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

[olger]

Back to the topic, I am glad that the variance vote failed.

g

[Twilight II]

Back to the topic, I am glad that the variance vote failed.

g

Me to.

But the secularisation agenda will keep being pushed, over and over.

Until eventually it splits the church.

Which is the real agenda anyway...

[doug yowell]

Back to the topic, I am glad that the variance vote failed.

g

Don't think we ever left the topic but I'll reup my two thumbs anyway.

[doug yowell]

But speaking out of the other side of the mouth the notion is that being a prophet is superior to the humanly ordained role of pastor, since the prophet speaks for God and the pastor speaks only for the church. And in practice no pastor dares to dispute or question the word of a prophet since the prophet has higher authority.

IIt does not make much sense, does it!

Where in the Bible or our church history do we find the need for the church to confer it's permission for a prophet to be a prophet? The very role itself conveys a different response. Generally the gift of prophesy is not considered a "leadership" position. That's one reason why EGW was never an elder,deacon, or pastor of her local congregation.Neither was she GC,union, of conference president. Neither did she perform the same tasks as her husband. She did also often remind us that the man was to be the high priest of the family a role which she attrubuted to her husband.In other words,the role of a prophet is not one of authority in the same sense as "those who rule over you".The gift of prophesy is not an office in the church open to anyone who feels the call.

[doug yowell]

It does not take excessive "calculus for physics" to see a pattern in that recent "initiative".

I wonder what the resulting effects would have been had it passed? Once ordination has been deemed unnecessary in order for the highest positions of governmental leadership to be exercised one wonders what ordination would be good for( though sometimes I already wonder that)? Maybe an antiquated meaningless tradition soon to be disgarded. The very words themselves carry a very different aura.Credentialed vs.ordained.College of Medical Evangelists vs. Loma Linda University.Something usually changes. Did you happen to read I Kings 12:31?

[doug yowell]

Me to.

But the secularisation agenda will keep being pushed, over and over.

Until eventually it splits the church.

Which is the real agenda anyway...

No, the real agenda is to UNITE EVERYBODY under the "truth" that there is no meaningful difference between the sexes/that men have nothing unique to bring to the leadership table, and that God's creative design and subsequent directives for the human race are antiquated, unfair, and destructive.

[SivartM]

No, the real agenda is to UNITE EVERYBODY under the "truth" that there is no meaningful difference between the sexes

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: Twilight II

Me to.

But the secularisation agenda will keep being pushed, over and over.

Until eventually it splits the church.

Which is the real agenda anyway...

No, the real agenda is to UNITE EVERYBODY under the "truth" that there is no meaningful difference between the sexes/that men have nothing unique to bring to the leadership table, and that God's creative design and subsequent directives for the human race are antiquated, unfair, and destructive.

Like the rest of society you mean?

[Twilight II]

Originally Posted By: doug yowell

No, the real agenda is to UNITE EVERYBODY under the "truth" that there is no meaningful difference between the sexes

There is more variation within a group than between two groups. Of course there is difference between males and females but if that means that I have superior leadership capabilities by virtue of my Y chromosome you will be sorely disappointed by all of the females I know who are vastly superior in that regard.

Quote:

that men have nothing unique to bring to the leadership table

As opposed to women having nothing unique to bring to the leadership table, right?

Quote:

and that God's creative design and subsequent directives for the human race are antiquated, unfair, and destructive.

Or, in other words, that humans should not be devalued based on the cultural assumptions of people who also condoned slavery (which was also justified on biblical grounds, because who would argue with God's curse of Ham?).

So you equate Gods decree on the statuts of women in the home and church as a cultural issue akin to slavery?

I never realised God was bound by such considerations of "culture" and was subject to the changing tides of human ideology?

[SivartM]

So you equate Gods decree on the statuts of women in the home and church as a cultural issue akin to slavery?

I never realised God was bound by such considerations of "culture" and was subject to the changing tides of human ideology?

Do you equate God's decree on slavery as a cultural issue akin to stoning the disobedient?

Nobody is binding God to culture except people who want us all to live exactly as people did thousands of years ago.

[doug yowell]

Like the rest of society you mean?

Like the rest of western society,so far.

[Steve Ervin]

Although I haven't read all the posts and I'm certainly not qualified as an Adventist theologian, I find this discussion very interesting in light of the existance of Ellen White's Ordination Certificate to the Gospel Ministry, to include her leading the direction of the infant church. Call it what you will, but leadership is leadership, whether formal or informal.

Although men and women certainly have their differences, what does gender have to do with the Gifts of the Spirit? Why would God care about our gender as long as we are about using His gifts for His purposes, especially the remnant commission/privilege that has been given to this church?

[CoAspen]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

And when was the last time you saw someone sitting around it their controlled office working by the sweat of their brow? Read the 'punishment' for males....any males actually doing what is described in Genesis other than the occasional farmer? Didn't think so!!! Yep, we male seem to have slipped under the wire..huh! Just making sure those females stay in their place!

Right on you guys! High fives all of you!!

Can't you ever bring anything Biblically thoughtful or nonsarcastic to discussion,CoA? Try reading the reason why God cursed the ground in Gen.3:17 Maybe God's curse under the circumstances was actually for man's good. Maybe sinful man could no longer handle the Eden like lifestyle that he once had.And maybe the headship of the man was designed as a blessing under the circumstances for sinful women.

STill did not answer the question!

Got keep the double standard going....men up...women down!

[CoAspen]

Originally Posted By: CoAspen

And when was the last time you saw someone sitting around it their controlled office working by the sweat of their brow? Read the 'punishment' for males....any males actually doing what is described in Genesis other than the occasional farmer?

Really? If working in the air conditioned office is such a joy then why does anybody need a vacation?

Oh the sorrow..an ac office!!

By the way quoting a text means what! Interpretation vs Interpretation? That really works well!!

[Tom Wetmore]

Quite right, Steve. But sadly we will soon hear from someone attempting to explain away those ordination certificates of EGW issued by the General Conference.

[John317]

Although I haven't read all the posts and I'm certainly not qualified as an Adventist theologian, I find this discussion very interesting in light of the existance of Ellen White's Ordination Certificate to the Gospel Ministry, to include her leading the direction of the infant church.

I've talked to the Ellen G. White Estate about this, and according to them, the Certificate was given to Ellen White for financial reasons. The conferences paid for her travel expenses to visit the various churches, and therefore she needed to have an official certificate in order to receive reimbursment.

She received her individual certificate only after her husband died. The certificate had nothing to do with her prophetic ministry. She was a prophet long before she received any kind of certificate. There's no indication that there was ever an ordination ceremony when the leaders of the church officially recognized her as a prophet. She never needed such offical recognition, nor did she ever request it.

[John317]

Where in the Bible or our church history do we find the need for the church to confer it's permission for a prophet to be a prophet? The very role itself conveys a different response. Generally the gift of prophesy is not considered a "leadership" position. That's one reason why EGW was never an elder,deacon, or pastor of her local congregation.Neither was she GC,union, of conference president. Neither did she perform the same tasks as her husband. She did also often remind us that the man was to be the high priest of the family a role which she attrubuted to her husband.In other words,the role of a prophet is not one of authority in the same sense as "those who rule over you".The gift of prophesy is not an office in the church open to anyone who feels the call.

[Guest arnie]

All of the positions mentioned are "important work". I didn't imply otherwise. On the contrary. I just think, given the Church rules, that men ought to be doing them and why any woman would choose to be ordained in pastorship in this Church is beyond me. Being a Pastor is a monumental thankless job. More social work than evangelism. There are rewards, but alot of "whining" by miserable constituents, not to mention, discrimination towards women who dare to hold executive positions. There may be discrimination in the secular work place, but it's not backed up with "God says". In this society, women can go into any profession we choose and be extremely successful. Really, if spreading the gospel is our objective, then the good news of Jesus is most likely being spread by people who are just Christian in behaviour, whatever their profession, than any other source.

[Guest arnie]

Hi Doug, Are you familiar with the word "humble"? Your quote, "Yes, you're missing a lot". Actually, perhaps you should be in charge of jon duty, then maybe, just maybe, you could really appreciate the full extent of spreading the gospel.

[John317]

I completely agree with you.

God has many ministries in the church for women to do, though. Women are simply able to do some things better than men are. Ellen White herself encouraged women to be Bible instructors and also to preach when the minister had to be gone. She told at least one woman to preach in church as often as she could. However, Ellen White never suggested that women should take over the positions that men held, such as elder or church pastor.

[doug yowell]

There may be discrimination in the secular work place, but it's not backed up with "God says". In this society, women can go into any profession we choose and be extremely successful.

Why then did the Bible not address this discrimination thousands of years ago? To the contrary there are many statements that openly advocate the very church policies that you decry. Why did Jesus choose NO WOMEN APOSTLES? Why were there mentioned NO WOMEN ELDERS at the Acts 15 GC meeting? Why NO WOMEN PRIESTS in the OT? Why NO WOMEN head pastors for the SDA church until recently? Why Was EGW not a head pastor, GC president, or advocating this change in discrimination? Why all the statements from Peter and Paul about the man being the spiritual leader (high priest) of the home? Why do all the Biblical qualifications for the offices of deacon,elder/bishop only mention men? Why are women specifically forbidden to exercise authority over their husbands? Why are we supposed to throw out all this Bible evidence in favor of using society's secular workplace practices as our church model?

[doug yowell]

Hi Doug, Are you familiar with the word "humble"? Your quote, "Yes, you're missing a lot". Actually, perhaps you should be in charge of jon duty, then maybe, just maybe, you could really appreciate the full extent of spreading the gospel.

Yes, Arnie, I am familiar with that word. My original response to you was directly related to your opening question "Am I missing something?" You have since noted that you haven't read the entire thread so I think my answer was appropriate and not meant to be condescending.You also implied that some here were advocating the baning of all women from all church ministry. Even a quick survey of our positions taken from previous posts should dispell that notion.By the way I have worked as a common laborer for many years of my life including a stint at shoveling chicken poop (which I would have gladly traded for a couple of years in the jon).Does that count for or against me?

[doug yowell]

All of the positions mentioned are "important work". I didn't imply otherwise. On the contrary. I just think, given the Church rules, that men ought to be doing them and why any woman would choose to be ordained in pastorship in this Church is beyond me. Being a Pastor is a monumental thankless job. More social work than evangelism. There are rewards, but alot of "whining" by miserable constituents,

Now that's the gospel truth!!

[Tom Wetmore]

I've talked to the Ellen G. White Estate about this, and according to them, the Certificate was given to Ellen White for financial reasons. The conferences paid for her travel expenses to visit the various churches, and therefore she needed to have an official certificate in order to receive reimbursment.

She received her individual certificate only after her husband died. The certificate had nothing to do with her prophetic ministry. She was a prophet long before she received any kind of certificate. There's no indication that there was ever an ordination ceremony when the leaders of the church officially recognized her as a prophet. She never needed such offical recognition, nor did she ever request it.

As predicted...

Interesting how this gets spun. Taking that "explanation" and comparing it to the actual language of the ordination credential makes it sound like they must have been intentionally deceitful. If she wasn't really an ordained minister as represented on the credential, it was done simply for money. Was the General Conference lying when it certified that she was an ordained minister? And why would they misrepresent EGW this way, if women were not accepted as being ordained? Why would a prophet of God agree to or even silently acquiesce in such a falsehood about herself? Why not simply provide an accurate letter of authorization or some other credential that designated her as an authorized person to speak and act on behalf of the General Conference? For her to pose as something that she really wasn't in order to get money just seems dishonest, don't you think? This was not the only way one could possibly get reimbursement for expenses. And it wasn't as if nobody knew who she was at that point in time that they would have needed such certification. What you said was not really correct anyway, but it just shows the lengths to which those opposed to women in pastoral ministry will go to explain this away. Who from the White Estate told you that?

Actually, what you left out was the real facts. In EGW's time ordained ministers were paid more than other workers and men were paid more than women for the same work. The common practice was to issue joint ministerial credentials to husbands and wives working together in ministry. The ordination credential identified them both as ministers. The wife was recognized as being a minster as well as the husband and listed in the conference records as a licensed minister. But typically only the husband was paid or if the wife was paid it was a lower amount, even though she was also a minister.

When James died, EGW was left without his higher salary, or any salary for that matter. (Her only income was from the sale of her books which was not steady income.) The church had no pension plan for workers. Given their joint status and prior joint ordination credentials, the General Conference simply continued issuing her the credential alone and continued paying her at the higher salary of an ordained minister. (This was also done for other surviving spouses of ministry teams.) It was simply recognition that she had been functioning in that capacity for years already along with James White. The records do not indicate there was any disagreement that this was the right thing to do. Again, it was not as if this was the only idea they could have come up with to pay her a salary. They could have given her any designation they wanted to. But the credential is self-evident that this was a fact upon which they agreed as appropriate. They were not lying or bending the truth. They honestly viewed her as an ordained minister of the Church.

If it was done, as some have suggested, only to accommodate her and pay her more money, this was an abuse, a fraud even, on the sacred tithe funds of the Church. If EGW was in fact not an ordained minister, she was not entitled to receive the sacred tithe as pay for an ordained minister. But the truth is that she was recognized by the highest authority of the Church as an ordained minister and paid accordingly.

And the argument that she wasn't ordained since there was no ordination ceremony is equally fallacious. First of all, we are not a church dependent on ritual. (EGW confirms this.) The ordination ceremony is a formal public recognition of a fact of the calling. The issuance of credential is a formal recognition of a fact of the calling. That the highest governing body of the Church took an official action to authorize the credential and in fact issued that credential is as much a public act of recognition of the fact of the calling as any ceremony or ritual of laying on of hands.

The fact is there is no evidence or record of the laying on of hands ceremony for EGW. But there is likewise no evidence of it for other founders of the Church that were also recognized as ordained ministers. (Strange isn't it that none of them have had their credentials questioned?!?!) Either it didn't happen or records of such events were not kept. Oh wait a minute... There is an official record giving the best evidence that ordination did in fact happen. Its called a credential. That is the point of it. It confirms and certifies the fact of what it says on the credential. She was in fact an ordained minster of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. And that is the unvarnished truth.

[Guest arnie]

Hey doug, Your question,"Why did God not choose women apostles in Old & New Testament times"? Let's see, you listed just about every position except PROPHETS? I don't think the New Testament has any record of women prophets,though. O wait! He did choose one in the last century. What do ya suppose that means?