(moved to new thread) Persecution within the church

[B/W Photodude]

To keep this separate from BlessedMan's subject, I moved my responses to a new thread.

On 4/21/2020 at 4:06 PM, B/W Photodude said:

Well, guess the conference president wanted to throw his weight around and make his point. ... (I have no way of knowing what efforts to secure the "approval" of the conference president were made.) Pretty much everyone knows who Doug Batchelor is and what he reaches. I still think it was agenda driven behavior.

On 4/21/2020 at 6:53 PM, Gregory Matthews said:

Your comment related to the Conference President simply wanting to throw his weight around was both rude and ignorant.  It was beneath your dignity and what you normally post in this forum.

Perhaps I can rephrase that a bit better. There seems to be a variation in personality between churches. Some will be very lax in their spirituality as to be very wordly and others are seriously looking to make themselves look more like Jesus. Your very own favorite place to post from was very clear in stating that the conference president intervened in this planned event to foist his own interpretations on another company of believers. I am quite sure that members of this church were preparing for this event, prayed for the success of this event, only to have the "rug pulled out from under their feet." I would venture that if this church was planning an event with Leonard Sweet, they would have had the conference approval.

FLORIDA CONFERENCE CALLS DOUG BATCHELOR A "POLARIZING INFLUENCE," DISCOURAGES SPEAKING APPOINTMENT

The Florida Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has discouraged one of its churches from inviting Doug Batchelor to speak during a week-long revival meeting planned for the Fall. Batchelor's vocal opposition to ordained women at any level, whether deacons, elders or pastors, elicited a firm response from Florida Conference President Mike Cauley. Cauley issued a memo explaining that Florida Conference Administration advised the Spring Meadows Church in Sanford, Florida to reconsider inviting Batchlor to the October 2-10 meeting, citing the Amazing Facts speaker's divisiveness:

However, the Florida Conference Administration views Pastor Batchelor as a polarizing influence in the Seventh-day Adventist Church. This concern revolves around the subject of women's involvement in ministry, both as local elders and pastors, and that the position that he has taught openly for several years is not in harmony with the policy of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists.

Here also, Spectrum is being disingenuous with their readers in rolling elders and pastors into the same argument. the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has not approved of women as pastors and Batchelor holds views compatible with the world church.

So, this action of the Florida conference had nothing to do with scheduling and everything to do with the conference administration trying to form this church into their own image.

https://spectrummagazine.org/article/2015/08/17/florida-conference-calls-doug-batchelor-polarizing-influence-discourages-speaking

Again in the case of Steven Bohr, the same ideology seems to be in action. 

Illinois Conference Forces Church to Cancel Secrets Unsealed Event

Pastor Stephen Bohr of Secrets Unsealed was scheduled to present a two day Seminar (The Final Test) at the Downers Grove, IL Seventh-day Adventist Church on June 28, 29.  An ordained minister, Pastor Bohr is a respected Bible teacher in good standing who teaches & preaches around the world.

Why was this event cancelled?  

The long answer is that Stephen Bohr supports biblical male leadership in the Church.  This makes him opposed to the ordination of women and the agenda that drives it.  He also believes (as did Ellen White) that God will have a people in the end time that are so submitted to Jesus Christ and His Law that they will receive a special divine seal of mutual belonging.  The Illinois Conference resents his position on these topics.  

The short answer is that the Illinois Conference is marginalizing this gifted speaker and bullying a local congregation because their agenda is more important to them than people.

Some sectors of our church are currently making a big deal out of abuse, as a social justice initiative.  This action by the Illinois Conference is spiritually abusing people.

http://www.fulcrum7.com/news/2019/7/1/illinois-conference-forces-downers-grove-church-to-cancel-secrets-unsealed-event

Obviously, I expect Fulcrum7 to take an even more blunt assessment of the situation than Spectrum would. I tend to agree with their take on this that this is spiritual abuse by the "leadership."

While these two speakers are well known, there is a growing list of members of the church who do not agree with the actions of these conference leaders in their rebellion against the world church. Some local churches have gone to the extreme of getting court orders barring members from entering the church where they have been members for years. 

I do not have time to hunt down the specific cites, but two comments from SOP that come to mind are:

1. In the end times, some members of the church will become the most bitter enemies and persecutors of those remaining faithful to God.

2. A congregation will seldom rise above the level of spirituality of the pastor of that church. 

As I see it, whole congregations are being led in the wrong direction by the leaders (the individual members perhaps should have been more awake) and these events against churches, pastors, and members are the beginnings of the prophecies of persecution within the church, like the beginnings of sorrows.

[Gregory Matthews]

Photodude,, in the statement that I have quoted below, has stated a position that at teh least is subject to misunderstanding, and I consider it to be false.  Please note:  I do not consider Photodude to have intended to make a false statement.  But, his statement needs correction.

Quote

. . . 

the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has not approved of women as pastors and Batchelor holds views compatible with the world church.

The General Conference has not approved women for ordination as clergy.  But, the GC has approved women to serve as congregational pastors.  Under GC policy, such women should be "Commissioned,"  not ordained.  There are two levels to which people are Commissioned.  The first level is that of a Licensed Commissioned Minister.  The second level is that of a Credentialed Commissioned Minister.

In order to become a Credentialed Commissioned Minister, the person must meet requirements which include, among other requirements, the following:

*  Service as a Licensed Commissioned Minister.

*   Election as a local Elder.  [NOTE:  There is an exception made in a few cases.]

*  Ordination as a local Elder.  (Yes, I said "ordination.")

My source of information is the NAD Working Policy:

*  The NAD Working Policy complies with the General Conference working Policy.  See B-15.

*  My comments as to Commissioned Ministers are extracted from L-26 and L-27.

The bottom line is that approved policy does allow women to serve as congregational pastors.  The argument is whether or not policy allows for women to be ordained as clergy. But, I will not discuss that at this point.

There are some who do not believe that women should serve as congregational pastors.  Perhaps (?) Doug Batchelor is one of those.  In any case, it is generally agreed that women are approved to serve as Commissioned congregational pastors

NOTE:  I do not fault Photodude for his error.  Denominational Working Policies are not general available to the SDA public.  I consider this to be wrong, but, I am not in charge.  In any case, the result of this is that   people often are in error as to what SDA policy actually is.

 

 

 

[BlessedMan]

1 hour ago, Gregory Matthews said:

The bottom line is that approved policy does allow women to serve as congregational pastors.

We have one nearby. I dont have a problem calling a lady pastor. If I had to choose, Id choose a lady Pastor. Any that I have ever met are nicer.

[BlessedMan]

55 minutes ago, B/W Photodude said:

FLORIDA CONFERENCE CALLS DOUG BATCHELOR A "POLARIZING INFLUENCE," DISCOURAGES SPEAKING APPOINTMENT

The Florida Conference of Seventh-day Adventists has discouraged one of its churches from inviting Doug Batchelor to speak during a week-long revival meeting planned for the Fall. Batchelor's vocal opposition to ordained women at any level, whether deacons, elders or pastors, elicited a firm response from Florida Conference

So he is not being treated this way because of "mark of the beast stuff?"

[Gregory Matthews]

On the assumption teh the description above of Batchelor's  beliefs on the role of women is true, he is opposed to what is SDA teaching and policy.  As an outsider teo Florida, that President has the right to prevent him from coming into the Conference and speaking against  denominational teaching.

 You may ask:  Would Batchelor actually have done such?  Well, that could have been cleared up if Batchelor had followed policy and sought permission form the President to come to Florida.

Doug is the Sr. pastor of a large congregation in California.  I have attended his service a couple of times.  He preaches what he wants in that congregation.   If he wants ot speak in othera places, he must work in concert with the local President.

 

[JoeMo]

I still think the whole debate over female pastors is a red herring.  I have had female pastors that I loved and others "not so much".  I have had the same experience with male pastors.  IMHO, Christ ordains those who are to teach and lead in the church; not the Conference.

As far as Doug B. is concerned, I agree with Gregory that if he intends to bring his message to an SDA Church in a different conference/union, he should abide by denominational rules. That doesn't mean that he (or I) necessarily support or agree with those rules; but with over 20 years experience as a compliance manager for a couple large energy companies, "rules are rules" and my job was to report any violations of those rules whether or not I agreed with them.  Same with church rules.

I personally don't believe that Doug's message represents the opinion of most main line SDA's (at least the ones I know). I'm not saying he's wrong; I'm just saying most of the believers I know consider Doug sort of a "Taliban" SDA.  I'm confident that if Pastor Doug read some of the stuff I've posted here, he would consider me as either deceived or an apostate.

If he really wanted to, he could have held the event in a neutral place with no support from the conference or local congregations.  That would have got him and AF in trouble, probably.

[B/W Photodude]

20 hours ago, JoeMo said:

I still think the whole debate over female pastors is a red herring. 

Since "red herring" is described as something that distracts from a discussion of the real issue, what is the real issue?

[JoeMo]

On 4/24/2020 at 8:11 AM, B/W Photodude said:

Since "red herring" is described as something that distracts from a discussion of the real issue, what is the real issue?

The real issue is are we going to be led into the Kingdom by our Lord Jesus Christ or by our denomination.  Are we going to listen to leaders who are ordained by Conference presidents or who are called by the Holy Spirit?

The denomination and the Holy Spirit are not the same thing.  Bono once said that when the Holy Spirit leaves the church, all you have left is religion.

[BlessedMan]

5 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Bono once said that when the Holy Spirit leaves the church, all you have left is religion.

Im glad he is not one of the Bible writers. It seems "true religion" is supported in scripture:

Quote

Jas_1:26  If anyone among you thinks he is religious, and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this one's religion is useless.
Jas_1:27  Pure and undefiled religion before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their trouble, and to keep oneself unspotted from the world.

I am always happy to have a little religion in my life.

[phkrause]

8 hours ago, JoeMo said:

The real issue is are we going to be led into the Kingdom by our Lord Jesus Christ or by our denomination.  Are we going to listen to leaders who are ordained by Conference presidents or who are called by the Holy Spirit?

Exactly! Pr Batchelor is definitely led by Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and not the denomination!!

 

8 hours ago, JoeMo said:

The denomination and the Holy Spirit are not the same thing.

Absolutely!!

[BlessedMan]

2 minutes ago, phkrause said:

Exactly! Pr Batchelor is definitely led by Jesus Christ and the Holy Spirit and not the denomination!!

Right now, my comments may seem to be in objection to this; I can assure you, they are not. I am not. This is just about a mistake we are all, for the most part, making. More in another post.

[B/W Photodude]

On 4/25/2020 at 10:57 AM, JoeMo said:

Bono once said that when the Holy Spirit leaves the church, all you have left is religion.

Many like to brag that they are not religious but are "spiritual." Others have said that religion is just the practice of your spirituality.

[BlessedMan]

On 4/25/2020 at 8:57 AM, JoeMo said:

The real issue is are we going to be led into the Kingdom by our Lord Jesus Christ or by our denomination.  Are we going to listen to leaders who are ordained by Conference presidents or who are called by the Holy Spirit?

The denomination and the Holy Spirit are not the same thing.  Bono once said that when the Holy Spirit leaves the church, all you have left is religion.

The great controversy between the Prince of life and the prince of darkness has been going forward, strengthening with each successive generation. Severe indeed has been the conflict waged between right and wrong, between truth and error, between the kingdom of light and the kingdom of darkness. Truth has fought against error and error against truth. The conflict has existed for thousands of years. . . . {CTr 93.2}

[TrevorL]

Greetings B/W Photodude,

On ‎4‎/‎25‎/‎2020 at 12:11 AM, B/W Photodude said:

Since "red herring" is described as something that distracts from a discussion of the real issue, what is the real issue?

From an outsider’s point of view, or perhaps from the view of my environment, I was very surprised when I attended the Daniel Seminar series at one SDA Church. On the first evening the Pastor presented Daniel 1, and on the second evening his wife, who was co-Pastor presented Daniel 2. Years later I attended another evening when a young lady presented an evening on the Prophetic Code series. On both occasions the ladies did a reasonable job. In our fellowship we do not have our sisters speaking, but they are very proficient at Sunday School and other activities.

 

Kind regards Trevor

[B/W Photodude]

On 5/11/2020 at 5:01 PM, TrevorL said:

On both occasions the ladies did a reasonable job. In our fellowship we do not have our sisters speaking, but they are very proficient at Sunday School and other activities.

Never said women could not get up and give very thoughtful intelligent speeches on complicated topics. Having gone thru nursing school and a variety of other academic areas, I had many gifted women as professors. I count a number of woman as a "grandparent" (i.e., woman who were professors that had famous professors for themselves to learn from) of knowledge. Even have listened to a gifted woman speaker talk most eloquently against women's ordination. However, leading a church is different than just getting up and giving a good speech.

[JoeMo]

On 5/14/2020 at 6:29 AM, B/W Photodude said:

However, leading a church is different than just getting up and giving a good speech.

That goes for both male and female clergy.

[stinsonmarri]

On 4/23/2020 at 9:07 AM, Gregory Matthews said:

The General Conference has not approved women for ordination as clergy.  But, the GC has approved women to serve as congregational pastors.  Under GC policy, such women should be "Commissioned,"  not ordained.  There are two levels to which people are Commissioned.  The first level is that of a Licensed Commissioned Minister.  The second level is that of a Credentialed Commissioned Minister.

You know this has been a problem with the male species throughout the centuries. Women are tired of it. You disrespected us in every way you can mention. Look at the Bible from the very beginning by not only the KJV versions they all say this:

 And ELOHIYM said, Let US make *man in OUR IMAGE, after OUR LIKENESS: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. Gen 1:26

The word *man is not accurate at all! The word was Adam and it did not just mean the male species either. The Hebrew word  "âdâm," means ruddy. According to the Etymology Online Dictionary it states:

Ruddy (adj): Late Old English rudig "rubicund," probably from rudu "redness," related to read "red" (from PIE root *reudh- "red, ruddy"). As a British slang euphemism for bloody
 

Strong Hebrew Dictionary states that "âdâm,"  root is  H119-'âdam;  which means to show blood (in the face), that is, flush or turn rosy: - be (dyed, made) red (ruddy).

But leave it up to the Europeans male ego here are the words that only reflect just the male and not both male and female according to the Bible. Human-beings and man-kind and the worst one is wo-man! If you notice in my comments I use flesh beings and I hate to use the word woman and here is why:

'ishshâh  nâshı̂ym: The first form is the feminine of H376 or H582; the second form is an irregular plural; a woman (used in the same wide sense as H582).: - [adulter]ess, each, every, female, X many, + none, one, + together, wife, woman. Often unexpressed in English. Strong Hebrew Dictionary

To be honest, I haven't figure this meaning out yet, does it mean adulter or less, all females are automatically a wife or what for peace sake? Then it is often unexpressed in English!

Woman (n.): "adult female human," late Old English wimman, wiman (plural wimmen), literally "woman-man," alteration of wifman (plural wifmen) "woman, female servant" (8c.), a compound of wif "woman" (see wife) + man "human being" (in Old English used in reference to both sexes; see man (n.)). Compare Dutch vrouwmens "wife," literally "woman-man." Etymology Online Dictionary

Now, the myth that is told that the male Adam was created first to rule over the female; which is not true. The other fable that Gen 2: 16,17, ELOHIYM was only speaking to the male Adam. The male scholars added a word to make it appear that ELOHIYM was only talking to the male. When Moses did a summation and then begin to break it down. This is a main feature that the Bible does is provides the summation first and then breaks it down! The male was allowed to be created first, and to name the animals for a reason. So the he could see that each of the animals has a partner both male and female. All this was done to show that the male Adam needed a help mate! The male Adam realize that he did not see a counterpart for him. Then he was put to sleep and when he awoke, he saw his female counterpart! I am not going to use the word woman instead I believe the Hebrew word meant wife. She was also Adam which means to have blood but most do not catch their names also were called Adam not H120 but H121! If you notice from Gen 2:20 H121 was used as the male Adam's name. Then another word H376 should be husband and not man. But here is the great wow factor that the male species never speak about is Gen 5:1, 2

This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that ELOHIYM created man, in the likeness of ELOHIYM made HE him; male and female created HE them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. WOY, KJV, HRB, TS2009 ECT.

 God created men and women to be like himself. He gave them his blessing and called them human beings. This is a list of the descendants of Adam, the first man: Gen 5:1 CEV

Look the only version says it almost correct is the Contemporary English version; yet, it still uses the word human and it had to express that Adam was the first man, the female was also the first female. The word man was incorrect this how these verses should have state just like the KJV+

This is the book of the generations of Adam H121. In the day that ELOHIYM created Adam H120, in the likeness of ELOHIYM made HE them; male and female created HE them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam H121, in the day when they were created. 

So the male Adam have been fighting over this role about only he should be a preacher. The Bible does not indicate that at all. Yes, YAHWEH allowed male to have more than one wife and also combines; but they paid for it. If you don't thinks so look at Abraham, Jacob, David and Solomon and compare them to Isaac, Joseph, Job, Boaz, Zechariah (John the Baptist daddy) and Joseph the father of YAHSHUA! HE allow the vain male to show just how they treated the female. Who washed YAHSHUA'S FEET, or was at the tomb first and heard the angel tell them that YAHSHUA had risen? Who was the first one who talked to YAHSHUA after HE rose? They were there in the upper room with the male. The Hebrews still had the male superiority problem but THE HOLY SPIRIT had Luke to tell the truth:

These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Miriam the mother of YAHSHUA, and with HIS brethren. Act 1:14

Doris was a disciple and there were also female apostles, and prophetess and in the OT judges and leaders like Esther. Many of you male don't really understand Acts 2:15-18 nor do you understand that a prophet or prophetess is a special preacher! These special preachers ended with John the Revelator. It all was doing ministry work, but now you have a new type of work speaking to the assembly. EGW was a minister and she did exactly what Acts 2:15-18 stated would take place in the last days. The male stop calling her a minister and tried to make her be a prophetess. You refuted her own words and the Words of YAHSHUA, that she stated very clearly. She was told directly she would be a messenger, which is a Gospel preacher a minister who also prophesied and could stand and preach to the assembly of people. This exactly what she did until Uriah Smith after the 1888 conference just like Batchelor, he did not agree that she accepted Jones and Waggoner truth. She not only accepted it but began to preach it. Uriah Smith then sent her away to Australia. If you all know the history of the church, this exactly what happen. She said later there was problem with Uriah Smith book, plus he lied on her and said she saw an angel standing by his side. Her son disputed this!

Here you are worked over about the policy of the church! Can the policies of the church save anyone of us? NO! YAHSHUA'S SAVES! Female, male, even children are going to finish the work! Who died and made you male THE MOST HIGH!  Female have the right to be ministers and preach to the assembly and be over a church as a male does. I feel we will do a better job in the presidency than a male if you ask me! I can vote for a Republican female quicker then I would ever vote for a male. I have never read in the Bible that YAHWEH said that a female could not be a Bishop, minister or an elder! We had a female elder at our church!

Here we are just like Satan want us fighting over this nonsense when the work is not done! Female was made in THE IMAGE OF YAHWEH just like the male. What made us different is our sex organ and that is all. Female produces but the male decides what the child will be male or female. It takes both to produce a child period! YAHWEH created that both should raise a child. It will take both of us to finish the Gospel! I do not care about Batchelor or anyone else who does not speak according to the Word. We put these males up on a pedestal, and that's a major problem. The Bible says the priest put no different between the Holy and the unholy and the male are doing the same thing today! They are not priest and YAHSHUA is after the order of Melchizedek and the 144,000 are not only going to be just male! They will be priest and rulers from all nations and kindred! So, now I am done and it makes me so sad that the male haven't learned that YAHWEH is no respect of person. Person is a female or a male!

Prayer and THE HOLY SPIRIT is need here!

 

 

[BlessedMan]

On 5/14/2020 at 6:29 AM, B/W Photodude said:

very thoughtful intelligent speeches on complicated topics

I can't resist this one my friend. I have heard many such "thoughtful and intelligent" "speeches" and they often reflect quite the opposite.

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

Can the policies of the church save anyone of us?

You should tell Annanias and his wife this.

9 hours ago, JoeMo said:

That goes for both male and female clergy.

I have seen women lead a church just fine. But is that the problem?

[BlessedMan]

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

These special preachers ended with John the Revelator.

"preachers" don't always "lead the church."

 

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

Female have the right to be ministers and preach to the assembly and be over a church as a male does.

They actually do NOT have "the right," because being a Pastor is NOT once in scripture a "rights" issue.

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

We put these males up on a pedestal, and that's a major problem.

some women I've seen are fighting to be on the same "soap-box. (not pedestal).

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

I feel we will do a better job in the presidency than a male if you ask me!

what a lovely, misogynistic statement!

1 hour ago, stinsonmarri said:

These all continued with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Miriam the mother of YAHSHUA, and with HIS brethren. Act 1:14

THIS does NOT confer any special title, status, or privilege of any kind on any woman, or any man. Period!

Jer 3:15 God promises "Pastors after His own heart." We, the church can count on this promise today.

[stinsonmarri]

1 hour ago, BlessedMan said:

You should tell Annanias and his wife this.

Show me in the Bible that they broke the policy of a denomination or church!

But a certain man named KhănanYAH* (Ananias in the KJV) , with Sapphira his wife, sold a property, and kept back from the price, his wife also aware of it, and bringing a certain part, he put it at the feet of the apostles.   But Peter said, KhananYAH, why did Satan fill your heart for you to lie to to THE HOLY SPIRIT, and to secretly keep back from the price of the land? While it remained, was it not thine own? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power? Was it not yours before it was sold? And after it was sold, again you were in control over its proceeds. Why have you placed in your heart to do this spectacle? You have not lied in the presence of men, but in THE PRESENCE of ELOHIYM. Act 5:1-4 HBR

*The actual Hebrew word is KhananYAH which is correct; however the WOY version uses a C and the KJV uses the Greek H. It shows proof that even Luke knew and used the Hebrew language but that's another story. There is no policy here at all but a commitment that KhananYAH made before THE MOST HIGH. The land sold for more and it shows that THE HOLY SPIRIT was in his mind and he thought he could conceal the truth. So, he and his wife lied to THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE PRESENCES of THE JUDGE, THE FATHER and they both were judged and destroyed. What does that have to do with male dominating the female when they are both equal! All females are not married to all males! Females have a right to choose to serve YAHWEH as a Bishop, minister or gospel worker period. There is no church policies that should contradict the Bible. YAHWEH is no respect of either a female or a male that is what the Bible says and not the usual male ego policy!

Peace!

[B/W Photodude]

On 5/16/2020 at 10:29 AM, JoeMo said:

That goes for both male and female clergy.

Certain groups were picked for certain tasks in the Bible. Males were called out for a number of things. For the priesthood, Levites were called out. I am quite sure King Uzziah could swing an incense censer just fine, but his disobedience left him living in a several house afflicted with leprosy for the rest of his life. Being able to do something is not the question, but does the Bible support it. Of course, you can twist it around to say whatever you want.