Rutgers Okays ‘Gender-Neutral’ Dorm Rooms to Help Gays Feel Safer"
"Gay Agenda: Gender Neutrality a.k.a. Paganismgender neutrality"
"gender neutrality:
Suppose you are talking to someone (an acquaintance, a workmate, a person at a party) who you are pretty sure is gay.."
"Columbia Union Conference Authorizes Ordination Without Regard to Gender"
by Robert Jacobson
In the Senate, Sen. Gary Hooser (D, Kauai-Niihau) introduced a bill, SB-1062, to permit two unrelated people at least 16 years old to apply for a civil-union license "without regard to gender."
Marriage has evolved into a civil institution through which the state formally recognizes and ennobles individuals’ choices to enter into long-term, committed, intimate relationships and to build households based on mutual support. With the free choice of the two parties and their continuing consent as foundations, marriage laws treat both spouses in a gender-neutral fashion, without regard to gender-role stereotypes.
At least, most of the time. Except in Massachusetts, Iowa, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Washington, D.C., men may only marry women, and women may only marry men. This requirement is an exception to the gender-neutral approach of contemporary marriage law and to the long-term trend toward legal equality in spouses’ marital roles...
Enabling couples of the same sex to gain equal marriage rights would be consistent with the historical trend toward broadening access.
"Many voiced their belief that all whom the Holy Spirit has clearly called to ministry should be ordained without regard to gender..."
And how long before the use of Ellen White leads to broad justification for putting the Bible aside? I know SDAs who already have. Could that perhaps be the next logical step in the Church if we continue to allow EGW to be used as divine authority? Does that fear justify banning EGW in the Church?
And how long before the use of Ellen White leads to broad justification for putting the Bible aside? I know SDAs who already have. Could that perhaps be the next logical step in the Church if we continue to allow EGW to be used as divine authority? Does that fear justify banning EGW in the Church?
The article from Adventist News Network on the Columbia Union Conference votes includes this description of the delegates lined up to speak at the microphones:Quote"Many voiced their belief that all whom the Holy Spirit has clearly called to ministry should be ordained without regard to gender..."
How long before a church entity will be using this phrase to justify voting in rights for homosexuals? If the gay person "has clearly been called by the Holy Spirit to ministry"...
The article from Adventist News Network on the Columbia Union Conference votes includes this description of the delegates lined up to speak at the microphones:Quote"Many voiced their belief that all whom the Holy Spirit has clearly called to ministry should be ordained without regard to gender..."
How long before a church entity will be using this phrase to justify voting in rights for homosexuals? If the gay person "has clearly been called by the Holy Spirit to ministry"...
I really don't see the connection.
What has gender to do with sin?
Identifying women with homosexuals is like saying.
If we ordain women we have to ordain drug addicts
If we ordain women we have to ordain alcoholics
If we ordain women we have to ordain adulterers
To try to make the understanding clearer maybe saying
If we allow women to teach the Sabbath School lesson we have to allow homosexuals to teach the Sabbath School lesson.
Or if we allow women to teach the children we will have to allow child molesters teach the children.
I mean it's just such a strange (and wrong) way of reasoning.
I hear you, Ulicia. The problem I see is that the women's ordination question has paved the way for the gay rights agenda in other denominations. And there are pro-WO folk who call themselves Adventists who do see a link between the two causes.Many reasons are given to allow sin in the churches.
If either of these points is incorrect, I would appreciate enlightenment.
You may not see the correlation but it is definitely there and you will see the results in the future. What you fail to realize is that Homosexuality is not against the law as the other examples you mentioned. The fight is not merely a matter of ordination of women but a power struggle of who will control the church. The institution is a representation of heaven here on earth. I have stated before that the desire of Satan is to so pervert the house of God as to make the prodigal son's return impossible. The stakes are high the church is being corrupted and misrepresented and thrown off task. The sinners desire is no longer to flee the church but rather to change the church into their image. Is Jesus no longer the groom or is he the bride now?
That is true but neither of those examples are excepted as right. You will be hard pressed to find even people who have went through divorce as saying it is right. Neither will you find very many excepting promiscuity as right. However, you will find many trying to say that homosexuality is something one is born with and there is nothing wrong with it. I stated I believe that homosexuality will eventually be excepted as the norm and as something you are born with, as normal as heterosexuality. I have seen many a person re baptised after divorce or promiscuity, fornication.----- Men and women have bib-lacally been given different roles in the church. I am sure you as a woman can understand that God did not give men breast because it was not his design to have him suckle a child. Again, I believe it is Gods design that men should be the head in the church as in the home. I do believe there are times when women are required to play certain roles not design for them. When men fail to be good fathers, or are not present in the home the mother has to take up the slack but that is not excepted as the norm.You may not see the correlation but it is definitely there and you will see the results in the future. What you fail to realize is that Homosexuality is not against the law as the other examples you mentioned. The fight is not merely a matter of ordination of women but a power struggle of who will control the church. The institution is a representation of heaven here on earth. I have stated before that the desire of Satan is to so pervert the house of God as to make the prodigal son's return impossible. The stakes are high the church is being corrupted and misrepresented and thrown off task. The sinners desire is no longer to flee the church but rather to change the church into their image. Is Jesus no longer the groom or is he the bride now?
Neither is adultery against our country's law. Neither is promiscuity against our country's law.
Whether this is a power struggle between men and women is another topic.
What I am against is equating women with homosexuals.
If people have to resort to that to defend the "men only" stance, then there is something very wrong.
And how long before the use of Ellen White leads to broad justification for putting the Bible aside? I know SDAs who already have. Could that perhaps be the next logical step in the Church if we continue to allow EGW to be used as divine authority? Does that fear justify banning EGW in the Church?
The cultural implications
1) Is the Biblical admonition against homosexuality a cultural thing?
No -- it is all through the Bible declared as "an abomination to the Lord".
Leviticus 18 is pretty straight forward against incest and homosexual behavior.
It's a call to LEAVE the culture of surrounding countries and not do these abominations.
Lev. 20 has a list of sins that result in the death penalty, adultery and homosexual behavior among them.
"The wages of sin" is still "death", though Christ suffered that penalty for all sinners, including homosexual sin, and forgiveness and restoration is offered to all who come to Christ for forgiveness and cleansing, yet this clearly shows it is SIN, not a "cultural restriction".
Paul's reference has nothing to do with "policies of the church" but who will and who will not enter heaven!
1 Cor. 6:9 Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,
6:10 Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.
2) Is ordaining or not ordaining women a cultural thing?
...
1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
If people really take Paul seriously we would never have any woman be an Adult Sabbath School teacher, a Sabbath School Superintendent, or any other office which requires teaching or speaking or having authority over a man.
...
Yes, most all Christians, including Adventists treat these verses as "cultural" and no longer applicable to our day. Possible some Mennonites still follow it as their women wear little scarfs or hats (another of Paul's commands) and don't allow women up front.
Is it a sin to be homosexual? MY answer, No.
Is it a sin to engage in homosexual conduct? My answer, the Bible says it is.
NOTE: When I say that it isnot a sin to be homosexual, I do not justify the conduct. I have known a number of homosexuals who were celebate. They did not engage in homosexual conduct.
Just wondering --What you said is so very true, but a lot of the blame goes to the church. We have an obligation to point the world to Jesus but we have become much to preoccupied with success here in this world. In many ways we are worse off than those in the world because they may except their situation but they when expose to truth recognize it.
Do you deal much with people outside the church?
If you did you would know that adultery and promiscuity is the given way of life for most.
There are many strange things accepted as the norm
Many don't get married any more, they just "shack up" till they get bored of each other, then they part and find a new partner or partners. That's accepted as a norm by A LOT of people. It's even supported by the government. A common law partner gets most of the privileges as a married partner now.
I taught children for several years (not in church school) , and oh so many came from broken homes, so many. It's a sad thing really. There are MANY mothers with children, with no father anywhere in sight. Worse is all the mother's boyfriends the poor kids have to put up with.
And yes, it's accepted as normal in our day and age.
Normal simply means that a large percentage of the people experience it, and society accepts it as such.
School textbooks no longer have the classic father, mother, Dick, Jane and baby Sally anymore.
Now families are depicted as -- mother and couple kids but no father, or father with kids, but no mother. Or mother with her kids marrying a father with his kids. Families are depicted now as a group of people living together. And yes, they are trying to push the two fathers, or two mothers.
The break down of the family is a very real thing in our present society.
Most young men just want to play computer games they aren't interested in being a spiritual leader in home or church. Mothers are left with the kids usually. Though sometimes mothers leave the kids with the father and run off after their own illusive dreams.
Personally I don't think equating the women with gays etc. is going to do anything constructive.
It's hurting your cause, not helping it.
How did you know they weren't engaging?
Churches where the members are followed and watched are generally known as oppressive and dangerous cults. I would think that if Gregory engaged in that sort of behaviour it would warrant a call to the cops.Is it a sin to be homosexual? MY answer, No.
Is it a sin to engage in homosexual conduct? My answer, the Bible says it is.
NOTE: When I say that it isnot a sin to be homosexual, I do not justify the conduct. I have known a number of homosexuals who were celebate. They did not engage in homosexual conduct.
How did you know they weren't engaging?
Did you follow them around and watch closely enough to know for sure?
Ariste asked:QuoteHow did you know they weren't engaging?
How do I know that any person who comes to Christ gives up their sinful behavior and repents?
No, I do not have to followo them arround.
I simply believe in a God who can give people the power to give up their sinful behavior.
who is the God you believe in? Is your God powerless?
2) Is ordaining or not ordaining women a cultural thing?
...
1 Timothy 2:11 Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection.
2:12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
If people really take Paul seriously we would never have any woman be an Adult Sabbath School teacher, a Sabbath School Superintendent, or any other office which requires teaching or speaking or having authority over a man.
...
Yes, most all Christians, including Adventists treat these verses as "cultural" and no longer applicable to our day. Possible some Mennonites still follow it as their women wear little scarfs or hats (another of Paul's commands) and don't allow women up front.
At least certain Church of Christ and Plymouth Brethren groups do as well.
But here is a problem:
1 Tim. 2:13-14 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
How can Paul's statements be just cultural when he cites Creation and the Fall, events that transcend every human culture, tradition, and policy on earth?
It is fine to voice high-sounding religious principles.
You said: "I have known a number of homosexuals who were celebate. They did not engage in homosexual conduct."
I can say that this is an unlikely scenario, having dealt with hundreds of homosexuals, most of them professionally, but also some who were friends.
(Don't look now, but they may be laughing behind your back...)
Is it a sin to be homosexual? MY answer, No.
Is it a sin to engage in homosexual conduct? My answer, the Bible says it is.
NOTE: When I say that it isnot a sin to be homosexual, I do not justify the conduct. I have known a number of homosexuals who were celebate. They did not engage in homosexual conduct.
But here is a problem:
1 Tim. 2:13-14 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.
How can Paul's statements be just cultural when he cites Creation and the Fall, events that transcend every human culture, tradition, and policy on earth?
That is a difficult verse to understand:
It says Eve "was deceived and was in transgression".
"Adam was not deceived."
But why is there no comment made in that verse about the fact that he transgressed as well, and if not deceived then it was outright rebellion. Sinning wilfully.
If he were a "leader" why didn't he take Eve's hand lead her to God when He came to talk with them, and intercede for her, instead of "sinning wilfully"? Obviously he didn't trust God, he took things into his own hands.
But beyond the questions that arise concerning this --
the fact still remains that this is NOT talking about ordination.
Where we stand now in these issues is basically that a woman can do all the work that an elder or even most pastors do within the local churches -- teaching, speaking in church, leading out in seminars and programs, organizing all sorts of church programs -- basically everything except baptizing new members and doing marriage performances. And no one thinks there's anything wrong, it's only the question of ordination. Yet, Paul doesn't talk about ordination.
So -- haven't the "no women ordination" people already shown that they regard these verses as "cultural".?
Where we stand now in these issues is basically that a woman can do all the work that an elder or even most pastors do within the local churches -- teaching, speaking in church, leading out in seminars and programs, organizing all sorts of church programs -- basically everything except baptizing new members and doing marriage performances. And no one thinks there's anything wrong, it's only the question of ordination. Yet, Paul doesn't talk about ordination.
Ulicia said:QuoteWhere we stand now in these issues is basically that a woman can do all the work that an elder or even most pastors do within the local churches -- teaching, speaking in church, leading out in seminars and programs, organizing all sorts of church programs -- basically everything except baptizing new members and doing marriage performances. And no one thinks there's anything wrong, it's only the question of ordination. Yet, Paul doesn't talk about ordination.
Female Commissioned Ministers in the SDA Church can baptize and perform marriages.
There is very little that a female Comissioned Minister cannot do that can be done by a male ordained minister.
And would this only be true within divisions that permit women to serve in this manner? Are there not divisions where this does not occur?
QuoteAnd would this only be true within divisions that permit women to serve in this manner? Are there not divisions where this does not occur?
Yes, the above is true. But, an ordained, male, SDA minister, is not suppsed to baptize outside of his Conference unless he has permission in the area where he is.
My understanding is that female Commissioned SDA Clergy do not have to be elected Elder by their local congregation in order to baptize.
L 26 Commissioned Ministers in Pastoral Positions—Role and Status
L 26 05 Requirements—An employee in pastoral position is recognized as a commissioned minister when all the following prerequisites have been satisfied:
1. Completion of the Bachelor of Arts degree with a major in Bible or religion plus nine quarters in the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, or two years of employment in ministerial or pastoral work or a total of two years of seminary training and employment in ministerial or pastoral work. Until this prerequisite has been met, the person will receive a missionary license.
2. Recipient of a commissioned minister license.
3. Appointment by the conference to a ministerial or pastoral responsibility.
4. Election as a church elder in the churches or named in the companies to which he/she is assigned.
5. Ordained as local elder.
Bob, Iwould appreciate it if you wou ld givethe date,when you cite Working Policies. They are published so often that I would find value in knowing the edition that you cite.
Quote from: NAD Working PolicyL 26 Commissioned Ministers in Pastoral Positions—Role and Status
L 26 05 Requirements—An employee in pastoral position is recognized as a commissioned minister when all the following prerequisites have been satisfied:
1. Completion of the Bachelor of Arts degree with a major in Bible or religion plus nine quarters in the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary, or two years of employment in ministerial or pastoral work or a total of two years of seminary training and employment in ministerial or pastoral work. Until this prerequisite has been met, the person will receive a missionary license.
2. Recipient of a commissioned minister license.
3. Appointment by the conference to a ministerial or pastoral responsibility.
4. Election as a church elder in the churches or named in the companies to which he/she is assigned.
5. Ordained as local elder.
L 26 10 states that a commissioned minister cannot organize or unite churches, and cannot ordain elders and deacons. Weddings and baptisms cannot be performed outside of the assigned district without the same permission that a licensed minister must obtain.