Interview with Pastor Rebekah Liu of China

[Tom Wetmore]

[debbym]

God is the same yesterday today and forever.

He has used men and women and children to lead spiritually, and he does use them today and he will used them tomorrow. Whoever is willing to obey the Spirit he will use.

[olger]

As it pertains to Selected roles it is my belief that the shifting of gender roles goes hand in hand with the indistinction of gender and thus an emasculation of church and country that tears at the foundational underpinnings that Godly absolutes provide. Because we have become so feelings oriented - absolutes have become repulsive to the place where we teach around them as though they were not there.

We shouldn't buy into a viewpoint because of the intensity of the argument.

"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

5 (For if a man know not how to to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)" (1 Timothy).

Regards!

G

[Green Cochoa]

God is the same yesterday today and forever.

He has used men and women and children to lead spiritually, and he does use them today and he will used them tomorrow. Whoever is willing to obey the Spirit he will use.

That's a good example of stringing together some unrelated truths to make them appear related and to teach something that is no longer true.

For example, your last sentence is absolutely correct. But if by "use" you mean to imply "to lead spiritually" as you said in the prior sentence, then that last sentence becomes false.

There were many in Moses' day who wished to officiate in the sanctuary service whom God had not called, and whom God was not willing to use, albeit they thought themselves willing to obey the Spirit.

See my post HERE for more details.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

[ClubV12]

One consistent theme that keeps coming around is example after example of the good works and the various roles that women have played in Gods work through the ages. This is good! Women can be, have been and will continue to be an important and needful part of the fabric of the Church.

The problem as I see it is we take these excellent examples as a case for why womens ordination should be allowed. I support women who preach and in many other roles.

I believe the bible does not allow for authority of women over men in an ecclesiastical office. Accept in extraordinary conditions.

As it concerns China, the G.C. does not recognize MEN or women Pastors for a simple reason. There are no consistent standards within that country for the qualifications to BE a Pastor. The country itself has no official Adventist Conference or recognized leadership thereof. China is an anomaly. Concerning the question of W.O., it is irrelevant.

[Neil D]

As it pertains to Selected roles it is my belief that the shifting of gender roles goes hand in hand with the indistinction of gender and thus an emasculation of church and country that tears at the foundational underpinnings that Godly absolutes provide. Because we have become so feelings oriented - absolutes have become repulsive to the place where we teach around them as though they were not there.

We shouldn't buy into a viewpoint because of the intensity of the argument.

"But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.

15 Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.

3:1 This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.

2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous;

4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity;

5 (For if a man know not how to to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?)" (1 Timothy).

Do you believe that ALL scripture is inspired? Of course you do....

Then why do you leave parts of it out?

Also, tell me, Olger, how does your wife feel about the above qualifications of women for leadership? I believe that when Tom asked about this, you shut down any inquiry about this from anyone....indicating that your wife doesn't like your interpretation of scripture....So,if your wife doesn't like this type of counsel, what makes you think that any OTHER WOMAN would go for this servitude attitude?

In fact, when we look at your biblical texts, we find that you have left part of the verses out. Olger, you of all people on this board, know that bible texts CAN NOT be taken out of context and neither can other thoughts be left out that are associated with your quoted passage..for example, 1Timothy 2 was quoted...let me quote the whole paragraph for you and to make it simple, let me use The Message bible-

11-15 I don’t let women take over and tell the men what to do. They should study to be quiet and obedient along with everyone else. Adam was made first, then Eve; woman was deceived first—our pioneer in sin!—with Adam right on her heels. On the other hand, her childbearing brought about salvation, reversing Eve. But this salvation only comes to those who continue in faith, love, and holiness, gathering it all into maturity. You can depend on this.

It is given that Paul was a "Righteousness thru faith" man. He had no place for works in salvation. Mankind is saved thru faith, and even that faith is not our own, but thru Jesus Christ our Lord. Paul dedicated the first three pages of Romans to show that dependance on our works to enter heaven was an argument that was rubbish. He even admonishes the Galatians that if he "or anyone else were to proclaim a different Gospel", he was to be accursed and not listened to...

Now, unless there is a different interpretation of this passage, we can't listen to this, because to think that "childbearing brought about salvation", is to depend upon the works of a woman to bring about her salvation...There is no getting around this, Olger....If a woman can't be a leader, then she must, according to the passage, be a woman with children to earn salvation.

I also think that your belief of the shifting of gender roles goes hand in hand with the indistinction of gender and thus an emasculation of church and country that tears at the foundational underpinnings that Godly absolutes provide. goes counter to Paul's understanding of the Gospel in addition to his understanding of leadership...If the Gospel has no gender given advantage, then this...."equal ground", ...this understanding of the Gospel mingles our attitudes and changes our understanding of fairness is confirmed by an OT passage.

"He has told you, O man, what is good;

And what does the Lord require of you

But to do justice, to love kindness,

And to walk humbly with your God? Micah 6:8

Of course, this is my understanding of what is fair in the Good News that was delivered in a patriarchal society and being reinterpreted into today's multicultural society. And yes, I do believe that the Good News/Gospel does permeate every society.....fairly.

[ClubV12]

As it concerns China, because they have no officially recognized Seventh-day Adventist Conference, we might as well consider what the Baptists or even the Catholics do with the question of ordination of women.

IF the answer was a simple review of the word of God, or the Spirit of Prophecy we wouldn't need 2,400 plus members of the Church from around the world to consider the issue closely.

In view of this, it becomes obvious no single person has an easy answer. I will wait for the appointed committee to finish it's work.

[Neil D]

There were many in Moses' day who wished to officiate in the sanctuary service whom God had not called, and whom God was not willing to use, albeit they thought themselves willing to obey the Spirit.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

It is assumed that many in Moses' day lost sight of what the Sabbath was to be.

400 years of slavery in Egypt does NOT change the attitude of men....or women...in 20 minutes.....or even a day...or even a year....

Women had been thought of as property...even the nations surrounding Israel thought of women as property...Only Israel gave better liberality for women...a dowry to protect her in her old age...something to think about spiritually other than child bearing, sex and love.

No, what you are proposing doesn't square with history nor cultural history....

[Neil D]

As it concerns China, the G.C. does not recognize MEN or women Pastors for a simple reason. There are no consistent standards within that country for the qualifications to BE a Pastor. The country itself has no official Adventist Conference or recognized leadership thereof. China is an anomaly. Concerning the question of W.O., it is irrelevant.

These thoughts do not take into account the politics of china regarding the adventist church in China. Politically, we have an adversarial historical role in China, according to the missionary who were there, as I understand it. Current political administrations do not favor any outside control over thier people...

And since these people are able to find the Sabbath on thier own, what makes you think that thier set up of church is less beneficial than the early church?

You gloss over these important factors. You also don't think that the Chinese can think very well...If they have re-established the early biblical church, what make you think that they need to attach themselves to us....Why are not we attaching ourselves to them? There is a difference...and you do not allow credit where credit is due....

[ClubV12]

The bible examples left for us are not cultural, they bring principles to bear that are applicable to us today.

Green makes referrence to a situation well after the Children of Israel received and acknowledged the law. They were well aware of the Sabbath.

The issue was WHO is authorized to serve in what position? As Priests, that fell to the tribe of Levi and to specific members of that tribe. Not all Levis, though well qualified, were allowed, by the law, to serve in certain positions. That principle still applies today. Not all who would like to serve in some specific positions are authorized of the Lord to do so. We are not always told WHY, it's just the way He set things up.

"Why are not we attaching ourselves to them?"

Not everyone is allowed to be baptized or enter into Church membership or ordain as they see fit. The Church is well organized, there are rules and laws which must be followed. China, bless their heart and I appreciate their good work, are outside the laws of the Church as they currently stand. The G.C. has no choice in this matter, unless they set aside the law, which is impossible.

[Neil D]

The bible examples left for us are not cultural, they bring principles to bear that are applicable to us today.

Green makes referrence to a situation well after the Children of Israel received and acknowledged the law. They were well aware of the Sabbath.

I will address these two items-

If you think that the biblical examples given are not cultural, then you have not read the begining pages of the GC [great controversy]. God does not dictate the words of inspiration...He gives thoughts...It is the prophets who are His penmen...and He uses thier thoughts as they describes the scenes presented....Culture is still a valid factor in ANY biblical example, because the penmen were raised in that culture....

As to the Sabbath issue, you missed the point....If Isreal had forgotten the Sabbath, what other priniciples did God's people miss? What principles are obscured due to predominant cultural practices? As an example, slavery was practice in the bible, even in Isreal. We,in the US, fought a war over slavery.In Christian circles, regardless of demomination, it is pretty much a world wide global law that slavery is not a humanitarian cultural practice nor is it biblical. What principles changed between the bible and current historical humanity?

[CoAspen]

[ClubV12]

Principles can be applied to any culture at any time anywhere on earth. Principles are what the bible and the Spirit of Prophecy teach because it would exhaustive to detail every circumstance for every people in every culture.

Consider the slave thing: In the culture of the Israelites slaves were respected, they had rights. A Jew could not be enslaved for life. If his master so much as injured him physically, even slightly, he gained his freedom. This in no way can be compared to the atrocities of how slaves were treated in our Civil War era. Nor can it be compared to the slavery conditions that STILL exist today. The atrocities of human trafficing. Paul even encouraged a slave to return to his master and serve him. Slavery is not the problem, it's how slaves are treated that is the problem! If you owe a debt, debt collectors have to follow the law. They cannot literally "enslave" you, though you ARE a slave to them.

The Children of Israel, like us today, had lost sight on many of the principles, the law. Step by step God leads his people to more and more light. Seventh-day Adventists use to worship from 6 to 6 pm for Sabbath! Ellen White and our pioneers did this for over six years! When the fullness of time came, an angel was dispatched to correct this error, which was not accounted as "sin" to them. They did not know the law.

This is why culture in the word of God is a stumbling block to many. It's the principles we must consider and apply.

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

Principles are what the bible and the Spirit of Prophecy teach because it would exhaustive to detail every circumstance for every people in every culture.

There is always principle and application. Application my differe from time and place. Both the Bible and EGW teach both principle and application.

While EGW did teach principles, she more often taught an application of a principle and that application was generally in the time and culture of the 19th cent. U.S. Yes there are exceptions.

In my opinon, many of the posts made in CA take an application of a principle and claim that it is the principle itself.

[ClubV12]

A reasonable point Gregory. Ellen White counseled against bicycles and photographs. These two examples remain applicable to us today. The application of the principles are substantially enlarged upon than from her day!

I would "apply" the bicycle and photograph principles in a much wider field today than she could have ever seen in her time. She did not say we should not have bicycles or photographs, if you see the counsel in that respect, you missed the principles she is teaching. The application of these principles are still relevant and even broader today than in her time. We would do well to "apply" them exactly as she applied them, and more so for ourselves.

The "principle" involved with ordination in China is that the process is not in harmony with Church law. Therefore, the action, ordination of men or women, cannot be applied. It cannot be recognized officially by the G.C.

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

The "principle" involved with ordination in China is that the process is not in harmony with Church law. Therefore, the action, ordination of men or women, cannot be applied. It cannot be recognized officially by the G.C.

Some people who are against the ordination of women would suggest a different principle, as I would if I were against such.

In any case, to suggest that such is against chruch law is not as clear cut as some here would make it to be. An argument can be made for it being in accord with chruch law.

[ClubV12]

An "argument" could be made Gregory. As the G.C. notes the current "argument" has turned into a direct challenge to the authority of the Church. The G.C. has specific guidelines and procedures for ordination of men and women. As it currently stands, these guidelines and procedures are impossible to implement or gaurentee in China.

Those who oppose that G.C. policy need to work within the system to effect change. Those stating it is legal within the framework of the G.C. rules and laws set themselves directly against the clear unambigious statements of the G.C. that it is not.

They do indeed "argue" the point. They issue a direct challenge to the point. They refuse to submit their will to the point. They refuse to wait for the appointed committee to finish it's study on the question. Many have declared they don't care what the findings of the G.C. are, they will ordain women regardless. Now and in the future.

What we have in this "argument" is anarchy, civil disobediance, revolt, rebellion. Feel fre to use whatever word to describe it you like. Freedom fighter? Equal rights protector? Social terrorist? I stand with and support the G.C., I honor and respect the process, imperfect though it might be.

China is currently irrelevant as it concerns ordination, men or women. Perhaps that will change in time? If it doesn't, will you join with those who directly oppose and challenge the authority of the G.C.? Will you, like Korah, stand in the door of your tent and proclaim all the people are holy, everyone of them? Because that IS whats going on here.

[Tom Wetmore]

Sadly misguided, overstated and overwrought...

[ClubV12]

The G.C. thinks it pretty serious, these Conferences making a direct challenge to their authority. I think it's pretty serious too. So serious it is difficult to overstate the danger.

[debbym]

i appreciate your comments Neil, i am left wondering if the person you were responding to, believes that the church in China is emasculated.

i am not seeking an answer to my wondering, but i am left in wonderment. the thought is just jaw dropping.

and could not just leave it unmentioned. so here i go posting it...

[Johann]

I wonder how many know how our Church Manual has developed?

It so happens that back in about 1950 I took a class in how to manage the local church. Believe it or not, but that is now 63 years ago.

At that time the English version of the Church Manual had quite a large section in the back which only applied to North America.

Other versions of the Church Manual were not only translated but adapted to the local conditions and applied only in the conferences which accepted it as applying to their local conditions.

Since then a number of super smart individuals have appeared in our denomination and its leadership who felt they were endowed with greater potentials at interpreting inspiration and the meaning of unity as giving more power to the central and universal government of the church, and to have a universal Church Manual to which every knee shall bow.

[ClubV12]

I'm glad we have a Church Manual. I have found nothing in that that compells me to violate my conscience, bow down to it as an idol, or in any way threatens or demands the members unfairly.

I suspect your comments, Johann, represent a large group of people who would prefer to be independant of Church authority in all respects. Paul faced much the same problem in his day, the Church will always have to deal with such.

[Johann]

I'm glad we have a Church Manual. I have found nothing in that that compells me to violate my conscience, bow down to it as an idol, or in any way threatens or demands the members unfairly.

I suspect your comments, Johann, represent a large group of people who would prefer to be independant of Church authority in all respects. Paul faced much the same problem in his day, the Church will always have to deal with such.

Are you denying the fact that around 1950 we had a Church Manual which permitted variations to fit local circumstances in different parts of the world?

[ClubV12]

I believe there is still plenty of room for that today Johann. I see the Church Manual, on many subjects, can be broadly interpreted and applied as the local needs might be.

On the other hand, there are specific "rules" and "laws" that must be maintained around the world, by all Adventist Churches, regardless of local customs or culture. This was the same in Pauls day when the Church had to deal with Greeks and Jews who saw things in remarkably different light.

Perhaps you could provide some specific or even general example of how the Church Manual restricts or holds back the work in some way?

[Johann]

One great danger is not with the Church Manual itself, as it is in the hands of people who use an interpretation of an outdated Manual to further their own private pet issues and insist that other people honor their mistakes as the only valid interpretation.

Another great danger lies again with people who interpret portions of the Manual to further their heretical views and keep hammering on those ideas of theirs just to make the work of female commissioned pastors as difficult as possible. Thereby they are a tool in the hands of Satan hindering the final work of God on this Earth,in preparing a people to be ready for the Second Coming of Jesus.