Adventist Church in North America recommends affirmation of men and women for or

[Tom Wetmore]

Missing the point there, Green...

[phkrause]

This line of reasoning, human reasoning it must be said, ignores the fact that God does not look to the sort of "qualifications" that man looks at. He is interested in the obedience to His will that comes from the heart.

So your saying that women just don't have that obedience from the heart! that is sad.

[Kevin H]

Quote:

His disciples were not so well educated. By the world's standards, they were not "qualified." But to God, they were the most qualified.

Your statement is a rather, well, it understates reality....

His disciples had entrenched ideas that the best Teacher in the universe, had to over come...And once these same men began to think outside thier entrenched ideas, they slowly began to see what was needed...Hence, they began to 'obey' and do what was needed...after all, thier Teacher taught them better than any they have ever heard before...and qualified them such that any university would have been proud to have graduated them...

Also another point. We like to emphasize the lack of education of the disciples. However, in a world where most people were illiterate, the Hebrews were very well educated. While some towns only had the equivalent of a 6th grade education (such as Nazareth) the typical "Uneducated" Jew had the equivalent to 2 to 4 years of college. Remember Peter, James and John had the fishing boats that could go on the deep water and had people who punched the time clock for them. While they did not have the Ph.D in what the Rabbis taught (as Paul did) they had the business background probably similar to today's MBA.

[ClubV12]

Kevin you bring up a point that is an ongoing problem I see. For some reason there is a class that just LOVES to talk about how people like Moses had to "unlearn". That all the training he got was garbage. They suggest that limited education is a good thing.

Moses was sharp, well trained, and we ALL have stuff to "unlearn". I believe his military skills were a blessing to the host of people he had to lead. I appreciate those with higher education, they are a blessing.

And yes, there is a downside. Pride being a big one. One does NOT have to have a PhD to read and understand spiritual things or Gods word. So the issue is, to some degree, a double edged sword.

Can we find some balance on this issue? Depending on the crowd, maybe not! In one ditch or the other and the devil don't care which side. :)

[Green Cochoa]

Also another point. We like to emphasize the lack of education of the disciples. However, in a world where most people were illiterate, the Hebrews were very well educated. While some towns only had the equivalent of a 6th grade education (such as Nazareth) the typical "Uneducated" Jew had the equivalent to 2 to 4 years of college. Remember Peter, James and John had the fishing boats that could go on the deep water and had people who punched the time clock for them. While they did not have the Ph.D in what the Rabbis taught (as Paul did) they had the business background probably similar to today's MBA.

[Kevin H]

Green, ever study what Mrs. White says that visions do and don't do for her? She used what her readers would understand, and she was more interested in applying the Bible to us and the growing church at the time. She kept getting upset when people tried to use her writings for exegesis saying that her writings are not to answer those kinds of questions.

[Neil D]

To get an MBA, you have to know letters. Peter, James and John were "unlearned."

Originally Posted By: Ellen White

These four disciples were more closely associated with Jesus in his earthly life than any of the others. Christ, the light of the world, was abundantly able to qualify these unlearned fishermen of Galilee for the high commission he had chosen for them. The words spoken to these lowly men were of mighty signification; they were to influence the world through all time. It seemed a simple thing for Jesus to call those poor, discouraged men to follow him; but it was an event productive of tremendous results; it was to shake the world. The quickening power of God, enlightening the minds of those illiterate fishermen, was to enable them to spread the doctrines of Christ far and wide, and others were to take up the task, until it would reach all lands, and be taught in all ages, winning many to salvation. Thus would the poor fishermen of Galilee be, indeed, "fishers of men." {2SP 185.2}

Jesus did not oppose education. The highest culture, if sanctified by the love and fear of God, receives his approbation. An objection is sometimes brought against education because Jesus chose ignorant fishermen for his disciples. But these men were subject to his refining influence for three years, and the Saviour was the most perfect educator the world has ever known. The Prince of Life did not choose the learned lawyers, the scribes and elders, for his disciples, because they would not follow him. Therefore he chose the humble peasants for his helpers. The rich and educated among the Jews were exalted by their own worldly wisdom and self-righteousness, and felt all-sufficient in themselves, realizing no special need of a Redeemer. Their characters were fixed, and they would not receive the teachings of Christ. But the humble fishermen were rejoiced to be connected with the Saviour, and become co-laborers with him. {2SP 186.1}

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

You say that these men did not read, were ignorant and under Jesus' inflence, were able to turn the world upside down while 'uneducated'.... I would like to point out to you, your quote and those parts highlighted in red....and the following biblical passage from Acts 8...

30 Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked.

31 “How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.

32 This is the passage of Scripture the eunuch was reading:

“He was led like a sheep to the slaughter,

and as a lamb before its shearer is silent,

so he did not open his mouth.

33 In his humiliation he was deprived of justice.

Who can speak of his descendants?

For his life was taken from the earth.”

34 The eunuch asked Philip, “Tell me, please, who is the prophet talking about, himself or someone else?” 35 Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.

It's pretty evident that Philip is reading the scripture as he is explaining the passage...Add to that the refining influence of the Savior the past 3 years, and you have an educated man...Now, what we don't know is when Jesus started, did the man know how to read or not....at any rate, by the time he met the eunuch, not only was he able to read, but also free from previous entrenched idea and able to show that Jesus was The Lamb of God from Isaiah 53....Philip may not have a degree, but he could have passed test and earned his degree by todays standards...And if Philip had been so educated, then Peter, James and John and all other disciples also can be assumed that they also had been educated by the Universe' greatest Teacher....

[Textus Receptus]

According to Jesus, He found fault with the pharisees and used some very strong language to describe them. "And said unto them,

"It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves." Mt 21:13.

Frankly, this scripture renders Fleming's research pointless.

[Neil D]

How so?

How does the reference to a 'den of thieves" renders Flemming's archeology pointless???

If at a 100 years before Christ, they were allowing female rabbis, you don't think they did so prayerfully? If you don't think so, then you think the Jews reckless??? To me, a reckless culture would be more likely to rush in and change the honesty [aka make it a den of thieves] of that culture....

[Kevin H]

According to Jesus, He found fault with the pharisees and used some very strong language to describe them. "And said unto them,

"It is written, My house shall be called the house of prayer; but ye have made it a den of thieves." Mt 21:13.

Frankly, this scripture renders Fleming's research pointless.

1. There were different schools of the Rabbis. The conservatives who did not like to stop doing things that would continue to train women and ordain women, who let the lay women stand and listen to the Rabbi speak, and to wear the blue thread in their clothing. Then there were the more liberal schools of the Rabbis that wanted to change things. They wanted women to stop being ordained, they wanted women to stop wearing the blue thread, and they did not want the women to stand around listening to the Rabbis, but to kind of listen while performing hospitality things around the fringes.

Since there were these two different practices, you cannot just classify it together as Pharisaical and worthy of being dismissal because one is for continuing women's ordination, the other wants Judaism to stop women's ordination.

Using your reasoning I can say that you are a den of thieves because you support the liberal Pharisees who were anti women's ordination.

2. The Pharisees were not in control of the temple at the time. That was the Sadducees, corrupt puppets of Rome. The money from the money changers went to Pilate for bribery to allow the house of Annis to stay as high priests. The Pharisees were critical of this as well and saw them as having turned the house of prayer into a den of thieves. Jesus was just someone who was willing to do anything about it. It gave the courage to another Pharisee a while later to clean the temple again and permanently stopped the practice.

[CyberGuy]

Three divisions have voted to accept the recommendation to ordain women. Not that they are ordaining women yet but their own people have researched scripture and can find nothing in scripture to forbid it.

1. North American Division

2. Inter European division which makes up 12 countries in southern Europe. unnaminous vote

3. South Pacific Division which makes up Australia New Zealand and the islands around Australia. Uninaminous vote

Northern European division is expected to follow

[Johann]

It is remarkable that the Brethren in the first four Divisions of the Seventh-day Advetist church find that the ordination of women is fully Biblical.

What makes the difference?

[Green Cochoa]

It is remarkable that the Brethren in the first four Divisions of the Seventh-day Advetist church find that the ordination of women is fully Biblical.

What makes the difference?

English? Modern Bible translations? Hollywood? Feminism in western society? Other?

Some parts of the world are not yet exposed to the modern influences of western society which have gradually compromised on many points.

How can one truly not understand the Bible when it says that women should not have authority over men? The scripture is plain enough, but people will see what they want to see.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

[Green Cochoa]

Neil,

I have no argument regarding how educated the disciples were after their years with Jesus. The point I was making had to do with whom He chose as His starting material. At the beginning, they were unlearned, ignorant, and illiterate. To have learned so much in three years demonstrates the quality of education they had with Jesus. Certainly, in order to write books of the New Testament, they became literate, among other knowledge they obtained.

Blessings,

Green Cochoa.

[Johann]

A teacher who has reached the age of retirement, having through life been a keen observer of developments in the Seventh-day Adventist church, suggests another explanation. Some of the most sincere members of our church have become the Taliban movement in Adventism. They still remain devout and sincere and very much Adventist and active in missionary endeavors.

In their eagerness they interpret Scripture the way the Taliban interpret the Koran. This is primarily seen in two areas:

1. God as an avenger

2. The supremacy of the male species of humanity.

[olger]

It is remarkable that the Brethren in the first four Divisions of the Seventh-day Advetist church find that the ordination of women is fully Biblical.

What makes the difference?

Western liberalism.

gosh

[Johann]

Originally Posted By: Johann

It is remarkable that the Brethren in the first four Divisions of the Seventh-day Advetist church find that the ordination of women is fully Biblical.

What makes the difference?

Western liberalism.

gosh

So you prefer the Taliban way?

[ClubV12]

I wonder if we are seeing the will of the leadership instead of the people.

Perhaps leadership are the Taliban Johann in that they are more vocal and forceful with their view and not accurately reflecting the larger view of the people?

It's a little like asking does the Taliban represent the majority of Muslims?

[olger]

So you prefer the Taliban way?

Not as much as you prefer straw men.

Thanks!

g

[Neil D]

Quote:

It's a little like asking does the Taliban represent the majority of Muslims?

....and who does the Taliban represent in the debate between Women's Ordination and those who wish to suppress women?

It's all about how you phrase the question....

W/O vs Women's equality

W/O vs Women's en-equality

W/O vs Women Priests

W/O vs Women as helpmeets

which is the correct biblical view?

[Johann]

I have for a long time admired that halo on your picture, olger. Were you born with it? Has it increased with your engagement with the anti ordination movement?

[olger]

Thanks.

See Psalm 51:5.

You have stand in the sun just right.

`G

[ClubV12]

"...which is the correct biblical view?"

Thats what the G.C. committee is going to rule on.

Johann started the Taliban metaphor. I see it as meaning a small vocal group speaking as if they represent the majority view, when they may or may not actually reflect the majority view.

This seems to be the case with the South Pacific Division report. Primarily based on a handful of "academic" studies. From various comments made by those within that Division I conclude the report DOES NOT reflect the majority opinion of the members! I also conclude the Division leaders RECOGNIZE THIS. They are moving ahead anyway, because they personally feel, uh, WHAT do they feel? That they can ignore the members? That the members are to stupid to understand the issues? That they could care less what the members think?

All of that, but this is the most insidious reason they are ignoring the membership. There are counting on the YOUNG PEOPLE to eventually turn the tide of thinking toward allowing women ordination. As the old people die off. It's just a matter of time before the Division membership gets in line with their "Taliban" leadership.

[olger]

All valid observations, CV12.

It may come down to polling every member in the NAD to learn their position on WO. If that happens, I think the liberal crowd is going to be disappointed. I really do.

`G

[ClubV12]

As it concerns the SP Division, this does bring up some questions, not easily resolved. How is it their committee, apparently, does not reflect the views of the majority of the members? Was the deck staked? Are "acedemics" fundamentally different than the bulk of the people? Were not enough laymen opinions considered? What is this concept of ignoring the old in favor of the young opinion? Since when has THAT ever worked, setting aside "Mom and Dad's" opinion in favor of the teenager, if you would. NOT a good game plan!

Perhaps my questions aren't even valid or warranted, but these are some of my concerns with this particular study report. It just doesn't "feel right". And NOT because I have a position on one side or the other, I'm just looking at the process. And going, hmmmmm, something doesn't feel right about this.

The double edge sword in this is that doctrine should NOT be based on majority or minority opinion. But lets at least try to get a fair balance of the opinions while we consider the questions.

And maybe, just maybe, the same questions and concerns could apply to NAD as they apply to the SP Division!