Leaderboard

A WORD FROM EGW... "It is the desire and plan of Satan to bring in among us those who will go to great extremes—people of narrow minds, who are critical and sharp, and very tenacious in holding their own conceptions of what the truth means. They will be exacting, and will seek to enforce rigorous duties, and go to great lengths in matters of minor importance, while they neglect the weightier matters of the law—judgment and mercy and the love of God. Through the work of a few of this class of persons, the whole body of Sabbathkeepers will be designated as bigoted, Pharisaical, and fanatical. The work of the truth, because of these workers, will be thought to be unworthy of notice." She goes on to say that people of experience have a great work to do: "they are to guard the cause of God" (Evangelism, 212; taken from The Review and Herald, May 29, 1888).

A couple of things that bothers me is that there is Biblical evidence supporting women's ordination, but the picture presented is "We who believe in headship Theology are following the Bible and you who support women's ordination are in rebellion to the Bible." and we have gone from a church that had done careful Bible study into a church using a superficial Bible study to support Babylonian traditions. We have also been a church that agreed to unite on a few "Landmarks" and from there, as long as we were not fanatical, the permission to follow the Bible according to the dictates of our conscience. Now we are being told that we can no longer do this. That we need to be a church who are blindly obedient to the powers that be. About 200 years before Jesus Christ there started a movement among the rabbis for the Jews to STOP having women priests and rabbis. (a first question we should ask is how do you stop something unless you are doing it.). There were mixed reasons for this. First, as Jews had to deal more with non-Jews these women priests and rabbis were confused with the sacred prostitutes in paganism. But there was also a rabbi, Jesus Ben Sirach (spelling?) who's writings were so good that they were considered as a possible Biblical book and almost made it into the Bible, had a bad marriage. The equality among the Jewish husbands and wifes made it harder, so he wanted women in Judaism to have a status more like the women outside of Judaism had. The more liberal rabbis supported this idea and the conservative rabbis disagreed with it and would treat women better and would still have women rabbis. So the Jews had a conflict over this topic. The group that was against women priests and rabbis became more powerful. They were able to get added to Herod's temple something that we did not find in the Old Testament temple; a court of women where women could go no further (this put a stop to women priests). And in Numbers every Hebrew, man and woman, were required to wear a tassel with a blue thread in it. This was a reflection of priestly garment and was to remind every Hebrew that they were a kingdom of priests. While it can be used as an argument for women priests, it can also just be understood as the priesthood of all believers. However the Rabbis who wanted the Jews to stop having women priests and rabbis said that only MEN should wear this tassel and that women needed to STOP wearing this. This adding to God's word the court of women and removing the tassel from women's clothing was the beginning of replacing the word of God with the traditions of man. Women's ordination was the start of this happening which eventually lead to Jesus having to say "Your house is left to you desolate." We are following the foot prints of those rabbis who were rejecting women priests and rabbis. We are expecting a different outcome than those rabbis who rejected women's ordination back then. We think that instead of Jesus saying our house is left to us desolate, that Jesus will bless us. What do you call people who do the same thing and expect a different outcome?

Absent a clear Biblical mandate the will of the majority should not be imposed on others. The American way is to place boundaries on the will of the majority. The world Church has not rejected the ordination of women: 1) In SA it refused to grant Divisions the authority to decide. That is not a rejection of female ordination. 2) The world church has allowed women to be ordained as Elders. 3) The world church has not prohibited women from being ordained a Deacons and Deaconesses, both of which are being done. 4) Contrary to what many believe, there are valid points of disagreement as to the level of denominational administration that has the authority to decide questions as to ordination. 5) Some would argue for tyranny consisting of other examples of attempted control. 6) Contrary to Gerry's post above, his minority does not want to impose its will on his majority. Rather, his minority simply wants the freedom to conduct its affairs with self-determination and without having the will of others imposed on it.

A smile and wave to Robert...... I do wish to cheer you up somehow. However the mantle of bereavement must be worn until the time to take it off. This deep mental anguish causing your heart to be burden down with sadness has its "while" and it too fades with time. Most of us here have had loved pets that passed away. We all miss their presence in our lives.

Psalms 36:6 English Standard Version Your righteousness is like the mountains of God; your judgments are like the great deep; man and beast you save, O LORD. How can we not love this beautiful GOD

awww.... so sorry, Robert. I have a hunch Sully will come running to you when he sees you again...

Agree. But in using the word "commissioning" it diminishes the role that women can have. While you may never be called to be a Conference President, you are assumed to be qualified for that role. While, solely on the basis of gender, females are assumed to not be qualified to serve as Conference President. Yet is sending us a message in China, which we are to blind to see. It just may be that our failure to listen to the message that God is giving us will result in God unwinding the tangle of administrative control in a manner that those on the front-lines will have to operate without (or diminished) support for their mission.

I like the face of your dog. It is loveable.

https://www.ventusky.com/?p=48;64;2&l=temperature the map is "live" ... here's a snapshot:

I'm so sorry for your loss, he was awfully young for such a little guy. ((((HUGE HUGS))))

Sad when a member of the family dies! Sorry for your loss Robert.

I'm so sorry to hear this Robert. You and your wife remain in my prayers.

Sure was a cutie pie! ((( Robert and wife )))

I am sorry about your loss. I know we will see our pets in heaven too. God can't wait to watch our faces when he delivers them into our arms.

I have said this before, and will say it again @rudywoofs (Pam) you bring some go the coolest things here. It is so appreciated.

I don't know about your Christianity but clearly many of Trump's supporters are are nominally christian by the fact they are supporting this outrageous narcissist . Thankfully there are many white male conservatives who stand against the racism and bigotry that is the Trump campaign. Certainly Trump's campaign has sought to appeal to white males who are afraid and racist. David Duke knows Trump speaks for him. The KKK and Neo-Nazi's are supporting Trump. Do you think they are deplorable?

We of course don't know the future in this very thing. If the Ship sinks over this ( what ever side wins or loses ) ..it will primarily because the anti Jesus spirit of resentment,unforgiveness, and punitive and vengeance that will sit in the members. Not even mentioning the Anti Jesus lordship and dictating matters of Conscience. The denomination is at stake over this spirit. No one gets everything they want in church or life ..we all deal with disappointment. Our Church was built on disappointment Sorry bad joke. I grew up surrounded by church peeps saying no matter what happens - stay on the Boat! Stay on the Boat!!!!!! Don't leave the Church.! The denomination/dogma/theology doesn't save. Jesus is the Lifeboat here. And keeping His Spirit in how we look upon others who disagree with us! May the Joy of the LORD be your Strength! # The People who have His Spirit of meek and lowly have the GOD's Authority on Earth.

Transparency... She wasn't trying to hide it. He has been evasive about his business holdings and taxes. She released her tax returns. He still hasn't. She hasn't been lying about her taxes. He still won't tell the whole truth about his taxes and business holdings here and overseas. See the difference? And how about the false equivalency... again? Comparison. One year vs. 18 or more years. Reduced some of her federal income taxes vs. all of his. She pays a substantial amount of federal income taxes most years. It looks like he doesn't pay any most years. Nobody said what he did was illegal. The tax system clearly does not treat everyone equally. The rich get richer, in part thanks to "yuge" tax benefits that only the wealthy and big corporations can take advantage of while all of us poor working smucks pay a dramatically higher proportion of our hard earned income in taxes than they do. And which of the two candidates has pledged to fix that? It sure isn't Donald. His tax proposal will provided increased benefits to the wealthy beyond what we see and give a pittance, if any tax break for the middle class. Hillary has pledged to give a significant tax break to the middle class and correct the ever increasing tax breaks for the wealthy, including herself, so that they actually have to contribute their fair share of taxes.

Trump himself claims his business acumen makes him the perfect candidate to run the country. He has lambastedother political opponents over their tax/business plans for running the country. So.....it is not desperation to prove he is a bad business person. Do you care? Do you think he has the ability to run the coun try business wise, or just more of us everyday working schmucks going to pay for his lack of fiscal resposibilty or just plain tax evasion? Yes, for those that don't appartently understand that running the country is a business and requires coherence, it is important!!

HCH said below: A reasonable person would believed that you did imply such, whether you intended to do so or not, the implication was all Christians who disagreed with you. Of course, there was no implication that those who agreed with you were superficial.

Now, again I must make this clear, because someone is bound to miss it. Even though Jesus was not sent to all peoples, that does not mean they themselves cannot come to him. Eventually everyone will. He will not refuse any who sincerely come to him. Like the Samaritan woman at the well, for example.

Are the errors in Paul's teachings, or are the errors in the interpretations of Paul's writings?

It is true that the phrase "house of Israel" often refers to the 10 tribes of the northern kingdom of Israel, especially when it is used in contrast to the phrase "house of Judah". However the phrase "house of Israel" was also used to refer to all 12 tribes of Israel together before the kingdom was divided. These verses show that usage as early as the time of Moses: Exodus 16:31 Now the house of Israel called its name manna. It was like coriander seed, white, and the taste of it was like wafers made with honey. Exodus 40:38 For the cloud of the LORD was on the tabernacle by day, and fire was in it by night, in the sight of all the house of Israel throughout all their journeys. Leviticus 10:6 And Moses said to Aaron and to Eleazar and Ithamar his sons, “Do not let the hair of your heads hang loose, and do not tear your clothes, lest you die, and wrath come upon all the congregation; but let your brothers, the whole house of Israel, bewail the burning that the LORD has kindled. See also Leviticus 17:3-10, Leviticus 22:18, and Numbers 20:29. "House of Israel" was also used to refer to all 12 tribes in Joshua 21:45, Ruth 4:11, and 1 Samuel 7:2-3. Also, during the time of the united Kingdom, all 12 tribes of Israel were referred to as the "house of Israel" as shown in these verses: 2 Samuel 6:5 And David and all the house of Israel were celebrating before the LORD, with songs and lyres and harps and tambourines and castanets and cymbals. 2 Samuel 6:15 So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting and with the sound of the horn. See also Psalm 98:3 and Psalm 115:12. Because Jesus was familiar with the Torah, the Psalms, and the Writings and the way "house of Israel" had been used in Scripture to refer to all 12 tribes, it is likely that he would use the phrase in the same way. Besides, your assertion that Jesus was referring to only the 10 lost tribes doesn't seem to make sense in the other passage where Jesus used the phrase "the lost sheep of the house of Israel". Look at Matthew 10:5-6 -- These twelve Jesus sent out, instructing them, “Go nowhere among the Gentiles and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." If Jesus had actually been referring only to the 10 tribes of Israel that were scattered among the Gentiles, why would he have directed, "Go nowhere among the Gentiles" and "enter no town of the Samaritans" ? Weren't those places, which the twelve were instructed not to go to, places where they would have found people from the 10 lost tribes of the northern kingdom?

I certainly pray so. And also among the other DNA descendants of Abraham.

spectrum may be a liberal magazine but we would not have learned of this plot by the GC to disband the unions who do not fall into line with Ted Wilsons line from any church news network. Adventist News Network would not have told us. Neither would we learn of this on Hope channel or 3ABN or any of the official channels of the church.