Reason to vote NO to woman's ordination

[Stan]

A good reasons to vote no, or absolutely no to woman's ordination, is because you recognize the authority the Catholic Church put in place for Church Governance and Church administration.

 

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

 

 

Just my opinion, and I can say that I have really not had many good experience with female pastors, except those who are really active in ministering to people. I know three right now that are outstanding.

[LifeHiscost]

A good reasons to vote no, or absolutely no to woman's ordination, is because you recognize the authority the Catholic Church put in place for Church Governance and Church administration.

 

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

 

 

Just my opinion

I'm of the opinion that's not just your opinion.

 

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord. BTW were you aware that the sign of the rider on the llama is of an occult nature? I got that from the best sources.

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[rudywoofs (Pam)]

BTW were you aware that the sign of the rider on the llama is of an occult nature? I got that from the best sources.

 

sources from your tinfoil hat?

[hch]

A good reasons to vote no, or absolutely no to woman's ordination, is because you recognize the authority the Catholic Church put in place for Church Governance and Church administration.

 

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

 

 

Just my opinion, and I can say that I have really not had many good experience with female pastors, except those who are really active in ministering to people. I know three right now that are outstanding.

 

It may be difficult for some of the brethren coming from a Catholic background to grasp the notion

that their ideas might be tainted by their earlier training.

 

Brother Finley is an outstanding SDA evangelist

He converted from Catholicism in his teens

And he has been active in studying the WO issue

 

Are we to assume that his conclusions might be tainted by his early training?

 

Even discussing such as this can open a can of worms that we might not want to explore

[Kevin H]

It may be difficult for some of the brethren coming from a Catholic background to grasp the notion

that their ideas might be tainted by their earlier training.

 

 

Our background is what is coloring this issue. We have 3 groups all based on how we approach the Bible, but which is effected by our backgrounds:

 

1. Those who hear the proof texts from Corinthians and Timothy and believe that the rest of us are rejecting the Bible and they are defending the Bible.

 

2. Those who try to limit the proof texts from Corinthians and Timothy saying they are merely cultural and that they no longer apply.

 

3. Those who have studied the background and ideas like that blue thread which was a sign of ordination. The conflict over women's ordination in time of Jesus and sees how the story of Mary and Martha has all the elements of the debate in Jesus' day and that it is indeed Jesus doing an active parable directly dealing with the issue of women's ordination. That there is evidence that Paul, especially in Acts, supported Women's Ordination and are faced that either we are misinterpreting the proof texts or that Paul did not practice what he preached. And there is evidence, both in the textual context and historical context that we have learned about in the past few decades that indicate that the traditional interpretations of the proof texts are us misreading those texts. Thus this group, like the first group, believes that we are defending the Bible and that the first group has confused the Bible with Tradition.

[hch]

Our background is what is coloring this issue. We have 3 groups all based on how we approach the Bible, but which is effected by our backgrounds:

 

1. Those who hear the proof texts from Corinthians and Timothy and believe that the rest of us are rejecting the Bible and they are defending the Bible.

 

2. Those who try to limit the proof texts from Corinthians and Timothy saying they are merely cultural and that they no longer apply.

 

3. Those who have studied the background and ideas like that blue thread which was a sign of ordination. The conflict over women's ordination in time of Jesus and sees how the story of Mary and Martha has all the elements of the debate in Jesus' day and that it is indeed Jesus doing an active parable directly dealing with the issue of women's ordination. That there is evidence that Paul, especially in Acts, supported Women's Ordination and are faced that either we are misinterpreting the proof texts or that Paul did not practice what he preached. And there is evidence, both in the textual context and historical context that we have learned about in the past few decades that indicate that the traditional interpretations of the proof texts are us misreading those texts. Thus this group, like the first group, believes that we are defending the Bible and that the first group has confused the Bible with Tradition.

 

The background of the Disciples also tainted their presentation of the gospel

 

Bible study should not be limited to the obvious.

 

There is often a deeper meaning if we take the time to look.

 

will there be any women in the 144,000?

And it is written:

Revelation 1:6 "And hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father;

to Him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen."

Revelation 5:10 "And hast made us unto our God kings and priests: and we shall reign on the earth."

Either there are no women among the redeemed cited above

or the Bible says something that we do not understand from "the proof texts" and other Scriptures

[Kevin H]

I am not proficient enough to lay out all the evidence here; however we cannot use the terms Kings and Priests as gender exclusive. There is evidence that there were women Priests in the Old Testament. But also in Old Testament times men and women wore that priestly blue thread in their garments. That blue thread also represented authority which is related to kingship. So do you agree with the liberal Rabbis in Jesus' day that only men should wear the blue thread and that it should, despite the Biblical command, be removed from women's clothing so that the women are not priests and have authority? 

 

Also, a few years back there was some books for deeper study of the Bible. Sadly they did not sell well. I read in one of them, as well as heard in some sermons, and I don't remember for sure but I think I may have seen it in a commentary or two years ago, but there is evidence that the "King" of Nineveh when Jonah came, was actually a woman.

[LifeHiscost]

there is evidence that the "King" of Nineveh when Jonah came, was actually a woman.

And since they were under threat to be destroyed unless they repented, that would make it appear to me that a woman king would be just the opposite of a God ordained government.

 

 

God is Love! Jesus saves!

[Kevin H]

If I recall correctly the text in Jonah did not say that the female king resigned and a male king took her place and that made God happy... And since it does not say that in the text and the king repented and lead her empire to repentance, if your thinking is right then maybe God repented about not wanting her to be king.

 

Linguists tell us that there are places in the Old Testament that indicates women priests, and that there was at least one "king" in the Bible who appears to have been a women. Thus people cannot use Revelations "Kings and Priests" as an argument that they are all male.