Another Union Affirms Ordination of Women

[olger]

I find it interesting that people start saying that having ordained women homosexual pastors is next if women are ordained. I know many godly women pastors who preach the word as is taught in the bible. Do not start putting that falsehood doctrine that women being ordained means homosexual pastors next. Yes I know there is a movement to have that happen but I doubt the church will go that far. Already in my area some pastors were fired for going so far as urging the acceptance of homosexuals in church and not trying to reform them.

The pastor of the Hollywood church was terminated for going to far on that point.

And that from a conference who supports womens ordination. So I would not go so far as you guys are that womens ordination means homosexual and lesbian pastors. That is just scare tactics.

It appears to me, Bruce, that you are overlooking the very nature of progressivism, and its appetite for change. Mixed with a liberal and world-loving throng, this change inevitably leads down. Down.

Feminism and Homosexuality share several vital characteristics. One does not automatically lead to the other in punctiliar fashion (in certain time frame), but evidence is mounting that both are points along an incline. Feminism paves the way for the normalization of homosexuality. Why? Because they both share the same ethical trajectory. I am currently researching for an article on this important topic. Suffice it to say that what I am finding is several very interesting tributaries between them, not the least is what each group says about the other. That in itself will occupy a third of my forthcoming article.

Blessings,

`G

[Gordon1]

Quote:

...just scare tactics..

No, it is the process of incrementalism.

We will adjust to full-on abomination, even embrace it.

Watch on.

[olger]

No, it is the process of incrementalism.

We will adjust to full-on abomination, even embrace it.

Watch on.

Absolutely.

[Gordon1]

Yes olger.

Dissent is not allowed; descent will follow.

[Woody]

Quote:

not the least is what each group says about the other

Gossip really should not be our study. What is important is what scripture says. And scripture is very clear on this issue. Praying our church will give this study and gain understanding.

[Woody]

HMS Richards support a Biblical perspective on this issue and that's good enough for me.

[olger]

Gossip has NOTHING to do with this.

When EGW mentions the Methodists in {GC88 259.2} was she gossiping. Of course not.

That is just hyperbole thrown out to confuse the discussion.

You may go now,

`G

[olger]

HMS Richards support a Biblical perspective on this issue and that's good enough for me.

Well, he was against women's ordination anyway, for whatever that's worth.

[Tom Wetmore]

Great. And I suspect that his son may have disagreed with him. But, speaking of dead guys' opinions, I am quite certain Uriah Smith and James White supported WO.

OK. So there.

[olger]

Tit for tat.

Give me your address, I'll send you a gift to cheer you up.

repent always,

`G

[Neil D]

Quote:

It appears to me, Bruce, that you are overlooking the very nature of progressivism, and its appetite for change. Mixed with a liberal and world-loving throng, this change inevitably leads down. Down.

Feminism and Homosexuality share several vital characteristics. One does not automatically lead to the other in punctiliar fashion (in certain time frame), but evidence is mounting that both are points along an incline. Feminism paves the way for the normalization of homosexuality. Why? Because they both share the same ethical trajectory. I am currently researching for an article on this important topic. Suffice it to say that what I am finding is several very interesting tributaries between them, not the least is what each group says about the other. That in itself will occupy a third of my forthcoming article

This is extremely subjective and does not with any accuracy lend itself to the reality of things as they are...IOWs, you are full of BiaS....I know that that sounds rather crude, but the fact of the matter is that it's true....It's your bias' that are showing, not facts....

Consider from your own words..."Feminism and Homosexuality share several vital characteristics." Which ones??? "One does not automatically lead to the other..." That's a relief... "feminism paves the way for the normalization of homosexuality",In what way???No evidence of this.... "They ...share the same ethical trajectory" What 'ethical trajectory'?

This is all nonsense....It's on the same level as me saying that Conservative interpretations and behaviors of the bible must be extremely literal... The conclusion is that if we do that, all followers of Christ must then die on a Cross....

[olger]

Hi Neil,

Sounds like your patience is a bit thin - how about you wait for the article and then you can stomp on it?

I'll link to it when it goes online.

Or submit an article of your own to me and I'll forward it to ADvindicate. Calling your bluff here.

Have a great day!

`G

[Woody]

Great. And I suspect that his son may have disagreed with him. But, speaking of dead guys' opinions, I am quite certain Uriah Smith and James White supported WO.

OK. So there.

The fact that HMS Richards and Uriah Smith and James White all supported WO .... is a good reason for the rest of us to do so also.

[debbym]

Quote:

The SDA leadership will choose unity and a large membership over clear Bible direction every time. Homosexual ordination is next.

why would an ordination of a female be any more likely to result in homosexual ordination then ordination of a male?

i would be surprised if in the history of the church not one male pastor who was ordain was not also incidentally inclined to homosexuality.

if it were not a job security issue, i imagine we might hear confessions also.

we are not saved because we have such great behavior, we are saved because we accept Christ's sacrifice for us, and surrender our will to His will, which is for us to be saved.

anyone of any kind of past, or of any kind of sinful condition can be saved, and live for the glory of God, anyone.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

why would an ordination of a female be any more likely to result in homosexual ordination then ordination of a male?

Really! What a novel thought!

(tic)

[Woody]

Quote:

Really! What a novel thought!

Yes. As for me and mine - we will abide by scripture and not be deterred by the naysayers.

[Hair]

Many of the arguments used to support WO can also be used to support HO... and you had better believe that they are waiting and hoping for WO so they can use the same arguments as a stepping stone.

I think there is a common misconception that is purposely thrown around by pro WO people; and that is that anti WO people are against women teaching, helping, ministering, and when appropriate, preaching in the church. That is simply not so... but to ordain a female as the "HEAD" of the church seems to run against the entire grain of the Bible.... and if that thinking is just "outdated because of the time and culture in which the Bible was written and we need to get modern" well then I can see a train load of things waiting at the church door to ride in on that logic.

The statements about EGW being FOR WO should not be blatantly stated as fact. Whether she was for or against WO is a highly debated issue as well. EGW was a prophet, there were several women prophets (9) in the Bible. Women prophets are Biblical, a prophet is a different avenue than being ordained as the leader of a church or churches... when we compare pastors to EGW we are comparing apples to oranges.

OGLER is correct, those who think that there is no threat in HO following WO simply do not understand how this typical and familiar "progressive" pattern unfolds.

One of the biggest dangers in our church right now is trying to be "hip" and keep up with the world while the scriptures are leaving us behind. People of the Word, not people of the World folks. Why did it take us 150 years to find out we were wrong on this one?... I don't think we were. If we were wrong on that, then what else may we be wrong about? Surely there's others... maybe the investigative judgment, maybe the trinity, maybe homosexuals, who knows?? I don't think so.

As far as pastors being fired for sympathizing with homosexuals; all that proves is that we are surely under attack already. I'm sure we could look back through our history and find pastors that have been in hot water or fired for allowing certain things in the church that we freely accept today that we shouldn't.

[Stan]

Have not seen any pro say "outdated because of the time and culture in which the Bible was written and we need to get modern"

[CoAspen]

The HO issue is brought up a lot when discussing WO.....can anyone explain why that happens...in a reasonable, logical manner? Or maybe it is just used as a large paintbrush when all else fails? Sounds to me like lazy thought processes when looking for factual data.

I submit that it is intentionally used to derail thoughtful thinking and hoped to put others on the defensive about support of WO.

[CoAspen]

Quote:

Why did it take us 150 years to find out we were wrong on this one?... I don't think we were. If we were wrong on that, then what else may we be wrong about?

So you disagree with EGW when she spoke about changing our beliefs/views/opinion when continuing the search? Do you believe belief systems are dynamic or static? Do you believe we have learned all there is? Or is it that we have more to learn.....unless it disagrees with preconceived beliefs?

So, yes, there may be other things that we are 'wrong' about, only time will tell!!!

[Gibs]

Have not seen any pro say "outdated because of the time and culture in which the Bible was written and we need to get modern"

Maybe that is what is happening Stan, the church going modern when it ought to be going Godly and Biblical.

1Jo 4:4 ¶ Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them: because greater is he that is in you, than he that is in the world.

1Jo 4:5 They are of the world: therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them.

1Jo 4:6 We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error.

[debbym]

Quote:

Many of the arguments used to support WO can also be used to support HO...

i am not aware of any of these arguments.... could you help me with this?

[olger]

I'll provide a quick one, Deb on the driving concepts of ideological feminism and gender fluidity. There is much, much more I could share on this topic, but these are a few snippets. The things I am learning in my research are mind-boggling, to put it mildly.

The postmodern worldview embraces the notion of gender as a social construct. That is, postmodernists argue that our notions of what it means to be male and female are entirely due to what society has constructed as its theories of masculinity and femininity. Of course, the social construction of all truth is central to the postmodern mind, but when the issue is gender, the arguments become more volatile. The feminist argument is reducible to the claim that patriarchal forces in society have defined men and women so that all the differences ascribed to women represent efforts by men to protect their position of privilege. This is one of the arguments being used on ClubAdventist (by a select few) to advocate for women's ordination (I call it cultural moral egalitarianism).

Of course, the pervasiveness of this theory explains why radical feminism must necessarily be joined to the homosexual agenda. Don't miss this. If gender is socially constructed (or gender roles are culturally conditioned even in the Bible), and therefore differences between men and women are nothing more than social convention, then heterosexuality becomes nothing more than a culturally-privileged form of sexuality.

The utopia envisioned by ideological feminists would be a world free from any concern for gender--a world where masculinity and femininity are erased as antiquated notions, and an age in which the categories of male and female are malleable and negotiable. In the postmodern view, all structures are plastic and all principles are liquid. In their minds the influence of previous ages has molded us to believe that men and women are distinct in significant ways, but our newly liberated age will promise to free us from such misconceptions and point us toward a new world of transformed gender consciousness.

Gloria Steinem has expressed support for same-sex marriage, stating "The idea that sexuality is only okay if it ends in reproduction oppresses women—whose health depends on separating sexuality from reproduction—as well as gay men and lesbians." Steinem is also a signatory of the manifesto, "Beyond Same-Sex Marriage: A New Strategic Vision For All Our Families and Relationships", which advocates extending legal rights and privileges to a wide range of homosexual relationships, households, and families.

Teresa de Lauretis is the person credited with coining the phrase "queer theory.” It was at a working conference on lesbian and gay sexualities that was held at the University of California, Santa Cruz in February 1990 that de Lauretis first made mention of the phrase. She later introduced the phrase in a 1991 special issue of differences: A Journal of Feminist Cultural Studies, entitled "Queer Theory, Lesbian and Gay Sexualities." More later…

In Summary:

Categorizing males and females into social roles creates binaries in which individuals are at one end of a linear spectrum and must identify themselves as man or woman. This is seen as “oppression” by feminism. Indeed the founding motive of feminism was to redefine a rigid linear gender spectrum in favor of an amalgamation of roles at first and ultimately to redefine an individual’s self-perception and behavior. This has opened the door to gender fluidity – ultimately regarding all gender structures as plastic and all principles as liquid. The great thrust today (2013) is a rapidly growing postmodern agenda that sees gender binaries as divisive and claims that they polarize society in unhealthy ways. Two examples of this as I close;

Barack Hussein Obama identified "Stonewall" as one of the three stars that should guide us throughout his last presidential term. By identifying Stonewall with Selma, and Seneca Falls he sought to chain all three together as civil rights issues – a byproduct of his postmodern socialist worldview.

Tricia Famisiran recently "preached" (if we can call it that) in an Adventist church, that patriarchy and heterosexism are two sins in the church that should be "repented of." Notice how she binds the two together. Such conclusions are the inevitable resting place for a person who has bought into the liberal worldview of re-defined gender consciousness.

Resist and reach out,

`G

[CoAspen]

I think we have finally reached "The Outer Limits"......or at least the "Twilight Zone"!

[Neil D]

In Summary:

Categorizing males and females into social roles creates binaries in which individuals are at one end of a linear spectrum and must identify themselves as man or woman. This is seen as “oppression” by feminism. Indeed the founding motive of feminism was to redefine a rigid linear gender spectrum in favor of an amalgamation of roles at first and ultimately to redefine an individual’s self-perception and behavior. This has opened the door to gender fluidity – ultimately regarding all gender structures as plastic and all principles as liquid. The great thrust today (2013) is a rapidly growing postmodern agenda that sees gender binaries as divisive and claims that they polarize society in unhealthy ways.

Olger,

We told you "the pills from the Rexall Store"...We also said that they were "happy pills"...Why did you go to the marijuana store??? You KNOW smoking that stuff makes you paranoid....