Leaderboard

The often untold story http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/arts-and-life/life/faith/conscientious-objector-left-mark-on-battlefield-400922351.html

Jackson: There is a fundamental issue here. Some of us believe that some current leaders of the denomination are in rebellion against the God-given advice of EGW: 1) This is based upon a belief that God gave EGW a role in guiding the developing SDA denomination. I agree with this as I have so stated a number of times. 2) As part of that advice, EGW spoke out against "kingly power." I believe that EGW would speak out today against a "kingly power" that is exercised in the ability to appoint people to fill positions and to be members of committees. 3) As part of that advice, EGW advocated the establishment of the Unions in order to move decision making out of the hands of the General Conference and into the hands of people who were actually working in the affected geographic areas. It was as a part of this that the Unions were given the authority to decide who should be ordained. I believe that the attempt today to restrict this authority of the Unions is simply rebellion against God-given advice. As such it should be resisted. Jackson, in brief, I Believe that if EGW were alive today she would deliver a strong rebuke to certain of our denominational leaders.

God has not created any hindrance to man seeing the light now or any time. What blinds is hardness of heart. Pharaoh saw light and step by step rejected it and went into increasing darkness. Light shines brightly on us and we see it and it will either increase or decrease depending on our response, our exercise of will. we will either reflect light or absorb it like darkness that merely absorbs light. when we use the light to glorify ourselves it is absorbed and not reflected. When we give God glory it is reflected and will increase. Jesus is the light that lighted every man that cometh into the world. God help us in spite of ourselves to give and not just take.

Yes this is HOW IT IS SUPOSED to be. But this assumes that through the many minds assembled that they would be able to work something out. Maybe a small minority might hold some ideas that the group as a whole does not see at that time. That small group can't focus on their minority view to be used by the church as a whole in their outreach and evangelistic meetings etc. For ideas that are closer and good sides it is to see what can be worked out. It is not to be two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner. Sadly at the 2015 General Conference there were items that were bulldozed through the church. When Pilate asked who he should release, scholars have pointed out similarities and relationships between Barabbas and Jesus. Therefore Pilate knew which one he was going to release he only gave the choice to toy with everyone (which was his custom). The motion was a "Heads I win tails I loose" situation. I'm sorry but the guidelines for how the General conference should be held was not used in 2015. When people wanted to raise points they were quickly shot down. I'm sorry but the behavior was an attitude of telling the Holy Spirit to "Shut up." There is also a disregard for our church's history. When A. G. Daniels, who worked with Mrs. White in the restructure of the church was General Conference President; and the conferences and unions wanted to ordain women. He did NOT tell them that they were not authorized to. He recognized and respected that they had that right and that he did not have the right to stop them. He felt that all he could do is request them to wait until the members who thought it was unbiblical could be educated into learning that it was indeed Biblical. In the court system there is statute law and case law. Case law is based on the outcome of former cases. And what we find in both our statues and in case is in 1902 you had the restructuring of the General Conference which Mrs. White and A. G. Daniels were deeply involved in. They gave the power to ordain to the conferences with Union approval. That is our statute. And we find in our case law that Elder Daniels (who worked directly on the statute) saw the Conferences and Unions as having the right to ordain women and that he could only request them to wait before carrying out that right. This is what the General Conference both in session and in application worked out over 100 years ago. While the topic got put on the back burner this is still what the General Conference worked out as God's voice. The vote in San Antonio as I said was a "Heads I win, tails you loose" proposition. It would have removed the role of ordination from the union to the division (in which it is easier to move in a few people who can stop the ordination) and where church leaders could use that as an overthrow of what was set up in 1902. The vote in San Antonio being defeated did not change things. Thus we are still under the 1902 General Conference policies and the case law of Elder Daniels applying the statute as the conferences and unions having the right to ordain women. This is what the General Conference in session voted in 1902 and how it was applied back then. Thus the conferences who are ordaining women are following this precedence. Just because a law has not been used and someone discovers it and starts to use it does not put that person in rebellion.

HCH said below: HCH, my calling your post eisegesis had nothing to do with my agreement or disagreement with what you posted. I happen to agree with some of what you posted. But, your post is still eisegesis. The fact that I agree with some of your statements does not make such statements exegesis. Exegesis and eisegesis are not determined by whether or not something is true or in error. They are determined by the methods by which someone either studies the Bible or how one presents ideas as being Biblical. I can not judge your study. But, your presentation is, especially in the post that I referenced, eisegesis.

Awesome story. Thank-you Stan for moving on your inspiration to have this story told onscreen.

just an update. Although the attendance was nowhere close to our expectations, we did have 3 baptisms last Sabbath. There was supposed to be two more today but came down with a bug. I believe there were supposed to be 3 or 4 coming in on profession of faith. I had to leave early for my clinic, so I wasn't there for the whole service.

from wiki https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisegesis Eisegesis (/ˌaɪsəˈdʒiːsəs/; from the Greek preposition εἰς "into" and the ending from the English word exegesis, Greek ἐξήγησις, which in turn is derived from ἐξηγεῖσθαι "to lead out")[1] is the process of interpreting a text or portion of text in such a way that the process introduces one's own presuppositions, agendas, or biases into and onto the text. This is commonly referred to as reading into the text

It wasn't that long ago that on this forum there was a belief that the behavior of Trump supporters reflected badly on Trump and he was the cause of it. Logic would dictate then that Hillary and the person she is the cause of this behavior

I highly doubt such protests and trashing (as in Portland) would have occurred if Hillary had won... perhaps I'm wrong, but I don't recall any Republican protests after Barack Obama was elected...

HEY ALL my computer broke then i lost my internet----- but i now have both up and running dgrimm60