Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted June 20, 2015 Administrators Share Posted June 20, 2015 http://spectrummagazine.org/article/2015/06/19/ordination-herstories-kendra-haloviak-valentine-and-norma-osborn Quote "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted June 20, 2015 Author Administrators Share Posted June 20, 2015 Quote "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted June 20, 2015 Moderators Share Posted June 20, 2015 (edited) I have viewed the video and previous to its being posted here. I have a take on it that some will not like: In the SDA denomination, local congregations, do not have the authority to decide who should be ordained clergy in the SDA denomination. (That resided with the Unions.) Therefore, as my position has been, from the time this event happened, that those women were only ordained to the position of local Elder. As most of you know, I support ordination for women. But, I do not believe that what happened in the video accomplished that. My po0sition applies to the majority of the women who are alleged to have been ordained to a clergy position. Some will ask me what my position is in regard to the SDA Church in China: The SDA Church in China is a complex situation. One part of it is a at least a semi-independent organization that is not controlled by the General Conference. The central issue here is: Should the General Conference recognize this branch of Adventism as part of the Adventist family? If the answer is yes, then my position will be that the Church must recognize those clergy that it has selected and without any further equivocation. To be clear: I believe that the General Conference should recognize this semi-independent branch of Adventism as part of the Adventist family. Edited June 20, 2015 by Gregory Matthews Naomi 1 Quote Gregory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted June 20, 2015 Author Administrators Share Posted June 20, 2015 While it may have been local, it was nonetheless a significant event. Witnessing the event and not forgetting that this was in a local church that had women pastors on its staff continuously since 1973, more than 20 years before this took place in 1995. I was a member there from 1975 until around 1990. It was my first exposure to women pastors. It was all positive and good. As is described by both Kendra and Norma, this was very much a natural outcome of that congregation's long experience and is powerfully evident that God was present in that church community. Quote "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 While it may have been local, it was nonetheless a significant event. Witnessing the event and not forgetting that this was in a local church that had women pastors on its staff continuously since 1973, more than 20 years before this took place in 1995. I was a member there from 1975 until around 1990. It was my first exposure to women pastors. It was all positive and good. As is described by both Kendra and Norma, this was very much a natural outcome of that congregation's long experience and is powerfully evident that God was present in that church community. Again, this is lacking scriptural authority. A person advocating a certain ideology can make the same claims with examples of a practicing homosexual pastor, or even a non believing pastor. You keep making appeals outside of scripture Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeMo Posted June 22, 2015 Share Posted June 22, 2015 Again, this is lacking scriptural authority. From whom does scriptural (or spiritual authority) come? From the denomination at any level whatsoever? NO!! Scriptural (or spiritual) authority only comes from one place - God through His Son Jesus Christ. Who are you to determine who or what does or doesn't have scriptural authority, unless you have an inside connection with God not available to us peons? In your opinion, do women in general lack spiritual authority? Just because someone's position doesn't agree with yours does NOT mean it lacks authority. Oh; and BTW, why are you tying WO with ordination of gays and non-believers? They are not related at all. Strawman!!! Red Herring!!! Naomi, CoAspen and rudywoofs (Pam) 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 From whom does scriptural (or spiritual authority) come? From the denomination at any level whatsoever? NO!! Scriptural (or spiritual) authority only comes from one place - God through His Son Jesus Christ. Who are you to determine who or what does or doesn't have scriptural authority, unless you have an inside connection with God not available to us peons? In your opinion, do women in general lack spiritual authority? Just because someone's position doesn't agree with yours does NOT mean it lacks authority. Oh; and BTW, why are you tying WO with ordination of gays and non-believers? They are not related at all. Strawman!!! Red Herring!!! You should actually read the context of a persons words before you react. Scriptural authority would first start at actually using the Bible to defend a ideology. So far it has been everything outside of the bible to prop up an ideology. That is my first step in determining scriptural authority-to actually use it. Secondly, it has to have scriptural synergy through the whole Bible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Twilight Zone again!! Naomi 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 Twilight Zone again!! having troubles backing up your words from scripture? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rudywoofs (Pam) Posted June 23, 2015 Members Share Posted June 23, 2015 God has given [most] people brains with which to think, to reason, to discern, to discover, to invent. If God had not wanted anyone to think, He wouldn't have provided the means to do so. Ridiculing anyone who dares to think is disrespectful at best, and really has no business in an open forum. The notion that any idea, opinion, or thought that doesn't originate from a specific scriptural text is unworthy to be discussed in relation to theological matters isn't very flattering to God's creation of the human mind... **back to topic** Naomi 1 Quote Pam Meddle Not In the Affairs of Dragons; for You Are Crunchy and Taste Good with Ketchup. If we all sang the same note in the choir, there'd never be any harmony. Funny, isn't it, how we accept Grace for ourselves and demand justice for others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aliensanctuary Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 There may be women who are better preachers/pastors than men... In the Kingdom there will probably be no male/female genders. Quote The Parable of the Lamb and the Pigpen https://www.createspace.com/3401451 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 23, 2015 Share Posted June 23, 2015 God has given [most] people brains with which to think, to reason, to discern, to discover, to invent. If God had not wanted anyone to think, He wouldn't have provided the means to do so. Ridiculing anyone who dares to think is disrespectful at best, and really has no business in an open forum. The notion that any idea, opinion, or thought that doesn't originate from a specific scriptural text is unworthy to be discussed in relation to theological matters isn't very flattering to God's creation of the human mind... **back to topic** So now it switches to riduculing someone for thinking mmmmmmmm? Where did I claim this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeMo Posted June 24, 2015 Share Posted June 24, 2015 You should actually read the context of a persons words before you react. Scriptural authority would first start at actually using the Bible to defend a ideology. So far it has been everything outside of the bible to prop up an ideology. That is my first step in determining scriptural authority-to actually use it. Secondly, it has to have scriptural synergy through the whole Bible. OK. Show me some scriptures that name a specific denomination with "scriptural authority". Show me some scriptures that tie WO with ordination of gays and non-believers. You need to change your handle from "brotherly love" to something else. I see no brotherly love in most of your posts. phkrause, Tom Wetmore and Naomi 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 OK. Show me some scriptures that name a specific denomination with "scriptural authority". Show me some scriptures that tie WO with ordination of gays and non-believers. You need to change your handle from "brotherly love" to something else. I see no brotherly love in most of your posts. You are asking a silly question as the bible does not mention denominations. This is your first mistake. The second mistake you make is tying my words with denimination and scriptural authority-I made no such claim-these are your own ideas imposed into the conversation. The third mistake you make is believing truth is relative in scripture, this is derived from relativism, which is foreign to scripture. The fourth mistake you make is asking me to tie in WO with ordination of gays and a non believing pastor. The bible does not have to tie separate issues together in order to make them wrong. The fifth mistake is to ask me to change my name because we dont agree with each other on a subject. Love is not shown by accepting every wind of doctrine, or by accepting cultural changes and harmonizing the bible to these changes. In regards to your response, the evidence shows you are not willing to have a discussion with any substance at this time, this may change, and when it does then we can have a discussion. This is only a choice you can make Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members rudywoofs (Pam) Posted June 25, 2015 Members Share Posted June 25, 2015 Refusal to discuss anything unless it's by one's own rules is arrogant. Anything anyone writes that doesn't meet with such "rules" gets mocked and the rule-maker ends up looking like a pompous ninny. [Note I did NOT write that that the person is a pompous ninny - I wrote that is how it makes that person appear.] BL's rule is that he will only want to discuss something that has "scriptural authority".... that's nice. But my point is that not everything in today's theological world has "scriptural authority." God gave people brains to use, to think with, to mull things over. The absence of scriptural authority do not make all theological debates moot. The scriptures are silent on some subjects, and only mentioned in passing on others. If ordination of women (or of men) was such a critically vital component of a church's belief and operational system, why wouldn't it be so noted in scriptures? The fact is, is isn't. The best, scripturally, either side of the debate can give are only scriptural nuances, which can, of course, be debated, but there is nothing about ordination that was written in stone. Now, a reply can be presented in a pompous, overbearing manner [which I wouldn't advise], or a response can be given in a civil manner, or no response may be made. THAT is one's choice. Lauralea and Naomi 2 Quote Pam Meddle Not In the Affairs of Dragons; for You Are Crunchy and Taste Good with Ketchup. If we all sang the same note in the choir, there'd never be any harmony. Funny, isn't it, how we accept Grace for ourselves and demand justice for others? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 Refusal to discuss anything unless it's by one's own rules is arrogant. Anything anyone writes that doesn't meet with such "rules" gets mocked and the rule-maker ends up looking like a pompous ninny. [Note I did NOT write that that the person is a pompous ninny - I wrote that is how it makes that person appear.] BL's rule is that he will only want to discuss something that has "scriptural authority".... that's nice. But my point is that not everything in today's theological world has "scriptural authority." God gave people brains to use, to think with, to mull things over. The absence of scriptural authority do not make all theological debates moot. The scriptures are silent on some subjects, and only mentioned in passing on others. If ordination of women (or of men) was such a critically vital component of a church's belief and operational system, why wouldn't it be so noted in scriptures? The fact is, is isn't. The best, scripturally, either side of the debate can give are only scriptural nuances, which can, of course, be debated, but there is nothing about ordination that was written in stone. Now, a reply can be presented in a pompous, overbearing manner [which I wouldn't advise], or a response can be given in a civil manner, or no response may be made. THAT is one's choice. Some realities are not laid out in scripture in which we must take the principals of the bible and apply them to our modern life. Theologically 50 shades of grey is not contained in the bible, but biblical principals can be applied to when this goes to far. Invitro fertilization and the embryos left over are not covered directly by the pages of the Bible, but biblical principals do cover this topic. God gave us brains and the word of God in order to bring both into play. King Solomon had lots of brains, but he departed from the wisdom of God and relied on his own brains, and brought Covenant Israel to its knees and broken up. The difference is that the Bible does tackle the issue of women priests in both old and new testaments-instead of discussing this from the pages of the bible, you choose to resort to these kind of replies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Administrators Tom Wetmore Posted June 25, 2015 Author Administrators Share Posted June 25, 2015 Where? Give us the texts you think actually support your last sentence. Just stop beating around the bush. Naomi and rudywoofs (Pam) 2 Quote "Absurdity reigns and confusion makes it look good." "Sinless perfection is such a shallow goal." "I love God only as much as the person I love the least." *Forgiveness is always good news. And that is the gospel truth. (And finally, the ideas expressed above are solely my person views and not that of any organization with which I am associated.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeMo Posted June 25, 2015 Share Posted June 25, 2015 You are asking a silly question as the bible does not mention denominations. This is your first mistake. The second mistake you make is tying my words with denimination and scriptural authority-I made no such claim-these are your own ideas imposed into the conversation. The third mistake you make is believing truth is relative in scripture, this is derived from relativism, which is foreign to scripture. The fourth mistake you make is asking me to tie in WO with ordination of gays and a non believing pastor. The bible does not have to tie separate issues together in order to make them wrong. The fifth mistake is to ask me to change my name because we dont agree with each other on a subject. Love is not shown by accepting every wind of doctrine, or by accepting cultural changes and harmonizing the bible to these changes. In regards to your response, the evidence shows you are not willing to have a discussion with any substance at this time, this may change, and when it does then we can have a discussion. This is only a choice you can make Thank you for setting me straight bro love. While I do appreciate the judgement and implied condemnation, I agree that we probably can't have a civil discussion here untl I agree that you are correct on all counts. That will likely be a while. In the mean time, I will continue to support women in ministry; and you can continue to do otherwise. Blessings to you. Naomi and phkrause 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 Thank you for setting me straight bro love. While I do appreciate the judgement and implied condemnation, I agree that we probably can't have a civil discussion here untl I agree that you are correct on all counts. That will likely be a while. In the mean time, I will continue to support women in ministry; and you can continue to do otherwise. Blessings to you. Lots of people do disagree on a subject, yet can have a discussion on the topic. A discussion ceases to be a discussion when the subject is not discussed and personal attacks are employed. time and time again. In your above response we see the words judgment and condemnation, and that a discussion will only take place when you agree with me on all counts. In a normal conversation by two people who may disagree on a subject, one person states his case, and the responder gives a counter point or his/her case. So on and so forth. This has never been the case with a handful of people on here-a case is always countered with slander and false statements against the person, and the subject is ignored Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted June 26, 2015 Share Posted June 26, 2015 In your above response we see the words judgment and condemnation, and that a discussion will only take place when you agree with me on all counts. Thou seems to protest too much.....I wonder why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brotherly love Posted June 27, 2015 Share Posted June 27, 2015 Thou seems to protest too much.....I wonder why? thou has little to add to a conversation..I wonder why lol!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.