‘Variance’ for North American, Trans-European Division Fails

[Tom Wetmore]

So you think that the numerous translations of references to the grave as "hell" show no translator bias from long held tradition? Or do you think the comma in Jesus' assurance to the thief on the cross reflects a reliable bias of the afterlife? Or with the same bias they translate breath as spirit?

After all hundreds of translators and scholars agreed to translate it that way...

[Tom Wetmore]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

If women in ministry are not of God, it will prove itself fruitless. If it is of God, no human effort can prevent it.

This isn't necessarily true at all. There are many things that have been successes which aren't of God. God doesn't stop people from doing things that they are determined to do against His expressed will. The history of the Christian church is full of things that God allowed even though they are definitely against His will.

not true at all... Really?!?!

So are you suggesting that the success of women in ministry bringing souls to Christ and nurturing them in their spiritual growth is not of God? That those baptized by women are baptized against God's expressed will? (You might want to read again Jesus' words about vexing the Holy Spirit...)

If not true at all, as you suggest, then you are also saying that Gamaliel was also wrong.

The fatal fallacy of your attempt to refute this is that you avoid the second part. The wisdom is contained in the whole of it. No amount of human effort in opposition will prevent a thing if it is God's will. Are you really saying that is also not necessarily true at all?

Your response seems to me to be just desperate foolishness.

[Neil D]

That was a very interesting(and long)post,HB. Thanks for sharing it.I don't know where you got it from but it's assertions have no backup from Scripture.while the historical facts about the oricle may be true it does not necessarily follow that unconverted women in attendance at a gathering of believers that were openly displaying the many gifts of the Spirit were the only ones responsible for the chaos. This explanation opens the door for too many questions that the Scriptures can give no answer for.In fact it could easily serve to support the idea that women should be completely silent in church. Why were no unconverted men speaking up or were women the only ones with the gift of prophesy? Is this kind of confusion only privey to unconverted female spouses of converted men? Furthermore, Paul's employing the Law and the term subjection has no authority over a non-believer so why use that as a motivator to do what is right? It also seems highly unlikely that a group of unbelieving women could disrupt a meeting of that nature without simply being asked to leave anyway.That explanation might be plausible if Paul had mentioned the Oracle ect... but he didn't. One also has to wonder why God, knowing that this letter with it's directives would be read by billions who would extrapolate from it other principles that correlated with the original teaching of the Law,and completely missing the point, would do nothing for 2000 years to clear up such a misconstrued understanding?

It was long to give a foundation and then give the explination of the historical facts of why Paul said what he did. We don't have the other letter from the Corinthians so we only get ONE side of the conversation. They knew what he was talking about. They knew they had problems in THIER house churches. They knew that the problems were from people with strong background in Amazon women superiority. They knew they had men with unconverted wives there. They also knew they had unconverted men with converted wives. They also had converted couples and also unconverted people looking on... And yet, they came to our churches to experience God...To worship with Him...and to share the experience with each other.... Now, how do you correct the behavior of all without loosing all?

As for clearing up a miscontrued understanding, perhaps God is testing what is in your heart.....If you are so sure that women should be silent in church because you think God said so, what is to prevent you from killing someone because you think God said so...?

I remember someone saying that Christianity makes better people. If you aint better when you become a Christian, then something is definately wrong...and it aint Christianty.....

[doug yowell]

As for clearing up a miscontrued understanding, perhaps God is testing what is in your heart.....

Perhaps. Me and billions of others who have never heard of the Oracle connection for the past 1900 years.Seems like an easier way would have been to simply record the hundreds(or so) of women pastors recorded in the NT. Or at least some plain teaching on how the new gospel order is intended to change the centuries old tradition that did not allow for such.Saying that women are to be under their husband's authority in the church seems like kind of a funny way to teach the opposite.

[Neil D]

Saying that women are to be under their husband's authority in the church seems like kind of a funny way to teach the opposite.

are you more interested in the husband's authority or a partnership in marriage? Because if you are more interested in keeping your marriage happy, you don't "lord it over" your wife...

My grandmother used to say that the man is the head of the house, but the woman was the neck and she knew how to turn the head where she wanted......

[doug yowell]

If you are so sure that women should be silent in church because you think God said so, what is to prevent you from killing someone because you think God said so...?

Several reasons. 1)I know for a fact that God never intended that women be silent in the church, only that they should not hold positions that would bring their husband's spiritual headship into question. A noticeable difference between how you presented the question and what I actually believe(assuming you're intending the personal "you" as opposed to the corporate "you). 2)Because murder(the taking of an innocent human life) is clearly identified in the Bible as a grievious sin and as a follower of Jesus I cannot entertain the thought of God saying different. 3) Because I do not believe that God will give up on anyone simply because they refuse to follow His intended order. It's quite a leap from women pastors to Helter Skelter.4) Most importantly, the HOly Spirit would prevent me from doing so. Do you feel safer now?

[doug yowell]

My grandmother used to say that the man is the head of the house, but the woman was the neck and she knew how to turn the head where she wanted......

Your grandmother was a very wise woman.

[doug yowell]

I remember someone saying that Christianity makes better people. If you aint better when you become a Christian, then something is definately wrong...and it aint Christianty.....

Hard to argue with that!!

[doug yowell]

are you more interested in the husband's authority or a partnership in marriage? Because if you are more interested in keeping your marriage happy, you don't "lord it over" your wife...

Why do the two need to be mutually exclusive? Both Peter and Paul speak clearly of both being necessary. EGW also verifies this in PP58,59.Peter counsels women to call their husbands "lord" and turns right around and explains that the husband should consider her as a "co-heir" of the kingdom.Paul explains that the husband is "head" of the wife and immediately tells us that the husband should treat the wife like his own body.Do you reject the concept of the husband being the spiritual leader of the home? Do you believe in too many indians not enough chiefs?

[Neil D]

[

Paul explains that the husband is "head" of the wife and immediately tells us that the husband should treat the wife like his own body.Do you reject the concept of the husband being the spiritual leader of the home? Do you believe in too many indians not enough chiefs?

Are you trying to tell me that men are spiritually superior because they were the last to fall? Is there some biblical basis for this "headship" of the home?

[John317]

Are you trying to tell me that men are spiritually superior because they were the last to fall? Is there some biblical basis for this "headship" of the home?

Yes, there is a biblical basis for the "headship", and there are also clear teachings in the writings of Ellen White on the topic.

As for spiritual superiority of the male, I don't believe that is what God is indicating when he made man the head of the home. But God had good reasons for designing the family the way He did. Also good reasons for designing the leadership in the church the way He did. They both go together.

See Adventist Home, part of which I will post below.

Also see the book, SDAs Believe...28 FB, the chapter on Marriage and the Family, and Col. 3: 18-21 and 1 Peter 3: 1-8.

Quote:

Col. 3:18-21

Wives, submit to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord. [19] Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them. [20] Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. [21] Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged.

1 Peter 3:1-8

Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives— [2] when they see your respectful and pure conduct. [3] Do not let your adorning be external—the braiding of hair, the wearing of gold, or the putting on of clothing— [4] but let your adorning be the hidden person of the heart with the imperishable beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which in God's sight is very precious. [5] For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their husbands, [6] as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening.

[7] Likewise, husbands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered.

[8] Finally, all of you, have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind.

Quote:

The Head of the Family Firm.--The husband and father is the head of the household. The wife looks to him for love and sympathy and for aid in the training of the children; and this is right. The children are his as well as hers, and he is equally interested in their welfare. The children look to the father for support and guidance; he needs to have a right conception of life and of the influences and associations that should surround his family; above all, he should be controlled by the love and fear of God and by the teaching of His word, that he may guide the feet of his children in the right way. . . . {AH 211.4}

The father should do his part toward making home happy. Whatever his cares and business perplexities, they should not be permitted to overshadow his family;

212

he should enter his home with smiles and pleasant words. {AH 211.5}

The Lawmaker and Priest.--All members of the family center in the father. He is the lawmaker, illustrating in his own manly bearing the sterner virtues: energy, integrity, honesty, patience, courage, diligence, and practical usefulness. The father is in one sense the priest of the household, laying upon the altar of God the morning and evening sacrifice. The wife and children should be encouraged to unite in this offering and also to engage in the song of praise. Morning and evening the father, as priest of the household, should confess to God the sins committed by himself and his children through the day. Those sins which have come to his knowledge and also those which are secret, of which God's eye alone has taken cognizance, should be confessed. This rule of action, zealously carried out by the father when he is present or by the mother when he is absent, will result in blessings to the family. {AH 212.1}

The father represents the divine Lawgiver in his family. He is a laborer together with God, carrying out the gracious designs of God and establishing in his children upright principles, enabling them to form pure and virtuous characters, because he has preoccupied the soul with that which will enable his children to render obedience not only to their earthly parent but also to their heavenly Father. {AH 212.2}

The father must not betray his sacred trust. He must not, on any point, yield up his parental authority. {AH 212.3}

To Walk With God.--The father . . . will bind his children to the throne of God by living faith. Distrusting his own strength, he hangs his helpless soul on Jesus and

213

takes hold of the strength of the Most High. Brethren, pray at home, in your family, night and morning; pray earnestly in your closet; and while engaged in your daily labor, lift up the soul to God in prayer. It was thus that Enoch walked with God. The silent, fervent prayer of the soul will rise like holy incense to the throne of grace and will be as acceptable to God as if offered in the sanctuary. To all who thus seek Him, Christ becomes a present help in time of need. They will be strong in the day of trial. {AH 212.4}

Maturity of Experience Called For.--A father must not be as a child, moved merely by impulse. He is bound to his family by sacred, holy ties. {AH 213.1}

What his influence will be in the home will be determined by his knowledge of the only true God and Jesus Christ whom He has sent. "When I was a child," Paul says, "I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things." The father is to stand at the head of his family, not as an overgrown, undisciplined boy, but as a man with manly character and with his passions controlled. He is to obtain an education in correct morals. His conduct in his home life is to be directed and restrained by the pure principles of the word of God. Then he will grow up to the full stature of a man in Christ Jesus. {AH 213.2}

Submit the Will to God.--To the man who is a husband and a father, I would say, Be sure that a pure, holy atmosphere surrounds your soul. . . . You are to learn daily of Christ. Never, never are you to show a tyrannical spirit in the home. The man who does this is working in partnership with satanic agencies. Bring your will into submission to the will of God. Do all in your power to

214

make the life of your wife pleasant and happy. Take the word of God as the man of your counsel. In the home live out the teachings of the word. Then you will live them out in the church and will take them with you to your place of business. The principles of heaven will ennoble all your transactions. Angels of God will cooperate with you, helping you to reveal Christ to the world. {AH 213.3}

Do you accept these teachings?

There's a close relationship between the role of the husband in the home and the roles of men and women in the church.

[John317]

Saying that women are to be under their husband's authority in the church seems like kind of a funny way to teach the opposite.

Originally Posted By: hamilton-beach

are you more interested in the husband's authority or a partnership in marriage? Because if you are more interested in keeping your marriage happy, you don't "lord it over" your wife...

We're saying the same thing that the Bible and Ellen White say on this topic. We're not talking about "lording it over" one's wife.

Read Adventist Home, the chapters on the husband-wife responsibilities and relationship. I'm not saying anything different from what she wrote in those chapters.

What I've noticed is that people who disagree with Ellen White on the roles of the husband and wife in the home also tend to have problems with what Paul and Ellen White were inspired to say about the roles of men and women in the church.

[Twilight II]

I am just glad I am not a farmer.

Imagine being part of the group that was under that curse...

Imagine selecting a career path where you were cursed because of your occupation.

This is basically the argument Coaspen presented earlier.

It shows the lengths that one has to go to to deny Gods original Edict in the Garden of Eden.

So, Coaspen (I believe it was you that made this point), do you think it fair that only farmers who toil the land are still under the original edict?

And all the other men in society no longer have to "toil"?

[Tom Wetmore]

Maybe the Amish are right. Maybe they are living the life God intended if you apply the entire curse...

[Twilight II]

Maybe the Amish are right. Maybe they are living the life God intended if you apply the entire curse...

Well with that logic Tom, all Adam had to do was not till the soil and he escaped Gods edict...

Bit of a loophole there don't you think?

Unless of course you are being a little over-simplistic with this point, so that you can remove Gods edict and promote feminism?

[lazarus]

Paul's whole point in his inspired instructions was that women are not to exercise authority over men.

Is not EGW considered to be an authoritative voice in Adventistm? While she had no administrative authority, she certainly exercised wide ranging authority over men. Clearly, from Paul's delineation of what women should not do he is not talking about Administrative authority.

Under God’s illumination, Ellen White’s clarifying and unifying leadership in these four theological crises—Salvation by Faith encounter at Minneapolis in 1888; Holy Flesh Movement in 1901 at Battle Creek; Pantheism crisis in 1903 at Washington, D. C.; and the Sanctuary challenge in 1905—was remarkably timely as well as determinative. No other person involved in these four potentially divisive crises was able to unify and set the course for the future. As noted often by many, “It was she who played a key role in resolving these issues. . . . Without Ellen White’s authoritative voice, the outcome may have been very different.”73

Ellen White was indeed the voice of the Advent movement, but not by spelling out each theological detail and settling each crisis with Sinai thunder. She worked to build up the best thinking of the moment, waiting at times until that best thinking ripened so that she did not break the equation initiated many years before: sound Bible study + confirmation by divine revelation = present truth.

It seems that Mrs. White’s highest, greatest contribution was to keep the big picture in view, sensing always the harmful consequences of false theories. Clear in her mind was the full-orbed understanding of the gospel, and any theory that blurred any aspect of the gospel got her careful and concerned attention. She steered the church away from legalism on the right and romantic fanaticism on the left, always concerned with unity and with the distinctive mission of the Adventist Church.

Schwarz, Adventism in America.,

[Guest arnie]

Originally Posted By: arnie

Samuel filled more than one position, He was not only a prophet but a judge of Israel. He ruled Israel. Deborah was a prophetess and judge, ruled over Israel and went to war because that Ninny, Barak, didn't trust God and was afraid to go it alone. So, See, you can be whatever God asks you to be, man or woman and He uses both in whatever manner He choses if WE are willing.

One of the problems with your use of Deborah is that you equate her going out to war with God's calling her to go out to war. The fact that she specifically told Barak that God had called HIM (not her) to lead the people you've somehow overlooked. As a punishment for his unwillingness to believe God's word thru the prophetess God gave the glory to a woman instead!That was seen as a rebuke of his failure to man up and lead.All this happened at a time (unlike today??) when every man did what was right in their own eyes. One of the very low points of Jewish history, hardly a model for future success.Let's not forget either who did the fighting. Who had to put their lives on the line for the peoples freedom.God never asked the women to do this. It is also a misportrayal to speak of any of the judges or prophets, male or female,as "rulers" over Israel. Not until the people chose Saul as king did that type of relationship between the people and leadership develope.

Doug, "One of the very low points of Jewish History". Kind of like now in the North American Adventist Church. I guess God called Deborah out of desparation. Using your reasoning, now He's doing it again.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: John317

Paul's whole point in his inspired instructions was that women are not to exercise authority over men.

Is not EGW considered to be an authoritative voice in Adventistm? While she had no administrative authority, she certainly exercised wide ranging authority over men. Clearly, from Paul's delineation of what women should not do he is not talking about Administrative authority.

Under God’s illumination, Ellen White’s clarifying and unifying leadership in these four theological crises—Salvation by Faith encounter at Minneapolis in 1888; Holy Flesh Movement in 1901 at Battle Creek; Pantheism crisis in 1903 at Washington, D. C.; and the Sanctuary challenge in 1905—was remarkably timely as well as determinative. No other person involved in these four potentially divisive crises was able to unify and set the course for the future. As noted often by many, “It was she who played a key role in resolving these issues. . . . Without Ellen White’s authoritative voice, the outcome may have been very different.”73

Ellen White was indeed the voice of the Advent movement, but not by spelling out each theological detail and settling each crisis with Sinai thunder. She worked to build up the best thinking of the moment, waiting at times until that best thinking ripened so that she did not break the equation initiated many years before: sound Bible study + confirmation by divine revelation = present truth.

It seems that Mrs. White’s highest, greatest contribution was to keep the big picture in view, sensing always the harmful consequences of false theories. Clear in her mind was the full-orbed understanding of the gospel, and any theory that blurred any aspect of the gospel got her careful and concerned attention. She steered the church away from legalism on the right and romantic fanaticism on the left, always concerned with unity and with the distinctive mission of the Adventist Church.

Schwarz, Adventism in America.,

Ellen White did not hold authority over men in the Church.

Her messages however had authority because they came from God.

I think some are confusing these two points.

Ellen White avoided authority over the church.

[Twilight II]

She was a Messenger.

Not a Conference President.

[Twilight II]

Doug, "One of the very low points of Jewish History". Kind of like now in the North American Adventist Church. I guess God called Deborah out of desparation. Using your reasoning, now He's doing it again.

Why would He be doing it again, when there are men available to fill the roles already?

The secularisation movement (liberalism), is trying to do this, but I doubt that Gods hand is behind that particular endeavour.

[CoAspen]

I am just glad I am not a farmer.

Imagine being part of the group that was under that curse...

Imagine selecting a career path where you were cursed because of your occupation.

This is basically the argument Coaspen presented earlier.

It shows the lengths that one has to go to to deny Gods original Edict in the Garden of Eden.

So, Coaspen (I believe it was you that made this point), do you think it fair that only farmers who toil the land are still under the original edict?

And all the other men in society no longer have to "toil"?

I do believe you know what I was talking about, no obfuscation on my part! Many are assigning certain roles to women based on their interpretation of the Geneses story, so why not have all men stay in their role, toilers of the soil...that was the occupation of the day!!

[Twilight II]

I do believe you know what I was talking about, no obfuscation on my part! Many are assigning certain roles to women based on their interpretation of the Geneses story, so why not have all men stay in their role, toilers of the soil...that was the occupation of the day!!

The point you are missing is simple.

Mankind is toiling still.

Not just farmers.

If your interpretation is correct, all Adam needed to do to escape Gods edict was change careers...

Can you not see the absurdity of your argument?

Which is:

Only farmers were judged...

[lazarus]

.

Ellen White did not hold authority over men in the Church.

If you are saying that she did not hold a formal office, I would agree. Title and position are not the only ingredients of authority.

The men of the church accepted Ellen white as a teacher, preacher, counselor. When she stood up to speak men listened to her and often followed her counsel. She assumed a position that Paul clearly counseled against. She did things that Paul counseled against. Would you deny that?

If EGW had no authority over the men of the church then neither did any other prophet have authority over the men and women of God.

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

.

Ellen White did not hold authority over men in the Church.

If you are saying that she did not hold a formal office, I would agree. Title and position are not the only ingredients of authority.

The men of the church accepted Ellen white as a teacher, preacher, counselor. When she stood up to speak men listened to her and often followed her counsel. She assumed a position that Paul clearly counseled against. She did things that Paul counseled against. Would you deny that?

If EGW had no authority over the men of the church then neither did any other prophet have authority over the men and women of God.

Moses and Ellen White were totally different.

Moses had direct authority over Israel.

Ellen White held no authority over the SDA church.

But her messages were authorative.

In fact, the church often ignored her counsel.

Many prophets in the past did not have direct authority over Israel.

Jeremiah for instance was cast into a pit, indicating the authority he had.

Elijah ran from the king.

Prophets are not automatically rulers...

So using Ellen Whites role as a prophet to justify women as spiritual rulers over the church of God, is not wise.

[lazarus]

It's sad that we want to play games with God's word. If want to take Paul's counsel as being applicable, as it reads, in 2011 then we need to look again at the role of EGW in the church.

I've posted it already but I'll say it again. Ellen White clearly goes against the Paul's counsel to the church. If you are serious about strictly applying Paul's counsel you have to reject EGW's as being called of God.