B/W Photodude Posted April 7, 2018 Share Posted April 7, 2018 5 hours ago, The Wanderer said: what does any of this have to do with Phoebe being a church leader. Ya gotta keep up with the whole discussion! There was a point made about EGW being misquoted. Thread drift happens. Quote >>>Texts in blue type are quotes<<< ***************************************************************************** And therefore as a stranger give it welcome. There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. --Shakespeare from Hamlet ***************************************************************************** Bill Liversidge Seminars The Emergent Church and the Invasion of Spiritualism Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark Leslie Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 On 4/6/2018 at 1:58 PM, CoAspen said: One can then be lead to believe, based on prior rhetoric, that having women 'ordained' to be leaders in the church, pastor a church, leader over men including the .org is 'destroying Gods Church'. What is always missing in such an argument, is that Christ never spoke about a .org when refering to His Church but rather to those that followed Him. The RCC, however, does teach that Christ did just exactly that when speaking to Peter. That is the basis of their theology and is has crept in the the SDA .org from time to time...'headship'. I find it very interesting that after all we have taught about 'following after the beast', with the meaning being used most often to describe the RCC, there are some choosing to do that within the .org however unwittingly or just ignoring the parallels. Perhaps pointing out the obvious, you are once again associating those who stand firmly against WO with the catholic church. That is a strawman argument together with ad hominem. Another fallacy the WO proponents use, and you used here, is the argument from silence. So, not only do you have no leg to stand on spiritually, it seems that your arguments dont stand the test of secular logic either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoAspen Posted April 26, 2018 Share Posted April 26, 2018 Ahhhh....I am getting older but I can still stand on my own two legs! Not sure what spirituality has to do with legs...but to each their own!! Speaking of legs...however...not sure what you are trying to say? You don't like my comments, is that it? It's okay, it doesn't bother me! stinsonmarri 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gustave Posted September 30, 2018 Share Posted September 30, 2018 On 7/1/2016 at 10:27 PM, Rossw said: The article is confusing as to whether they place Phoebe as a deacon or an elder. Please excuse my simplicity but that's were the logic in the matter will lie. I think in the Adventist Church a "Bishop" is just redefined to mean "pastor", essentially, according to SDA's, an Elder is a Bishop. Thus, if an Elder is the same thing as Bishop there should be no problem in saying a deacon is a Bishop or Pastor. Therefore, IF it can be proven that Phoebe was a deacon by default she was also a Pastor - using the SDA rubric. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted September 30, 2018 Moderators Share Posted September 30, 2018 Various comments, some of which may not be related to other comments: * In the Roman Catholic Church there are only three (3) levels of clergy--Deacons, Priests & Bishops. * In the SDA Church there is one level of clergy, who are all formally given the title of Elder. * Deacons are not considered clergy in the SDA denomination. * Elder is also a title given to a local leader in a congregation who is NOT considered to be clergy. * SDA clergy elected to certain other administrative offices would be considered Bishops in the Roman Catholic Church. * On rare occasions, when meeting the public, SDA clergy have assumed the title of Bishop. Am example of this would be Bishop A. A. Leiske of the American Religious Townhall. (1952) * General Conference Vice-Presidents would be called Cardinals in the Roman Catholic Church. * In my opinion, contrary to the direction of the current discussion in the SDA Church, the Biblical issue is the role that women should have in spiritual nurture, not whether or not they should be ordained. * In my opinion, the Bible presents Phoebe as having a position of spiritual leadership in that congregation. * Deacons are ordained, but not clergy in the SDA Church. * Deaconess are sometimes ordained, but not clergy in the SDA Church. * Females are sometimes elected as Deacons, but not clergy, in the SDA Church and are then ordained. * Presently females are serving as congregational clergy and as higher elected administrative officials. * Women serving as SDA Clergy are generally Commissioned, but not Ordained. * Some such women are presently being Ordained. * One such ordained woman is presently serving as a Local Conference President. * One Commissioned woman has served as a General Conference Vice-President (Roman Catholic Cardinal), * Female SDA clergy are presently serving as military chaplains and as chaplains in other situations. phkrause 1 Quote Gregory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeMo Posted October 1, 2018 Share Posted October 1, 2018 On 9/30/2018 at 10:17 AM, Gregory Matthews said: In the Roman Catholic Church there are only three (3) levels of clergy--Deacons, Priests & Bishops There are also Brothers/Sisters, who are between Deacons and Priests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Gregory Matthews Posted October 2, 2018 Moderators Share Posted October 2, 2018 My statement was as to Roman Catholic clergy. As you know, in the Roman Catholic Church, sisters are not clergy. Deacons are clergy and undergo a formal ordination service. Priests are clergy and also undergo a formal ordination service, even if formally ordained as a Deacon. A Bishop, is a Priest who has been formally ordained as a Bishop. Cardinals normally are Bishops who serve is a special role as an assistant to the Pope. However, under Canon law 351.1, the Pope may directly elevate a priest to a Cardinal. The Pope is simply a Bishop who has been elevated to the first among equals as the Bishop of Rome. Quote Gregory Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R. G. White Posted May 28, 2019 Share Posted May 28, 2019 Just looking over the comments on the first page seems to indicate to me that some people might be missing an essential point on which the article perhaps only touches, but which is essential to our understanding of the entire matter. In the early Christian church, especially according to Paul, there were NO higher or lower positions. Jesus Himself had washed His disciples' feet, demonstrating that the greatest is the one who takes the lowest place. Thus, everyone who served the church would have had to be considered equal. So it's no wonder that Paul spoke of Phoebe, whose church leadership function was local, as one in an equal position with himself, despite his more extensive ministry. I would add one thing. If, despite all of the evidence cited in the article, one still has doubts as to whether or not Phoebe was really such a prominent church leader, we need only look to Ellen White as a more modern -- and thus more verifiable -- example. Read the 6-volume biography of her life, and see if it doesn't settle the question of what God may call a woman to do. Obviously, there are no upper limits on that. phkrause 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.