Leaderboard

It is satire of course. But satire often speaks the truth. It is obviously intended as a contrast of the often spurious reasons given against women serving as pastors or church leaders. It simply illustrates the foolishness of some arguments being made.

Top Ten Reasons Why Men Should Not Be Ordained 10. A man’s place is in the army. 9. For men who have children, their ministerial duties might distract them from the responsibilities of being a parent. 8. Their physical build indicates that men are more suited to tasks such as chopping down trees and wrestling mountain lions. It would be “unnatural” for them to do other forms of work. 7. Man was created before woman. It is therefore obvious that man was a prototype. Thus, they represent an experiment, rather than the crowning achievement of creation. 6. Men are too emotional to be priests or pastors. This is easily demonstrated by their conduct at football games and watching basketball tournaments. 5. Some men are handsome; they will distract women worshipers. 4. To be an ordained pastor is to nurture the congregation. But this is not a traditional male role. Rather, throughout history, women have been considered to be not only more skilled than men at nurturing, but also more frequently attracted to it. This makes them the obvious choice for ordination. 3. Testosterone makes men more prone to violence; no really “manly” man wants to settle disputes by any means other than by fighting about it. It also makes them more prone to lust; consider King David. Thus, they would be poor role models, as well as being dangerously unstable in positions of leadership. 2. The New Testament tells us that Jesus was betrayed by a man. His lack of faith and ensuing punishment remind us of the subordinated position that all men should take. 1. Men can still be involved in church activities, even without being ordained. They can sweep sidewalks, repair the church roof, and perhaps even lead the song service on Father’s Day. By confining themselves to such traditional male roles, they can still be vitally important in the life of the church. (Originally from the late Dr. David M. Scholer of Fuller Theological Seminary in 1997.) Found on https://ordinationFacts.wordpress.com/reasons/

Now you're just being vexatious. I have a busy life and work very hard, I'm not going to spend hours going out trawling the web sites and public pronouncements of the dozen or so Republican candidates and summarising the vast reams of information here. Are you asserting that my brief summary is inaccurate? If so, feel free to bring the evidence yourself: I'm not going to put in the hours. If you want to decide I've withdrawn from the field and that means you've 'won' by default, I'm OK with that.

​I have seen several variations on this theme. It does make some valid points. While intended somewhat tongue in cheek, it has a ring of truth about it. It may strike a raw nerve in some as a result. But that is not its intent. It is intended to provoke thought. If it does not, it is wasted on those unable or unwilling to get the point.

Missing the point...

Well worth taking the time to read http://webpages.charter.net/stephenbauer/Index.html Stephen Bauer is a professor in the religion department of Southern Adventist University. He also served on the GC Theology of Ordination Study Committee.

Yes I agree this is a well thought out response. I do have one point of difference- he says it is no different than a heterosexual who struggles with these feelings, but there is a difference because the heterosexual struggles with not expressing desires outside of marriage but the homosexual has desires which unless transformed by God can not be expressed in a heterosexual marriage. Other than that, his response was right on IMO.

I thought this was an interesting point brought out here.

​Nay, my friend, there's more than an Orange Parade in heaven when one gay or lesbian sinner or ANY sinner repents!

Character IS power.

Reading your posts there really isn't much to recommend straight SDA christians is there? It would be interesting to hear the entire stories of the various gay/lesbian persecution you provide. I find it odd that entire churches participate in this behavior based strictly on someone being gay/lesbian. Especially a pastor demanding that someone bring a "church date" when he attends church.I don't attend a perfect church by any means. Flawed human beings everyone. It is a small fairly conservative church and this would not happen. I can't think of any of our churches locally that I have visited where it would. I can think of a few members that might not be the best at accommodating someone different,but not a entire church Your stories remind me of members we have had over the years. They absolutely knew they were being persecuted for being different or not conforming. In fact the real reason was the "enormous self righteous" chip they had on their shoulder,daring the "good christians" to knock it off. And yes,there are always those willing to accommodate.One was a very talented member that was turned down by the nominating committee. We made an attempt to talk to her privately with some concerns we had about placing her in office. Not a sexual orientation issue. Her response was the same as yours here. "Well what about so and so,that is as bad or worse".After all God loved her as much as the other members She didn't take into account "so and so" was turned down by the nominating committee as well. She left the church blaming the "self righteous" members for persecuting her and driving her out. Over time I have heard her accusations against the church and it doesn't bear any resemblance to what took place. Here she would garner all sorts of sympathy for her treatment at the hands of the hypocritical christians. A young man of multiple divorces and a lifestyle that was against everything we believe. He was treated like any other member. He left and I saw on facebook his announcement he left the church because he was tired of being judged.No one judged him,the embers attempted to befriend him and include him in activities. HIs conscience judged him and rather than face that he blamed others,looking for the slightest word to place the responsibility on others. The following in red suggests to me that you have a huge chip on your shoulder and are just daring someone to knock it off to prove how persecuted you and those with your agenda are. Especially with continued remarks as .......# who knows? we might even throw a lil Orange Parade in the Church! Narrow minded bigot as you seem to believe I and others are,NOT IN MY CHURCH. Gay parades can be held elswhere The fallen and broken down Minister and His fallen, broken down Congregation stay in ? And the fallen and broken down LGBTIQQAA still outside? .. till the church gets it? till the church gets it? ????????????? till the church gets it? 'Till they get they are just like them and perhaps far worse? !!! oh dear me Hey I know! Hopefully, Many Many (and I do mean MANY) QUEERS are coming in with The Spirit of JESUS,accepted or not, and will wear whatever and be their glorious selves and challenge the celebrated comfortable hypocritical Laodicean status quo. And they discover the Wonder of Wonders- they are all together in this and are more alike than not. Wait till the Church gets the glorious redeeming TRUTH that they are called to accept as they are just as themselves are accepted too? Time is Short! Jesus is coming soon! (btw.. When you find Christians who don't understand that.. you can be sure themselves don't understand fully that they themselves are accepted in Thee Beloved and therefore block the Kingdom without meaning too)

And I thought an Adventist discussion board, especially this one - Theological Townhall, should base discussions upon Scriptures, which I believe is the basis of Adventist Theology.

​ Well, that's according to you and you haven't even provided any Scripture. I have provided Scriptures. Between your statements and that of Scriptures', I'd settle for the latter.

​Clear passage, eh? If the "clear" verse 15 is read at face value, then the only women who will be saved are those who have borne children. That's ridiculous.

is a still photo from the live video feed that shows the two parents birds, three hatched chicks and one egg that still ha to hatch. http://www.bouldercounty.org/os/openspace/pages/ospreycamera.aspxhttp://www.bouldercounty.org/os/openspace/pages/ospreycamera.aspx NOTE: My photos came from a different nest than that of the live video feed. NOTE: The above URL will take you to a live feed at the time you clicked on the URL. To get to the still photo that I mentioned, scroll down t he page to the title "June 3, 3rd chick." Click on the thumbnail and you will get the still phicture.

Is the point of the plan of salvation God showing His power or God fighting sin and thus character change being greatly important? I would say this though, character change in someone who lives for evil into someone who lives for righteousness is the greatest display of God's power that exists.

Administrative Note: You are simply wrong. On several levels. Just because atheists use satire to ridicule God does not automatically make satire the exclusive tool of the godless or of Satan. But more to the point here, it does not make the satire of the OP an atheist bit of satire nor does it make it ridiculing God. That is an accusation like that of guilt by association. That you continue to hang on to that fallacious argument seems to be your way of trying to attack Gregory's character and motives, accusing him of mocking God. That is a profoundly serious accusation which needs to be rebuked. I have known him for a number of years and know him to be a Godly man. Since I believe it to be an attempt to unfairly and inappropriately attack his motives and character I would suggest an apology to him from you is in order. You have inserted emotion into this and may have an emotional response to it for any number of reasons. But that does not make it an emotional argument. Nor is satire inherently emotional. Quite the opposite it is usually a very rational and intellectual perspective. It is quite similar to The unhealthy part of the conversation is not the satire or the point of the satire. It is the apparent emotional reaction (anger, it seems), that it upsets you. If you cannot take it in the perspective intended, and take it personally because it may strike at notions you hold dear than perhaps you need to examine yourself. Humor and satire is admittedly sometimes a tricky thing since people's sense of humor varies greatly. But you are overreacting and making far more out of this than was intended. Either that, or you are just engaging in purposely trollish behavior. Either way you need to stop. Take this as an official warning. As you have already been told, this is not open for discussion or debate.

I agree with Naomi! I lost a lot of sleep with my newborns, but when my kids were (and still are for one more month!) teenagers, I lost a lot more sleep. While at the allergist's office today, I read another study that indicated sleep is important for retaining memory and with too much sleep deprivation, our capacity to remember can be permanently diminished. Maybe that's the reason my friends who do not have children seem to remember so much more of my past than I do!

If Paul considered Phoebe to merely be a servant or helper and not one sent to lead the believers, explain why he would instruct the people to help her with whatever she has need of? If she was merely a servant wouldn't the instruction of Paul have been to her to go help those people with whatever they had need of? Isn't his instruction to them much more consistent with someone sent to be in charge of the group? Why restrict her then to mere helper/servant status? You are twisting the Scripture and adding things too it that are simply not there. (The translation you have quoted is not a literal translation. May be if you would use or look at the original or the most literal translation you might better understand what I am saying.) I am not inclined to continue discussing this with you since you really consistently seem to miss the point and just bring up extraneous things not under discussion. It seems to me that perhaps you have come here just to be argumentative, to pick a fight and not to really learn.

Men and women receive a good education that prepares them for pastoral work by:

The Holy Spirit prepares both men and women for pastoral work:

This makes me sad. All people should be included in God's house; and all people deserve an equal right to life, love and happiness.

I Do not see any people here who have been humiliated. Further, satire does not humiliate another. Some people may feel humiliated by the that they said. But, not only was it their choice to feel humiliated it was their choice to put into word what they said/wrote. NOTE: There have been times when I have felt personally humiliated by something stupid that I said. But, I took responsibility for that. It was I who had humiliated myself. It was not the person who pointed out the fallacy in what I said or wrote. You know, every such case has been a learning experience for me. I would resolve not to make the same mistake twice.

Satire, of course. However, there is truth in it, even when it is not a literal truth and some of the statement have more truth than do other statements. In reality, the foolishness of the above statements demonstrates the foolishness of some of the arguments that are made by the other side.

You do realize that in many languages, including The original Biblical languages and the English translation you are quoting, that the masculine forms of words and pronouns are inclusive of both male and female. Read the Ten Commandments or any number of doctrinal passages in Scripture and using your flawed reasoning, they do not apply to women, since only male forms of words are used with no specific directives to women and/or about women. The context of only male that you claim is eroded substantially by the mere existence in the NT of any female described as an elder or diakonos since the virtually identical language describes the qualifications of a diakonos of the church. See what I have already posted about Phoebe, a female diakonos. And to you point, Paul refers to the women elders of the Church of Ephesus in his instructions to Timothy. Paul speaks of the body of elders of that church that laid hands on Timothy and goes on to tell Timothy how he should relate to the individuals of that body of elders. He tells Timothy that he should relate to the male elders of the group as he would to his own father and brothers and to the female elders as he would his own mother and sisters. There were clearly female elders in that body of elders.

But today we hear some in our remnant church teaching that men are to be "heads" in the church. Is it consistent? Does that mean all men are heads (mini-popes), or just some are considered heads (mini-popes) over other men?

​Supporting scriptures .... please

So, Neil, all humans are not God's children? He didn't create us all? A disobedient child isn't a child who is loved? I'd say that often the reverse is true, but it is rarely true, even of human parents, that they don't love their disobedient children, even when those children have gone beyond the point where their parents can allow them to remain at home and cause problems for everyone else there. And you think this is true of God? He created people only to destroy them? To me that makes God some kind of monster.

​As for the "close of probation" (an Adventist term): I AGREE that "probation" will be closed at the SC, for those who have HEARD and refused the Gospel message, and the Law of God. I do NOT AGREE that probation will close for those who never HEARD or UNDERSTOOD the message. I find the prophecy of Ezekiel's Temple very compelling. Ezekiel "saw" the resurrection of "the whole house of Israel". Then Ezekiel was shown something like a city, and outside of the city - a Temple. A "river" flowed from this Temple to heal the land. In the vision, the priests and “the prince” offered sacrifices to Yahweh at this Temple (Ezek. 40:38-43; 42:13; 44:11; 46:4,12,13,15,20). I'm NOT SAYING that literal animal sacrifice will be resumed during the 8th millennium. I believe the animal sacrifices symbolized (in this vision) the continued provision of blood and covering, for those raised at the 8th millennium. In this vision given to Ezekiel, each animal sacrificed is Yeshua, who will offer His own blood for another man or woman, clan or village, or nation. Yeshua is “the priest” who makes the atonement. And Yeshua is the “prince”. The ministration of the blood of Messiah WILL CONTINUE after redeemed Israel has been returned to “the land.” THIS is the message!!! Ezekiel “saw” animal sacrifices. We “see” Christ, presenting His own blood on behalf of those who come to the Father at The 8th Day. This ministry of His blood will continue until the last repentant sinner is washed and healed - to sin no more. When the Holy City New Jerusalem descends (after the Gog/Magog Battle and cleanup) there is NO TEMPLE in that City. Now that City will cover all of the territory promised to Abraham, so it will cover any Temple that was on the Mount, prior to the descent of the NJ. There is a period of TIME, AFTER the resurrection of the "whole house of Israel" and BEFORE the New Jerusalem descends, when people from nations go up to the House of the God of Jacob - Ezekiel's Temple - on that Mount - to learn the ways of the LORD. These prophecies must be taken seriously.

Concerning Satan: ​The Beast and the "false prophet" are thrown into the "lake of fire" at the SC. There is NO COMING BACK from the "lake of fire". So some people actually are permanently executed at the SC. The Beast has "heads" reaching back to ancient Egypt. All those "heads" are kingdoms that persecuted the people of God. So WHY is NOT SATAN (and his spirit army) also executed at the SC ??? THAT's a big question! If he has already deceived everyone he's going to deceive, and those deceived are settled into rebellion, then WHY let Satan loose from the "pit" (which I believe is the uninhabited earth) to deceive again? Those people are ALREADY DECEIVED! They have been declared "filthy" and Jesus has decreed that they will remain "filthy". They CANNOT change their minds! Why raise all those people, and give them TIME to plot and plan their attack, and TIME to build weapons of war ? In Mrs. White's version, the gates of the City remain open until just before the attack. She says it's all to demonstrate that no one will change his mind, or come to Christ. But Jesus already SAID, "Let him that is filthy be filthy still." It makes much more sense to me, that Satan is loosed BECAUSE the battle for souls is NOT OVER. The "nations" of people who are raised as "the rest" have not been declared "filthy still". Their future is NOT decided, because they have not yet decided. That's what the "priests" are for. They will govern and educate these people in the "ways of God". Isaiah 2:2 "Now it will come about that In the last days The mountain of the house of the LORD Will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it. 3 And many peoples will come and say, "Come, let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; That He may teach us concerning His ways And that we may walk in His paths." For the law will go forth from Zion And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4 And He will judge between the nations, And will render decisions for many peoples; And they will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they learn war." (NAU) The "mountain of the LORD" - the "house of the God of Jacob" has NOT YET been "established as the chief of the mountains" (above all other kingdoms). The "peoples" who "go up to the house of the God of Jacob" are NOT REDEEMED ISRAEL. Why would any of Israel need to be taught the ways of the LORD, especially if they have spent 1000 years in the Father's House, learning "His ways". "The nations" are NOT REDEEMED ISRAEL. In Scripture, "the nations" always refers to NON-Israelite peoples. So WHEN will this prophecy be fulfilled?? I has NEVER been fulfilled - so far. It's unlikely it will be fulfilled before the SC. Micah 4:1-4 repeats this prophecy and adds: "The LORD shall reign over them in Mt Zion from henceforth, even forever."

These ladies are already being spiritually effective. A vote at GC will not change that. God Spirit is not governed by a vote of the majority. Women are already baptizing, preaching with power, marrying, etc. The GC cannot create or stop that. Paul did not wait for the Jeruslem council's sanction to bring the gospel to the gentiles. He began the work that God for him to do. Jerusalem caught up. I hope GC catches up!

Men are on very shaky ground when one of the arguments they use against WO is inappropriate or "wrong" sermons by women. Men are very good at delivering those kind of sermons.