ordination.
The Columbia Union Conference executive committee endorses Pastor Leslie Bumgardner as a candidate for full ordination no earlier than August of 1990 on the basis that it is "morally right and theologically correct.
"
1989, May 21: SECC calls for women’s ordination.
The Southeastern California Conference constituents pass a resolution (279-179) mandating that local qualified women pastors be considered for ordination no sooner than August 1990.
1989, June 7.
The Pacific Union Conference executive committee votes a resolution urging the General Conference "to eliminate gender as a consideration for ordination to the gospel ministry." They add that "we endorse the ordination of qualified women to the gospel ministry in divisions, unions, and conferences where deemed helpful and appropriate."
1989, mid-June: NAD union presidents endorse women’s ordination.
AD union presidents vote unanimously to send an endorsement of women’s ordination to the Commission on the Role of Women meeting in Cohutta Springs, Georgia, "in those divisions where it would be deemed helpful and appropriate."
1989, mid-June: NAD Officers resolution.
By secret ballot, NAD officers endorse a resolution similar to the one passed by the Pacific Union Conference by a vote of 5-1.
1989, June: First black woman becomes sole pastor of a church.
Hyveth Williams, previously associate pastor at Sligo Church, becomes senior pastor of the Boston Temple, Boston, Massachusetts.
1989, July 12-18: Cohutta Springs, Georgia.
Commission on the Role of Women in the Church—III.
Votes no ordination for women; some pastoral privileges.
Commission members vote 56-11 in favor of a controversial two-pronged recommendation brought to them by the division presidents and GC officers present.
Recommends:
(a) Women not be ordained to gospel ministry, and
(b) that divisions may authorize qualified women in ministry to perform baptisms and marriages.
The commission has representatives from every world division, and includes 17 women. (Three divisions decline to send women: Inter-America, South America, and Eastern Africa.)
Survey of women in leadership.
Karen Flowers, GC Women’s Ministries Advisory coordinator, shares results of an international survey documenting the concerns of Adventist women in leadership.
The women attendees make recommendations.
Women commissioners caucus and submit a document to the commission calling for positive actions toward Adventist women including:
(a) equality and career opportunities,
(b) full-time women’s ministries coordinators,
(c) inclusive language in church documents,
(d) affirmative action bringing women into positions of leadership that do not require ordination,
(e) accountability for progress toward these goals.
1989, July 23.
Under the leadership of Rosa Banks, newly elected director of the Office of Human Relations (OHR), the NAD Women’s Commission adopts a mission statement and goals. NADWC operates through the sponsorship of OHR.
1989, September 28: Women leaders support women’s ordination.
A summary of Karen Flower’s international survey of Adventist women in leadership is published in the Adventist Review. Sixty-five percent of the women surveyed feel that the associate pastor of a local church should be ordained, and 74% feel it would be appropriate for women to serve in this capacity.
The survey identified 1,872 women working as administrators, departmental directors and associates, pastors, chaplains, and Bible instructors. Of these, 875 responded to the survey.
1989, October 7: "Celebration of Equality."
TEAM sponsors the event in Sligo Church which features Charles E. Bradford, Hyveth Williams, Madelynn Haldeman, Duncan and Wilmore Eva, Harold Camacho, singer Pat Taylor, and TV personality and Adventist pastor Clifton Davis.
1989, October: Annual Council.
Delegates vote 187-97 in favor of accepting the two-pronged recommendation from the Commission on the Role of Women in the Church, which met in Cohutta Springs—rejecting women’s ordination, but permitting qualified women to baptize and perform marriages (See above.)
A nod toward women’s concerns—but no promises:
Delegates also vote to "record our appreciation for" the women’s recommendations from Cohutta Springs, as revised by the GC officers, and state that they "encourage" each organizational entity and institution to "give study" to the concerns "so as to achieve the spirit and purpose of this proposal." They also recommend that women make up at least 25% of committees and boards "in those categories of membership where a sufficient number of women are eligible for membership."
1989, November 29: Women’s studies degree.
The faculty of the College of Arts and Sciences at Andrews University votes to establish the first women’s studies program in Adventist colleges. Classes for the minor begin in Fall 1990.
1990, January 1.
Ramona Perez Greek begins service as coordinator of the NAD Women’s Commission, succeeding Thesba Johnston. The commission adopts a five-year plan with goals and objectives. Volunteer commissioners are in place in every union in NAD and in most conferences.
1990, February 23-28: Chaplains vote support, again.
Seventh-day Adventist Healthcare Chaplains Association meeting in Nashville, Tennessee, votes strong support for ordaining women to ministry.
1990, April: SECC educates constituents.
The Gender Inclusiveness Task Force of Southeastern California Conference produces
(1) "Equals in Service," a slide program featuring male and female theology students seeking a place in the Adventist ministry.
(2) "What’s Good for the Gospel," a video encouraging women’s full participation in church life and ministry.
(3) A pamphlet for readers of the Pacific Union Recorder, authored by John Brunt, entitled "The Ordination of Women: A Bible Perspective."
1990, April 8: Religion teachers vote support, again.
The West Coast Religion Teachers vote unanimously to reaffirm their commitment to women’s ordination and request the GC session delegates "to take no action that would either forbid or compel the ordination of women in the gospel ministry in any part of the world."
1990, June: AAW documents women in ministry.
The Adventist Woman, vol. 9. No. 3-4, documents the education, training, and public ministry of 62 women from 12 different countries, and includes photographs of them.
1990, July 5-14: GC Session in Indianapolis. Delegates deny ordination for women.
In Indianapolis, GC delegates vote 1,173 to 377 to accept the 1989 commission’s and 1989 AC recommendation that women not be ordained at this time.
Women may perform baptisms and marriages in some divisions.
By a vote of 776 to 494 the delegates choose to update the Church Manual to reflect the policy adopted at the 1989 Annual Council, which permits women to perform marriages in divisions which so authorize.
1990, August: New books on women.
Throughout 10 years of discussion on women’s ordination, the General Conference officers had urged the Review and Herald and Pacific Press not to publish books on the topic. Several books were stopped in manuscript form, and the authors sought alternative publishers. Bacchiocchi self-published in February 1987. In 1990 two additional books were published:
(1) Called by God, by Josephine Benton (Blackberry Hill Publishers, Route 2, Box 121, Smithsburg, MD 21783), 240 pages. It devotes a chapter each to each of six Adventist women in public ministry during the late nineteenth and early twentieth century.
(2) Women, Church, God: A Socio-Biblical Study, by Caleb Rosado (Loma Linda University Press, Riverside, California), 173 pages. Addresses such issues as Jesus and the patriarchal system, "Is God Male?" and headship theology.
1990, September 19: NAD Committee establishes Office of Women’s Ministries.
Elizabeth Stemdale named as director of the new office.
1990, September 24: Leaders of women’s groups meet.
Thirty-five women, most of whom are members of AWl, TEAM, AAW, and the SECC Gender Inclusiveness Task Force meet in Addison, Pennsylvania, and issue ajoint statement responding to the 1990 GC decision to deny ordination to women. The statement calls the church to implement equal opportunity and affirmative action for women, and to ordain women in divisions where the move would be culturally acceptable. They also discuss an Adventist Women’s Coalition. A 17-member steering committee, chaired by Helen Thompson, agrees to work on proposals.
1990, October: Annual Council. GC also establishes Office of Women’s Ministries.
On October 4, AC adopts President Robert Folkenberg’s recommendation to establish an Office of Women’s Ministries. Rose Otis is subsequently named director.
1990, October 21: SECC sidesteps ordination issue.
SECC constituents accept a recommendation by conference president L. Stephen Gifford to establish a Commission on Justice, by a vote of 370 to 128.
According to the recommendation, the SECC executive committee is to:
(a) "lead out in a strong concerted program in the recruitment, hiring, education, placement, and support of women in ministry," and
(b) to work closely with denominational leaders "to facilitate the ordination of all qualified ministerial candidates without gender discrimination" and to repot back on these efforts at the 1992 constituency meeting.
The purpose of the Commission on Justice is to: "fulfill the church’s goals of racial, ethnic, and gender equality."
SECC constituents reject a motion, endorsed by the Gender Inclusiveness Task Force, to ordain women to gospel ministry by a vote of 440 to 274.
A progress report is requested in 1992.
1990: New GC president stalls discussion of women’s ordination.
Robert H. Folkenberg advises denominational editors that discussing women’s ordination is off limits.
1990: V. Norskov Olsen publishes study of ordination.
Olsen’s book, Myth and Truth: Church, Priesthood and Ordination, a scholarly study, supports ordination of women.
1991. Australian women publish research report.
Four women: Jennifer Knight, Pamela Clifford, Merolyn Coombs, and Linette Lock, conduct research to study women’s perceptions of the SDA Church in Australia and New Zealand, and publish a 125-page report, The Adventist Women in the Secular World: Her Ministry and Her Church. Report pleads for change.
1992: SECC wants ordination plan.
Constituents ask executive committee to devise a plan for ordaining women within its jurisdiction and to conduct all future ordinations of men and women uniformly.
1992: Review and Herald publishes book, A Woman’s Place.
In the planning stage by the NAD Women’s Commission and the Office of Human Relations since 1986, a book by 11 women authors surveys issues for women in the church and society. Edited by Rosa Taylor Banks, Office of Human Relations director.
1992: TEAM begins scholarship program.
Three women in ministry receive the first scholarships to support their graduate studies in theology. This program grows from small grants to an international program with gifts of $2500 or more to worthy recipients.
1993: NAD leaders call for ordination.
At a January meeting, 88% of the NAD ministerial directors attending, along with the senior pastors of college churches, ask NAD to authorize and promote women’s ordination on a regional basis.
1993, February: Healthcare chaplains elect first woman president.
Members of the Seventh-day Adventist Healthcare Chaplains Association elect Penny Shell president. For two years each she will be president-elect, then president, then past president.
1993: AAW commemorates 20th anniversary of Camp Mohaven.
A special issue of the Adventist Woman marks 20 years since the Seventh-day Adventist Church convened the Camp Mohaven Council on the Role of Women. All the original Mohaven recommendations are published—alongside the actions that the 1974 Annual Council actually took. Three men and four women who were members of the Mohaven group share their perspectives. (Historic photo of the group included).
1993: Women’s ordination kept off the agenda.
Delegates find women’s ordination, which has been under discussion behind closed doors only, was removed from potential discussion by Annual Council by the GC president. It is reported that he hopes to prevent conflict and polarization by waiting until 1994.
1994: SDA Theological Seminary professor publishes anti-ordination book.
Raymond Holmes, retired seminary professor, publishes the Tip of an Iceberg, [sic] in which he argues that the authority of the Bible, and all of Adventist’s unique beliefs, are threatened if Scripture is interpreted to allow women’s ordination. The self-published book is widely distributed. Endorsed by several highly placed SDA leaders, the book gives the appearance of being the church’s "official position."
1994: GC president talks to SECC.
In communication with Southeastern California Conference leaders, Robert Folkenberg discusses ordaining women and expresses hope that a consensus can be secured among division leaders.
1994: SECC holds off on ordination.
Ready to move ahead in ordaining women, SECC votes to postpone and to take up the issue again at a November 1994 meeting to determine a course of action should Folkenberg not get consensus at Annual Council.
1994, September 22: Atlantic Union Conference Executive Committee (NAD) votes statement in support of women’s ordination.
Southern New England Conference President Charles Case voted against the statement and asked that his name be excluded and thus recorded.
1994, September 23-24: Sligo celebrates women in ministry.
All eight women who have been on the pastoral staff since 1973 participate in a reunion. The program concluded with a "procession of light" on Sabbath afternoon. Marking the church’s 150th anniversary of 1844, and the 21st anniversary of Camp Mohaven, candles were carried for 150 women in ministry as their names were read in a special ceremony. Eighteen women carried their own candles.
1994, October: AAW publishes second list of women in ministry.
Photos and stories of 90 women in ministry make up the October! November issue (Vol. 13, No. 5) of the Adventist Woman. Included are women from Sweden, Switzerland, Canada, Germany, the Baltic Union, Russia, Norway, Finland, and the U.S.
1995, April: Adventist publications renew discussion of women.
Ministry Magazine publishes issue that discusses ordination of women and decision-making in the church.
1995, April: Pro-ordination book is published.
-
Here is your problem. Your article is written by someone that presents his sediments "for Lulu" and his historical view points. You really need to reread his article over and over until you get the scenario on how and why he wrote that. I consider most professors to be quite liberal.
and the most profound statement that you can find is the "laying on hands for women's ministries" is for DEACONESSES not "ORDAINED CREDENTIALS". You have the same perversion of church doctrine now as they did back then.
My, have you been so busy to look up the clientele of how many people present their own views of the matter. Interesting as i see the scenario in a much broader picture.
Johann, I sincerely hope Ian has answered your questions!
-
I have no problem with this, Tinka. The author clearly provides Biblical interpretation that supports the position of ordination of women. Your bias against educators doesn't lend credibility to your position, it merely indicates your unwillingness to listen to anyone else. Your offered "quotes" by Mrs. White are not quotes by her at all, they are another's speculative interpretation of what she "meant" when she spoke or wrote certain things. I ask again for a direct quote from Mrs. White speaking against the ordination of women and provide the location of that quote. It would also be more powerful if you could provide three or more quotes - not interpretive consideration.
The author of the work I posted is examining the Bible, studying Scripture, in an effort to understand what it has to offer us some 3500 years after its writing. God understood long ago that while his principles are unchanging, their application in a changing world will play out differently. Idols/graven images for instance are no longer images of wood or stone. Today's idols/graven images come in the form of television, work, material possessions, anything that stands in the way of God's occupation of the throne of our heart - even a self-righteous attitude is one of today's idols. God knew that what He talked about would look different as the world hurtled toward its final days.
The modern definition of ordination is “the investiture of clergy” or “the act of granting pastoral authority or sacerdotal power.” Usually, we think of an ordination service as a ceremony in which someone is commissioned or appointed to a position within the church. Often, the ceremony involves the laying on of hands.
However, the biblical definition is a little different. The word ordain in the Bible refers to a setting in place or designation; for example, Joseph was “ordained” as a ruler in Egypt (Acts 7:10); the steward in Jesus’ parable was “ordained” to oversee a household (Matthew 24:45); deacons were “ordained” to serve the Jerusalem church (Acts 6:1-6); and pastors were “ordained” in each city in Crete (Titus 1:5). In none of these cases is the mode of ordination specified, nor is any ceremony detailed; the “ordinations” are simply appointments. The word can even be used negatively, as an appointment to punishment (Luke 12:46).
Acts 13 includes a good example of a ministerial appointment: “While they were worshiping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ So after they had fasted and prayed, they placed their hands on them and sent them off. The two of them, sent on their way by the Holy Spirit, went down to Seleucia” (vv. 2-4). In this passage, we note some key facts: 1) It is God Himself who calls the men to the ministry and qualifies them with gifts (Acts 20:28; Ephesians 4:11). 2) The members of the church recognize God’s clear leading and embrace it. 3) With prayer and fasting, the church lays hands on Paul and Barnabas to demonstrate their commissioning (cf. Acts 6:6; 1 Timothy 5:22). 4) God works through the church, as both the church and the Spirit are said to “send” the missionaries.
Paul regularly ordained pastors for the churches he planted. He and Barnabas directed the appointment or ordination of elders “in each church” in Galatia (Acts 14:23). He instructed Titus to “appoint elders in every town” on Crete (Titus 1:5). Titus himself had been ordained earlier, when “he was chosen by the churches” (2 Corinthians 8:19). In the above passages, the ordination of elders involves the whole congregation, not just the apostles. The Greek word used in 2 Corinthians 8:19 for Titus’s appointment and in Acts 14:23 for the choosing of the Galatian elders literally means “to stretch forth the hands.” It was a word normally used for the act of voting in the Athenian legislature. Thus, the ordination of church leaders involved a general consensus in the church, if not an official vote. The apostles and the congregations knew whom the Spirit had chosen, and they responded by placing those men in leadership.
When God calls and qualifies an individual for the ministry, it will be apparent both to that individual and to the rest of the church. The would-be minister will meet the qualifications set forth in the Bible for those who minister, and they will possess a consuming desire to preach (1 Corinthians 9:16). It is the duty of the church elders, together with the congregation, to recognize and accept the calling. After that, a formal commissioning ceremony—an ordination service—is appropriate, though by no means mandatory. The ordination ceremony itself does not confer any special power; it simply gives public recognition to God’s choice of leadership.
An adherence to cultural tradition doesn't make that tradition Biblical or in line with Spirit of Prophecy. Rather, it makes it man leaning to his own understanding and suggesting he can know God's intent. All throughout time God has given His followers new light as He knew they were ready to hear and receive it. From the Dark Ages to the Reformation, from the Reformation to the Millerite movement, and so on. Are you suggesting that you at this very moment, Tinka, know all the truth there is to know? If so, you set yourself up to be surprised like the unprepared virgins. You can not handcuff God. If He chooses a woman to bring the Gospel to those who are unaware, are you going to tell her she can't or tell her that the church will not recognize or sanction her labors? Ordination is the public acknowledgment that church members and leaders have seen clearly, the evidence than an individual has been called by God into His direct service. It isn't mystical, it isn't supernatural. Just like baptism it is a public acknowledgment. A life dedicated to the service of sharing the love of the Savior should not be told no, that would be akin to telling God that He doesn't know what He is doing. Are you going to make that pronouncement, that God is wrong?
-
Anyman, I will read further the study by Kitt Watts when I can. It appears, in short, to demonstrate that the SDA church, during its time under the leadership of EGW, ordained and supported women in ministry.
-
I read where the SDA church "licenced them " but only did the laying on of hands for deaconess.
-
I ask again for a direct quote from Mrs. White speaking against the ordination of women and provide the location of that quote.
But that's never really been the issue, correct? The issue is not ordination, but to what one is being ordained for. The issue is the roles of men and women.
Ellen White clearly took the position that God had forbidden men to fill certain roles. She also spoke against "restless modern Eves" trying to fill "a higher sphere than that which God had assigned her." She never advocated abolishing all distinctions between the roles of men and women.
Whether we like it or not, there are dedicated men and women of other faiths who are committed to following Scripture, and who will not consider joining God's remnant church if we ignore the distinctions the Bible makes between the roles of men and women in the church.
I wonder if your question above is similar to the question, Where in the NT is the Sabbath ever commanded? Because of the universality of Sabbath keeping in the church at that time, that question isn't appropriate. Rather, the question should be, Where in the NT is Sunday keeping ever commanded? Similarly, your question should be, Where did Ellen White ever advocate that women may serve as elders (which would include the pastors of today) of local churches?
-
I read where the SDA church "licenced them " but only did the laying on of hands for deaconess.
One of our "problems" is that Scripture indicates the same rules apply to deacons and deaconesses, and further that deacons performed such pastoral duties as baptism.
-
I read where the SDA church "licenced them " but only did the laying on of hands for deaconess.
One of our "problems" is that Scripture indicates the same rules apply to deacons and deaconesses, and further that deacons performed such pastoral duties as baptism.
As I chime in here (for some reason I feel compelled to), it is probably not enough for most people to take my position on this based on my explanation to follow.
It's heavily weighted in how I have come to see God over the years by sorting out the garbage and seeking to know HIM for what HE tells me of HIMSELF, wading out the legalistic garbage and not going so far over to the liberal views of things (often I feel others do this only for the sake of just not being "legalistic'), but I think not only stating that women were not meant to be pastors with such confidence is such a bunch of hooey, but also very chauvinistic, and often it comes from those that are indeed more chauvinistic then they themselves realize.
I try never dare to take a gray area such as this (as I see it), and presume to know the mind of God. I can wonder if this or that, but to say I know??? I see God very differently - I see Him as someone who designed the idea that He would use human beings to convey a message - USE them. What the heck difference is it if it is man or women? Titles? Do they really matter to God in this denomination (or in any "organized" denomination) that MAN has made (ut ohh, that will step on some toes)?
God is about TRUTH and giving us the privilege of being a tool in His hands. Now, want to throw around the "man was made to be the priest...." the priest of what? The home, it does say that (of course some men have abused that position)..... He likens the women to being the bride....ok, and??? Take that for what it clearly states in the context it was written. How is it we can never really let the bible dictate itself? And when it is gray, maybe it's gray for a reason? We know that women were instruments of God's in the bible, but if men were writing the bible, do you think they went to a lot of trouble to write every detail (no fainting please, that only is to say that we know that there were things not said, for whatever reason)? What is not made clear, or what is not said, does not mean it was not so. The only times we know that something was IS so is when it is made abundantly clear (no voodoo required). So, hence the grayer areas.
I have come to have great disappointment and disrespect for those that take the liberty to reach and interpret and teach their opinions in these gray areas. Are we to just accept it because we assume that it's from God? How do we know that?
I think that we make issues where they are not, deals of things were they should not be deals, and it becomes a great distraction from the real point. FWIW, that's my thinking on the matter. My advice, it's not worth the "argument" it makes. I don't care how sincere it is. Ok, get out your guns and start shooting at me - it's what we have become so good at after all. Hang around the seminary...debate and argument all day long (don't get me wrong, I actually think the seminary is a very important thing and everyone in ministry should go, there is much to be gained these days, unlike maybe the 60s-70's - again, don't shoot me).
-
DB is right on, glad he did ..a woman's greatest work and help is in other areas. I do not consider woman or their talk that like wearing the pants of the pulpit. Most women give up their best talents to the home, children and security of well being of family to this big notion. They have given up greater talents to enter into masculine duties. EGW was a teacher, a "chosen" messanger and complier of the "Holy Spirit". She was willing to use her talents as "instructed". I never considered her a preacher. She was used to write.
Tinka, are you saying all women are suppose to be mothers and wives?? Are you splitting hairs over what EGW did? Was it not like a pastor? Titles???
-
Sonshineonme,
Absolutely not, all women cannot be mothers and wives. some can head up organizations of help in all fields, Dorcas, bible workers, caretakers, doctors, dentists, deaconesses, writers, and the word EGW uses to the best advantage of women is teachers and missionaries.
Also I still stick in the grey areas (or women's movements areas) as you call them with SP's use of the word "peril". as you can see the exact display in these post as one example. and the other is that the majority in a church group will not support it and from it comes "peril". Most people that have a view or make big difference in man and women will just not tolerate it. Then there is the people that no difference between man and women and do everything they can to prove it. In a church where this happens, most people will not say anything and just finally slip away from and go where their views are upheld. and that happens in all things. I believe you can call that putting the church in "peril".
I am a person of that sort and i put a huge difference between man and women and their duties. Behind every good man, preacher, or whatever he succeeds is a good woman. Lets see if I can find that theory in Proberbs as I do not have it at the
moment.
This the majority believe in and it is not a grey area. This belief within the church of below scripture will bring "peril" everytime when women go into their "equality movements" and wearing the pants in the pulpit. EGW did not, and said she did not follow the womens movements. She was too busy with doing the instructions below!
31:10 Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price [is] far above rubies.
31:11 The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.
31:12 She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.
31:13 She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands.
31:14 She is like the merchants' ships; she bringeth her food from afar.
31:15 She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens.
31:16 She considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.
31:17 She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms.
31:18 She perceiveth that her merchandise [is] good: her candle goeth not out by night.
31:19 She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.
31:20 She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy.
31:21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household [are] clothed with scarlet.
31:22 She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing [is] silk and purple.
31:23 Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land.
31:24 She maketh fine linen, and selleth [it]; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant.
31:25 Strength and honour [are] her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come.
31:26 She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue [is] the law of kindness.
31:27 She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness.
31:28 Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband [also], and he praiseth her.
31:29 Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all.
31:30 Favour [is] deceitful, and beauty [is] vain: [but] a woman [that] feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.
31:31 Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.
Johann, What text would you be referring to that brings up a problem?
-
I will preface this question with the fact that I am not among those that feel Mrs White was not called by God when she was. I will also say to you that I ONLY read complete writings of hers (cover to cover written by her), and NEVER compilations put together by "well meaning" humans.
So, if there was no Mrs White, can you get all your thinking on this out of the bible alone?
Sonshineonme,
Absolutely not, all women cannot be mothers and wives. some can head up organizations of help in all fields, Dorcas, bible workers, caretakers, doctors, dentists, deaconesses, writers, and the word EGW uses to the best advantage of women is teachers and missionaries.
Also I still stick in the grey areas (or women's movements areas) as you call them with SP's use of the word "peril". as you can see the exact display in these post as one example. and the other is that the majority in a church group will not support it and from it comes "peril". Most people that have a view or make big difference in man and women will just not tolerate it. Then there is the people that no difference between man and women and do everything they can to prove it. In a church where this happens, most people will not say anything and just finally slip away from and go where their views are upheld. and that happens in all things. I believe you can call that putting the church in "peril".
I am a person of that sort and i put a huge difference between man and women and their duties. Behind every good man, preacher, or whatever he succeeds is a good woman. Lets see if I can find that theory in Proberbs as I do not have it at the
moment.
This the majority believe in and it is not a grey area. This belief within the church of below scripture will bring "peril" everytime when women go into their "equality movements" and wearing the pants in the pulpit. EGW did not, and said she did not follow the womens movements. She was too busy with doing the instructions below!
31:10 Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price [is] far above rubies.
31:11 The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.
31:12 She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.
31:13 She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands.
31:14 She is like the merchants' ships; she bringeth her food from afar.
31:15 She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens.
31:16 She considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.
31:17 She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms.
31:18 She perceiveth that her merchandise [is] good: her candle goeth not out by night.
31:19 She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.
31:20 She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy.
31:21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household [are] clothed with scarlet.
31:22 She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing [is] silk and purple.
31:23 Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land.
31:24 She maketh fine linen, and selleth [it]; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant.
31:25 Strength and honour [are] her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come.
31:26 She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue [is] the law of kindness.
31:27 She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness.
31:28 Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband [also], and he praiseth her.
31:29 Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all.
31:30 Favour [is] deceitful, and beauty [is] vain: [but] a woman [that] feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.
31:31 Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.
Johann, What text would you be referring to that brings up a problem?
-
1 Timothy 3:11
11In the same way, deaconesses are to be women worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
The original text in which the Apostle wrote indicates here that the rules for deacons apply also to deaconesses. In the King James Bible the word "their" is in italics, indicating the good translators tampered with the text.
Acts 8 tells us the deacon Philip both healed and baptized and drove out evil spirits.
-
Johann,
I've checked four Greek texts, and none of them say "deaconesses" rather than "women" or "wives" in 1 Tim. 3:11. Where did that translation get "deaconesses" from?
-
Johann,
I've checked four Greek texts, and none of them say "deaconesses" rather than "women" or "wives" in 1 Tim. 3:11. Where did that translation get "deaconesses" from?
Bob, Your note points out a typical problem when translating a text from one language to another. I experience this daily because my family deals with four different languages. So often we use words and terms in one language which are better expressed with entirely different words in another language.
Study the whole epistle to see how Paul is using his language. If you were merely using a dictionary to translate the fifth chapter it might sound like this: "Do not rebuke an elder but exhort him as you would a father, . . . female elders like mothers, . . ." What right do translators have to translate it otherwise? Doesn't the same principle apply elsewhere?
The third chapter starts with standards for bishops. Then in verse 8 he turns to deacons using the terms "hosautos semnous" meaning that those principles apply to deacons as well, but adding more terms for emphasis. Just like that in verse 11, but here he starts with "gynaikas hosautos semnas" in female. (I just thought of it now that the "sem" could be the stem in the English resemlance and similar. In spite of differences there are also a lot of similarities in these languages.)
Nowhere does it state "their wives" or anything like it. Paul is saying that the same principles apply to bishops, deacons and deaconesses. At least you cannot argue that it does not.
What other mandate did our pioneers have for ordaining deaconesses if it is not found in this text?
The text as I quoted it is found in the NIV - margin. And you know that Ellen G White did not shy away from using expressions found in the margins of her Bible! (I have a notion the NIV translators retained the KJV rendition in the text itself because they were attempting to get the approval of the Roman Catholic Church for their new translation. Should that refrain us from applying the true meaning of what Paul wrote?)
-
Nowhere does it state "their wives" or anything like it.
1 Peter 3:7 Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered.
In this verse it is understood that the woman referred to belongs to the husband referred top, even without a possessive pronoun.
Colossians 3:19 Husbands, love your wives, and be not bitter against them.
"Your" is supplied by the translators, but definitely called for in the above verse.
The critical text for Eph. 5:25 also does not have the possessive pronoun, though the Textus Receptus does.
In 1 Cor. 7:10, 11, 33, the possessive pronoun is also understood.
The question is whether the word should be translated "women" or "wives," rather than "deaconesses." If "women," then deaconesses would be intended if it is not trying to say what all women should be like. If "wives," then it would be referring to the wives of the deacons.
-
When I stated "nowhere" I was merely referring to 1 Tim. 3. It looks like we agree that "if" the word applies to women, then it means deaconesses. Again, where else would our pioneers have found their mandate to ordain deaconesses than here in 1 Tim. 3?
Another interesting text is 2 John. Here John calls himself the "presbyteros" or elder and not apostle. He addresses the letter to the "eklektei kyria" and her children. I just happen to have the RSV on my desk at the moment where this is translated "elect lady". Is this really what he says?
KYRIA is the feminine form of KYRIOS which is usually translated LORD or king. What is the feminine word in English? Wouldn't you say that QUEEN comes pretty close? Elder John is writing this letter not only to an elect lady, but to the elect queen of the church? John could have said woman, but he used a different expression, and I believe this is the only place this feminine word is found in the Bible.
-
We do have Phoebe who is identified as a deaconess, and so we aren't dependent on a particular rendering of 1 Tim. 3.
Some have felt that Kuria in 2 Jn. was a proper name or some such. I don't know. It does appear in the LXX where the KJV says "mistress," referring to a lady who is like a master.
-
Tinka, you gave quotes of EGW suggesting women for different things. There is still the absence of her comments condemning the ordination of women. Just because pastoring or preaching was not mentioned in those quotes given doesn't mean EGW was against women doing it just for the duties suggested in the quotes. Also, what was the context of those quotes, etc.? I am also glad to se that it has been established that ordination is not biblical, not a bad thing, just not biblical.
Sorry, Tinka, in the absense of a direct statement, we cannot say that she was for or against the ordination of womeon. However, biblically, there is no reason why they cannot be ordained, as GodHimself placed some in authority to men, which is the real issue here.
I did and you just can't grasp it. nor the legal documents your so confused about. I really do not understand the time given you back on any post by anyone. end.
-
Di,
That quote was for Ian and not meant for you but still read your post.
I read most of the day today on this and still very convinced that there was a time during EGW day that the church was definitely doing their own thing. In fact she really came down hard. i rested awhile and then laid books down and couldn't remember which one it was in. Oh well, it doesn't matter because nothing you can do to change mind set of ones opinion or justifications.
But to make a whole picture of the state we are in I believe you can call it the "Omega" of the Adventist church as many different scenarios are portrayed to be ok.
Today I switched on Hope again hoping to see something good. There was a black women with great big earrings on yelling for all she was worth in what they called music. I think it must have been one of these Aussie programs. Not sure as I switched it off in utter amazement. I have no doubt now that Hope channel is showing and actually progressing in the "Omega" of the church. It's here, nothing anyone can do about it. It's just a sick feeling and I am finished with it. and low and behold I found one thing that I can agree with DS. Unbeliveable, as I am now for the first time reading some documents that I have not read before. Some even are more incriminating but came across his statement on Hope channel. I agree to the hilt. amazing! But another thought! what makes him know that??? and not think anything else is wrong on his side of the fence. I am talking about the spending and hiding of money.
-
I wonder whether the "real issue" is not that man has made "ordination" something that God did not.
Jesus clearly taught that he who would be great among us should be the most eager to serve -- not to rule over others, be they men or women. We are not to practice hierarchial authority, such as the "heathen" have.
Yet "ordination" is deemed to imply the bestowal of some sort of power or authority to rule over "lesser" members of the body of Christ.
The distinction between laity and clergy was unknown in apostolic times. In the Adventist church it is a holdover from from Catholicism -- a holdover the Reformers failed to reform. Although Luther taught the priesthood of all believers, he failed to implement the practical application of this doctrine. Thus, in many places, Adventist pastors exercise "priestly authority," much like Catholic priests. (I trust it is self-evident that this is not after Christ's direction.) That concept is also central to Samuele Bacchiocchi's argument against women being ordained. He points out that only men were able to be priests. What he failed to recognize is that after the cross, we have only one priest and one mediator between God and man -- the Man Christ Jesus who ministers in the heavenly sanctuary. Of all people, Adventists ought to recognize such fallacious arguments as those based on the OT priesthood to demonstrate that men are to rule the body of Christ.
IMO, we should altogether scrap "ordination" as it is now practiced (contrary to biblical principles), and go back to something closer to the NT model -- commissioning individuals for certain duties to which God has called them.
[Please forgive me if I do not respond further in this thread. I just happened to drop by ... ]
-
Very well said, and I'm glad you stopped by. I agree with you completely.
I wonder whether the "real issue" is not that man has made "ordination" something that God did not.
Jesus clearly taught that he who would be great among us should be the most eager to serve -- not to rule over others, be they men or women. We are not to practice hierarchial authority, such as the "heathen" have.
Yet "ordination" is deemed to imply the bestowal of some sort of power or authority to rule over "lesser" members of the body of Christ.
The distinction between laity and clergy was unknown in apostolic times. In the Adventist church it is a holdover from from Catholicism -- a holdover the Reformers failed to reform. Although Luther taught the priesthood of all believers, he failed to implement the practical application of this doctrine. Thus, in many places, Adventist pastors exercise "priestly authority," much like Catholic priests. (I trust it is self-evident that this is not after Christ's direction.) That concept is also central to Samuele Bacchiocchi's argument against women being ordained. He points out that only men were able to be priests. What he failed to recognize is that after the cross, we have only one priest and one mediator between God and man -- the Man Christ Jesus who ministers in the heavenly sanctuary. Of all people, Adventists ought to recognize such fallacious arguments as those based on the OT priesthood to demonstrate that men are to rule the body of Christ.
IMO, we should altogether scrap "ordination" as it is now practiced (contrary to biblical principles), and go back to something closer to the NT model -- commissioning individuals for certain duties to which God has called them.
[Please forgive me if I do not respond further in this thread. I just happened to drop by ... ]
-
Very good points, Inga. We have institutionalized a number of rules that have no Biblical foundation. Like the Roman Catholic Church, we have established tradition as equal to scripture in many ways.
-
The distinction between laity and clergy was unknown in apostolic times. In the Adventist church it is a holdover from from Catholicism -- a holdover the Reformers failed to reform.
Yes, Inga. This is the case.
Don't be a stranger.
-
Yes, that is a good idea except I think they did this so they knew who to pay since there was a big situation of this. :)
-
Does HOPETV sell airtime to other ministries? That is what that sounds like to me.
Di,
That quote was for Ian and not meant for you but still read your post.
I read most of the day today on this and still very convinced that there was a time during EGW day that the church was definitely doing their own thing. In fact she really came down hard. i rested awhile and then laid books down and couldn't remember which one it was in. Oh well, it doesn't matter because nothing you can do to change mind set of ones opinion or justifications.
But to make a whole picture of the state we are in I believe you can call it the "Omega" of the Adventist church as many different scenarios are portrayed to be ok.
Today I switched on Hope again hoping to see something good. There was a black women with great big earrings on yelling for all she was worth in what they called music. I think it must have been one of these Aussie programs. Not sure as I switched it off in utter amazement. I have no doubt now that Hope channel is showing and actually progressing in the "Omega" of the church. It's here, nothing anyone can do about it. It's just a sick feeling and I am finished with it. and low and behold I found one thing that I can agree with DS. Unbeliveable, as I am now for the first time reading some documents that I have not read before. Some even are more incriminating but came across his statement on Hope channel. I agree to the hilt. amazing! But another thought! what makes him know that??? and not think anything else is wrong on his side of the fence. I am talking about the spending and hiding of money.
-
Does HOPETV sell airtime to other ministries? That is what that sounds like to me.
I highly doubt it.
What "it sounds like" is that Tinka didn't like the music she heard or the ear rings. That sort of thing tends to affect the way people describe music. ;D
Today I switched on Hope again hoping to see something good. There was a black women with great big earrings on yelling for all she was worth in what they called music. I think it must have been one of these Aussie programs.
-
What I was describing is a complete disrespect for the SP and actually what SDA's are supposed to believe. There is not one good thing to come of this. The picture Is getting bigger and bigger of Hope channel going with the "Omega of the church".
-
Well, Inga, I have spoken many times to my friend and sister in Christ, tinka, about indulging in the haterade. Lately she has been doing much better, however, we know that folks often fall off the wagon on the road to recovery.....LOL!!! Just teasing Tinka!
That said, I believe Inga to be right. We really have to be carefully about believing that God shares our likes, dislikes, preferences, etc. i.e. "If I don't like it God must hate it, must be sin.
I believe there is one other issue, but that would take this thread in a whole 'nother direction.
Does HOPETV sell airtime to other ministries? That is what that sounds like to me.
I highly doubt it.
What "it sounds like" is that Tinka didn't like the music she heard or the ear rings. That sort of thing tends to affect the way people describe music. ;D
-
What exactly is the "Omega of the church"? The only Omega I know about is God being the Alpha and Omega, etc. Readers Digest version please. I don't have a lot of PC time for ready a long dissertaion.
What I was describing is a complete disrespect for the SP and actually what SDA's are supposed to believe. There is not one good thing to come of this. The picture Is getting bigger and bigger of Hope channel going with the "Omega of the church".
-
Di, you always make good points, make me smile while making them, and I appreciate you and your truly Christian spirit. (fall off the wagon, I love it!! ;-) )
Well, Inga, I have spoken many times to my friend and sister in Christ, tinka, about indulging in the haterade. Lately she has been doing much better, however, we know that folks often fall off the wagon on the road to recovery.....LOL!!! Just teasing Tinka!
That said, I believe Inga to be right. We really have to be carefully about believing that God shares our likes, dislikes, preferences, etc. i.e. "If I don't like it God must hate it, must be sin.
I believe there is one other issue, but that would take this thread in a whole 'nother direction.
Does HOPETV sell airtime to other ministries? That is what that sounds like to me.
I highly doubt it.
What "it sounds like" is that Tinka didn't like the music she heard or the ear rings. That sort of thing tends to affect the way people describe music. ;D
-
HUGS, Darlin'!
Di, you always make good points, make me smile while making them, and I appreciate you and your truly Christian spirit. (fall off the wagon, I love it!! ;-) )
Well, Inga, I have spoken many times to my friend and sister in Christ, tinka, about indulging in the haterade. Lately she has been doing much better, however, we know that folks often fall off the wagon on the road to recovery.....LOL!!! Just teasing Tinka!
That said, I believe Inga to be right. We really have to be carefully about believing that God shares our likes, dislikes, preferences, etc. i.e. "If I don't like it God must hate it, must be sin.
I believe there is one other issue, but that would take this thread in a whole 'nother direction.
Does HOPETV sell airtime to other ministries? That is what that sounds like to me.
I highly doubt it.
What "it sounds like" is that Tinka didn't like the music she heard or the ear rings. That sort of thing tends to affect the way people describe music. ;D
-
Princessdi,
January, 1900, and the world was comparatively peaceful and full of hope. but in the Adventist Church a deadly apostasy brewed, wherein a few of the denomination's most brilliant and charismatic teachers would seek to undermine fundamental doctrines. In so doing they would attract to themselves some of the more able people in the church. Ellen White called the apostasy the "Alpha", and warned that it would be followed by an even greater falling away--the "omega".
Is today's church, buffeted more from within than from without, enmeshed in the omega apostasy.
How is that for "Hateraid"! In fact I believe that word is entirely uncalled for as especially when you have followers that appreciated your answers and have not appreciated a great counsel that will lead us home.
Irreverence Encouraged by Display of Apparel.-- All should be taught to be neat, clean, and orderly in their dress, but not to indulge in that external adorning which is wholly inappropriate for the sanctuary. There should be no display of the apparel, for this encourages irreverence. . . . All matters of dress should be strictly guarded, following closely the Bible rule. Fashion has been the goddess who has ruled the outside world, and she often insinuates herself into the church. The church should make the Word of God her standard.
Not for Display
Musical talent too often fosters pride and ambition for display.--Musical entertainments which, if conducted properly, will do no harm, are often a source of evil. . . . Musical talent too often fosters pride and ambition for display, and singers have but little thought of the worship of God.--VSS 422. {PaM 179.4}
I see nothing on Hope channel that portrays a pure Adventist message throughout as the above on most of their programs. and yes it does seem like they have other churches on there that must be paying but if not --that is what I am talking about or observing. So a matter of fact you can watch other religious programing for charismatic and hullabaloo channels of Direct TV that have these same messages of everything goes.
It was never what "tinka" liked or disliked. It was a view that I wholly except and again Hope channel is in the relm of not respecting SP in all things.
All statements by EGW and Lewis Walton stating EGW statements.
-
Princessdi,
January, 1900, and the world was comparatively peaceful and full of hope. but in the Adventist Church a deadly apostasy brewed, wherein a few of the denomination's most brilliant and charismatic teachers would seek to undermine fundamental doctrines. In so doing they would attract to themselves some of the more able people in the church. Ellen White called the apostasy the "Alpha", and warned that it would be followed by an even greater falling away--the "omega".
Interesting comment, since I am just reading about that time of our church history in George Knight's excellent biography of AT Jones. I highly recommend it, rather than looking at the past through the eyes of Lewis Walton who demonstrates a certain bias.
A secular saying is that "those who don't learn from the past are condemned to repeat it." Ellen White wrote, "We have nothing to fear for the future, except as we forget how God has led us in the past. I also recommend this year's adult devotional "Lest We Forget," by the way.
Is today's church, buffeted more from within than from without, enmeshed in the omega apostasy.
Possibly. But perhaps the main players are not the ones you judge them to be.How is that for "Hateraid"! In fact I believe that word is entirely uncalled for as especially when you have followers that appreciated your answers and have not appreciated a great counsel that will lead us home.
Your words re not appreciating "great counsel that will lead us home" do sound a mite judgmental. (Judgementalism is a chief ingredient of "haterade.")
I appreciate your EGWhite quotes and agree with them completely. I wonder if it would surprise you to know that the leaders in the Alpha apostasy used her quotations liberally?
I also wonder if you realize that those involved in the Alpha apostasy were -- as far as I can tell -- very "conservative" in their approach to Adventism? By contrast, people like Ellen White and A.G. Daniells who did their mightiest to stem the tide of apostasy would today be judged as very "liberal." The difference was that the latter could see the bigger picture and overlooked some of the details. "Love covers a multitude of sins." Of course, Ellen White had the distinct advantage of understanding what was in the hearts, considering she got this insight through divine revelation.
I see nothing on Hope channel that portrays a pure Adventist message throughout as the above on most of their programs. and yes it does seem like they have other churches on there that must be paying but if not --that is what I am talking about or observing. So a matter of fact you can watch other religious programing for charismatic and hullabaloo channels of Direct TV that have these same messages of everything goes.
It was never what "tinka" liked or disliked. It was a view that I wholly except and again Hope channel is in the relm of not respecting SP in all things.
I'm glad you are saying that you "see nothing on Hope channel that portrays a pure Adventist message." Of course, I have no idea what your standard of "purity" are. At the time of his apostasy, AT Jones was quite sure that "the brethren" at the GC did not portray the pure Adventist message. He and his cohorts went so far as to conjecture that Ellen White (because of her more "liberal" stance) was influenced by these men in what she wrote and therefore they felt free to reject her counsels.
Those who will not learn from the past are condemned to repeat it.
I haven't seen any Hope broadcasts lately, but when I did see them earlier, I saw that they broadcast from a wide spectrum of Adventist churches and ministries -- in contrast to 3ABN which has its own strict standards to make it "better" than the rest of the Adventist church. The Hope Channel is a far better reflection of the Adventist church -- for better or for worse.
It might also be profitable to remember that the "conservatives" in Christ's day shouted loudly to demand Christ's crucifixion. They joined the "liberals" (the priests) in their deadly endeavor.
There's an interesting postscript to the latter. My husband pointed it out recently, and you can check it out for yourself: After the crucifixion a goodly number of the priests joined the believers. We know of no Pharisees who joined, other than Nicodemus. And finally God had to hit Saul over the heat to get him to see the light, and he was converted as well.
It rather seems to me that it is easier to get "liberals" to see the truth when it is made clear than to get "conservatives" to see it -- probably because the "conservatives" are already sure they know it and thus have no further need of enlightenment.
H'mm ... that does sound a lot like Laodicea, doesn't it?
At least that's the way I see it. You are free to see things differently. :wave:
-
Interesting comment, since I am just reading about that time of our church history in George Knight's excellent biography of AT Jones. I highly recommend it, rather than looking at the past through the eyes of Lewis Walton who demonstrates a certain bias.
I read some of Lewis Walton's books which are challenging. Too bad that he seemed to be influenced by Charles Darwin in some of his conclusions.
-
Hmmm, you all sound so convincing, it's a wonder why some of you were not to be the chosen messengers. I can read very proficiently and I am not a justifier or make way for ones own selfish ways of liberalism. The reason EGW had to write so much in counsels and letters is exactly because people either went to fanaticism or did their own views or opinions to their own liking. It was very important for me to read word for word meaning. I do not waste my time anymore to be convinced by Hope Channel that it is a true version or foundation that was supposed to be for our guidence in any age. It is a well painted picture that one can view in this age that the church and their lost foudations are definitely in the "Omega" of time given by EGW.
-
I do not waste my time anymore to be convinced by Hope Channel that it is a true version or foundation that was supposed to be for our guidence in any age. It is a well painted picture that one can view in this age that the church and their lost foudations are definitely in the "Omega" of time given by EGW.
Interesting that you should say that, Tinka. I don't spend much time with Hope Channel either -- chiefly because I don't have time to watch any TV. As you should know, Hope Channel is not any particular program, but it is a channel through which a variety of Adventist programming is made available to the world. I wonder what sort of programming you would find superior to the official TV channel of the world-wide Seventh-day Adventist church -- broadcast in all the major languages of the world and viewable in most parts of the world.
To me, the programming looks like a "who's who" in Adventism, with regular programs from people such as Mark Finley, Kenneth Cox, Jose Rojas, programs such as Amazing Facts (Doug Batchelor), It Is Written (Shawn Boonstra), Breath of Life, Faith for Today, Lifestyle magazine, Janice's Attic, Really Living (Jeannie Ramos), Exploring the Word, His Word Alive, Native New Day, Beyond Addiction, Cooking Vegetarian, Healing Hope, Fingerprints of Creation, Life and Teachings of Christ, Faces Around the Cross, Hope Sabbath School, Nature Speaks... but you can look up the programming yourself at http://www.hopetv.org/watch-now/tv-schedule/dialup.html.
It seems to me that you can't denigrate HopeTV without denigrating the Adventist Church throughout the world.
I wonder whether you believe that there is a special group of "perfect" people whom God commissioned to give the last message to the world -- other than the the world-wide Seventh-day Adventist church? Are you a member of this "perfect" group?
One lesson that has been impressed upon me recently is that God uses very imperfect people to do His work on this earth. If He didn't, He couldn't use any of us.
I believe we should be very careful about denigrating our brothers and sisters and even any particular ministries. God may be using them in ways He could not use us, and by denigrating them, we are denigrating God's elect instruments, as imperfect as they are.
It is much easier to criticize and tear down than to actually do the work of building up. We can choose to be part of the construction gang or the wrecking crew.
As for me, I pray that the Lord will give me the grace to choose to be part of the construction crew.
-
NO, I am not a part of a perfect group, but I am a part of a perfect message and I do get up and state when they make it imperfect with their own girations of "everything goes" just send the money. I feel the leaders know when these imperfections of SP are produced.
It's like the ring, soon as one wears and its ok'd the followers follow and now it is a brand new imperfection along with dress, vanity, and what ever. But some of your mentioned programs where the evangelists control the study and audience of SDA are not in view and performing their stuff is what I pay attention to.
Btw, today I watched the most inspired music I believe I have ever witnessed that I am sure the Holy Spirt was sending the most powerful listening to the Savior that could be possible by anyone. I observed every moment in awe. The melodous sound seemed to be perfect with heartstrings attached straight to Heavenly courts.
There was no talk, there was no expression of ones self, there was no story to tell as that is not what his music was about, there was humbleness so attached to perfection of the most beautiful portrayed music given to Jesus. Never have I felt the Holy Spirit or the angels that had to be listening to such a beautiful boys given talents back to Jesus that his only connection was his heart to Jesus as he played. He seemed to have no other connection with anyone but His Creator. It was to beautiful to see and hear and the reverance was not touched by one sound after he played by the programing or chit chat after ward. I was left in awe and with knowledge all Heaven was listening. His name was Michlen LaiePeng. a beautiful boy and soul. A proud mother she must be!
-
“In the city of Portland the Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my first labors were given to the cause of present truth.” — Ellen G.White in RH, May 18, 1911.
-
Actually, Inga, contrary to popular belief. it is not an issue with the singer, pastor, etc. The fact that one is able to be distract by something so superficial as one's dress, is on the part of the observer. It shows how easily the enemy can distract and cause us to lose out on a blessing trying to look for perfection that God Himself does not require. Mising out because the "message" doesn't come in a package we will except. In essence it is the worse kind of rebellion....telling God you will not hear His message to you unless it looks this way or that, or is given by this person. We MUST be open, especially these day to the manifest Word of God in our everyday lives. The example of this we see here, would be of a person who would have missed the message given by the donkey, and been one of those condemning the woman who anointed Jesus feet, or of David's wife Michal. They all missed the message, because they got caught in a package. There is nothing we can do or say to change this. It is the way they look at things, and a part of their growth process their Lord. It is only when we become completely open to the workings of the Holy Spirit that we lose these "conditions" for hearing God's Word,
Interesting that you should say that, Tinka. I don't spend much time with Hope Channel either -- chiefly because I don't have time to watch any TV. As you should know, Hope Channel is not any particular program, but it is a channel through which a variety of Adventist programming is made available to the world. I wonder what sort of programming you would find superior to the official TV channel of the world-wide Seventh-day Adventist church -- broadcast in all the major languages of the world and viewable in most parts of the world.
To me, the programming looks like a "who's who" in Adventism, with regular programs from people such as Mark Finley, Kenneth Cox, Jose Rojas, programs such as Amazing Facts (Doug Batchelor), It Is Written (Shawn Boonstra), Breath of Life, Faith for Today, Lifestyle magazine, Janice's Attic, Really Living (Jeannie Ramos), Exploring the Word, His Word Alive, Native New Day, Beyond Addiction, Cooking Vegetarian, Healing Hope, Fingerprints of Creation, Life and Teachings of Christ, Faces Around the Cross, Hope Sabbath School, Nature Speaks... but you can look up the programming yourself at http://www.hopetv.org/watch-now/tv-schedule/dialup.html.
It seems to me that you can't denigrate HopeTV without denigrating the Adventist Church throughout the world.
I wonder whether you believe that there is a special group of "perfect" people whom God commissioned to give the last message to the world -- other than the the world-wide Seventh-day Adventist church? Are you a member of this "perfect" group?
One lesson that has been impressed upon me recently is that God uses very imperfect people to do His work on this earth. If He didn't, He couldn't use any of us.
I believe we should be very careful about denigrating our brothers and sisters and even any particular ministries. God may be using them in ways He could not use us, and by denigrating them, we are denigrating God's elect instruments, as imperfect as they are.
It is much easier to criticize and tear down than to actually do the work of building up. We can choose to be part of the construction gang or the wrecking crew.
As for me, I pray that the Lord will give me the grace to choose to be part of the construction crew.
-
Have you ever considered that we would receive the greatest blessing if a great number of the people worshiping with us were dressed like people in the theater or the dance hall?
Why?
Because these are probably the people who need the gospel message even more than you do and would therefore receive a greater blessing than you do by hearing Jesus Christ presented with power of the Holy Spirit and conviction. Our churches should be more for the sinners than the saints, and you receive a blessing when you invite your worldly neighbors to hear the message and pray earnestly that the message will convict them as well as yourself.
We remain the OMEGA - lukewarm - people as long as we retain the conviction that church gatherings are only for the perfect people who need to see only "perfectly" dressed people around us when we hear the message preached.
I doubt that such spiritual selfish people will ever be sealed before the gate closes.
-
So where does the example of Christ like fit in??? In that scenario It doesn't. The problem is that most people want to jump on the ones that bring apostacy to their attention by example. They fail to realize they are jumping on the person that suggests it but the origianal ONe that originally gives it is who they are trampling on. All can suit their selves in what they want to belive and see the outcome of bringing everyone down to the lowest level to feel great theirselves. I really don't think you will win souls all decked with the devil's folly. and why should I be surprised at the state of the church in this latter time???Just read advent talk and it enough to scare you to not enter in.
-
Preach that!!!! By beholding[Christ} we become changed! Our churches need to be filled at every meeting with folks "inappropriately" dres'ed. Us personifying Jesus' appeal to come as you are. If we go by scripture, Jesus did not hang out much with the church leaders, you know you the folks who "looked" as if they were doing things right. In fact, the Bible says something about them being vessels, white perfect looking on the outside but corrupt on the inside. "Jesus example" is that he was always accused by those who "looked right" for always being in the company of those who were from from right. His example to that forgotten group was none of the condemnation show them by those who thought themselves perfect. let's remember the publican as he gave his offering......and remember who Jesus preferred in that situation. Let us remember that what was wrong with the publican,m was his attitude. He was doing things right, but it was his attitude while doing it. Christ example ws over and over again, preferring those who did not "look" right to those who thought they had it all right.
So, which example of Christ were you talking about, Tinka? Man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart", right?
Lest, we become confused, though. We don't stay there in our sins, but are in an healing environment to grow Christ. Not just to dress a certain way to fit in, but out of our individual love relationships with Christ. Too often we are looking for the signs so that we can do what God says we can't........discern the wheat from the tares. It is our Christ like character that draws, Tinka. Remember, Jesus says, If I be lifted up, I will draw all men......"
Have you ever considered that we would receive the greatest blessing if a great number of the people worshiping with us were dressed like people in the theater or the dance hall?
Why?
Because these are probably the people who need the gospel message even more than you do and would therefore receive a greater blessing than you do by hearing Jesus Christ presented with power of the Holy Spirit and conviction. Our churches should be more for the sinners than the saints, and you receive a blessing when you invite your worldly neighbors to hear the message and pray earnestly that the message will convict them as well as yourself.
We remain the OMEGA - lukewarm - people as long as we retain the conviction that church gatherings are only for the perfect people who need to see only "perfectly" dressed people around us when we hear the message preached.
I doubt that such spiritual selfish people will ever be sealed before the gate closes.
-
Christ broke the mold of what a person was supposed to look, talk and act like. He was considered a dangerous liberal who did not represent the truth given to the church. He spent time with tax collectors, prostitutes, zealots, and the dregs of society. In one of his parables, he said to go into the alleys and hedges and bring in the riffraff to the king's dinner. He broke the Sabbath time and again, and deeply offended the staunch defenders of the faith with his liberal attitude that people were more important than doctrine, form, belief system, or any of the other things that were most important to the exclusive truth given to the church. In Christ's example I have not ever seen where he attacked anyone for their looks, their clothes, their jewelry, or their gender. I have never seen an instance where he told anyone to come back when they were dressed more appropriately for him. In the case of the Samaritan, he demonized those who abided by the law, and set a man who did not even care about the law as an example of what matters most to God, for all time.
Preach that!!!! By beholding[Christ} we become changed! Our churches need to be filled at every meeting with folks "inappropriately" dres'ed. Us personifying Jesus' appeal to come as you are. If we go by scripture, Jesus did not hang out much with the church leaders, you know you the folks who "looked" as if they were doing things right. In fact, the Bible says something about them being vessels, white perfect looking on the outside but corrupt on the inside. "Jesus example" is that he was always accused by those who "looked right" for always being in the company of those who were from from right. His example to that forgotten group was none of the condemnation show them by those who thought themselves perfect. let's remember the publican as he gave his offering......and remember who Jesus preferred in that situation. Let us remember that what was wrong with the publican,m was his attitude. He was doing things right, but it was his attitude while doing it. Christ example ws over and over again, preferring those who did not "look" right to those who thought they had it all right.
So, which example of Christ were you talking about, Tinka? Man looks on the outward appearance, but the Lord looketh on the heart", right?
Lest, we become confused, though. We don't stay there in our sins, but are in an healing environment to grow Christ. Not just to dress a certain way to fit in, but out of our individual love relationships with Christ. Too often we are looking for the signs so that we can do what God says we can't........discern the wheat from the tares. It is our Christ like character that draws, Tinka. Remember, Jesus says, If I be lifted up, I will draw all men......"
Have you ever considered that we would receive the greatest blessing if a great number of the people worshiping with us were dressed like people in the theater or the dance hall?
Why?
Because these are probably the people who need the gospel message even more than you do and would therefore receive a greater blessing than you do by hearing Jesus Christ presented with power of the Holy Spirit and conviction. Our churches should be more for the sinners than the saints, and you receive a blessing when you invite your worldly neighbors to hear the message and pray earnestly that the message will convict them as well as yourself.
We remain the OMEGA - lukewarm - people as long as we retain the conviction that church gatherings are only for the perfect people who need to see only "perfectly" dressed people around us when we hear the message preached.
I doubt that such spiritual selfish people will ever be sealed before the gate closes.
-
I really don't think you will win souls all decked with the devil's folly.
What is the example of Jesus Christ?
Matthew 18:10-12 (King James Version)
10Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.
11For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
12How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?
Mark 2:17
When Jesus heard it, he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
-
Di
What in the world is wrong getting off into your own tangents and re courses of mumble jumble against something you haven't the least understood what I am implying. Of course it is nothing unusual watching the same misunderstanding of what is going on with the 3abn saga that you all come up with. Have you lost the train of the subject we were discussing. We were discussing the appearance of true SDA and their examples going into worship the Lord God and being an example in actions and dress, eathing and drinking. You sure are off the wall with coming back with your justifying aggressiveness of something clear different. Have you not read about how we should dress, act, worship, and reverence God. Your off the wall idea using different circumstances does not apply to what has been said. If Adventist cannot set the right example of instruction, clean,true way of living then why don't you all just get off it.
No body was talking about going out gathering sinners under the sinners banner of doing things and that is what your answers imply. The example of Jesus was gathering sinners under His instructions and His banner of Righteousness.
-
Ok, so what is a true Seventh Day Adventist? What do those words mean, actually. I don't believe I was agressive as my examples came from the Bible, and were correct. Read George's post. I have long way to be like Christ, and perhaps never will be, but your accusations of me(and others) sounds a lot like those of the Pharisees towards Jesus. Above all many missed out because Jesus Himself did not "look" as they expected him. Not off the wall or extreme. Plus we have to get out of the rut of thinking that everyone has to look the same as us. We are all at different places in our walk with God We might not all look the same at the same time, neither should we expect it. It makes "us" feel better, but is it a requirement of God?
I like you tinka, but I am not going to trust my soul's salvation to your word, or even your interpretation of God's Word. I have to seek Him for myself, and allow Him to reveal His Will for me.......and guess what some of that can differ from His Will for you. The fact that you don't understnad this is ok, but very telling.
Di
What in the world is wrong getting off into your own tangents and re courses of mumble jumble against something you haven't the least understood what I am implying. Of course it is nothing unusual watching the same misunderstanding of what is going on with the 3abn saga that you all come up with. Have you lost the train of the subject we were discussing. We were discussing the appearance of true SDA and their examples going into worship the Lord God and being an example in actions and dress, eathing and drinking. You sure are off the wall with coming back with your justifying aggressiveness of something clear different. Have you not read about how we should dress, act, worship, and reverence God. Your off the wall idea using different circumstances does not apply to what has been said. If Adventist cannot set the right example of instruction, clean,true way of living then why don't you all just get off it.
No body was talking about going out gathering sinners under the sinners banner of doing things and that is what your answers imply. The example of Jesus was gathering sinners under His instructions and His banner of Righteousness.
-
A true Adventist, is loyal, honest, generous, patient, humble, dedicated, gentle, giving, loving, sober, prayerful, ambitious, forgiving, grateful, kind, thoughtful, clean and neat and extremely wise for the example to the disloyal, dishonest, ungenerous, impatient, boastful, disobedient, harsh , selfish, hating, drunks, atheists, lazy, unforgiving, ungrateful, mean, thoughtless, disshelved, dirty and ignorant. and this is not a rut nor an (or off the wall implication) that everyone has to look the same or cloned.
-
Aaaaaaahhhhhhh, but you make my point exactly, Tinka. Per your own descriptors of a true SDA, very few have anything to do with the outward appearance, aonly to, to be exact. The rest have to do with their character. The very part on which God looks. However, like in the post about the Hope Channel and the ladies singing there, you would not know anything about their character, because you can't get past their outward appearance.
Now, we know that Jesus spent a lot of time around folks whose outward looks were not exceptable to the church leaders or even society at large, But He looked passed their outward appearance. Where does that leave us who cannot see our brothers and sisters through God's eye, as His children, our brothers and sisters. to see that no matter the outward appearance, Jesus came to die for their sins........and loves them........unconditionally......just like us....while they are yet in their sins. What does this say about us, who are so "holy" that we require even more than God Himself of a person? We must remember that for anyone to be saved, it is not necessary that they convince us of their relationship with God
A true Adventist, is loyal, honest, generous, patient, humble, dedicated, gentle, giving, loving, sober, prayerful, ambitious, forgiving, grateful, kind, thoughtful, clean and neat and extremely wise for the example to the disloyal, dishonest, ungenerous, impatient, boastful, disobedient, harsh , selfish, hating, drunks, atheists, lazy, unforgiving, ungrateful, mean, thoughtless, disshelved, dirty and ignorant. and this is not a rut nor an (or off the wall implication) that everyone has to look the same or cloned.
-
No you missed my point. Hope channel is supposed to present the examples that I said above. They don't always. They are supposed to be SDA's top of the line example to present to world. Their appearance does not uphold those appearances presented by SP and that is very obvious in their manners of boastful self interest girations, handclapping, gaudy un-neat dress, jiving, and bluezy, jazz wacking away at the drums with ruby red nails and jewelry galore. These are not true Adventists showing out on tv presented to the whole world as cream of the crop but copiers of the secular world. I am disgusted with it and mostly ashamed. and my complaint is that this is not the example to set for non adventists. That was my point. Their character is already displayed with what they want seen. How will non adventist know what is truth if they are told early and discover a bunch of talkers and not walkers.
-
“In the city of Portland the Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my first labors were given to the cause of present truth.” — Ellen G.White in RH, May 18, 1911.
Has anyone discovered the date when the Lord withdrew His ordination from Ellen G. White if it was still valid 1911?
-
???
-
the Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my first labors were given to the cause of present truth.” — Ellen G.White in RH, May 18, 1911.
Has anyone discovered the date when the Lord withdrew His ordination from Ellen G. White if it was still valid 1911?
[/quote]
Key words...the Lord ordained me as His messenger... I don't think she misspoke a word. messenger of the Lord does not mean the same as Ordained pastor. She was exactly what she said ..the Lord ordained me a messenger
-
the Lord ordained me as His messenger, and here my first labors were given to the cause of present truth.” — Ellen G.White in RH, May 18, 1911.
Has anyone discovered the date when the Lord withdrew His ordination from Ellen G. White if it was still valid 1911?
Key words...the Lord ordained me as His messenger... I don't think she misspoke a word. messenger of the Lord does not mean the same as Ordained pastor. She was exactly what she said ..the Lord ordained me a messenger
"Sound doctrine" is Bible truth--truth that will promote piety and devotion, confirming God's people in the faith. Sound doctrine means much to the receiver; and it means much, too, to the teacher, the minister of righteousness; for wherever the gospel is preached, every laborer, whatever his line of service, is either true or untrue to his responsibility as the Lord's messenger. {GW 311.2}
According to this a messenger is also as teacher, a minister of righteousness, one who teaches the gospel, labors. . . What is a pastor then?
-
It is interesting to note how Ellen G White refers to Wycliffe both as a chaplain, pastor, reformer, - and a messenger
-
Key words...the Lord ordained me as His messenger... I don't think she misspoke a word. messenger of the Lord does not mean the same as Ordained pastor. She was exactly what she said ..the Lord ordained me a messenger
Help! I have been searching for a quote by Ellen White where she states that a pastor should be ordained, and I have found none. Could you help me?
I have found a number of places where she lists the duties of pastors, but none of them apply to what is generally regarded as the special duties of the pastor and not the church elder.
-
Here are points of interest in ordination but am still looking for your direct question but the words again are not mistaken "the Lord ordained her as messenger." No human hands ordained EGW as a preacher. But again many wanted that as they voted for it but it did not happen as one can see here.
From the Lifetime and Experience of Ellen G. White
A PAPER PRESENTED AT THE MINISTERIAL MEETING AT THE 1990 GENERAL CONFERENCE SESSION. PREPARED BY THE WHITE ESTATE STAFF. {DG 248.1}
1. A RESOLUTION TO ORDAIN WOMEN WAS DISCUSSED AT THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1881. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN. THE MINUTES INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING LINES: {DG 248.2}
"RESOLVED, THAT FEMALES POSSESSING THE NECESSARY QUALIFICATIONS TO FILL THAT POSITION MAY, WITH PERFECT PROPRIETY, BE SET APART BY ORDINATION TO THE WORK OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY. {DG 248.3}
"THIS WAS DISCUSSED BY J. O. CORLISS, A. C. BOURDEAU, E. R. JONES, D. H. LAMSON, W. H. LITTLEJOHN, A. S. HUTCHINS, D. M. CANRIGHT, AND J. N. LOUGHBOROUGH, AND REFERRED TO THE GENERAL CONFERENCE COMMITTEE."--RH, DEC. 20, 1881.{DG 248.4}
ELLEN WHITE DID NOT ATTEND THE GENERAL CONFERENCE OF 1881. HER HUSBAND DIED ON AUGUST 6 OF THAT YEAR. TWO WEEKS AFTER HIS DEATH SHE LEFT BATTLE CREEK, BOUND FOR CALIFORNIA. SHE DID NOT RETURN TO MICHIGAN UNTIL AUGUST OF 1883.{DG 248.5}
2. FOR MANY YEARS ELLEN WHITE WAS VOTED MINISTERIAL CREDENTIALS BY THE MICHIGAN CONFERENCE (SEE E.G. RH, SEPT. 10, 1872),
249
AND THEN LATER BY THE GENERAL CONFERENCE. HOWEVER, SHE WAS NEVER ORDAINED BY HUMAN HANDS, NOR DID SHE EVER PERFORM A WEDDING, ORGANIZE A CHURCH, OR CONDUCT A BAPTISM.{DG 248.6}
3. IN 1895 ELLEN WHITE RECOMMENDED THE ORDINATION OF WOMEN WHO WOULD GIVE THEMSELVES TO A DEACONESS-TYPE OF WORK:{DG 249.1}
"Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service of the Lord should be appointed to visit the sick, look after the young, and minister to the necessities of the poor. They should be set apart to this work by prayer and laying on of hands. In some cases they will need to counsel with the church officers or the minister; but if they are devoted women, maintaining a vital connection with God, they will be a power for good in the church. This is another means of strengthening and building up the church."--RH, July 9, 1895.{DG 249.2}
A NUMBER OF WOMEN WERE ORDAINED AS DEACONESSES DURING ELLEN WHITE'S AUSTRALIAN MINISTRY. ON AUGUST 10, 1895, THE NOMINATING COMMITTEE AT THE ASHFIELD CHURCH IN SYDNEY RENDERED ITS REPORT, WHICH WAS APPROVED. THE CLERK'S MINUTES FOR THAT DATE STATE: "IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE ELECTION, THE OFFICERS WERE CALLED TO THE FRONT WHERE PASTORS CORLISS AND MCCULLAGH SET APART THE ELDER, DEACONS, [AND] DEACONESSES BY PRAYER AND THE LAYING ON OF HANDS."{DG 249.3}
SEVERAL YEARS LATER, IN THE SAME CHURCH, W. C. WHITE OFFICIATED AT THE ORDINATION OF THE CHURCH OFFICERS. THE MINUTES OF THE ASHFIELD CHURCH FOR JANUARY 7, 1900, STATE: "THE PREVIOUS SABBATH OFFICERS HAD BEEN NOMINATED AND ACCEPTED FOR THE CURRENT YEAR, AND TODAY ELDER WHITE ORDAINED AND LAID HANDS ON THE ELDERS, DEACON, AND DEACONESSES.--AR, JAN. 16, 1986.{DG 249.4}
-
Before ordination, ministers should give evidence that they have dedicated themselves to the work.--There must be evidence on the part of those who take the solemn position of shepherds, that they have without reservation, dedicated themselves to the work. They must take Christ as their personal Saviour. . . . Hands are laid upon men to ordain them for the ministry before they are thoroughly examined as to their qualifications for the sacred work; but how much better would it be to make thorough work before accepting them as ministers, than to have to go through this rigid examination after they have become established in their position, and have put their mould upon the work.--TM 171, 172. {PaM 42.2}
We must not rely on human judgment alone in selecting ministers.--Those who are about to enter upon the sacred work of teaching Bible truth to the world should be carefully examined by faithful, experienced persons. After these have had some experience, there is still another work to be done for them; they should be presented before the Lord in earnest prayer that He would indicate by His Holy Spirit if they are acceptable to Him. The apostle says: "Lay hands suddenly on no man." In the days of the apostles, the ministers of God did not dare to rely up on their own judgment in selecting or accepting men to take the solemn and sacred position of mouthpiece for God. They selected the men whom their judgment would accept, and then they placed them before the Lord to see if He would accept them to go forth as His representatives. No less than this should be done now.--4T 406. {PaM 44.2}
-
REASONS FOR ORDINATION:
The Business Sessions of the Conference
Ministers present belonging to the Michigan Conference were James White, J. H. Waggoner, J. B. Frisbie, John Byington, J. N. Loughborough, Moses Hull, M. E. Cornell, R. J. Lawrence, and Joseph Bates. Bates now resided in retirement in Monterey, only two blocks from the meetinghouse. He was asked to serve as chairman of the conference. {1BIO 477.5}
There was much to be accomplished in the business meetings; first, the examination of the standing of the churches, their memberships, and their wishes in relation to being taken into the conference. This accomplished, study was given to ministerial credentials and the assignment of ministers to fields of labor.
478 {1BIO 477.6}
Now that there was an official Seventh-day Adventist Church body, with longstanding, acknowledged leaders to guide in the work of the church, particularly in Michigan, attention could be given to more general resolutions. One read: {1BIO 478.1}
Whereas, We believe that the Lord has called Brother and
Sister White to labor among the churches, and, {1BIO 478.2}
Whereas, The state of the cause in the several States
demands their labor, therefore, {1BIO 478.3}
Resolved, That this conference recommend Brother and Sister
White to labor in different States, and assist in organizing
conferences and churches, as the way may open before
them.--Ibid. {1BIO 478.4}
Matters for Conference Consideration
The minutes of this conference session set forth some interesting items of business that Elder Sanborn brought from Illinois and Wisconsin, calling for the opinion of the conference: {1BIO 478.5}
1. How shall we treat divorced marriages? {1BIO 478.6}
2. Shall preachers from other denominations embracing the
message preach and baptize among us, on the strength of their
former ordination and standing as ministers? {1BIO 478.7}
3. Shall young preachers, before being ordained, be allowed
to baptize? {1BIO 478.8}
4. Shall T. M. Steward have a letter of commendation as a
preacher among us?--Ibid. {1BIO 478.9}
Steward was the minister deeply involved in the fanaticism that broke out in Mauston, Wisconsin. {1BIO 478.10}
After satisfying themselves to the full intent of the first question--and ascertaining that what was involved was the accepting into church membership those couples comprised of individuals who had been divorced on grounds other than the violation of the seventh commandment, actions were taken as follows: {1BIO 478.11}
1. Resolved, That the matter of divorced marriages be
referred to the conference committee. [DILIGENT SEARCH FAILS TO
DISCLOSE ANY REPORT ON THIS PERPLEXING ITEM.]
479 {1BIO 478.12}
2. Resolved, That ministers of other denominations, embracing
present truth, should give proof of being called to preach the
message, and be ordained among us, before administering the
ordinances. {1BIO 479.1}
3. Resolved, That no person, young or old, should administer
the ordinances before being ordained. {1BIO 479.2}
4. In reference to Brother Steward's case, it was suggested
...that... further time be allowed.... The conference saw fit to
take no action in the matter.--Ibid. {1BIO 479.3}
The feeling prevailed that Steward's position was somewhat akin to that of a young minister, allowing him time to give proof of his ministry before endorsing him again for that sacred work. It was felt best, however, to leave the matter without record. {1BIO 479.4}
The closing actions of the conference called for the next State conference meeting to be held in Battle Creek, October 2 to 5, 1863, and that the State conferences be invited to meet with them by delegates "in general conference, at our next annual conference." {1BIO 479.5}
The subject of a general conference that would bind State conferences together surfaced again from time to time. This would be the crowning step in organization. {1BIO 479.6}
Uriah Smith, as he reported the conference, pointed out that "our pilgrimage heavenward lies through a pathway that is rough and thorny," but that the conference at Monterey would be looked back upon as an oasis in the desert. It was clear that organization of churches and conferences was paying off. He observed, "The meetings were harmonious, and the brethren unanimous in their conclusions."--Ibid. {1BIO 479.7}
-
Very good! But I used the word "pastor" on purpose in my question. In my early youth I never heard of church pastors in the Seventh-day Adventist church. Yes, we had ministers and/or evangelists who were preaching - and moving on for new fields, but not hovering over established churches. There the local elders were to take car of the members. I recall Ellen White warning against having local pastors to take care of those already established.
In one of the quotations I notice that ministers are ordained/appointed by ordination to baptize, perform marriages and establish churches.
We make quite a point of being part of the Reformation. But are we still subscribing to the priesthood that Martin Luther fought against?
Justification by faith was a very important part of the Reformation, but do we realize how Martin Luther took his stand against the priesthood which substituted the sacrifice of Jesus Christ with the magic work of the priesthood which made indulgences possible?
Martin Luther agreed with the Apostle Peter 1 Peter 2:5:
"you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." And 1 Peter 2:9:
"But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light."
Luther interpreted Peter as saying that this priesthood included any believer and therefore if a group of believers were gathered without an ordained pastor any individual in that group could baptize or perform marriages.
Are we leaving this Reformation principle behind us and returning to the teachings of the church Luther was expelled from?
Does this question not matter to us at all?
-
No reaction? What does it take to stir up the saints?
-
Johann
When the early Church learned they could pay someone to do their work for them the spirituality of the members declined. Can we relate this to the church today?
If women are not to be ordained as elders or pastors is God fair?
-
Johann
Welcome Robert! I know a number of Roberts, but I have no idea if you are one of them, but that makes no difference. When I noticed you registering as our member number 353 I had a feeling you wanted to participate in this discussion, but I had no idea in which direction you were inclined. I believe any view should be considered and tested to see what God wants us to do. That is much more important than clinging to our own warped ideas. When the early Church learned they could pay someone to do their work for them the spirituality of the members declined. Can we relate this to the church today?
This is an important question because we see that the priesthood turned at least in two directions in the early church. You have the apostolic model which the apostle Paul also describes as being a deacon. The Church of England still follows this in name by calling their pastors deacons. You will also notice from this discussion that the Seventh-day Adventist church has recognized this by approving the ordination of both male and female deacons. You will also recall that Philip seems to have used his mandate as a deacon to baptize people (also the Ethiopian minister of finance) and establish a new church in Samaria (Acts 8).
It is interesting to notice that we have nowhere in Scripture a model of how a church/temple official performs a marriage ceremony.
Then you have the second model basing the new priesthood partly on the Aronic tradition. The Roman church seems to have preferred this model with impressive robes and continuing the offering system from the temple service, just adopting it to fit with the sign of the cross and making the wafer the sacrificed Christ. By adding celibacy to this model the way was open for infant baptism - but that is a different story, explained by the Bishop Augustine of Hippo who became more important than any writers of Scripture to the Church of the Middle Ages. (Another interesting story is how one of the monks/priests of the order of Augustine became the great reformer, Martin Luther.)
Some may have noticed through the history of the Seventh-day Adventist Church that our membership stabilized without much increase in the Western World as more and more ordained pastors were being attached to local established churches in stead of fulfilling their God given appointment.
If women are not to be ordained as elders or pastors is God fair?
Where does God say that, Robert? I still haven't found that reference. Will you provide it?
-
Johann
I'm the Robert Russell you know. If you believe EGW, there was never to be settled pastors (clergy) only in certain areas the paid pastors were to train and open up new areas. Read how the Baptist church grew like wild fire in the 1800's.
If there is no male or female in Christ than they should be treated the same. Look at Job a man God calls perfect. How did he treat the females. Study the first two chapters and the last part of the last chapter. There are many places in the Bible we need to study more for ourselves.
Robert
-
Robert,
Sure glad to know it's you and welcome to participate in our discussions. I never forget when Owen Troy introduced us to each other and you as the Director of the Call Center at 3ABN. Owen seemed to regard you as a very important person in the structure of 3ABN, and I soon discovered how quite a bit of the technical things at camp-meeting and other events hinged on you.
-
I wasn't that important there. I just done whatever I could to make things better or was asked to do.
When I look at issues in the church I think of my picture of God. Then I think would the devil be able to accuse God of being unfair. And does this fit the picture of a loving God. God is a God of order, does it fit? This is the way I make many decisions. There are some things I just don't know what is right.
Robert
-
I wasn't that important there. I just done whatever I could to make things better or was asked to do.
When I'd ask Danny or others at 3ABN certain questions I was told, "Talk to Robert!"
When I look at issues in the church I think of my picture of God. Then I think would the devil be able to accuse God of being unfair. And does this fit the picture of a loving God. God is a God of order, does it fit? This is the way I make many decisions. There are some things I just don't know what is right.
Robert
Job 37:23
The Almighty is beyond our reach and exalted in power; in his justice and great righteousness, he does not oppress.
But who does? When the great enemy is not able to make God's elect break any of His Ten Commandments, the evil powers might try to get them to accept a priesthood akin to what is approved by those who have changed one of the commandments. Anything to prevent the advancement of the Three Angel's Messages on Earth.
-
Some may not realize that in most of the places in the New Testament where the King James Version has the terms "minister" or "ministry" it is a translation of the Greek words diakoneo, diakonos, or diakonia which are terms for "deacon". The only one of these which is translated "deacon" is the word "diakonos", and that occurs only three times in the KJV. The same word is tranlated 20 times as "minister". This indicates that deacon and minister are synonyms and interchangeable, almost like in English where both deacons and ministers are servants.
In reality you find no distinction in Scripture between the terms deacon and minister.
It is interesting that you do not find the term deacon in the KJV as applied to the seven men appointed to the "daily ministration" of the church in Acts 6. Here diakonia is translated ministration and not deacon.
-
Johann
I agree with you. I believe there needs to be some changes.
Robert
-
Johann
I agree with you. I believe there needs to be some changes.
Robert
Good, Robert. But don't agree with me just because I say so. It should be because this is according to Scripture and the conviction of the Holy Spirit. We do need a revival, even if it will cost us a number of our old convictions when we see the Lord is guiding us closer to Him.
-
It really shivers me to even ever utter a question asking if God is fair in his creation of duties of male or female. It is beyond plain that his intentions are different in the works of male and female. Otherwise, why make a he and a she??? A bigger question to me is why a believer would always try to make all equal and always justifying out how we can make it happen. I found no where that we had examples of EGW stating that women should take on that role but she definitely gave examples of what they should be doing. The parts where it shows women being ordained or the laying on of hands was deaconesses or bible workers. The liberals back then were doing, and trying their own thing.....just like they are trying to do now. Take note that EGW did not attend their attempts of women ordained preachers. I did read many reasons why this should not be. If all women were doing what all they are capable of in so many fields...of which some do.... they would not want to wear the pants. Where are the children of today???? Two acting fathers or is it two mothers?? Think it not important on what God creates and for what reasons??? I believe that women have great abilities of speech....examples...Linda sat on the porch and I always took note and enjoyed her abilities. If she was in the pulpit ordained as a preacher I would not have listened but considered her flaked in her obsession of being equal with man. I am totally woman with no desires of anything manly. Except right to vote (smile) and then I question sometimes if we really should.
-
It is quite interesting to see how we through the history of our church have the tendency of labeling anyone who discovers greater things that God wants to give His people than what I am willing to accept - as liberals or something. Just as long as we can use a label on those who disagree with me. That tendency is very - too - strong with me too.
May the Good Lord have mercy on us!
-
I am so old that I remember my mother using a washboard next to the creek where she heated the water over firewood.
Should we re-establish a way for dedicated women to get hold of those washboards? That would occupy their time and help them not to get into mischief in Church!
-
Johann
I just got back from VA where we were upgrading one of our houses. Before we move to MN.
I'm not agreeing just to be agreeing. I have taken classes from Andrews on church growth 20 years ago. What I was taught most pastors I've been around disagree.
In the early seventy when I became an Adventist the pastor said the members shouldn't give Bible Studies became they were not trained, only the pastor was trained to give Bible Studies. That was not what I read in Bible and EGW. The last few years I have just warmed a pew. I worked with a pastor 30 years a ago for 3 years that taught me even thing he knew about church growth. It was wonderful. I would like to find someone like that to work with again. Maybe when we get to MN I will find that person.
When we study EGW writings and the Bible we need to look at area, time, and customs.
I loved my job at 3ABN and even when I was there I believed there was greater things to come. I put in 60 hours most weeks. But I disagreed with how Linda was treated! I left!
Robert
-
I know I'm not Adventist, and that I am southern Baptist. However, I would like to add that I have a HUGE problem with women carrying the title Pastor. I do not believe that it is a woman's place to pastor be a deacon or even serve on the church board.
I further do not believe that God would call any woman to do any of these jobs I have spoken of. So, I would have to agree with Doug Bachelor's analysis.
This is input from a Southern Baptist Minister. :)
-
I would also pose a question for Johann, Robert and Bob Pickle:
Do you believe that divorced men should be able to pastor?
-
Alex
I have a question for you, is divorce any worse sin than lying in God's sight?
I believe it depends on the reason for the divorce. The question is what does God think on divorce and women in the church?
Robert
-
Robert:
I believe that all sin is equal. I do not believe one sin is greater than another one, except for the unpardonable sin.
On Divorce: This is an issue that is probably the most debated among Southern Baptist. As a rule, the southern Baptist Church does not allow divorcee's to hold the title pastor.
I do believe that any type of fornication does warrant and is biblical grounds for divorce. I do not necessarily agree fully with the SB Church on their theory. However, I am against men being ordained pastor's if the divorce was for any reason other than fornication.
Now, to the subject of re-marriage. Jesus tell's us that a man put away his wife and marries another one he hath committed adultery. So, my problem would not necessarily be with a man who has been divorced, but someone who has remarried.
-
I am so old that I remember my mother using a washboard next to the creek where she heated the water over firewood.
Should we re-establish a way for dedicated women to get hold of those washboards? That would occupy their time and help them not to get into mischief in Church!
Ha-ha, Johann!
-
I know I'm not Adventist, and that I am southern Baptist. However, I would like to add that I have a HUGE problem with women carrying the title Pastor. I do not believe that it is a woman's place to pastor be a deacon or even serve on the church board.
I further do not believe that God would call any woman to do any of these jobs I have spoken of. So, I would have to agree with Doug Bachelor's analysis.
This is input from a Southern Baptist Minister. :)
A tough question, Alex. In a way it reminds me of early church history when the new Christians were developing their doctrines and moral philosophy. We might not realize it, but quite early the moral stands of the church was based not so much on what Jesus Christ or the Apostles had said but comparisons were made with other group of philosophies or religion. You had the Greek, the Roman, the Jewish, the Gnostic, the Stoics, etc. Often the main concern of the developing church was trying to appear to be "better" or at least with just as high "morals" as other groups in the eyes of the general public.
It appears like other groups had some kind of monks and nuns, and so the new Christians decided they should have that too, and that their monks and nuns should be even better. Since it was a sacrifice to live without a spouse, the Christian pastors or priests should be able to do that and even better. And thus several doctrines emerged.
Some of the doctrines today have a similar history. Since the Baptists have such high ideals about clergy, etc, then we should be able to do even better.
Much good can be accomplished this way, but to my way of thinking this is not the right standard to compare man with man. I adhere to the belief that God must speak to me through Scripture and reveal to me what He wants me to do, even if another member of my own chuch has a different idea. Then it becomes much more important that we get together and study what God wants us to know about this subject. "Come, let us reason together. . ."
-
You said it is difficult, and it is. I feel the way to go is to compare all that Scripture has to say on that subject, and not only base the decision on one text. And it might also take a lot of prayer - and even fasting.
I would also pose a question for Johann, Robert and Bob Pickle:
Do you believe that divorced men should be able to pastor?
-
Johann
Well said!
Robert
-
Johann and Robert:
Back on the issues of women holding the title of pastor. Didn't the apostle Paul teach that a woman's place was to be quiet in the church?
I feel I must say this. If a woman feels a calling on her life. I would have no issue with her seeking to be an evangelist. However, being the head of the church is an entirely different story.
For instance: Let's look at the book of Timothy where the Apostle Paul gives the instruction's for the Pastor and Deacons. It is clear that he is giving those instructions to men not women.
-
Johann and Robert:
Back on the issues of women holding the title of pastor. Didn't the apostle Paul teach that a woman's place was to be quiet in the church?
I feel I must say this. If a woman feels a calling on her life. I would have no issue with her seeking to be an evangelist. However, being the head of the church is an entirely different story.
For instance: Let's look at the book of Timothy where the Apostle Paul gives the instruction's for the Pastor and Deacons. It is clear that he is giving those instructions to men not women.
Depends on which Bible translation you use. Many scholars understand the original text to say that female deacons should be ordained, just like the men. The original does not clearly state "their wives", but "women". - Therefore that female deacons should be treated just like male deacons.
So it depends on your own bias how you read the text.
1 Timothy 3:11
New International Version, ©2010 (NIV)
Listen to this passage
View commentary related to this passage
11 In the same way, the women[a] are to be worthy of respect, not malicious talkers but temperate and trustworthy in everything.
Footnotes:
1. 1 Timothy 3:11 Possibly deacons’ wives or women who are deacons
New International Version, ©2010 (NIV)
Copyright © 1973, 1978, 1984, 2010 by Biblica
The Message (MSG)
View commentary related to this passage
8-13The same goes for those who want to be servants in the church: serious, not deceitful, not too free with the bottle, not in it for what they can get out of it. They must be reverent before the mystery of the faith, not using their position to try to run things. Let them prove themselves first. If they show they can do it, take them on. No exceptions are to be made for women—same qualifications: serious, dependable, not sharp-tongued, not overfond of wine. Servants in the church are to be committed to their spouses, attentive to their own children, and diligent in looking after their own affairs. Those who do this servant work will come to be highly respected, a real credit to this Jesus-faith.
The Message (MSG)
Copyright © 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 2000, 2001, 2002 by Eugene H. Peterson
New Century Version (NCV)
View commentary related to this passage
11 In the same way, women[a] must be respected by others. They must not speak evil of others. They must be self-controlled and trustworthy in everything.
Footnotes:
1. 1 Timothy 3:11 women This might mean the wives of the deacons, or it might mean women who serve in the same way as deacons.
New Century Version (NCV)
The Holy Bible, New Century Version®. Copyright © 2005 by Thomas Nelson, Inc.
Contemporary English Version (CEV)
Listen to this passage
View commentary related to this passage
11Women [a] must also be serious. They must not gossip or be heavy drinkers, and they must be faithful in everything they do.
Footnotes:
1. 1 Timothy 3:11 Women: Either church officers or the wives of church officers.
Contemporary English Version (CEV)
Copyright © 1995 by American Bible Society
-
The title "pastor" occurs only one time in the New Testament, and it means shepherd, so there is no instructions on the term pastor in Scripture.
-
The way I understand from a broad picture of the word "Ordained" is this:
When the foundation of the SDA was first formed, it was issential that all were on the same page of Inspired guidence before they entered into teaching. It was a responsibility of the people of the 3rd angels "enlightening" of this message to all be on the same page in order to go out and give it in the manner presented. Ordination was special prayer and laying on of hands to make sure that "ones own opinions and presentations were exactly as given that upheld all the foundation revelations of truth opened up for that time. To me that is all that it means and the asking of blessing on that person to be right and sincere in taking on this great feat of spreading the last message of to a people just before the coming events.
All other denominations take the same stance on their beliefs to uphold their religions.
Now the question arises that if God's chosen instrument is to bring this to light and she states has been "Ordained" of God to do so, then where is the thinking of men and women to think they must ordain EGW by their hands when she clearly states she has been "ordained" by God as a messenger and nothing else. That is plain simple to me. She never attended man's vote to do otherwise. She already gave clear picture the work of women according to scripture. She knew beyond doubt where her credentials came from and why would she want "applause" or credentials from men. I understand her clearly. What a slap in the face to God if she had "vanity" for this acknowledgement from earthly feebles. The fact is that God made women to be a helpmate, companion, mother, teacher, and so what is man??...... without?? (smile) A women has the greatest job and accomplishments of all as she provides the nourishment and armour for the battle!!! A man in return for his protective and strong love for women gives back to him her reason for living and love for God that gave her this protection. So this is what I get when I read that women are respected. Nothing more and nothing less. Too bad that some only like to wear pants and their duty and job is all mouth while they produce offspring that is cared by someone else.
Two weeks ago unexpected and instant to my finding, I just lost the love of my heart. I feel very lost and broken and can't believe hardly what time of day or when it is. Just coming on post to divert my hurt. He gave what he was in my life for and I in return believe and did what I wrote above. We always wanted eternity together. Now I wait. It was the best way that worked for us.
-
I for one would never allow a woman to stand behind my pulpit. Call me sexist, call me old-fashioned, whatever. The truth is lady's are not called to preach!
-
I for one would never allow a woman to stand behind my pulpit. Call me sexist, call me old-fashioned, whatever. The truth is lady's are not called to preach!
You are in "good" company. The largest Christian body will be in full agreement with you.
Women Priests — No Chance
JOANNE BOGLE
There is a general assumption, especially in North America and Europe, that the Catholic Church’s insistence on a male priesthood is an obscure anomaly, which endures only because a Polish pope has refused to move with the times.
. . .
. . .
In the Church’s latest statement on this matter, Pope John Paul II, using his full authority as the successor of Peter, states categorically that the Church cannot — not will not, but cannot — ordain women, now or in the future. The Catechism of the Catholic Church sets it out clearly, quoting the decree Inter insigniores:
Only a baptized man (vir) receives sacred ordination.
http://www.catholiceducation.org/articles/apologetics/ap0001.html
-
From The Texas Baptist Committed:
Dr. Billy Graham, when asked by David Frost about women's ordination, said, "Women preach all over the world. It doesn't bother me at all from my study of the Scriptures. And there were many women preachers in the Bible." . . .
. . . on the same day that the SBC published its proposed revision to the "Baptist Faith and Message," USA Today carried an article about Anne Graham Lotz, daughter of the famous evangelist. In that article, Graham called her the "best preacher in the family."
http://www.txbc.org/2000Journals/July2000/July00womeninthepulpit.htm
-
I had the hardest time believe that Saturday was the Bible day of worship. I though they were crazy. How could so many be wrong? It took me a few years of study. I read book after book on Sunday and Saturday worship. I read of Moody and other great preachers who questioned Saturday as the true day of worship. I read only a few Germans didn't believe in what Hitler was doing. I had been wrong so many times. Now I question more. I was 45 when I went to college. It taught me so many things I had been wrong about.
Robert
-
From The Texas Baptist Committed:
Dr. Billy Graham, when asked by David Frost about women's ordination, said, "Women preach all over the world. It doesn't bother me at all from my study of the Scriptures. And there were many women preachers in the Bible." . . .
. . . on the same day that the SBC published its proposed revision to the "Baptist Faith and Message," USA Today carried an article about Anne Graham Lotz, daughter of the famous evangelist. In that article, Graham called her the "best preacher in the family."
http://www.txbc.org/2000Journals/July2000/July00womeninthepulpit.htm
I greatly admire Dr. Billy Graham. He is a true leader in the SBC. However, I am greatly appalled by his comment. There is no biblical foundation that there were women preacher's in the bible.
This goes to show the division within my church, I love greatly.
-
Here is a short list of female preacher in the Bible. Worth considering.
1. Deborah
2. Miriam
3. Mother in Isa. 8:3
4. Mary
5. Anna
6. Priscilla
7. Phoebe
-
Here is a short list of female preacher in the Bible. Worth considering.
1. Deborah
2. Miriam
3. Mother in Isa. 8:3
4. Mary
5. Anna
6. Priscilla
7. Phoebe
:thumbsup:
-
Here is a short list of female preacher in the Bible. Worth considering.
1. Deborah
2. Miriam
3. Mother in Isa. 8:3
4. Mary
5. Anna
6. Priscilla
7. Phoebe
:thumbsup:
I forgot to mention the four daughters of Philip. . .
-
Do you believe that a homosexual man should be able to pastor?
I would also pose a question for Johann, Robert and Bob Pickle:
Do you believe that divorced men should be able to pastor?
-
This is kind of an unpopular response to your question, but here goes........ Sin is sin, and iffn you are going to start clearing out the homosexual pastors, you gots to clear out the ones who are committing "same sex" adultery and fornication, lying, stealing money, etc., etc. We tend to focus to the sins on which we, not God, rank as more sinful that others. Homsexuals and pregnant teen girls can always expect to feel the full brunt of the law.
-
I'd say that all depends on if he permits his homosexual leanings to govern his life, or if he is fully committed to the Lord and conquers in his temptations.
This may not be the answer you were expecting, but I have known such a person who, as far as I know, gained full control over his temptations. Only his wife knew about his tendencies and did not reveal it until more than 20 years after his death.
Do you believe that a homosexual man should be able to pastor?
I would also pose a question for Johann, Robert and Bob Pickle:
Do you believe that divorced men should be able to pastor?
-
I'd say that all depends on if he permits his homosexual leanings to govern his life, or if he is fully committed to the Lord and conquers in his temptations.
This may not be the answer you were expecting, but I have known such a person who, as far as I know, gained full control over his temptations. Only his wife knew about his tendencies and did not reveal it until more than 20 years after his death.
Do you believe that a homosexual man should be able to pastor?
I would also pose a question for Johann, Robert and Bob Pickle:
Do you believe that divorced men should be able to pastor?
Homosexuals, women, murderers who are we to say who can preach and who can't? If God calls someone to preach then they should do just that, instead of listening to judgmental Christians saying who should "be allowed" to preach or not.
There were obviously women preachers in the bible but even if there were not that doesn't mean they "shouldn't be allowed" to exist now. They did not use cars, eat McHamburgers or play basketball in the bible but that doesn't make these things wrong. If someone is called to preach, let them preach. Just because someone is preaching doesn't mean you have to listen either. Let people do what they will, let God worry about what is right and wrong for other people.
-
There are millions of preachers out there who preach their own doctrine and uneducated opinions.
What is supposed to happen for a true message comes under a "foundational true biblical account" guided by a close organized way meaning education of scriptures and then "Ordained" or "Blessed" by the teachers that they will give a complete true account as most SDA "preachers" do to follow the pure church.
As far as the women in the Bible and their leadership and teaching, was the same similiar scenairo as EGW. She was ordained as a messenger by God as she claims and was not ordained by men as a preacher. So why would she let men and human hands ordain her when she already knew God's hand was on her. I see no place where the women of the Bible were ordained by men. All churches have rituals to define the same way for whatever religion. Our choice is to know which one is right and then fellowship with the leader and people of truth. and we can't know that unless we study for ourselves or else we are led by man and his own opinion. Ordination was to secure facts as true before one goes out and takes the responsibility of being a false preacher.....which many are.
-
Excellent answer, Pastor!
Tinka, you are allowing for God to have used EGW and the women in the Bible as leaders, preachers, prophets. Why do you believe He stopped at some point? If He chose to use women then, then why not now? I mean by far, the women did not seem to have nearly as many issues as the men chosen to be leaders, preachers, prophets.There is no reasons given, besides the insecurities of men and their desire to rule over women.
I only read in the Bible about women submitting(willingly) to their husbands, not all women being subject to all men by station of their birth.
I'd say that all depends on if he permits his homosexual leanings to govern his life, or if he is fully committed to the Lord and conquers in his temptations.
This may not be the answer you were expecting, but I have known such a person who, as far as I know, gained full control over his temptations. Only his wife knew about his tendencies and did not reveal it until more than 20 years after his death.
Do you believe that a homosexual man should be able to pastor?
I would also pose a question for Johann, Robert and Bob Pickle:
Do you believe that divorced men should be able to pastor?
-
This morning I heard that the Roman Catholic Church has now decided that pastors in the Anglican Church are fully accepted as Fathers in the Roman Catholic Church if they fulfill but one requirement: They have to object to women pastors.
Even married Anglican pastors can become Roman Catholic priests and remain married, but if they are single they are not allowed to marry after they have become Roman Catholics. It appears like the local Anglican Church will also be accepted as a Roman Catholic church if their pastor objects to female parsons.
Wonder how many other denominations will be accepted on the same premises?
-
The Roman Catholic prohibition against married priests is considered to be a church doctrine which the Pope can change at any time. The truth of the matter is that there is a history of Rome occasionally allowing married priests.
1) When I was on the teaching faculty of the U.S. Army Chaplain School, we had a married Roman Catholic priest (formally an Episcapalian) as a student.
2) There is a very small order of Roman Catholic priests in Europe that has been allowed to marry. But, few know about them.
3) In the beginning stages of the development of the Roman Catholic Church its priests were often married. Celebacy came at a later stage.
-
The following is quite informational:
http://catholicism.about.com/b/2009/11/19/reader-question-are-there-married-catholic-priests.htm
Actually I learned something from the above website. According to it, married Roman Catholic clergy has been allwoed more than I realized.
-
The issue as of January 1, 2012 seems to be that the Roman Catholic Church will not permit female pastors.
Are some other denominations attempting to meet those requirements?
-
Female pastors: That is clear. The Roman Catholic Chruch, as constituted today will not allow female clergy. However, it must be recognized that today it will allow females to distribute consecrated hosts and it has many females doing such.
Point of history: I believe that if you check your history you will find a female who it is claimed to have been the Pope. That goes back to the well-known historical time when there was more than one person who claimed to be the rightful Pope.
It msut be noted that the modern Roman Catholic Chruch and many scholars deny that there ever was a Pope Joan. But, a minority believe that there may have been a Pope Joan who lived as a male and was only discovered to be a female when she gave birth. For more on this, see the following URL:
http://www.haribird.com/news2C14.htm
-
Sometimes the group that protests the most loudly against another is in fact the most fundamentally aligned to it in basic principle.
-
The Roman Catholic prohibition against married priests is considered to be a church doctrine which the Pope can change at any time. The truth of the matter is that there is a history of Rome occasionally allowing married priests.
1) When I was on the teaching faculty of the U.S. Army Chaplain School, we had a married Roman Catholic priest (formally an Episcapalian) as a student.
2) There is a very small order of Roman Catholic priests in Europe that has been allowed to marry. But, few know about them.
3) In the beginning stages of the development of the Roman Catholic Church its priests were often married. Celebacy came at a later stage.
From Wikipedia - history of the last Catholic Bishop of Iceland
Jón Arason was educated at Munkaþverá, the Benedictine abbey of Iceland, and was ordained a Catholic priest about 1504. Having attracted the notice of Gottskálk Nikulásson, bishop of Hólar, he was sent by that prelate on two missions to Norway. In 1522 he succeeded Gottskálk in the episcopal see of Hólar, but he was soon driven out by the other Icelandic bishop, Ögmundur of Skálholt. Bishop Ögmundur later opposed the imposition of Lutheranism to Iceland, but being old and blind by that time his opposition proved effectively meaningless.
By this point Jón Arason had become known for his great talents if somewhat erratic faith. He fathered numerous children who fought for his causes figuratively and later literally. This was despite the canonical obligation that Catholic bishops are to be celibate, but Iceland was distant enough from Rome in that age for clerical discipline to be very lax.
-
It's very hard not to be biased. I was an old person that went to college and one thing I learned was I could write a paper using research to prove or disapprove any topic.
No one church, pastor, teacher, or leader should we use as a final authority. God gave each of us a brain to use and the more we use it the stronger it gets. We are individually responsible for making the right choice. In judgement we won't be able to say I followed after him.
We need to be careful who we listen to!!!
Do we have the true picture of God???
-
It's very hard not to be biased. I was an old person that went to college and one thing I learned was I could write a paper using research to prove or disapprove any topic.
No one church, pastor, teacher, or leader should we use as a final authority. God gave each of us a brain to use and the more we use it the stronger it gets. We are individually responsible for making the right choice. In judgement we won't be able to say I followed after him.
We need to be careful who we listen to!!!
Do we have the true picture of God???
:goodpost:
-
I know I'm not Adventist, and that I am southern Baptist. However, I would like to add that I have a HUGE problem with women carrying the title Pastor. I do not believe that it is a woman's place to pastor be a deacon or even serve on the church board.
I further do not believe that God would call any woman to do any of these jobs I have spoken of. So, I would have to agree with Doug Bachelor's analysis.
This is input from a Southern Baptist Minister. :)
The problem is that Adventist have to be able to discern these questions with scripture and not just what we feel, so it gets a bit complicated.