Women in Ministry

[Tom Wetmore]

... Of course. But there is a purpose for ordination. I am an ordained Elder and have seen the difference in my life when I am ministering to people. Before and after, there is a difference.

So, Norman, do you accept and support the ordination of women as local elders? How about the ordination of women as deaconesses?

And what exactly do you think the purpose of ordination is?

Tom

[Woody]

Quote:

Since she said that

Can you give us a quote for this?

Quote:

stupid fools are the majority of the people in North America and sad to say our church is not far behind.

I am sorry that you view the church in such a negative light. I believe there are many God fearing, dedicated and loving Christians in our church. I am proud of our church. I am so sad to hear your feelings of negativity. Perhaps you do not realize how this comes across. Perhaps if you could find something positive in the church and strive to help build on that ... it would help both you and the church.

But, I would hope that you would read some of the things you write about people and reconsider them. I don't consider myself a stupid fool and I don't believe the people in my church are that way. I find your language offensive.

Quote:

What is needed are men who are true to God, who will not compromise with evil, who are sold on principle and who love God and their neighbor as themselves. But men have been a shameful display of ungodliness and have not been the leaders they/we have been called to be. God help us.

I think perhaps that you have become so focused on the law and how people measure up that you have forgotten how to love as Jesus loved. If we abide IN HIM ... we will develop a love that does not condemn.

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Redwood

Quote:

John 3: 17---I haven't totally made up my mind on the issue of making woman pastors of churches

Isn't it true that the last time the world church in General Conference voted on the issue of women's ordination, it voted overwhelmingly against it?

It seems to me then that the ones who are going against the decision of the general body are the individual conferences, who are refusing to abide by the position of the General Conference.

If I am wrong in this, perhaps you could point me to a link that has the official statement of the GC on this, if one exists.

What do you understand happened?

Regards,

"John 3: 17"

John317 ... it is just too hard to talk with you when you keep changing the subject. IF you look at the quote at the top that you said ... you will see the topic to which I responded. The topic ... women being Pastors ... see below and above ...

Quote:

I haven't totally made up my mind on the issue of making woman pastors of churches

I responded and then you make the statement below ....

"Isn't it true that the last time the world church in General Conference voted on the issue of women's ordination"

So as you see ... you have now changed the subject to ordination and you accuse me of saying things about ordination of which was not the topic.

If is just too difficult to hold a conversation like this. When you seem to be on the wrong side of an issue ... you change the issue. Just too confusing for me. Sorry.

[Tom Wetmore]

... Do you know if, during Ellen White's time, credentials of an ordained minister were ever issued to any other woman by the SDA church?

As was previously listed, there were quite a number of licensed female ministers for the Church during EGW's time. In fact, as a percentage of all the minsters, there was a much higher percentage of female minsters in the SDA Church during her life time than there are now, even in North America. (The record indicates that, as a percentage, there were at least twice as many women pastors in EGW's time as there are now in NAD.)

And with that clearly in perspective EGW makes this amazing observation...

Quote:

Women can be the instruments of righteousness, rendering holy service. It was Mary that first preached a risen Jesus. In fulfillment of the divine plan, the Son of man came to seek and to save that which was lost... Those who engage with the Son of God in his work, be they ever so aspiring, can have no greater, no holier work than this. If there were twenty women where now there is one, who would make this holy mission their cherished work, we should see many more converted to the truth. The refining, softening influence of Christian women is needed in the great work of preaching the truth... Zealous and continued diligence in our sisters toiling for the spread of the truth would be wholly successful, and would astonish us with its results... -- RH, January 2, 1879.

Taken as a benchmark, EGW's statement above advocates that we should have at least 20 times the number of women in pastoral ministry. What do you think would happen if we added 1200 female pastors here in the US!! Quite simply as EGW said it, we would be "astonished" at the results, seeing "many more converted to the truth." That sounds like a real viable solution to stagnant church growth in NAD!

Tom

[Woody]

I agree with Carolaa that it is confusing about when you mean "men" as in males and when you mean "men" as in mankind. It is a little inconsistent to me.

For example ... what did you mean here ....

Quote:

Stick to your Bibles folks, there can nothing good comes from listening to the doctrines of men that are unsupported in the Bible.

Do you think the doctrines of "women" would be better. Perhaps they would not be unsupported by scripture as was the ones by men.

OK ... a little controversy aside. Honestly Norman .... I have to confess I find the insinuations here to be very strong when we are talking about women. The church has decided that women in ministry is NOT the doctrines of men or women ... but to be Biblical. You seem to be placing yourself as a private arbitrator determining that the church is wrong even though many good scholars in the church say women in ministry is fine. That is what it would appear. I sure hope not. I just wish you knew how harsh you sound.

[Tom Wetmore]

...I believe that the church in General Conference voted overwhelmingly against women's ordination, but a few individual conferences, such as Southeastern California conference, voted to go ahead with it anyway. That is my understanding of what has happened. I'm going to do more study both on the issue itself Scripturally and on what happened at the conference level.

Actually that is not exactly what happened - in either situation. The vote that took place in 1990 and 1995 were not "overwhelmingly against". Those votes would be more accurately described as deeply divided. And the 1995 vote demonstrated a growing support for women in ministry since a lower percentage voted against it then. And I think it bears pointing out that the vote to approve the female GC VP was by an overwhelming majority.

And the vote in the Southeastern California Conference was not for full denominationally recognized ordination, per se, but was to approve ordination for local pastoral function. I believe that many also advocated simply issuing commissioned credentials (the one usually issued to female pastors) to all the pastors, male and female. I understand that the ordained male pastors were supportive of this equalization of credentials.

Tom

[Tom Wetmore]

Actually, I think you will find that there is likewise no record of James White or any of the other early SDA church founders being ordained (or asking to be ordained) by any ceremonial laying on of the hands.

[Woody]

Quote:

This is true and a very relevant point. She was never ordained and never asked to be ordained.

If this is true ... then she could be held up on charges of fraud. For she signed several documents stating that she indeed WAS ordained.

[Denise]

Quote:

If this is true ... then she could be held up on charges of fraud. For she signed several documents stating that she indeed WAS ordained.

Can you show me where she was ordained? Because I never seen it anywhere.

[Tom Wetmore]

Denise,

Stan posts a picture of an actual ordination certificate issued to Ellen G. White... and you still must ask "Show me"? What sort of evidence do you need!?!? (The story of the Pharisees asking Jesus to show them a sign after witnessing Him perform miracles of healing comes to mind...)

When the General Conference takes an official action to recognize the fact of her status as an ordained minister for the Seventh-day Adventist Church by authorizing and issuing the credential, that is being ordained. The act of ordination is nothing more than the body of believers acting to recognize before God the call that He has already placed upon the person being ordained.

I have seen the actual certificates with my own eyes. I have checked and read with my very own eyes the fact as listed in the old SDA Yearbooks. The SDA Yearbook is the official directory for the Church listing recognized and accepted facts about the Church as of that given year. It is only Adventist historical revisionists (They like to call themselves Historical Adventists...) that now want desperately to undo this particular fact of our history.

It is also fact that she received and knowingly accepted the compensation specifically of an ordained minister during those years. In those days, an ordained minister received more pay. This could not have been overlooked by her. To accept this pay from tithe if she was not ordained would have been fraudulently accepting something to which she was not entitled - a theft on the Lord's treasury.

Tom

[Denise]

Quote:

I am sorry that you view the church in such a negative light. I believe there are many God fearing, dedicated and loving Christians in our church. I am proud of our church. I am so sad to hear your feelings of negativity. Perhaps you do not realize how this comes across.

Feeling of Negativity? I don't see it that way. It may come across that way to ones that believe women should be ordained.

Perhaps if you could find something positive in the church and strive to help build on that ... it would help both you and the church.

From what I see in our church, our church here is growing here very nicely spiritually, and in numbers.....Norman is doing a great job in leadership over here. Everyone just loves him over here. That's why the church voted him a head elder.

But, I would hope that you would read some of the things you write about people and reconsider them. I don't consider myself a stupid fool and I don't believe the people in my church are that way. I find your language offensive.

From what I read on what Norman wrote, he never considered you or the people in the church a stupid fool. I haven't seen where he wrote that. In fact it's the opposite:

Quote:

This is not a game for me to get one up on anyone nor to make anyone look bad or unqualified.

Why does everyone keep twisting and changing things to make someone else look bad? All I see Norman doing is sharing what he's read and learned. I am a woman, and I don't find his language bad or offensive. Again, he's just sharing what he's learned and studied. And to repeat it again, so no one gets offended:

Quote:

This is not a game for me to get one up on anyone nor to make anyone look bad or unqualified.

Can we as Brothers and Sisters in Christ share things without knocking one another down? Just because you don't agree, is it right to belittle your brother? Because this is what I see here. I think we can all strive to be mature Christians here. We are all hastening our Lord's return because of our attitudes (attitudes of sarcasm, belittle, etc.)towards one another. I am so thankful for our church over here, where there is so much warmth and love for one another, and acceptance. The Lord is truly blessing our church here. We have more and more people joining our blessed church. So, we need to be more careful on how we view one another.

[Denise]

Quote:

(The story of the Pharisees asking Jesus to show them a sign after witnessing Him perform miracles of healing comes to mind...)

Your sarcasm and judgemental attitude is uncalled for. God is my judge, thank you. I don't appeciate the way you respond to me.

Quote:

Stan posts a picture of an actual ordination certificate issued to Ellen G. White... and you still must ask "Show me"? What sort of evidence do you need!?!?

The point is Tom is that she didn't ask for it. And there's no biblical proof that women should be ordained. So, sorry if anyone gets offended on what I believe, we are still Brothers and Sisters in Christ and should treat one another with love and respect.

[Tom Wetmore]

... Why does everyone keep twisting and changing things to make someone else look bad? All I see Norman doing is sharing what he's read and learned. I am a woman, and I don't find his language bad or offensive...

It is human nature to not be offended by whatever they accept and agree with...

It's not just you, Denise, I see this happen over and over on forums such as this one, and repeatedly here. The very same or quite similar tactics, expressions, sarcasm, even blatant rudeness is tolerated and even vigorously affirmed and encouraged in those with whom we agree and chastised and rebuked if done by those with whom we disagree. And simultaneously with this very post you posted this:

Quote:

Your sarcasm and judgmental attitude is uncalled for. God is my judge, thank you. I don't appreciate the way you respond to me.

As God is my judge, I am not being sarcastic or judgmental. I am simply expressing genuine incredulity at open and obvious stubbornness to accept and believe plain truth and hard facts presented before your very own eyes. (I am less judgmental in such expression than you are by judging me to be sarcastic and judgmental!)

Originally Posted By: Denise

The point is Tom that she didn't ask for it. And there's no biblical proof that women should be ordained. So, sorry if anyone gets offended on what I believe, we are still Brothers and Sisters in Christ and should treat one another with love and respect.

How do you know she didn't ask for it? What evidence do you have of that? And as a matter of fact and practice, male pastors do not ask for ordination either. In fact if they do, it is somewhat suspect of being self-serving and unseemly. And as I posted earlier, you will be hard pressed to find evidence of an ordination ceremony for James White or any of the other male founders of this Church. Why such a hard stand on mere ceremony?

And I am likewise sorry you find what I believe to be so offensive...

Tom

[Gregory Matthews]

Quote:

Isn't it true that the last time the world church in General Conference voted on the issue of women's ordination, it voted overwhelmingly against it?

It seems to me then that the ones who are going against the decision of the general body are the individual conferences, who are refusing to abide by the position of the General Conference.

If I am wrong in this, perhaps you could point me to a link that has the official statement of the GC on this, if one exists.

1) The General Conference has voted not to ordain females to the gospel ministry. Whether or not it was overwhelming is a matter of debate.

2) I agree with the denominational leaders who believe that not local Conference has violated the decision of the GC, as referenced in # 1. Further, I believe that not local congregation has violated that decision.

[olger]

Originally Posted By: Taylor

I am not sure if the decision is conference by conference or Union by Union or Division by Division but yes that is how I understand it as well.

I believe that the church in General Conference voted overwhelmingly against women's ordination, but a few individual conferences, such as Southeastern California conference, voted to go ahead with it anyway. That is my understanding of what has happened. I'm going to do more study both on the issue itself Scripturally and on what happened at the conference level.

Regards,

"John 3: 17"

This is true, John.

oG

[Denise]

Quote:

As God is my judge, I am not being sarcastic or judgmental. I am simply expressing genuine incredulity at open and obvious stubbornness(yes, stubborness to principal) to accept and believe plain truth and hard facts presented before your very own eyes. (I am less judgmental in such expression than you are by judging me to be sarcastic and judgmental!)

Ok.....I am wrong if I judged you as being sarcastic or judgmental, but why Tom, why would you put in parenthesis, "The Story of the Pharisees making Jesus to...." after you asked me what sort of evidence do you need? I mean....was that really needful? To me is sounded like you were being sarcastic and comparing me with the Pharisees. Anyways.... I do believe that women shouldn't be ordained as Pastors and Elders. Now, I don't have a problem with women preaching. Ellen G. White preached, and I have heard some women preach that I have really enjoyed, but I don't agree with ordination for women as Elders and Pastors. I never found it in the bible. When Jesus ordained the twelve disciples, he chose men, that tells me something....

Quote:

... and you still must ask "Show me"? What sort of evidence do you need!?!? (The story of the Pharisees asking Jesus to show them a sign after witnessing Him perform miracles of healing comes to mind...)

Quote:

And I am likewise sorry you find what I believe to be so offensive...

And forgive me if I judged you wrong.

[Woody]

Quote:

"From what I read on what Norman wrote, he never considered you or the people in the church a stupid fool."

"Why does everyone keep twisting and changing things to make someone else look bad?"

"Can we as Brothers and Sisters in Christ share things without knocking one another down?"

Perhaps you have different glasses on. But when I read what NORMAN writes ... I am deeply offended for women and our church. And it is MY point that he should not be putting our church down and the women in it.

How do your glasses read this?

Quote:

"; blind, stupid fools are the majority of the people in North America and sad to say our church is not far behind."

Before commenting ... perhaps you should actually READ the things that Norman says.

Denise ... I do like the following advice you give ... and I hope that it applies to ALL here ....

Quote:

So, we need to be more careful on how we view one another.

[Tom Wetmore]

...Ok.....I am wrong if I judged you as being sarcastic or judgmental, but why Tom, why would you put in parenthesis, "The Story of the Pharisees making Jesus to...." after you asked me what sort of evidence do you need? I mean....was that really needful? To me is sounded like you were being sarcastic and comparing me with the Pharisees.

Yes, I believe it was necessary. I'm sorry if you didn't like it. It wasn't being sarcastic, it was an honest observation. What I parenthetically observed was what came to my mind in reaction to your post. It reminded me quite emphatically of that story. I simply could not ignore or deny those obvious similarities. And don't forget that the Pharisees were very dedicated to their principles - stubbornly so... And stubbornness is not generally regarded as a virtue. But as the saying goes, "If the shoe fits... " If not, don't get your knickers in a knot, because it isn't your shoe.

Quote:

...but I don't agree with ordination for women as Elders and Pastors. I never found it in the bible...

What about ordaining deaconesses? Where in the Bible does it say one can ordain female deacons? And how can a female deacon be the "husband of one wife" since that is also one of the oft cited Biblical qualifications for deacons as well as for elders?

Quote:

...Now, I don't have a problem with women preaching. Ellen G. White preached, and I have heard some women preach that I have really enjoyed...

How do you reconcile that with the oft cited Biblical directive of Paul that women should remain silent in church? It would seem rather difficult to remain silent and preach, wouldn't you say?

And if you paid attention to the EGW quotes that I posted back a bit further, I think that she described the preaching of the Gospel to be of the highest possible calling and very much a part of being a minister. The historical record bears out that one basis for issuing ordained ministerial credentials to EGW was because she preached so frequently - according to the White Estate an estimated 10,000 sermons! In the 70 years of her ministry that would average out to over 140 per year or nearly 3 sermons each and every week!

Quote:

...When Jesus ordained the twelve disciples, he chose men, that tells me something...

Do you know that the NT identifies by name a female disciple? And a female apostle?

And for that matter, do you know that Paul specifically speaks of female elders?

And Paul identifies by name a female minister and church leader about which back in the 1860's the Advent Review and Sabbath Herald (edited by none other than James White) published an article, with favorable comment by the editor, proclaiming that woman to have been the first bishop of Rome? (Actually, I believe the article used the word "pope", apparently before Adventists got all hot and bothered about Catholicism...)

Or that the documented historical record of the early Christian Church in the first several centuries include reference to female bishops? (That was before the Catholic Church wiped out that idea and agressively covered over and tried to even change the record of women in ministry...)

Quote:

...And forgive me if I judged you wrong.

Denise, I wasn't offended or hurt in slightest by your mistake, so there is nothing really to forgive. (I try to save the divine gift of forgiveness for really serious hurts...) But if it will make you feel better, I forgive you.

Tom

[Denise]

Quote:

If this was such as big deal. A big sin against the scriptures ... then like you say ... why did she not speak up and clarify things. OR just not accept the "misleading" statement that could lead others "to sin" !!

No. She made a quiet statement of approval.

Quote:

How do you know she didn't ask for it?

Something interesting I found in Testimonies for the church 8:236,237

Ellen G. White did not attempt to serve as an administrative leader, "There has been no controversy between Dr. Kellogg and myself as to the question of leadership. No one has ever heard me claim the position of leader of the denomination. I have a work of great responsibility to do--to impart by pen and voice the instruction given me, not alone to Seventh-day Adventists, but to the world" She wrote this when she felt distressed beyond measure that anyone should so misunderstand her work and the work of Dr. Kellogg. This was written in 1903.

Now, this tells me that she believed that leadership is for the man.

This is from what I am reading about her ministerial credential.... "to suggest that Ellen G. White was an ordained elder is to misrepresent the facts. Mrs. White was issued ministerial credentials--the hightest credentials our church had to offer--from 1871 until her death in 1915. Three of these credentials have been preserved. The second one (1885) has the word "ordained" neatly crossed out, but the earlier and later ones (1883 and 1887) do not have the word crossed out.

Are we, then, to conclude that she was an "ordained person" in 1883, "unordained" in 1885, and "reordained" in 1887? Of course not.

In 1909 she clarified the matter completely when she personally filled out the "Biographical Information Blank" for the General Conference. In response to the request "If remarried, give date, and to whom," she wrote and "X", indicating that, No, she had not remarried. When asked, "If ordainede, state when, where, and by whom," she again wrote an "X", meaning that she had never been ordained.

During her later years, Mrs. White was known mostly as "Sister White" and affectionately as "Mother White." She was never known as "Elder White" (and certainly not as "Pastor Ellen"!)"

That's why I do not agree for a woman to be ordained as a Pastor or Elder, plus there's no evidence in the bible.

[olger]

Doug Batchelor article "Unisex in Jesus?"

I picked up a recent Newsweek magazine to examine its cover. The title on the July 17, 1995, issue read: "Bisexuality. Not straight. Not gay. A new sexual identity emerges." "That does it," I thought to myself. "The devil is attacking every basic truth of nature and Scripture."" It is bad enough for homosexuality to be portrayed by society as a healthy, normal alternate lifestyle; but now the appeal is to lure those who have a natural attraction to the opposite sex into experimenting with the same sex. The article seemed to hint, "Maybe you're a bisexual and you will never know unless you try it!"-as though bisexuals were a more noble breed of humans because they are not limited to one gender or the other but have relations with anybody regardless of gender.

Sadly, if one should dare to speak up (even within some Christian churches!) and say that this is an unnatural deviation of God's design, they take a risk of being scornfully looked upon as unloving, unaccepting, and intolerant. There is a not-so-hidden agenda in the media to normalize sexual perversion.

Jesus said that before His return, conditions in the world at large would resemble conditions in Sodom. "Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded; but the same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is revealed." Luke 17:28-30.

The very survival of our society and church leans heavily upon the family unit, where a basic truth must be clear-that men are fathers and women are mothers. Men and women are equal as humans but entirely unique as creatures. They are not only distinct genders sexually, but almost every aspect of their natures is different. Men should never try to be women, and women should never try to be men. These differences should be evident, maintained, and yes, even emphasized in everything from the way we walk and talk to the way we work and dress.

God tells us how He feels when gender lines are ignored. "The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God." Deuteronomy 22:5.

When distinct male and female roles are blurred, children are in danger of growing up confused about whether they are a boy or a girl or an it! Is there any wonder that homosexuality is now rampant in societies that promote unisex thinking?

Now I want you to know that I am not a male chauvinist. I wash dishes, change diapers, and make beds. In the 1970s my beautiful mother was one of the leaders of the women's lib movement (now called the feminist movement) in North America. She wrote a whole album of songs dedicated to women's rights and was very articulate and outspoken. I firmly believe with mom that men and women should get equal pay for equal work. But I must add that she left the movement because, in her words, "About half the women there are angry lesbians who want to be men." Today this same, but more refined, feminist movement is pushing its agenda into churches with a frightening degree of success. I expect these things from the world, but I am worried when they seep into the body of Christ disguised as "improvements."

With the desire to reach the world with the message of salvation, some Christians have tried to increase their influence in the world by adopting popular philosophy. But we should never substitute politically correct but Biblically inaccurate social philosophy as our guide in the place of God's Word. In an attempt to reverse the injustice against women during the recent ages, we have allowed the feminist movement to push us beyond voting rights and equal pay for equal work into the arena of unisex thinking, which seeks to erase any Biblical distinction between men and women aside from the obvious physical differences. When an organization seeks to correct some wrong policy, there is always a tendency to overcorrect. I fear this is the case today, where a valid need for more women's ministries has been translated by some into a need for women to be ordained as pastors and elders.

Perhaps I should hasten to say that I believe the blame does not lie with the liberal feminist movement in the world, but with the lazy or indifferent men in the churches who are failing to fulfill their roles as strong, loving servant-leaders. As a result, women are naturally stepping into the vacuum left by the absence of strong male leadership. As most people know, the word "husband" means "house-band." Men are to be the head of the household and bind their families together in love.

A remarkable Christian woman and author named E. G. White once wrote: "The greatest want of the world is the want of men-men who will not be bought or sold, men who in their inmost souls are true and honest, men who do not fear to call sin by its right name, men whose conscience is as true to duty as the needle to the pole, men who will stand for the right though the heavens fall." 1

This short article is not designed to be an exhaustive study on the subject of women's ordination; neither will it deal with every single argument and rationalization regarding the ordination of women as pastors or elders. Rather, it is a simple presentation of "thus saith the Lord" which should always be our guide in determining the truth on any issue.

Let's begin with Creation. God made creatures in the order of their value and complexity. First, the base elements of earth, water, and air; then vegetation, light, and time divisions; then birds and fish; then cattle and land creatures; then man and, as a crowning act, woman.

The first woman came out of man, and every other human came out of woman. Women are the most beautiful and complex creatures on the planet. They tend to live longer than men, and use more of their brains in concert. Yet, because of sin, God had to establish a system of authority to maintain harmony in the family and church. Generally speaking, men think in terms of absolutes and are more task oriented. Women think more in terms of relationships. Their emotions are more influenced by internal feelings and cycles, while men are more affected by external, environmental changes. The March 27, 1995, cover article of Newsweek, entitled, "Why Men and Women Think Differently," demonstrates through new technology that men and women use their brains in completely unique ways. Perhaps because God's truth is an unchanging absolute, and for other reasons, the Lord in His wisdom established that men should be the servant-leaders and priests in the home and in the church.

God did not create men and women in the same way. God made man out of dust, and He made woman out of man. "And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept; and He took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made He a woman, and brought her unto the man." Genesis 2:21, 22.

God named man, whereas man named woman. "And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living." "And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man." Genesis 3:20; 2:23.

Sin came into our world as a result of man neglecting and woman disregarding the husband's leadership role. "She took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her, and he did eat." Genesis 3:6. "And the man said, The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat." Genesis 3:12.

"The angels had cautioned Eve to beware of separating herself from her husband while occupied in their daily labor in the garden; with him she would be in less danger from temptation than if she were alone. But absorbed in her pleasing task, she unconsciously wandered from his side." 2

God established that husbands should be the servant-leaders of the home. "Unto the woman he said, … thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." Genesis 3:16. Now, we must not rush past this verse. Some have argued that the passages regarding man's leadership role reflect the biases of a male-dominant culture. but notice that the command in Genesis 3:16 came directly from God-not from Peter, John, or Paul. It has also been said, "We can't take these Scriptures regarding male leadership seriously because they were based on eastern traditions and don't apply today. After all, there were laws regarding slavery and polygamy in Bible times." True, but God never commanded people to have slaves or multiple wives. Rather, as Jesus said, it was because of "the hardness of your heart he [Moses] wrote you this precept." Mark 10:5.

Biblically, a husband could overrule the vow of the wife, but the wife could not overrule the oath of her husband. "Every vow, and every binding oath to afflict the soul, her husband may establish it, or her husband may make it void." Numbers 30:13.

The Bible is clear that salvation was purchased by Jesus for all of the children of Adam and Eve, regardless of race or gender or age. "There is neither Jew nor Greek, … male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus." Galatians 3:28.

But this Scripture from Paul was never intended to mean, as some have hinted, that once you walk through the doors of the church you leave your sexual identity outside. It does not mean that men cease to be men and women cease to be women, or that we all become "unisex in Jesus." In fact, Paul goes to great lengths to say just the opposite. Read 1 Corinthians 11:3-16.

The fact that men and women have equal rights to salvation does not mean there is no submission to leadership in the home or in church. Jesus and the Father are equal, yet Jesus chose to submit to the authority of the Father in this world. "The head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." 1 Corinthians 11:3.

In America, "equal rights" does not negate the authority or leadership of the mayor, governor, or police. Likewise, equality in salvation does not negate the God-established patriarchal system of male leadership in the home and church. "Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right." Ephesians 6:1. "If a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?" 1 Timothy 3:5.

I also hear some say that because there are more women in the church than men, leadership roles should be evenly divided according to percentages. Using this line of reasoning, it would follow that in a family with three children, the children would be entitled to the largest share of leadership since they outnumber the mother and father! On the contrary, fathers do not receive their authority by popular vote, but rather from the Word of God.

God tells us that women should not rule over men. "I suffer [permit] not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man." 1 Timothy 2:12. The only times when women ruled over God's people were when men were too fearful and weak to lead (as in the case of Deborah and Barak) or in times of apostasy (Jezebel and Athaliah). "As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12.

God's Word equates the authority of man over woman with the authority of Christ over man. "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God." 1 Corinthians 11:3.

Christian wives should willingly acknowledge the headship of their husbands. "For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing." Ephesians 5:23, 24. "Teach the young women to be … discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed." Titus 2:4, 5. "Even as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement." 1 Peter 3:6.

Marriage is not a dictatorship, but a partnership where the husband fills the role as a senior partner. Husbands are to be servant-leaders in the home in the same way Jesus came to love, serve, and lead His church. "Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it." Ephesians 5:25.

It is very important to note that God's plan for male leadership is in no way an open license for tyranny. Unfortunately, there have been some sick men who have used these clear passages regarding the authority of husbands as an excuse for abuse. God does not expect a wife to remain in a house with a man who is physically abusing her or the children. Neither is a wife ever obligated to submit to a cruel husband's oppression. God will judge those cowardly men as He did Nabal (1 Samuel 25:38).

Elders were to be husbands (men). "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife…." 1 Timothy 3:2. "If any be blameless, the husband of one wife…." Titus 1:6. (Note: The terms for bishops and elders were interchangeable.) A recent magazine article points out the fact that the bible gives a long list of requirements for an ordained elder. "[Paul] did not say that just any man could be a bishop, even as in the Old Testament not just any son of Aaron could be a priest. The office has always been limited. The Christian leader Paul spoke of must be 'blameless' and married, 'vigilant, sober, of good behavior,' etc. There is a long list of requirements that eventually eliminates almost all men and leaves only a very few eligible."3 Women aren't the only ones who are ineligible; so are most of the men.

Every Christian is called to minister in some capacity, but not in every capacity. "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." Ephesians 4:11, 12.

Even though the Lord has chosen many women to serve as prophets through the ages, He never once hinted that a woman should be ordained as a pastor or priest. Women can minister as prophets, teachers, or even evangelists, but not as priests. Pastors and elders are the closest New Testament equivalent to the Old Testament priests. They lead in Holy Communion, which is the New Testament equivalent of offering a sacrifice. This was a role that was consistently performed by a man. While many priests were prophets, no women prophets were priests.

At the heart of this issue are at least three very subtle dangers: <0l>

Loss of confidence in the clear statements of Scripture. It undermines the authority of Scripture to say, "You can't take Bible statements about the relationship between men and women as inspired because they were influenced by a male-dominant culture." Christians who sweep aside plain statements of Scripture as outdated traditions or local customs are building on a fatal foundation of shifting sand. Soon every other Bible truth will be in danger of sliding away. They will soon say that the Lord's Supper, baptism, and marriage were all ancient traditions that no longer apply.

Blurring sexual distinctions undermines the family and normalizes homosexuality. The more we attack the unique biblical roles of men and women as sexist traditions, the more we promote unisex thinking, the more confused our children become about their own sexual identity, and eventually all of society erodes. It remains a fact that every Protestant denomination that now openly ordains gays and lesbians as priests or pastors began by first ordaining women to these positions.

Unisex thinking promotes the theory of evolution and undermines Creation. That's right, the existence of male and female differences is a tremendous problem for evolutionists to explain. Evolution teaches that life began by single cells reproducing, without the need for male and female. To multiply, each cell would simply split in two. If that theory were true, there would be no need for two separate genders that could not reproduce except by an act of love and cooperation. The more the evolutionists can downplay the differences between male and female as some "minor mutation in the plumbing," the more believable is their nonsense. But the Bible accounts for a separate creation for man and woman, unique creatures of the same species.

Finally, there is not a single example of a woman being ordained as a priest, apostle, pastor, or elder in Scripture. Jesus was following His own Word by ordaining only men. Of course, some will argue that He was merely conforming to popular customs and traditions of the day. But this is a dishonest smokescreen of feminists. The truth is that, in Christ's time, most of the pagan religions had women priests. God's people were the exception.

The notion that Jesus confined Himself to following the traditions of His day is completely opposite of His teaching. Jesus said, "Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition?" Matthew 15:3. Indeed, Jesus died because His teaching flew in the face of popular traditions. Jesus laid down His life in defense of truth irrespective of passing trends or popular customs. We should always be willing to do the same."

Doug Batchelor

[Woody]

Quote:

Now, this tells me that she believed that leadership is for the man.

That is quite some leap. Perhaps you could show us some reason for this belief. Do you have further indications that this would be the reason?

I am beginning to understand you better though. You can make this leap because just like in the case of Norman telling us that we and our church are "blind, stupid fools" ... you could not see it.

[Tom Wetmore]

...And the commentary about her credentials is written (or spin doctored) by a person who is steadfastly opposed to women in ministry. Others have read the same historical facts quite differently.

As evidence goes, one cannot give any significance to the "neatly crossed out" word since that could have been done long after her death by any of the many people whose hands the certificate passed through. Likewise the X in the questionnaire could have been added later by anyone. For that matter in answer to the specific question, I think marking it with an "X" is a bit ambiguous. It could mean "yes", "no" or "not relevant". (On questionnaires, I similarly draw a line through a blank that does not apply to me, which would fit with both of the mentioned questions.)

But one cannot spin away the facts which were that the General Conference recognized her as being an ordained minister, issued credentials and paid her accordingly. She never voiced any objection to those facts. And certainly if God had her ear during those years and considered it to be wrong, don't you think she would have been compelled to speak out forcefully, as she did frequently on so many far lesser things?

Tom

[Denise]

Quote:

Yes, I believe it was necessary. I'm sorry if you didn't like it. It wasn't being sarcastic, it was an honest observation. What I parenthetically observed was what came to my mind in reaction to your post. It reminded me quite emphatically of that story. I simply could not ignore or deny those obvious similarities. And don't forget that the Pharisees were very dedicated to their principles - stubbornly so... And stubbornness is not generally regarded as a virtue. But as the saying goes, "If the shoe fits... " If not, don't get your knickers in a knot, because it isn't your shoe.

Oh my......no comment.

Denise, I wasn't offended or hurt in slightest by your mistake

Oh my again....no comment.

I believe in principle and truth to God's word, and what you believe in ordination of women as Pastors and elders, is not truth. So, yes, I am stubborn to truth and principle, quite unlike the Pharisees as you say. There is a difference, the Pharisees didn't believe in truth, I do.

[Woody]

I am really understanding you better now Denise. Thank you.

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Quote:

I am sorry that you view the church in such a negative light. I believe there are many God fearing, dedicated and loving Christians in our church. I am proud of our church. I am so sad to hear your feelings of negativity. Perhaps you do not realize how this comes across. Perhaps if you could find something positive in the church and strive to help build on that ... it would help both you and the church.

Do you have a problem understanding english? It seems as though you do or that you are not reading what I have written. I said that North Americans are like this and the church is not far behind. I did not say that the church was like that. This is why we exist, to call them out of that. But how can we if we choose to be in the same boat as them.

But still, to answer concern about being sorry that I view my church that way, look at the words of Jesus and see if I am worse in my description.

So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth. Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold tried in the fire, that thou mayest be rich; and white raiment, that thou mayest be clothed, and that the shame of thy nakedness do not appear; and anoint thine eyes with eye salve, that thou mayest see. Rev 3 16-18

I am proud of our church. In light of the words of Jesus you are in need of some eyesalve Redwood. How can you be proud of the church and be able to help. Have you heard the terms signing and crying for the abominations done in the church? Those who do this are the ones who will receive the seal of God and you are proud of the church???

Don't misunderstand, I love God's one and only Remnant church, the Seventh-day Adventist church or I would not be here. At the same time my eyes are open to what is going on and it's not good.

Quote:

I think perhaps that you have become so focused on the law and how people measure up that you have forgotten how to love as Jesus loved. If we abide IN HIM ... we will develop a love that does not condemn.

It takes love to point out when people are going astray. To say nothing will lead to ones shame when they are asked, why didn't you tell us or say something?

The reason I said those things was to point out how far men have fallen in NA. Because of this the leadership has not beenwhat it should be. Soon if we are not careful we will be asking children to lead us.

Norman