Doug Batchelor Preaches Against Women Pastors

[Norman Byers, N.D.]

Originally Posted By: olger

"Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman's rights... might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women" (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1)

regards !

`oG

I believe the above quote is misleading...Here is the complete quote in context....and ALL of it...

There is an increasing tendency to have women in their dress and appearance as near like the other sex as possible, and to fashion their dress very much like that of men, but God pronounces it abomination. “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety.” 1 Timothy 2:9.

Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman’s rights and the so-called dress reform might as well sever all connection with the third angel’s message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women. Spiritualists have, to quite an extent, adopted this singular mode of dress. Seventh-day Adventists, who believe in the restoration of the gifts, are often branded as spiritualists. Let them adopt this costume, and their influence is dead. The people would place them on a level with spiritualists and would refuse to listen to them. Testimonies For The Church Volume One, page 421, paragraphs 3,4

After reading the context of the quote, I find that this text is more about dress than women's rights or the reformation of women's rights...By inference, mention is made of the veracity of people who do such things.....

[Woody]

Quote:

Do not, my sisters, trifle longer with your own souls and with God. I have been shown that the main cause of your backsliding is your love of dress. This leads to the neglect of grave responsibilities, and you find yourselves with scarcely a spark of the love of God in your hearts. Without delay, renounce the cause of your backsliding, because it is sin against your own soul and against God. Be not hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. Fashion is deteriorating the intellect and eating out the spirituality of our people. Obedience to fashion is pervading our Seventh-day Adventist churches and is doing more than any other power to separate our people from God. I have been shown that our church rules are very deficient. All exhibitions of pride in dress, which is forbidden in the word of God, should be sufficient reason for church discipline.

Reference?

[Woody]

Quote:

Do not, my sisters, trifle longer with your own souls and with God. I have been shown that the main cause of your backsliding is your love of dress. This leads to the neglect of grave responsibilities, and you find yourselves with scarcely a spark of the love of God in your hearts. Without delay, renounce the cause of your backsliding, because it is sin against your own soul and against God. Be not hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. Fashion is deteriorating the intellect and eating out the spirituality of our people. Obedience to fashion is pervading our Seventh-day Adventist churches and is doing more than any other power to separate our people from God. I have been shown that our church rules are very deficient. All exhibitions of pride in dress, which is forbidden in the word of God, should be sufficient reason for church discipline.

[SivartM]

Nobody has told me yet why women can do everything except draw a salary...

Unless they are a prophet...

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: olger

"Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman's rights... might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women" (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1)

regards !

`oG

I believe the above quote is misleading...Here is the complete quote in context....and ALL of it...

There is an increasing tendency to have women in their dress and appearance as near like the other sex as possible, and to fashion their dress very much like that of men, but God pronounces it abomination. “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety.” 1 Timothy 2:9.

Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman’s rights and the so-called dress reform might as well sever all connection with the third angel’s message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women. Spiritualists have, to quite an extent, adopted this singular mode of dress. Seventh-day Adventists, who believe in the restoration of the gifts, are often branded as spiritualists. Let them adopt this costume, and their influence is dead. The people would place them on a level with spiritualists and would refuse to listen to them. Testimonies For The Church Volume One, page 421, paragraphs 3,4

After reading the context of the quote, I find that this text is more about dress than women's rights or the reformation of women's rights...By inference, mention is made of the veracity of people who do such things.....

thanks! i was going to check it out but you beat me to it! :)

[teresaq]

i dont have time to check out the thread and see if this has been posted, or is relevant, but there are several of these.

Quote:

There are ministers' wives, Sisters Starr, Haskell, Wilson and Robinson, who have been devoted, earnest, whole-souled workers, giving Bible readings and praying with families, helping along by personal efforts just as successfully as their husbands. These women give their whole time, and are told that they receive nothing for their labors because their husbands receive their wages. I tell them to go forward and all such decisions shall be reversed. The Word says, "The laborer is worthy of his hire." When any such decision as this is made, I will in the name of the Lord, protest. I will feel it in my duty to create a fund from my tithe money, to pay these women who are accomplishing just as essential work as the ministers are doing, and this tithe I will reserve for work in the same line as that of the ministers, hunting for souls, fishing for souls. I know that the faithful women should be paid wages proportionate to the pay received by ministers. They carry the burden of souls, and should not be treated unjustly. These sisters are giving their time to educating those newly come to the faith, and hire their own work done, and pay those who work for them. All these things must be adjusted and set in order, and justice be done to all. Proof-readers in the office receive their wages, two dollars and a half and three dollars a week. This I have had to pay, and others have to pay. But ministers' wives, who carry a tremendous responsibility, devoting their entire time, have nothing for their labor. This will give you an idea of how matters are in this conference. There are seventy-five souls organized into a church, who are paying their tithe into the conference, and as a saving plan it has been deemed essential to let these poor souls labor for nothing! But this does not trouble me, for I will not allow it to go thus. In regard to the school's running in debt. The tuition has been altogether too low in America.

[BobRyan]

I doubt that a small increase in Ellen White's salary would make much difference considering the huge debt she was in when she died.

My argument is not that Ellen White was getting rich off of the salary - her published works paid more and she used the money to support the SDA church. Her goal was not to get rich, but to advance the work of God.

My point is simply that she was paid for having a recognized ministry in the church - not paid as if she was "retired".

in Christ,

Bob

[teresaq]

Originally Posted By: John317

Thanks for posting this link. I think it's important to read and give consideration to the arguments on both sides of this issue.

Paul also specifically says that his instructions concerning women's role in "all the churches" "are the commandments of the Lord" and agree also with "what saith the law." (See 1 Cor. 14: 32-37) Nowhere does Paul suggest that the reason for his instructions is the misbehavior or false doctrines of the women or that it's connected to cultural differences.

Amen John!

1Co 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

1Co 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

1Co 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

pauls last response seems out-of -place and irrelevant to anything unless he is responding to what he considers wrong.

[karl]

Paul also specifically says that his instructions concerning women's role in "all the churches" "are the commandments of the Lord" and agree also with "what saith the law." (See 1 Cor. 14: 32-37) Nowhere does Paul suggest that the reason for his instructions is the misbehavior or false doctrines of the women or that it's connected to cultural differences.

I find it fascinating that Paul is taken literally to contradict what the rest of the Bible (and he himself) says about justification, yet where we've got him agreeing with the rest of the Bible on the headship of men vs women, we can't take seriously what he wrote.

Where's the consistency in that?

[aldona]

Batchelor goes further, stressing the biological differences between the sexes. He states that "[M]en have more neurons in their brain, and some of that is because we have more mass and that may mean more nerve endings. But you should also know…and I know this isn’t gonna get me reelected. According to the British Journal of Psychology, [men] on an average score five points higher on an IQ test." He continues, "t’s important to recognize that as we approach this subject that those who are clamoring and campaigning to say that there shouldn’t be any difference in the roles of men and women in the church - we are different. We are gifted differently and God has said there should be a different [sic]."

http://www.atoday.com/content/doug-batchelor-preaches-against-women-pastors

[phkrause]

Originally Posted By: olger

"Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman's rights... might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women" (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1)

regards !

`oG

I believe the above quote is misleading...Here is the complete quote in context....and ALL of it...

There is an increasing tendency to have women in their dress and appearance as near like the other sex as possible, and to fashion their dress very much like that of men, but God pronounces it abomination. “In like manner also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety.” 1 Timothy 2:9.

Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman’s rights and the so-called dress reform might as well sever all connection with the third angel’s message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women. Spiritualists have, to quite an extent, adopted this singular mode of dress. Seventh-day Adventists, who believe in the restoration of the gifts, are often branded as spiritualists. Let them adopt this costume, and their influence is dead. The people would place them on a level with spiritualists and would refuse to listen to them. Testimonies For The Church Volume One, page 421, paragraphs 3,4

After reading the context of the quote, I find that this text is more about dress than women's rights or the reformation of women's rights...By inference, mention is made of the veracity of people who do such things.....

Thanks Neil for the complete quote and not just a spin on what was actually written/said.

pk

[Neil D]

Nobody has told me yet why women can do everything except draw a salary...

Unless they are a prophet...

AAAAwwwwwww....come on, SivartM. I know lots of women who can draw ire...even in prophetic form....[let me see if that tongue is still firmly planted in my cheek...yup! it is!]

The early Adventist church is replete with women leaders and a few female bible workers....Only in the last 60-70 years has there been the quiet replacing of women leaders [who have retired] with men....

And the substantial arguments for MEN being in church leadership roles have come from the literal interpretation of Paul's arguements against women. Samuel Bacchiochi was one to push for headship and, by inference, the non-equality of women, all the while maintaining that men and women were equal in thier spheres....

And yet, there are good arguments that Paul was NOT arguing against women in leadership positions. If the Bible/Paul says that women are equal to men in salvation status, then why not in most other areas as well? If there is "no partiality with God", surely Paul is acquainted with equality? If the 10 Commandments commanded both men and women, then why not equality with both? Genesis shows that there was no advantage to gender when mankind fell to Satan's deceptions. And someone had to be first to fall, and it just happened that woman fell first.

So, why not consider that men and women are equal in all areas of life, save the reproductive area?

[Neil D]

Yeah, weeell...there's this book called "The Welcoming Table" about women and our church and their roles and what's what and who's who in the Bible....

You'd think that just because I read a book or two on the subject, I would just be quiet and let others ramble and blather on ....but sometimes, the blather becomes rather humerus when engaged in real conversation....

Of course, there is this disease that I have to share with everyone what I know and that they MUST hear....I think it was refered to by one of my older relatives....As I recall, he said it was some form of hoof and mouth disease....You know, bathering on and then running off....[hmmmmmmm....self introspection mode-on]

[John317]

Quote:

Gregory Matthews:

... Doug Batchelor seems to ignore the leading of God in the life of the Adventist Church. This is not a Roman Catholic position that may appear to place denominational history on a level of authority equal with Scripture. Rather it is a position that acknowledges the role God gave Ellen White in the development of our denomination.

Any student of denominational history will likely acknowledge the EGW filled a role that placed her in a position of authority over male leadership. She directed men in their duties and obligations, often in the name of the Lord. She reproved males when she believed that they had done wrong. We would not exist as a denomination today in the form that we now have if it had not been for her leadership.

.... I believe that God has spoken in the life and ministry of EGW and many other women in our church. That word, as I understand it is this: I appoint whom I will to lead as ordained ministers in my church. I have appointed both men and women to lead in my church. Listen to my voice and obey what I have shown you.

Thanks for posting this, Greg. You've brought up some very good points which deserve serious consideration.

There's no question that Ellen White "reproved males when she believed that they had done wrong." It is also true, as you say, that "we would not exist as a denomination today in the form that we now have if it had not been for her leadership."

The difficulty that I have with these arguments for the ordination of women is that God chose Ellen White as a prophet, and by definition, prophets have a different role in the church than pastors and teachers. God is free to chose whoever he wants, but the fact that God chose a woman to be a prophet doesn't mean the church should discount the NT teaching in regard to the organization of the church and make women rather than men its pastors over the local congregations. Ellen White didn't rebuke or reprove men unless God gave her messages to deliver to them. That's different, in my view, from women being elected by the church to have authority over men, and determine church policy and doctrine, etc.

We shouldn't make the change on the basis of the fact that God chose Ellen White as a prophet. Nor should it be done because of the changes that are taking place in the world and in society outside the church. The only legitimate reason for our church to decide to have women elders and pastors of local congregations is that the Bible supports it.

It seems to me that as a church we should be sure to do at least the following things as we decide the question:

Study the Scriptures in order to understand whether the Bible, and particularly the NT, teaches that God's will is that women be appointed elders and pastors throughout the world church. Papers from both sides of the issue ought to be published and all the people should study them, pray, and then decide in their own minds.

If we decide that the Bible supports such a move, the whole church must move together on this policy, and it must be able to write a coherent explanation which shows clear Bible reasons for doing so.

[John317]

Quote:

Tom Wetmore: THen why mention them at all?!?!

I have to agree that Doug Batchelor would have been better off not talking about that aspect because I don't think it's relevent.

As I said, there are many women who are more talented and intelligent than many of the men are. But then that is NOT the case I would have made.

There are a lot of different kinds of ministries that women are able to do in the church, without being ordained or being put in posititons of authority over men.

I have no personal objection toward women being over men, but I'm just going by what I understand the Bible to say on the topic.

[Neil D]

There's no question that Ellen White "reproved males when she believed that they had done wrong." It is also true, as you say, that "we would not exist as a denomination today in the form that we now have if it had not been for her leadership."

The difficulty that I have with these arguments for the ordination of women is that God chose Ellen White as a prophet, and by definition, prophets have a different role in the church than pastors and teachers. God is free to chose whoever he wants, but the fact that God chose a woman to be a prophet doesn't mean the church should discount the NT teaching in regard to the organization of the church and make women rather than men its pastors over the local congregations. Ellen White didn't rebuke or reprove men unless God gave her messages to deliver to them. That's different, in my view, from women being elected by the church to have authority over men, and determine church policy and doctrine, etc.

God may be free to make prophets of women, but when He gives specific instruction that women are not allowed to speak in church nor teach, but rather asked questions of thier husbands [see 1 Corinthians 14:33-35] , how are WE humans to know if a woman is a prophet or not? At best, she gets to be a woman of good reputation....and that is no where nears "being a prophet"....And John, based upon 1 Corinthians 14:33-35, she will not be able to preach, or teach, any man if taken literally as you seem to have done...

You ideas sound good, John, but strangely impractical....

[John317]

Quote:

John317:

Thanks for posting this link. I think it's important to read and give consideration to the arguments on both sides of this issue.

Paul also specifically says that his instructions concerning women's role in "all the churches" "are the commandments of the Lord" and agree also with "what saith the law." (See 1 Cor. 14: 32-37) Nowhere does Paul suggest that the reason for his instructions is the misbehavior or false doctrines of the women or that it's connected to cultural differences.

Quote:

teresaq(sda):

1Co 14:34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.

1Co 14:35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

1Co 14:36 What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only?

pauls last response seems out-of -place and irrelevant to anything unless he is responding to what he considers wrong.

In verse 36, Paul is speaking to those in the church who objected to his instructions about the conduct of the church, especially in regard to the role of women.

Compare verses 37, 38: "Whoever thinks that he speaks for God or that he is spiritually gifted must acknowledge that what I write to you is what the Lord commands. But whoever ignores what I write [about the role of women in the church, in verses 34, 35] should be ignored."

Here's Phillips' paraphrase of verse 36:

"Do I see you questioning my instructions? Are you beginning to imagine that the word of God originated in your church?"

James Moffatt: "You challenge this rule? Pray, did God's word start from you?"

The Message: "Do you-- both women and men-- imagine that you're a sacred oracle determining what's right and wrong? Do you think everything revolves around you?"

The Clear Word: "Let me ask you a question: Did you originate the gospel? Are you the only people to whom God has spoken? Don't think you can do as you please in these matters of church order."

Again, verses 37, 38: "One way to test those who claim to have a message from the Lord is to see whether they acknowledge that what I'm writing to you is from God. If someone doesn't want to listen to what I've said, then he isn't speaking for the Lord as he claims he is, and what he says is not the truth."

[John317]

Quote:

Neil D: God may be free to make prophets of women, but when He gives specific instruction that women are not allowed to speak in church nor teach, but rather asked questions of thier husbands [see 1 Corinthians 14:33-35] , how are WE humans to know if a woman is a prophet or not? At best, she gets to be a woman of good reputation....and that is no where nears "being a prophet"....And John, based upon 1 Corinthians 14:33-35, she will not be able to preach, or teach, any man if taken literally as you seem to have done...

You ideas sound good, John, but strangely impractical....

Check out 1 Cor. 11: 3-10, esp. v. 5. It shows that Paul didn't mean for people to understand him to be saying women could never speak in church.

There's a really good book called, Recovering Biblical Manhood & Womanhood, edited by John Piper and Wayne Grudem, and published by Crossway Books (2006). It includes a lot of good articles about the very kinds of things we're talking about here.

[Neil D]

So, what you and Doug Batchelor are implying is that headship is the rule in today's Gospel...? IOWs, that in order to restore the Gospel Order in the relationships between men and women, ONE of these people, has to submit to leadership.In this case, God deemed that woman be the one to submissive to the leadership of man....Would this be a fair reflection of this situation?

[Tom Wetmore]

THe whole "headship" argument is a strawman, a red herring. Ministry is not about "headship" for women or men. And the women I know that are called to ministry are not seeking to be the head of anything. This argument is generated by confusion of both Scripture and what is happening in the here and now, IMHO.

The final answer on headship in terms of the Church is simply that we have but one head of the body of Christ - Christ and Christ alone. Anyone who claims or projects or advocates headship is a usurper of Christ. Any Church with multiple heads is not spoken of postively in Scripture.

It is time to set this false argument aside once and for all.

[WayneV]

For Doug's emphasis to have any relevance to his topic, the the highest IQ of a woman to be ordained would have to be lower than the lowest IQ of a man to be ordained. I highly doubt that all women have a lower IQ than all men!

Batchelor goes further, stressing the biological differences between the sexes. He states that "[M]en have more neurons in their brain, and some of that is because we have more mass and that may mean more nerve endings. But you should also know…and I know this isn’t gonna get me reelected. According to the British Journal of Psychology, [men] on an average score five points higher on an IQ test." He continues, "t’s important to recognize that as we approach this subject that those who are clamoring and campaigning to say that there shouldn’t be any difference in the roles of men and women in the church - we are different. We are gifted differently and God has said there should be a different [sic]."

http://www.atoday.com/content/doug-batchelor-preaches-against-women-pastors

Agape`

[Daryl]

That quote sends a strong message to our church.

I knew a "woman elder" who told me that she agreed that women elders were not biblical, however, she still accepted being ordained as one.

"Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman's rights... might as well sever all connection with the third angel's message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women" (Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1)

regards !

`oG

[teresaq]

so youre pretty much going on others understanding of what that verse means....

then there is one big problem in all the churches.

seems pretty ridiculous to me that a wife would be expected to "learn" from her husband. what if hubby couldnt care less about the Lord? what would she be learning then?

from what i read in the ot God never expected women to answer to their husbands...

ill let you review the angel and manoahs wife. strangely the angel felt no need to give any directions to hubby. both times he appeared to the woman, and in the end told "let her", not "see to it that she"...i think we get a better picture of what God expects taking all the biblical situations into account and not just a couple of "proof" texts.

[teresaq]

Other than honorary degrees, does anyone know what kind of education Doug B has?

that doesnt really bother me...i believe the man to be quite dedicated and sincere, but i dont know how reliant on the Lord he is. that concerns me.

when the "notice" from his ministry came out that cali was on fire because of the gay marriage thing i knew he was maybe not real in touch with reality.

cali is always on fire, and after the gay marriage thing was repealed, sure enough, big fire...

[teresaq]

So, what you and Doug Batchelor are implying is that headship is the rule in today's Gospel...? IOWs, that in order to restore the Gospel Order in the relationships between men and women, ONE of these people, has to submit to leadership.In this case, God deemed that woman be the one to submissive to the leadership of man....Would this be a fair reflection of this situation?

im curious as to where this "headship" comes in generally as in men are the head of women.

according to my bible the a man only gets to be "head" of his own wife, not women in general. yet ive known men who thought all women were under all men.

Eph 5:23 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.