Women's Ordination Sidetrack Topic on Trinity, EGW, etc...

[SivartM]

http://donmilleris.com/2010/05/04/how-to-not-really-win-an-argument/

[Woody]

[Dr. Rich]

Hard to argue with that! Amen CoAspen

[Tom Wetmore]

...Tom Wetmore believes that Phoebe was an "overseer," and that she held this position over the Apostle Paul as well as the other members of the church, although almost all scholars supporting WO believe she was a deacon. Tom also believes Romans 16: 7 is proof that a woman was among the apostles, although the sex of this person is throughly debatable...

Please stop misrepresenting what I have said. You should know very well that I have said far more than that. I am taking your post as ridicule of what I have actually said.

The gender confusion over Junia is more in the minds of those unwilling to accept that a woman could possibly be an apostle. Mary Magdalene was also been referred to as an apostle by the early church.

The patriarchal tradition established by the Catholic Church is very hard to overcome...

[Nic Samojluk]

Quote:

John 3:17: And finally, the Bible says, "Without shedding of blood there is no remission [forgiveness] of sin."

Quote:

Nic Samojluk: Are you suggesting that the “eye for an eye” should rule the day today? From the human point of view, there can be no forgiveness without this type of legal equity because human can’t read the mind and discriminate between true repentance and a fake one.

No. I'm suggesting the meaning of Hebrews 9: 22, 23. It teaches that it was necessary for the Messiah to shed his blood for the remission or forgiveness of sins.

This is also plainly stated in Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 64-67.

John,

Read this text and notice the following:

New American Standard Bible (©1995)

And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. [Heb. 9:22]

It says “according to the law.” Which law, the Mosaic “eye for eye law,” or the law of grace?

Notice also the use of the word “almost.”

And bear in mind that if the penalty must be paid, this negates the notion of forgiveness. My dictionary defines forgiveness as the giving up to the right of collecting the debt. If I forgive you the thousand dollars you owed me, I cannot claim the right to collect said money from you. If a judge says, you are forgiven, he cannot turn around and place someone in jail until the penalty is paid.

[Nic Samojluk]

Where do you find she said this? Do you find a hint of it on PP 64, 65?

[John317]

Quote:

Nic Samojluk (quoting): And according to the Law, one may almost say, all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness. [Heb. 9:22]

It says according to the law. Which law, the Mosaic eye for eye law, or the law of grace?

Could God have saved us apart from the shedding of Christ's blood?

Isn't that one of the chief lessons of the sacrificial system and particularly of the book of Leviticus? For instance, see Lev. 17: 11.

Notice that Heb. 9: 22, 23 is speaking of Christ's work in the heavenly sanctuary, that the things in the heavens are to be cleansed with better sacrifices than those which cleansed the earthly sanctuary. 1 Peter 1: 18, 19 says we were redeemed with the blood of the precious blood of Christ.

Hebrews 9: 22, 23 and 1 Peter 1: 18, 19 teach that it was necessary for the Messiah to shed his blood for the remission or forgiveness of sins.

This is also plainly stated in Patriarchs and Prophets, pp. 64-67.

Do you believe that the death and sacrifice of Christ-- the shedding of His blood-- was unnecessary for our salvation?

[John317]

Quote:

Nic Samojluk (quoting):

"From Olivet Christ looked upon Jerusalem, and with trembling lips and grief-burdened soul he said, if thou hadst known, even thou, in this thy day the things that belong unto thy peace: but now they are hid from thy eyes. He thought of what Jerusalem might have been had she maintained a living connection with God, of what blessings might have rested upon the people had they improved their privileges and blessings they enjoyed through the mercy and grace of a long suffering God. Jerusalem would have become beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth. God would have made Zion his holy habitation. {1888 915.1}"

Sure. This takes us back to Daniel 9: 24-27 where the Jews were given 70 prophetic weeks, or 490 years, in which to accept the Messiah. They could have.

But the question remains: what would have happened to Jesus if the Jews had accepted Him? Would He never have been killed and shed His blood?

Quote:

Nic Samojluk: Remember also that Mary was promised that her son would inherit the throne of David. This prediction failed because, as Ellen White stated, God’s promises and threatenings are alike conditional.

But are you sure that prediction really failed?

Does Ellen White say this particular prophecy will never be fulfilled?

If not, then how does Ellen White say that promise will be fulfilled?

[John317]

Quote:

Tom Wetmore:

The gender confusion over Junia is more in the minds of those unwilling to accept that a woman could possibly be an apostle.

Is that why almost all translations and virtually every Bible commentary and study Bible shows that the name could be either Junia or Junias?

More Greek NT texts show the name to be Junias than Junia.

The SDA BC on Romans-- written by Dr. Graham Maxwell, a friend of God and of women-- says the name could indicate either a male or a female.

Of my 66+ translations, the vast majority of them translate it as a man's name.

These are all facts that clearly point to a reasonable doubt as to whether this individual was a man or a woman.

[doug yowell]

Quote:

Kevin H: And then Elder Wheeler talked about that letter he found that James wrote at the end of his life that the arguments for the trinity were starting to make more sense than the arguments against it.

I wish I could find that letter. Do you suppose the Ellen White Estate would have the letter in their computer files? Today I'm going to the Loma Linda branch of the Estate and will ask them about it. I'll let you know what I find out there.

If any letter of James White has been alluded to or even preserved,I'm pretty sure the Heritage Room will have it on file or in the vault.Go John!

[doug yowell]

[

,

Remember also that Mary was promised that her son would inherit the throne of David. This prediction failed because, as Ellen White stated, God’s promises and threatenings are alike conditional.

Quote:

He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High. The Lord God will give him the throne of his father David, [Luke 1:32]

Quote:

But has the Word of the Lord failed? Never! It should be remembered that the promises and the threatenings of God are alike conditional. {Ev 695.1}

Are you sure the promise failed??? "Now David himself said in the Book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord,sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool." Therefore David calls Him Lord; how is He then his Son? (Luke 22:41-44) "From this man's seed, ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE,God raised up for Israel a Savior-Jesus..." (Acts13:22,23) John 18:37 19:19 Acts 2:29-36!!!!!!

[John317]

Quote:

John317: ...Tom Wetmore believes that Phoebe was an "overseer," and that she held this position over the Apostle Paul as well as the other members of the church, although almost all scholars supporting WO believe she was a deacon. Tom also believes Romans 16: 7 is proof that a woman was among the apostles, although the sex of this person is throughly debatable...

Quote:

Tom Wetmore: Please stop misrepresenting what I have said.

I'm not aware of how I've misrepresented what you've said. If I have, though, please show me and I'll gladly apologize and correct any posts.

Quote:

Tom Wetmore: You should know very well that I have said far more than that.

I didn't suggest that this is all you've said, but I do believe that it sums up accurately the major points you made about Phoebe and Iounias.

Quote:

Tom Wetmore: I am taking your post as ridicule of what I have actually said.

I assure you, there's no ridicule intended. Please show me how my words have ridiculed you.

Quote:

Tom Wetmore: The gender confusion over Junia is more in the minds of those unwilling to accept that a woman could possibly be an apostle.

Is that why almost all translations and virtually every Bible commentary and study Bible shows that the name could be either Junia or Junias?

More Greek NT texts show the name to be Junias than Junia.

The SDA BC on Romans-- written by Dr. Graham Maxwell, a friend of God and of women-- says the name could indicate either a male or a female.

Of my 66+ translations, the vast majority of them translate it as a man's name.

These are all facts that clearly point to a reasonable doubt as to whether this individual was a man or a woman.

Quote:

Mary Magdalene was also been referred to as an apostle by the early church.

Let's consider this. Please say more about it.

Quote:

Tom Wetmore: The patriarchal tradition established by the Catholic Church is very hard to overcome...

Actually, the "partriarchal tradition" goes back to the time when God placed Eve in subjection to her husband immediately after the Fall.

Please see PP 58, 59 and AH 211-228.

Quote:

And the Lord said, "Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee." In the creation God had made her the equal of Adam. Had they remained obedient to God--in harmony with His great law of love--they would ever have been in harmony with each other; but sin had brought discord, and now their union could be maintained and harmony preserved only by submission on the part of the one or the other. Eve had been the first in transgression; and she had fallen into temptation by separating from her companion, contrary to the divine direction. It was by her solicitation that Adam sinned, and she was now placed in subjection to her husband. Had the principles joined in the law of God been cherished by the fallen race, this sentence, though growing out of the results of sin, would have proved a blessing to them; but man's abuse of the supremacy thus given him has too often rendered the lot of woman very bitter and made her life a burden.

Eve had been perfectly happy by her husband's side in her Eden home; but, like restless modern Eves, she was flattered with the hope of entering a higher sphere than that which God had assigned her. In attempting to rise above her original position, she fell far below it. A similar result will be reached by all who are unwilling to take up cheerfully their life duties in accordance with God's plan. In their efforts to reach positions for which He has not fitted them, many are leaving vacant the place where they might be a blessing. In their desire for a higher sphere, many have sacrificed true womanly dignity and nobility of character, and have left undone the very work that Heaven appointed them.

[John317]

Quote:

Nic Samojluk:

Remember also that Mary was promised that her son would inherit the throne of David. This prediction failed because, as Ellen White stated, God's promises and threatenings are alike conditional.

Quote:

doug yowell: Are you sure the promise failed??? "Now David himself said in the Book of Psalms: The Lord said to my Lord,sit at My right hand, Till I make Your enemies Your footstool." Therefore David calls Him Lord; how is He then his Son? (Luke 22:41-44) "From this man's seed, ACCORDING TO THE PROMISE,God raised up for Israel a Savior-Jesus..." (Acts13:22,23) John 18:37 19:19 Acts 2:29-36!!!!!!

Excellent response, Doug. Jesus is today sitting on David's throne, and eventually this throne will be on earth for eternity.

Nic, I would like to know if Ellen White says the prediction failed. How does she say the prophecy is being, or will be, fulfilled? Can you find a quote?

[Kevin H]

As for the strongest evidence for women's ordination: I believe there is a lot of evidence starting where I'm too weak to present fairly but at least some evidence that there were priestist in the Old Testament. I've heard enough to catch my attention but not enough for me to even start to teach. So while I find this convincing to me, I know that the rest don't have the evidence so I'll just lay this point to the side.

Another point is the theology of the blue thread in the garment that both men and women wore. In the ancient world only ordained priest were allowed to have this thread. For God to have everyone men and women wearing this thread goes along with the idea that God chose them to be a nation of priests. It would be compaible to today commanding an entire nation of people to wear clerical collars. Also one of the things that (I'm thinking his name was Rabbi Ben Serah-- the Rabbi that had a big infuence on the school of Hillel) was going after was to have that blue thread removed from women's clothing and only have the men wear it as he only wanted men to be ordained. Here we see the word of God changed to the tradition of man.

Then I talked about Mary sitting at the feet of Jesus and the debate of women's ordination in Jesus' day, and how people of different status were to react around a Rabbi, and how Mary did not follow Martha for the role of women in the Hillel model, nor did she stand like a layman in any school would have done, but sat and Rabbis would ordain by having the one ordained by sitting at their feet. (Usually 12 full time the same sex as the Rabbi and 70 part time which in the Hillel school would only be men, but in Shammai and other schools could be men and women, and of course that they had women Rabbis back then. Since this was a hot topic if Jesus was against women's ordination that he would not allow Mary to be in the hot pototato seat that would look to everyone who saw and read like he was a Rabbi ordaining a person, he should have avoided all apperence of evil.) And at the resurection Jesus told Mary to "Apostle" the disciples and this spreading the news of Jesus resurection is the orgin of the word and title Apostle. An Apostle was one who had actually seen Jesus in person and could tell about their contact with him and had contact with the resurected Lord. Apostle was even higher than prophet (now some Apostles had both offices)

When Paul wrote Romans, he had not yet been to Rome. While he knew some of the people from when their paths crossed, basically he did not know them. He was not thanking the women in that chapter for the nice Sabbath dinner he had with them. He only knew their reputation as fellow ministers. And he starts out the personal part to the leader of the church Phebe. That the word translated decon and deconess is also in Biblical translations translated Elder and there is no reason why she should not be called an Elder. That the linguistic structure of the chapter indicates that she was the elder, the senior pastor, of the church in Rome. That if it was not for a womans name that the text would have been translated Elder or Pastor.

Fleming points out that the arguments that Junia could be male originated in the (I think it was the 1300s) but by Catholic leaders who did not want a woman to be the top apostle. When Dr. Maxwell wrote the commentary, all good comentaries by the time they are made are already 30 years out of date, so with the SDA BC was a reflection of cutting edge Bible study in like the 1920 and 30s. (hey, even my posts here are mostly knowlege from the 1970s and early 80s with just a trickel of the knowlege that we have leared since then, and even that trickel tends to be from the 1990s. My most up to date information is about 20 years out of date). Dr. Maxwell wrote that when we did not have the evidence that the question about Junia's sex was only from something like 1300 that previously it was clearly female.

Another major point is the linguistic structure and the narative of Priscilla and Aquela. When Baranbas was the leader it was Barnabas and Saul. When Paul took over it became Paul and Barnabas. When talked about as husband and wife it was Aquela and Priscilla. When talked about a ministerial team it is Priscilla and Aquela, indicating that Priscilla was the sr. pastor and Aquela was the assistant pastor. Priscilla had authority over Apollos and other men who she taught and Paul had no problem with her authority, thus apprently contradicting the anti-women's leadership texts.

Historical studies of Paul's apprently anti-ordination and anti-women leadership proof texts find that they fit specific problems of the congragations he wrote it to, and that his regular pratice, with people like Priscilla and Lydia and Phebe and Junia indicate that either Paul kept contradicting himself, or those verses are dealing with specific problems and we are missapplying the texts in our anti-women's ordination interpetation.

So I am in a positon where Jesus and Paul both appear to support women's ordination. Where in the Old Testament women had to wear an artical of clothing that only ordained priests would wear, that there are at least hints of female priests in the Old Testament. How Judaism had ordained women Rabbis and the liberals in Jesus' day wanted to stop the practice. Meanwhile when I see the proof texts against women's ordination, they are given only to congragations that had specific problems that those texts fit perfectly, and that if we don't interpet those texts in light of those problems, then we are stuck with Paul apprently contradicting himself. Since I do not believe that Paul contradicted himself, I will limit those verses to the historic problems that those churches were facing at that time and see that general speaking Paul was a supporter of women and women's ordination.

[Musicman1228]

Insecure men refuse to believe that women, any woman, should be considered equal with men such that they be given the privilege and responsibility of a leading pastor. Why should this not be the case? After all insecure men have been holding women in servitude, virtual slavery, for thousands of years. Insecure men refuse to believe that a 'weaker vessel' has any quality of logic or reason as that of a male, and therefore set them on a pedestal which glorifies their sex rather than their intellect. Weak women allow this all to frequently, choosing sexual admiration over spiritual content.

If you ask a Christian man today if he believes that God created men and women equal he will most likely say 'yes', but then EVE sinned and God punished her by placing her (in every way) under Adam. The former is true, the latter is an abject lie.

There is a God in Heaven that created mankind in His image and after His likeness-male and FEMALE. Therefore, there must logically be a part of God that has feminine characteristics. Yet when asked what part of God this would be they will tell you that they don't know because God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, all of which are male.

If there is a representative family in Heaven then this cannot be true. The logical explanation is that the Holy Spirit is the feminine characteristic of God because it is she that gives birth not only to Jesus Christ (Rev. 12:5), but to his brothers and sisters (Rev. 12:17). ONLY a woman can give birth, so when we are born of the Spirit of God we are born of the Woman of Rev.12, just as was Jesus Christ Himself.

Since women are as much a part of the Godhead as are men then there is no heavenly reason for them to be declared 'second class' to men here on earth. Men need to grow up and women need to recognize that they are as much a part of God as men, and not put up with any degrading or denigrating thoughts or actions from these men.

This concept would go a long way to promoting equality of thought and action in the relationship between men and women.

(Most women that I have shared this concept with LOVE IT. Most men HATE it. All who hate this concept quote from Paul as the reason why women are inferior to men. I wonder why?)

[John317]

Quote:

Kevin H: As for the strongest evidence for women's ordination: I believe there is a lot of evidence starting where I'm too weak to present fairly but at least some evidence that there were priestist in the Old Testament. I've heard enough to catch my attention but not enough for me to even start to teach. So while I find this convincing to me, I know that the rest don't have the evidence so I'll just lay this point to the side.

Are these priestess' ones that God called to their work?

Do you know of a text that reflects this?

Let me know if you ever come across specific evidence of this. I'm very interested.

Would this, then, be your strongest evidence?

Quote:

Kevin H: .... And at the resurection Jesus told Mary to "Apostle" the disciples and this spreading the news of Jesus resurection is the orgin of the word and title Apostle.

Could you list the verse that you have in mind? Do you mean John 20: 17?

It is true that the women were the first to proclaim the resurrection of the Lord. God was wonderful to give women the privilege of doing that.

Quote:

Kevin H: When Paul wrote Romans, ..... he starts out the personal part to the leader of the church Phebe.

Paul knew Phoebe quite well. It looks like you are saying Paul did not know Phoebe and that she was the leader of the church at Rome. Is this what you mean?

The text says she was a diakonon of the church in Cenchrea, a city 6 miles from Corinth. Notice it does not call her "the diakonon" which it would have if she were the only one in the local church.

Quote:

Kevin H: That the word translated decon and deconess is also in Biblical translations translated Elder and there is no reason why she should not be called an Elder.

That must be a mistake, Kevin. What translation translates the word diakonon as "elder"?

The Greek word used in Romans 16: 1 is diakonon, and this word is always translated "servant," "deacon," "deaconess," or "minister."

The word "elder" is translated from the Greek word, "presbyteros" (Strong's #4245). For instance, it is the word used in Acts 11: 30; 14: 23. Notice this is a totally different word from from the word used in Romans 16: 1, diakonon, which means "deacon" or "servant" or "minister."

Therefore the reason Phoebe is not called an "elder" is quite simply the fact that the Bible never refers to her as an elder.

But again, could you please quote and name the translation which refers to Phoebe as an "elder"?

Quote:

Kevin H: That the linguistic structure of the chapter indicates that she was the elder, the senior pastor, of the church in Rome. That if it was not for a womans name that the text would have been translated Elder or Pastor.

Are you certain of this? Are you sure that Phoebe should be called "elder" or "pastor"?

Again, could you give a reference for this? I've never heard of it before, even though I collect translations and often read different ones.

The word "pastor" is translated from the word poimen (Strong's #4161) in Eph 4: 11. This Greek word also refers to shepherds, herdsmen, guardians, superintendents,etc. See Matt. 9: 36; 25: 32; John 10: 11, 14, 16. It only refers to a leader in the church in Eph. 4: 11, where it really means a "pastor-teacher."

In view of the above, I don't believe it's true that if it wasn't for a woman's name, the individual would have been called an elder or pastor. If they were called by that title in that verse, it would have been a big mistake, whether they were a man or a woman.

Please do some research on this and get back with me. Let me know what you find out.

Quote:

Kevin H: Fleming points out that the arguments that Junia could be male originated in the (I think it was the 1300s) but by Catholic leaders who did not want a woman to be the top apostle.

This is clearly shown to be a false argument by virtue of the fact that Origin (d. 252 AD)wrote in the first commentary on Romans that the individual in Romans 16: 7 is a male. And as has been pointed out before, a Christian bishop, Epiphanius (b. 315 AD) wrote about Iounias as a male, and said that he had become a bishop of Apameia of Syria. Epiphanius wrote this in the Index of the Disciples, 125. 19-20.

As you can see, these men lived almost one thousand years before the 1300s.

Evidence for this can be accessed online in a book titled, Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, ed. John Pipeer and Wayne Grudem. See the chapter, "An Overview of the Central Concerns."

Quote:

Kevin H: When Dr. Maxwell wrote the commentary, all good comentaries by the time they are made are already 30 years out of date, so with the SDA BC was a reflection of cutting edge Bible study in like the 1920 and 30s. ......Dr. Maxwell wrote that when we did not have the evidence that the question about Junia's sex was only from something like 1300 that previously it was clearly female.

Why, then, are there still new translations being printed with the name being given as Junias? See, for instance, The Voice New Testament, a translation that was recently published by Thomas Nelson, having been translated by 21 noted Bible scholars.

Also, why are there still Greek NT texts being published with the name as Junias?

Can you tell what Greek manuscripts have been discovered since the 1950s when the SDA BC was published, which make it certain the name is female?

As recently as 1975, the United Bible Societies Greek NT showed that the editors of that text were certain the name Iounias was male.

Translations and study Bibles continue to be written and published which tell the reader the name could be either male or female.

[John317]

Quote:

Musicman1228: Insecure men refuse to believe that women, any woman, should be considered equal with men such that they be given the privilege and responsibility of a leading pastor. Why should this not be the case? After all insecure men have been holding women in servitude, virtual slavery, for thousands of years. Insecure men refuse to believe that a 'weaker vessel' has any quality of logic or reason as that of a male, and therefore set them on a pedestal which glorifies their sex rather than their intellect. Weak women allow this all to frequently, choosing sexual admiration over spiritual content.

If you ask a Christian man today if he believes that God created men and women equal he will most likely say 'yes', but then EVE sinned and God punished her by placing her (in every way) under Adam. The former is true, the latter is an abject lie.

There is a God in Heaven that created mankind in His image and after His likeness-male and FEMALE. Therefore, there must logically be a part of God that has feminine characteristics. Yet when asked what part of God this would be they will tell you that they don't know because God is Father, Son and Holy Spirit, all of which are male.

If there is a representative family in Heaven then this cannot be true. The logical explanation is that the Holy Spirit is the feminine characteristic of God because it is she that gives birth not only to Jesus Christ (Rev. 12:5), but to his brothers and sisters (Rev. 12:17). ONLY a woman can give birth, so when we are born of the Spirit of God we are born of the Woman of Rev.12, just as was Jesus Christ Himself.

Since women are as much a part of the Godhead as are men then there is no heavenly reason for them to be declared 'second class' to men here on earth. Men need to grow up and women need to recognize that they are as much a part of God as men, and not put up with any degrading or denigrating thoughts or actions from these men.

This concept would go a long way to promoting equality of thought and action in the relationship between men and women.

(Most women that I have shared this concept with LOVE IT. Most men HATE it. All who hate this concept quote from Paul as the reason why women are inferior to men. I wonder why?)

No comment needed.

I wonder if those who support WO in the SDA church agree with and appreciate this post.

I hope not, but then perhaps so.

[John317]

Quote:

Kevin H: Historical studies of Paul's apprently anti-ordination and anti-women leadership proof texts find that they fit specific problems of the congragations he wrote it to,

Please follow up on this comment and show from the texts themselves what evidence there is to support your thesis. For example, look closely at 1 Cor. 11, 14 and 1 Tim. 2, and let us see your reasoning. What is in the texts themselves indicating the problem was limited to a local congregation?

Quote:

Kevin H: So I am in a positon where Jesus and Paul both appear to support women's ordination.

You mean on the basis of your evidence and arguments on this post?

I hope you revisit them before you completely make up your mind about this. For instance, look again at what you said about Phoebe being an "elder" or "pastor."

Also reexamine your idea that the arguments about Junia's being male "originated in the 1300s by Catholic leaders who did not want a woman to be the top apostle."

Quote:

Kevin H: Where in the Old Testament women had to wear an artical of clothing that only ordained priests would wear, that there are at least hints of female priests in the Old Testament.

This "hint" is probably not a very strong argument for WO.

Quote:

Kevin H: How Judaism had ordained women Rabbis and the liberals in Jesus' day wanted to stop the practice. Meanwhile when I see the proof texts against women's ordination, they are given only to congragations that had specific problems that those texts fit perfectly, and that if we don't interpet those texts in light of those problems, then we are stuck with Paul apprently contradicting himself. Since I do not believe that Paul contradicted himself, I will limit those verses to the historic problems that those churches were facing at that time and see that general speaking Paul was a supporter of women and women's ordination.

OK, is this the best evidence you know of for WO in the SDA church today? Anything you would like to add to this?

Are these things that you learned while studying at the seminary?

[Tom Wetmore]

As someone so aptly pointed out, "Tradition infests the Church and is as hard to eradicate as cockroaches..."

Translators have a very hard time breaking with tradition. Where did all that tradition come from? How many centuries did those who had a strangle hold on Scripture and its interpretation prevent it being translated into the language of the common man? The first English translation was nearly a millenia and a half after the last of the canon was written in ancient Greek. And that had to depend on the traditional interpretation of those ancient languages.

[Tom Wetmore]

Quote:

Tom Wetmore: The gender confusion over Junia is more in the minds of those unwilling to accept that a woman could possibly be an apostle.

Is that why almost all translations and virtually every Bible commentary and study Bible shows that the name could be either Junia or Junias?

More Greek NT texts show the name to be Junias than Junia...

And there is part of the problem. Mere numbers do not tell the whole story. The majority of the Greek texts today are of much more recent vintage, long after the "error" occurred and merely repeat the majority error. The earliest manuscripts, of which there are fewer in number, provide a more likely and reliable and time proximate transcription of the original. And those earliest manuscripts are more consistant that this person was male. And the outside evidence and other early church writings tend more toward identifying this apostle as female.

Regarding the apostle Mary, this from Wikipedia:

Quote:

According to Harvard theologian Karen King, Mary Magdalene was a prominent disciple and leader of one wing of the early Christian movement that promoted women's leadership.[9] King cites references in the Gospel of John that the risen Jesus gives Mary special teaching and commissions her as an "Apostle to the Apostles." Mary is the first to announce the resurrection and to fulfill the role of an Apostle,someone sent by Jesus with a special message or commission, to spread the gospel ("good news") and to lead the early church. The first message she was given was to announce to Peter and the others that "He is risen!"[Mt. 28:7] [Mk. 16:9-11] [Lk. 24:10] [Jn. 20:2] Although the term is not specifically used of her (though, in Eastern Christianity she is referred to as "Equal to the Apostles"). Later tradition, however, names her as "the apostle to the apostles." King writes that the strength of this literary tradition makes it possible to suggest that historically Mary was a prophetic visionary and leader within one sector of the early Christian movement after the death of Jesus.[9]

Asbury Theological Seminary Bible scholar Ben Witherington III confirms the New Testament account of Mary Magdalene as historical: "Mary was an important early disciple and witness for Jesus."[47] He continues, "There is absolutely no early historical evidence that Mary's relationship with Jesus was anything other than that of a disciple to her Master teacher."

You can go to the article and look at the footnoted references. The word "apostle" literally means "one who is sent." Jesus referred to having sent out his disciples, using the verb form of the word. And Jesus likewise sent Mary back to the disciples, hence the "apostle to the apostles" reference. But other early Christian writings do tend to confirm this status for Mary in the early church. I would suggest that the fact that gives rise to the notion of her as the "apostle to the apostles" is very consistent with what EGW says about Jesus comissioning Mary to be the first to preach to gospel of the risen Saviour.

[Nic Samojluk]

Dr. Rich,

You made the following numbered statements:

1.

Quote:

Nic, please check out Luke 1:35. You will see that BOTH the Father (Most High) AND the Holy Spirit are responsible for placing Michael, as a zygote, into the womb of Mary. The 'offspring' here is called "HOLY OFFSPRING" and shall be called the "SON of GOD".

I believe that you are misinterpreting the passage found in Luke 1:35. We need to remember that Hebrew literature was very fond of parallelism, where one idea was rephrased with another one for emphasis. This is very evident in the Psalms. It is also evident in the Matthew passage where there is a reference to Jesus riding on two animals at the same time, which is very difficult unless you are a circus clown.

Evidently Matthew ignored this feature of Hebrew literature. The “Holy Spirit” and the “Most High’ is one and the same. The repetition is for emphasis and does not indicate two entities. Here is the text. If you accept this explanation, it will help you understand Scripture.

Quote:

The angel answered and said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; and for that reason the holy Child shall be called the Son of God. [Luke 1:35]

2.

Quote:

In John 3, Jesus told Nicodemus that to even see the Kingdom of Heaven one had to be BORN OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. Common sense would--or should tell you that only women can provide this 'birth'-right?

Jesus stated that in heaven we are going to be like angels. There will not be sexual activity in heaven. Angels are sexless. There is no sex in heaven. Assigning sexual roles to God makes no sense to me.

3.

Quote:

Now, if that is not enough evidence, the go to Genesis 3:14-15 where it should be clear that God is talking to the serpent (Satan) and says that God will put enmity between YOU (Satan) and the WOMAN (Holy Spirit) and between your (Satan's) seed and Her (Holy Spirit's) seed...

The woman in Genesis is not the Holy Spirit, but rather Eve and the church.

4.

Quote:

Verse 17 of Rev. 12 shows us that those who are born of the Holy Spirit are the ones who are also born of the Woman of Revelation 12, which would make them brothers and sisters of Jesus Christ.

The woman in Rev.12 symbolizes the church.

5.

Quote:

Is this enough Nic?

No, it’s not enough. If you study the Bible from my perspective, you will realize that the Holy Spirit expression is used anytime the presence and power of God is manifested in an invisible manner. When such manifestation is visible, then the Bible writers use the term, angel of the Lord, Michael the archangel, Lord, or God.

When Gideon met an angel, later on we discover it was God. When Jacob strove with an angel, we later discover it was God.

In the book of Acts there is a reference to the power of God. Said power of god was God’s presence on the day of Pentecost. There is no need to create a third person of the Godhead. In this respect the Adventist pioneers were closer to the truth than we are. The Trinity doctrine was created in the fourth century and it was borrowed from paganism.

There is God the Father, God the Son, the Angel Gabriel, and the rest of God’s angels. The Holy Spirit is used whenever God’s power and presence is manifested in an invisible manner. This is why Jesus compared the HS to the wind. We can’t see it but we feel its power. Gen. 1:2 can correctly be translated as follows: “God’s presence” or even “God’s wind.”

Quote:

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth." [Acts 1:8]

Look up the many references to “power” in the Bible and notice that they are quite often connected to the power of the HS.

[Kevin H]

John, keep trying for the Fleming material. There are other studies out there too and Fleming's notebook will point you to some of these. And also yes I had professors at AUC and Andrews which would point out things that supported women's ordination. If I recall correctly some of those refered to as women priests in my AUC and Andrews classes MIGHT include Zipporah and Jael among others.

[Kevin H]

The Godhead transends male and female. All three members have male and female qualities. All three are sometimes refered to in female terminology and other times in male theology. In the New Testament we have God the Parent, The woman wisdom, the great Logos as the man Jesus, and in the New Testament the Holy Spirit is always put in the Greek terminology of a real MALE person. We cannot go any further than this.

To limit the members of the Godhead to one sex or the other is to limit them and thus idolotry.

As for the woman of Revelation 12, it is an incomplete story. The woman runs into the wilderness and you should see coming across the screen "To be continued"

The story continues in Revelation 17. In Revelation 12 God's pure woman runs into the wilderness being chased by the red dragon, in Revelation 17 a woman rides a red beast from the wilderness. When John saw who she was he was baffled and shocked. It was the same woman! In the Old Testament a pure woman is God's people at their better times and God's people are pictured as whores at their worst times. This is continued Old Testament immagry of Judio-Christianity. It is not two different women, it is the rest of the story, full of the same imagry, Revelation 17 is the rest of the story that was started in Revelation 12.

Once again too many Christians because of the rapture doctrine are expecting to be raptured away before the Antichrist comes. Thus they don't have the study to keep their guard up.

[Nic Samojluk]

John,

You stated:

Quote:

We can conclude from this and other statements from Ellen White that she believed the Holy Spirit was the Third Person of the Godhead (Ev. 617), and that the Holy Spirit is as much a person as the Father and Christ are persons. She refers to the Godhead as "the eternal Godhead," and to "three great personal diginitaries of heaven." See Lift Him Up, p. 148; SDA BC Vol. 7, page 959, par. 8.

I am aware of what Ellen White believed. Nevertheless, for some reason, she avoided the use of the Trinity term. She also stated that in her book Counsels to Editors that there are truths to be discovered and that we are not to assume that we are free from error. Besides, she told us that if her Testimonies are not according to the Bible, we should reject them. I do follow said directive. I try to establish everything she has taught with the Bible.

Quote:

If the Testimonies speak not according to this word of God, reject them..--Testimonies, vol. 5, p. 691. {3SM 32.4}

I believe that there is enough evidence to show that Ellen White was not infallible, and that on certain minor details she did err.

My understanding is that whenever the Bible makes reference to God’s presence and power in an invisible manner, then the Holy Spirit phrase is used, and when his presence is visible then terms like “the angel of the Lord,” “the Lord,” “Michael the archangel,” or God is used. On many instances we find a reference to an angel and later on we discover that it was the Lord. Other times, we see a reference to the angel of the Lord and later we discover that it is the HS. Read Actos 8, for an example, or the story of Gideon.

Quote:

26But an angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza: the same is desert. 27And he arose and went: and behold, a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who was over all her treasure, who had come to Jerusalem to worship; 28and he was returning and sitting in his chariot, and was reading the prophet Isaiah. 29And the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this chariot.

Notice how the term “angel” is replaced later on with “the Spirit.” This means to me that what was a visible manifestation of God’s presence became invisible.

In the book of Acts we find a reference to “the Power of God.” We later discover that said power turned out to be the HS. Study the use of the “power” or “power of God” in the new Testament. I discovered that there is often an equivalence between the power of God and the HS.

Understood in this manner, the mystery of the HS identity disappears. This is why we find the Angel Gabriel performing the task of revealing the truth to Daniel—a role assigned to the HS by Saint Peter. And the same explains why the chain of revelation found in Rev. 1 doesn’t even mention the HS. God’s angel is used instead.

Quote:

1The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show unto his servants, even the things which must shortly come to pass: and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John;

The revelatory chain is God, Jesus, angel, and John. Why would the Bible ignore the role of the HS in the most important prophetic books of the Bible: Daniel and Revelation? The answer seems to be. The Holy Spirit, or “Spirit” [Hebrew Ruach} is used to symbolized the presence and power of God. The term “Ruach” has many connotations in the original: Spirit, breath, presence, wind and so on. When the term Spirit is accompanied by “Holy” it means God’s power or presence is manifested in an invisible manner. This is to make sure that the “evil spirits” are not meant.

This is why Jesus used the wind as a symbol of the work of the HS. Its work is felt but unseen.

[Dr. Rich]

Kevin wrote: "As for the woman of Revelation 12, it is an incomplete story. The woman runs into the wilderness and you should see coming across the screen "To be continued"

Hey Kevin, I have good news for you-that is IF you want it. IF you use the 7 rules for understanding prophecy then you would understand and once you understand it forms a perfect picture of the story of restoration. However, there is good news and bad news about this. The bad news is that none of the wicked will understand. The good news is that those with insight (the wise) from the Kingdom of Heaven will understand.