Leaderboard

Well many think Gays are the enemy. Enemies of our Morals and Theology and Church and Marriage. "Love your enemies! Do good to them. Lend to them without expecting to be repaid. Then your reward from heaven will be very great, and you will truly be acting as children of the Most High, for he is kind to those who are unthankful and wicked. Luke 6:35

I have missed him and often wondered what had happened to him. He was a good man and did good work. His posts here on CA were appreciated by me. NOTE: I do not think that he actually had a PhD. He told me once that he was actually ABD. In any case, he did good work and will be missed.

Good to know that others have a similar perspective. I wish our leaders well as they wrestle with these issues. My prayer is that we are able to find a healthy solution that will move the whole church forward. It's funny how we wrestle with issues after society and moved on to something else. In the 2025 session perhaps the LGBT issue will be center stage. I have visions of you sneaking into the president's office, sitting in his chair, feet on the desk, drinking a bottle of Kadem Concord grape wine and blaring BIg Daddy Weave. Of course that's what I would do.

Daryl, just a few days ago I received a note from one of the persons working for a division about as far from Europe as you can get. I was told that most of the delegates from that division will be voting "yes" to the proposal in Texas, and that is becaue they are convinced that WO is Biblical. In my early youth I learned to read the Bible the way our pioneers and Ellen G White did, and not the way the fundamentalists from Dallas are teaching and which has infiltrated among many SDA's who wrongfully label themselves as "Conservative". It was through my Bible study I learned from Paul in 1 Timothy that the ordination of women is Biblical. This happened about 30 years ago, and therefore I saw it as unbiblical what took place at the GC session in 1995. Daryl, you should take some time to read how our pioneers read the Bible around 1850 when our enemies were attacking the new Advent movement becaue it was following the preaching and teaching of a female prophet. Now the Dallas people are still using the same texts against us, but not as obvious as people did then. What they have managed in stead is to turn the heads of many SDA to understanad the bible like a harlot by making us using the texts they in the past were using against us, so we now use the same texts against ourselves. You see how smart our enemies are? Are we to follow their devices against ourselves? You will be in my prayers, Daryl.

Interesting thoughts here Gail. Not wanting to distract from the theme, but there is perhaps a "simpler" dimensional quality to the things of God. that we, "being rooted and grounded in love, may be able to comprehend with all saints what is the breadth, and length, and depth, and height [of love]; And to know the love of Christ, which [sur]passeth knowledge..." (Eph 3:17-19) I suggest that the "breadth" of Divine love points to its inclusiveness. (In contrast to a "narrow", exclusive, love.) The "length" to its endurance. The "depth" to its depth, layer upon layer. (In contrast to "shallow" love, based on sentiment and circumstance.) The "height" to its quality, etc.

You may remember the serious injury that Heather Boulais, a member of the gymnastics team, at Southern, sustained in early January. The latest news of he condition may be viewed at: http://www.adventistreview.org/church-news/story2212-union-college-gymnast-badly-injured-in-fall NOTE: Progress has been made, but it remains very serious. The latest update is dated April 18.

And it should also be remembered that she also said far to much importance was place on the ritual of laying on of hands. I have often challenged the effort of anyone discrediting her ordination credentials because that ritual supposedly never happened to her, as if it magically passed some divine power through the hands of those doing the ordination. To invalidate the official,action of the GC in giving her that recognition with these credentials for the want of any record of the ritual of magic hands, is to put an inordinate level of importance on the ritual. It is as if that trumps the action of the GC. We are not a ritualistic religion.

For me too, his name was very familiar! Sorry to hear of his passing.

I find too much of the arguments of both sides to be quite speculative and trying to build up philosophies that they can hang their view on. I find Fleming's arguments to be "Here is what the Bible says, this is the context where it said it" and you see a clear "Thus saith the Lord." and all the texts used to try to form philosophies based on Calvinism and which do not fit what I understand Mrs. White's view to be does not measure up to the "Thus Saith the Lord". I use consistent methods into why I believe that Mrs. White is a prophet, why I believe in 1844 and the Investigative Judgment, and these same hermeneutics lead me to the conclusion that the Bible teaches the ordination of women. I see the arguments for headship as Satan's trogon horse to loosen the foundation and prepare Conservatives when the issues of Fundamentalism come to focus to make of no effect the spirit of prophecy. I cannot accept the arguments for headship without having my reasons for being a Seventh-day Adventist tumble down and I'd have to become a Baptist or something else. And what I mean by "ignorance" is not in being ignorant. It is in I see a whole bunch of arguments as to why I should not support women's ordination. These do not fit with my understanding of the Bible, Mrs. White or the investigative judgment. If I was say a member of say the Unitarian Universalists or another very liberal group these arguments might make sense. Those who present those arguments may be convincing to those who are seeing these liberal reasons for ordaining women. However I do not see it answering the "Thus Saith the Lord" that I read. I do not find it in harmony with my understanding of Mrs. White and my view on the ordination of women are from the same hermeneutics that convince me that we are indeed living in the time of the investigative judgment. That this is a lost Bible truth that as our forefathers rediscovered the Sabbath, so we have rediscovered the lost Bible truth about women's ordination. As to your 4 points 1. I appreciate your honesty. However you need to be aware that when it comes to say my views you are barking up the wrong tree. You can try to tell that the Seventh-day Adventist church should stop encouraging vegetarianism because Hindus believe that cows are gods and in eating cows we affirm that they are not a god. You may be an expert in the Hindu faith but that is not why I have vegetarianism as a goal. 2. If I was living in the ancient world and happen to pass through Israel or Judah, what would those tassels mean to me? What was their cultural significance to say someone from Africia, or Egypt or Babylon, or Europe or Asia etc. They would routinely run into these tassels However in Israel/Judah everyone was wearing them, not just a few. But I believe I said that the tassels as such cannot be argued for more than a reminder to Israel that they were a kingdom of priests and the priesthood of all believers. It was Jesus Ben Sirach who wanted women to remove them because he wanted the Jews to STOP having women priests and Rabbis. 3. Who said anything about it being a "secret" sign? It is no more secret than Jesus riding into Jerusalem on a donkey. It is a very blatant stand. The Rabbis were arguing over whether or not women should be ordained. Jesus made a open and blatant stand as to which side of the argument he was on. 4. First of all may I remind you that it was not only the priestesses who were temple harlots in Paganism, but the priests as well. Using that as an argument opposing women's ordination sounds like "God was afraid of female harlots, but did not mind confusion over homosexuality." why didn't God simply have no priesthood since priests were prostitutes in paganism? Now again I will say that I have not heard any argument except for linguistic arguments in the Psalms for women priests. Only that some scholars I strongly respect have commented that there were both male and female priests. What I do know is that Rabbi Jesus Ben Sirach wanted the Jews to stop having women Priests and Rabbis. And YES there were women Rabbis. Ancient lists of Rabbis have been discovered and there are women's names on them. We know how Rabbis were ordained. We know that the liberal Rabbis were opposed to women's ordination while the conservative Rabbis supported women's ordination. And we know how Jesus responded to this argument.

Dwight was one of the 'good guys', and he went way to young.

It was from listening to these arguments and contrasting them with scripture that I came up with my warning list. This is built on Calvanistic theology and read back into the Bible. Elder Sorke received his doctorate from the Dallas Theological Seminary. When I was working on my Masters at the Seventh-day Adventist Theological Seminary and my BA at AUC (late 1970s early 1980s), our professors warned that the Dallas Theological Seminary was one of the most Anti-Adventist schools that there was. Adventist debate whether we should be Fundamentalists or not. Those of us who are Fundamentalists are on the liberal end of the Fundamentalist spectrum. The Dallas Theological Seminary's purpose is to make people very conservative Fundamentalist, Darbyist dispensationalists and Calvinists. My professors told us in the 70's and 80s that the Dallas Theological Seminary and the Seventh-day Adventist Theological seminary are dramatically opposed to each other. It is not that it is necessarily a bad school, and that every student who goes there end up brainwashed to their philosophy. However we need to have flashing yellow lights with we hear someone from that school, only because they are too far to the one extreme. Let's say that someone went to an equivalent school but who was at the other extreme. The professors are good Bible scholars but who believe that the Bible is purely of human origin, some who even doubt God's existence and they have Richard Dawkins come to lecture to the students. The graduate may be a good believing Seventh-day Adventist, but due to the purpose of the school we need to keep our guard up. For some reason we are aware of this danger with the ultra liberal schools, but we set that same guard down with the ultra conservative schools. At the 1919 Washington DC Bible Conference Elder A. G. Daniels and W. W. Prescott were warning the people (who were on their way to the Fundamentalist Bible Conference in Philadelphia) about what they were going to learn in Philadelphia. Daniels, Prescott and Willie White feared that what they were going to hear in Philadelphia would ruin the Seventh-day Adventist Church. The Dallas Theological Seminary is based on what was taught at the Philadelphia 1919 Bible conference with it mixed with Calvinism and Darby's Dispensationalism.