SECC gives ordination credentials to men and women pastors

[Overaged]

It's actually just occurred to me to mention here too that there are altogether too many people either saying, or hinting, that somehow people who are opposed to WO are "not being Christian."

[phkrause]

It's actually just occurred to me to mention here too that there are altogether too many people either saying, or hinting, that somehow people who are opposed to WO are "not being Christian."

[Woody]

It's actually just occurred to me to mention here too that there are altogether too many people either saying, or hinting, that somehow people who are opposed to WO are "not being Christian."

Oh. I was just thinking that the ones opposed to WO had been hinting that. I guess it's a matter of perspective. Can you give me some examples of posts where people who support WO stated that those who opposed it were not being Christian.

[Naomi]

It's actually just occurred to me to mention here too that there are altogether too many people either saying, or hinting, that somehow people who are opposed to WO are "not being Christian."

[Tom Wetmore]

Quote:

On the flip side of the coin here; WO proponents have said in one of these WO topics, that if the Bible is "silent" on something [meaning WO] then we should be able to do it. How does that work?

You would have to ask the author of that statement as to what he was referring to.

I do know that EGW suggested that we use all means available to us and to use new and innovative methods to accompish the spread of the Gospel.

And her husband James White, with her concurrence, stated the following:

Quote:

If it be asked, Where are your plain texts of scripture for holding church property legally? we reply, The Bible does not furnish any; neither does it say that we should have a weekly paper, a steam printing-press, that we should publish books, build places of worship, and send out tents. Jesus says, 'Let your light so shine before men,' etc.'; but he does not give all the particulars how this shall be done. The church is left to move forward in the great work, praying for divine guidance, acting upon the most efficient plans for its accomplishment. We believe it safe to be governed by the following:

RULE

All means which, according to sound judgment, will advance the cause of truth, and are not forbidden by plain scripture declarations, should be employed. [JW, RH, April 26, 1860]

[Woody]

Good One Tom

And I agree with our founders.

[Overaged]

I agree with Woody; this is a good quote Tom; but I would add that it does not mean anything goes...

[Woody]

I would agree with OA . But it clearly means that WO goes.

[Overaged]

Well; I guess you knew when you posted that that it is not so clear to a lot of people.

[Woody]

Well people will believe most anything these days.

I prefer to stick with the clear word of scripture and the SOP.

[Overaged]

Well people will believe most anything these days.

I prefer to stick with the clear word of scripture and the SOP.

While the culture at the time of Bible writers did permit women to serve as priests, as in many religions including women in their priesthood; we do see by sharp contrast, the inspired writers of both the Old Testament and the New Testament maintaining the role distinctions, as assigned by God to men and women from the beginning.

The Bible does present women as full participants with men in the religious and social life of the church.

In the fifth year of Jeremiah's prophetic ministry, the priests went to Huldah the prophetess for counsel (2 Kings 22:13, 14). Women served as musicians and attendants at the tabernacle and Temple (1 Samuel 2:22, 1 Chronicles 25:5, 6, Psalm 68:24, 25). Women prayed aloud and prophesied in the church (1 Corinthians 11:5). They labored side by side with Paul and other workers in the Gospel (Philippians 4:3). In the closing chapter of Romans, Paul begins his greetings and commendations with women, and he includes several other women subsequently in the chapter (16:1-5, 6, 12, 13, 15). Widows (Acts 9:39) may have been an organized body for service in the New Testament church.

But women did not serve as priests in the Old Testament (Exodus 28:1, Numbers 3:1-13) nor did they serve in the leadership/teaching role of elder or pastor in the New Testament (1 Timothy 2:11-14; 3:1-7; Titus 1:5-9; 1 Corinthians 14:33-36).

[Overaged]

Ellen White was never ordained. After more than 25 years of her prophetic ministry, the church voted her the credentials of an ordained minister, but she indicated in 1909 (when she was in her eighties) that she had never been ordained (Arthur L. White, Spectrum , 4, 2 [spring 1972] :7). Nor did she ever exercise the special functions of an ordained minister, such as performing marriages, baptizing, and organizing local churches. As are all church members, she too was ordained of God to work for Him and was given a special work to do. But she was never ordained by human hands.

[Overaged]

I would agree with OA . But it clearly means that WO goes.

Because our women haven't been ordained, has our church undervalued their work and treated them unfairly?

Our church has not handled the pay and hiring issues fairly. Mrs. White protested such unfairness in her own time. But her remedy was not to ordain women, but to treat them justly, as we see in the following example: “And if the Lord gives the wife as well as the husband the burden of labor, and if she devotes her time and her strength to visiting from family to family, opening the Scriptures to them, although the hands of ordination have not been laid upon her, she is accomplishing a work that is in the line of ministry. Should her labors be counted as nought, and her husband's salary be no more than that of the servant of God whose wife does not give herself to the work, but remains at home to care for her family?” (Manuscript Release #330, emphasis supplied). Again, “This question [appropriate pay for women workers] is not for men to settle. The Lord has settled it. You are to do your duty to the women who labor in the Gospel, whose work testifies that they are essential to carrying the truth into families” ( Evangelism , p. 493).

[Overaged]

Noting a “sphere” in which God had called and equipped women to work (see Patriarchs and Prophets , p. 59), Ellen White did call for greater involvement. She urged women especially to engage in personal work for women and families. A clear example of this may be found in her article, “Women to Be Gospel Workers” ( Testimonies for the Church , vol. 6, pp. 114-118).

Among other things, she says there that women “can do in families a work that men cannot do, a work that reaches the inner life. They can come close to the hearts of those whom men cannot reach. Their labor is needed” (pp. 117, 118). “Sisters, God calls you to work in the harvest field and to help gather in the sheaves. . . . In the various lines of home missionary work the modest, intelligent woman may use her powers to the very highest account” ( Welfare Ministry , p. 160).

Does Ellen White warn against seeking a role or “sphere” different from the one we're assigned by God?

Yes.

Referring to Eve, she writes: “She was perfectly happy in her Eden home by her husband's side; but like restless modern Eves, she was flattered that there was a higher sphere than that which God had assigned her. But in attempting to climb higher than her original position, she fell far below it. This will most assuredly be the result with the Eves of the present generation if they neglect to cheerfully take up their daily duty in accordance with God's plan.

“A neglect on the part of woman to follow God's plan in her creation, an effort to reach for important positions which He has not qualified her to fill, leaves vacant the position that she could fill to acceptance. In getting out of her sphere, she loses true womanly dignity and nobility” ( Testimonies for the Church , vol. 3, pp. 483, 484).

[teresaq]

I don't think we should present the opinions and traditions of men as if coming straight from the mouth of God. Nor prohibit by any means those who would study for themselves, and possibly come to different conclusions.

(You should give the source for the copy and paste. )

[doug yowell]

Arguing the pro's and con's of the Biblical propriety of organizing into a legally recognized church is equivalent to determining from Scripture whether or not pastoral headship should be instituted for the first time in the history of organized Christianity? Particularly after Paul has issued God's instructions for the manner in which church leaders should be chosen? Given that his wife had the gift of prophesy and was a very vocal part of the pre-organized Advent Movement, one has to wonder why neither James White, or any of the other founders,including the Prophet, never thought of including this particular in the forging of the most progressive and efficient of gospel accomplishing plans? Are the lessons learned from those other denominations that have gone WO irrelevant?

[doug yowell]

I would agree with OA . But it clearly means that WO goes.

Goes where?

[doug yowell]

Well; I guess you knew when you posted that that it is not so clear to a lot of people.

Nonsense, I believe that WO should go..............away.

[doug yowell]

Because our women haven't been ordained, has our church undervalued their work and treated them unfairly?

Our church has not handled the pay and hiring issues fairly. Mrs. White protested such unfairness in her own time. But her remedy was not to ordain women, but to treat them justly, as we see in the following example: “And if the Lord gives the wife as well as the husband the burden of labor, and if she devotes her time and her strength to visiting from family to family, opening the Scriptures to them, although the hands of ordination have not been laid upon her, she is accomplishing a work that is in the line of ministry. Should her labors be counted as nought, and her husband's salary be no more than that of the servant of God whose wife does not give herself to the work, but remains at home to care for her family?” (Manuscript Release #330, emphasis supplied). Again, “This question [appropriate pay for women workers] is not for men to settle. The Lord has settled it. You are to do your duty to the women who labor in the Gospel, whose work testifies that they are essential to carrying the truth into families” ( Evangelism , p. 493).

How can anyone argue with that??? Ordaining women to the headship role still does nothing to rectify this other situation. If EGW's advice had been followed things may be a little different today,yes? Now if we add female heads we simply increase the gap of the co-working wife.

[doug yowell]

I don't think we should present the opinions and traditions of men as if coming straight from the mouth of God. Nor prohibit by any means those who would study for themselves, and possibly come to different conclusions.

But if, as has been hinted, there is no Bible instruction concerning this matter, what else is left to study but the opinions and traditions of men? Which is it going to be, God speaks thru the Bible or God speaks thru men's opinions, feelings,silence,???

[Woody]

I agree with Woody; this is a good quote Tom; but I would add that it does not mean anything goes...

goes where?

[Woody]

Originally Posted By: Woody

I would agree with OA . But it clearly means that WO goes.

Goes where?

You'd have to ask OA

[Overaged]

Originally Posted By: Overaged

I agree with Woody; this is a good quote Tom; but I would add that it does not mean anything goes...

goes where?

#546693 - Today at 06:02 PM It was in this post where you were the one who said that in your opinion, "WO goes."

So we will all have to ask Woody: "Goes where?" lol

[Woody]

I agree with Woody; this is a good quote Tom; but I would add that it does not mean anything goes...

The above quote from OA on #546657 - Today at 09:18 AM

Let me see ??? Which is first ???

#546693 - Today at 06:02 PM

or

#546657 - Today at 09:18 AM

yep - the evidence is clear. (perhaps not for WO opponents)

OA mentioned "goes" at 9:18 AM which is prior to 6:02 PM when Woody mentioned it in reference to when OA stated it.

WOW !!! No wonder it is difficult to explain WO to this crowd.

I rest my case. When asking what "goes" means - we will have to ask OA.

From the pic that OA has as evidence - it would seem that OA has severely damaged something.

Man - I'm sure glad this is on Natter Matters.

[Naomi]

Please