Advent Talk
Issues & Concerns Category => Womens Ordination & Related Issues => Topic started by: Johann on June 08, 2012, 07:10:22 PM
-
He raped the girl:
Pipim Sexual Abuse Victim: The Story from a First-person Observer
.
Submitted: Jun 7, 2012
By Loren Seibold
A year ago Dr. Samuel Korangteng Pipim admitted to sexual misconduct while traveling in Africa. Dr. Pipim is well known as the author of a number of books against the ordination of women pastors in the Seventh-day Adventist Church and accusing some of the top theologians in the denomination of heresy in their interpretation of Scripture. He was an ordained minister and employed as director of campus ministry by the Michigan Conference. He resigned from denominational employment, turned in his ministerial credentials and ended his membership in the Church.
More:
http://www.atoday.org/article/1221/news/june-headlines/pipim-sexual-abuse-victim-the-story-from-a-first-person-observer
-
Amazing plea for repentance from a therapist who knows Pipim, sent to him back in January, which he seemingly pushed aside:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/96345904/Letter-to-Pipim-From-Nicole-Parker
A few days before his scheduled rebaptism, another victim comes forward (possible due to the bravery of the first victim?) and Pipim admits it. Baptism is canceled.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/96482422/Velez-s-Letter
-
My response to a request for signing a petition against the ordination of women:
I realize you mean it well, but I beg to disagree sincerely with your biased interpretation of Scripture, regardless of how long it has been going on. Especially in the light of the recent happenings with Samuel Koranteng Pipim's disgracing our Church, because he has been in the front line of those diminishing the role of women, I find it inappropriate and disgraceful that you should present this request just now.
Let us present Jesus Christ to the World, without so entangling our preaching with moral infidelity. That leaves a wrong impression of the Glorious Gospel and Advent Message.
Thank you for taking this into your consideration!
-
Defending his actions as a minor incident in comparison with all the good he has done, Pipim now in his own forum suggests that it could be a benefit to the church (paraphrased).
I might agree with him on that last part: Now we know that by following Pipim in his fight against the the ordination of women, due to their inferior design, we are making the church a safer haven for rapists and perverts.
-
Hi Johann
Is it really that Dr Pipim's fight against the ordination of women is because of their inferior design? Have you
misconstrued his statement? I wonder why the conference allowed this notion to continue when it is not theologically sound.
On the other side of the fence with all fairness, would the fight against ordination of women prevent the atmosphere of bearing false witness (in todays language gossip,rumour-mill, rumour-monger, scandalmonger etc etc.)
-
"Inferior design" is my own phrase where I try to describe the picture I see from their definition of the role of women where she eventually becomes a plaything unfit for a call to minister.
-
"Inferior design" is my own phrase where I try to describe the picture I see from their definition of the role of women where she eventually becomes a plaything unfit for a call to minister.
Johann while I don't want to paint all Africans in the same light I can tell you that culturally their view of women is different from that of European or American. I have been to Africa many times and culturally and socially women are viewed in a lower state and position in relation to men. Many of the African countries practiced polygamy in the recent past and in some countries it is still leagal. The previous statement was not stated to offend or belittle anyone but only to state a fact. But the fact that a man fails in his relationship and responsibility does not retract from the truth or lessen a true statement. When any of the prophet or leaders failed in their own personal lives it never diminished the truth one iota. So the fact that Pipim was opposed to women ordination and was caught in sin does not diminish the argument for those who oppose women ordination.
-
As I stated elsewhere, those who oppose the ordination of women are at a great advantage because they are following the dictates of fallen Christianity. It may give you an advantage when those great churches who oppose the ordination of women start persecuting you for keeping the Sabbath.
-
1 Corinthians 5:9-12 New International Version (NIV)
9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— 10 not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11 But now I am writing to you that you must not associate with anyone who claims to be a brother or sister[a] but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or slanderer, a drunkard or swindler. Do not even eat with such people.
12 What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside?
Did you notice how smart Pipim is? He knows how to use the Bible. When he gets caught he withdraws his membership from the church because then he can claim that the church has no authority to judge him for his behavior. When he is re-baptized all of his former life is forgiven and he can start a new life. So in theory this could go on several times.
-
Have been reading Batchelor who leans on Darmsteegt, and Darmsteegt refers to Pipim as a source. When I compare the writings of these great men among us, and also the latest from Pipim, then it seem to me like their combined works conclude that:
Ordaining a woman is a much greater sin than having illicit sex with, or even raping the woman. There are no great possibilities of redemption in case a woman is ordained, while the other offenses ere explainable and easily forgivable in case you get caught.
Is this the policy we want for our church? Could the ordination of some women be like a shield of protection to prevent men from downgrading womanhood?
-
Johann,
Unless you can quote comments from Damsteegt and Batchelor regarding Pipim's sin, your statements and comparison are unwarranted.
-
Johann,
Unless you can quote comments from Damsteegt and Batchelor regarding Pipim's sin, your statements and comparison are unwarranted.
Please read what I wrote and comment on that, not on what I did not write.You have it turned upside down. I never said that Batchelor nor Damsteegt wrote a comment on Pipim's sin.
-
Johann,
Unless you can quote comments from Damsteegt and Batchelor regarding Pipim's sin, your statements and comparison are unwarranted.
Please read what I wrote and comment on that, not on what I did not write.You have it turned upside down. I never said that Batchelor nor Damsteegt wrote a comment on Pipim's sin.
Then your comments are definitely unwarranted.
You plainly said that based on Damsteegt's and Batchelor's writings, ordaining a woman is a worse sin than rape. But if Damsteegt and Batchelor haven't written anything to that effect, then you are putting words into their mouths. The problem in your mind is that they cited Pipim's writings, or other people's writings that Pipim edited. But when did they cite such? Before they knew of the allegations against Pipim, or after?
-
Bob said to Johann:
You plainly said that based on Damsteegt's and Batchelor's writings, ordaining a woman is a worse sin than rape.
Bob, you are incorrect. Johann did not say that let alone plainly say that. Here is what Johann said:
. . . it seem to me like their combined works conclude that:
Ordaining a woman is a much greater sin than having illicit sex with, or even raping the woman. There are no great possibilities of redemption in case a woman is ordained, while the other offenses ere explainable and easily forgivable in case you get caught.
1st of all, he clearly stated that "it seems to me." IOW, he was stateing it as a personal opinion. He was not stating it as a quoted fact.
2nd he stated: "their combined works conclude that". Again, this was immediately following his stated "it seems to m", which was clearly a personal opinion.
You would be entirely within your rights to express an opinion as sto whether or not Johann was justified in the opinion that he has. It could be a subject for debate as sto w hether or not Johann was correct in his opinion.
But, if when you said: "Then your comments are definitely unwarranted." you menat to imply that Johann should not express an opinion, you are wrong. In any discussion, it is appropriate to express an opinion, which is identified as such, either explicity kr implicity, and then can become a point to debate.
-
Gregory,
I cannot see how your quotations disprove what I said.
Sure, everyone is free to have an opinion, even unwarranted opinions. And my opinion is that Johann's comments were over the top.
If anyone is free to express any and every opinion, then we wouldn't have moderators editing some comments.
Suggesting that Damsteegt's and Batchelor's writings portray that rape is much less of a sin than ordaining a woman is unwarranted and over the top. And if you or Johann think otherwise, then please quote for us here from Damsteegt and Batchelor passages that even remotely can be interpreted to support such a position.
-
Sure, everyone is free to have an opinion, even unwarranted opinions. And my opinion is that Johann's comments were over the top.
If anyone is free to express any and every opinion, then we wouldn't have moderators editing some comments.
Bob, I agree. Yes, you express personal opinions as do Johann and I.
I cannot see how your quotations disprove what I said.
I did not intend to disprove your main thesis as to the correctness of Johann's statement. I did not commenet on that. My comment was to the effect that you had misconstrued what Johann had said.
It is not unwarranted and over the top for Johann to express an opinion, which he clearly identified as his opinion, on Damsteegt atn Batchelor. That opinion, which may be correct and it may be incorrect, is clearly subject to debate and such a debate would be fair.
-
First I went into Batchelor'd website where I was not satisfied he was drawing the right conclusions in his understanding of Paul, especially in what seemed to me to be such a grave sin as ordaining women for the ministry. To prove his point Batchelor posted a Power Point presentation by Damsteegt right there on his website, again, as I understood it poiting to the great sin of ordaing women to the ministry. To prove his point Damsteegt referred to Pipim.
So I go to Pipim, and what do I find there? I understood Pipim was stating that really going to bed with another woman than one's wife was not so bad. That was all I wanted to read. I did not copy it nor do I have any urge whatsoever going back to reading any more of such stuff. That is just my honest opinion. I am not demanding of you to share my opinion. Neither will I object to you trying to change my opinion.
-
Gregory,
Then we disagree on this one. I think that Johann's opinion that Batchelor and Damsteegt come across as if rape is not as bad a sin as ordaining women is totally unwarranted.
Johann,
Adventism has a long history of quoting individuals in support of a point, without endorsing every single point the individual holds. To propose that Damsteegt and Batchelor must endorse every point Pipim holds too simply because they cite him regarding women's ordination is unwarranted.
Particularly is this the case since, in all likelihood, Batchelor and Damsteegt's presentations were made before the allegations of rape against Pipim went public in recent weeks. It is unfair to propose that someone endorses a position when that alleged position wasn't even known.
-
Bob: We seem to be talking over each other's head.
I did not express an opinion as to whether or not Johann's statement was accurate. On that basis, it can not be said that you and I either agree or disagree.
What I said was that you misquoted Johann.
1st of all, he clearly stated that "it seems to me." IOW, he was stateing it as a personal opinion. He was not stating it as a quoted fact.
Johann stated an opinion in regard to the two cited authors. Instead of taking it as an opinion, you responded as if Johann had stated it as a fact.
As an opinnion, you could have challenged Johann. If he had stated it as a fact, you could have challenged himl. It would have been appropriate to do so in either case.
When one stated an opinon, one is not claiming that something has reached the level of a fact.
If I say: "X happened on Monday, July 17, 2012," I am making a definative statement of fact that is clearly wrong due to the fact the July 17, 2011 was not a Monday. If I say: "I believe that X happened on Monday, July 17, 2011, I am stating an opinion that can be challenged and shown to be wrong, but I am not stating it as a fact.
Bob, you said: Then your comments are definitely unwarranted.
You spoke to the idea that Johann should not have posted his opinon.
If you had said: "You conclusion is unwrranted." I would never have challenged you.
This is probably a minor issue which I would not have wanted to comment on at such length. I have done so due to the fact you have indicated that you and I disagree with Johann's conclusion. I have not stated one way or the other as to whether or not I agree or disagree with his conclusion. I simply believe that it was not unwarrented for him to state an opinion, regardless of whether or not that opinion was accurate.
I disagree with some of your posted opinions and agree with others. Regardless, I beileve that you have a right to post your opiinions.
-
I do not think people should recklessly post unwarranted opinions. To accuse individuals of minimizing rape without any logical or factual basis for doing so in today's litigious climate is dangerous. Whether one calls it an opinion or not may not help.
Further, no Christian should recklessly post unwarranted opinions. Heaven's courts will judge us for every idle word, said Jesus.
If someone wanted to recklessly post, "I think Batchelor and Damsteegt hate black shoes, but like brown shoes," big deal. But in this instance these men were accused of minimizing rape in their opposition of women's ordination.
I can see why someone might accuse Pipim of that, and I would say that there may be evidence to that effect. But to accuse Batchelor and Damsteegt of that without any basis for doing so, simply because they cited Pipim at some point in the past, that is unwarranted.
One of the definitions of "unwarranted" is "unjustified."
-
First I went into Batchelor'd website where I was not satisfied he was drawing the right conclusions in his understanding of Paul, especially in what seemed to me to be such a grave sin as ordaining women for the ministry. To prove his point Batchelor posted a Power Point presentation by Damsteegt right there on his website, again, as I understood it poiting to the great sin of ordaing women to the ministry. To prove his point Damsteegt referred to Pipim.
So I go to Pipim, and what do I find there? I understood Pipim was stating that really going to bed with another woman than one's wife was not so bad. That was all I wanted to read. I did not copy it nor do I have any urge whatsoever going back to reading any more of such stuff. That is just my honest opinion. I am not demanding of you to share my opinion. Neither will I object to you trying to change my opinion.
I stand by what I say here, and not what you, Bob, falsely accuse me of saying.
-
First I went into Batchelor'd website where I was not satisfied he was drawing the right conclusions in his understanding of Paul, especially in what seemed to me to be such a grave sin as ordaining women for the ministry. To prove his point Batchelor posted a Power Point presentation by Damsteegt right there on his website, again, as I understood it poiting to the great sin of ordaing women to the ministry. To prove his point Damsteegt referred to Pipim.
So I go to Pipim, and what do I find there? I understood Pipim was stating that really going to bed with another woman than one's wife was not so bad. That was all I wanted to read. I did not copy it nor do I have any urge whatsoever going back to reading any more of such stuff. That is just my honest opinion. I am not demanding of you to share my opinion. Neither will I object to you trying to change my opinion.
I stand by what I say here, and not what you, Bob, falsely accuse me of saying.
Do you also stand by your statement that a segment of the church feel that rape is less a sin than women's ordination? You wrote that one after you wrote the above.
Are you simply saying that Pipim must believe that rape is less of a sin? Or are you saying that many others do too? You original statement sounded like you included Batchelor and Damsteegt in that segment.