Church Member Pens Open Letter Regarding His Non-Compliance


(Steve Mga) #42

Frank –
Something Spectrum has not done is an IN DEPTH article on Women of the 1st Century
A.D. concerning their Interactions In Society, HOW they were perceived by what they
wore, HOW they fixed their hair. HOW they related to men in general in society.
UNLESS we understand some of these issues, we will NEVER understand the cautions
Paul gave to women believers of that 1st Century time period.


#43
What if the principle is the priesthood of all believers? The Spirit's freedom to call whom He will to serve in spiritual leadership? What if that is a principle? It is definitely the one the early pioneers embraced after in-depth study.

(Cfowler) #44

Unrelated, but why is your post in such a weird format? Haven’t seen that before. :thinking:


#45

Harrpa,

Do you know how many times I have told you that the principle of the priesthood of all believers is already in the Old Testament?


(George Tichy) #46

Just don’t do it yet. The GC will save you time as they will soon be providing church members with an application form in which one will be able to “register as an offender,” thus officially becoming a non-compliant member.

Those self-reported non-compliant members will be denounced in public every time they are spotted making any financial contribution to the Church. It will be announced on every first Sabbath of the months, something like this:

" Last month the following non-compliant members, John Doe, Jane Doe, etc., made contributions to the Church. We strongly repudiate such a defiant behavior - but we are keeping the money anyway!" … :wink:


#47

@Nymous

But you have decided to disregard this principle and ignore the study on women in spiritual leadership by Uriah Smith and James White and many other of our forefathers because…?


(Steve Mga) #48

Nymous –
Perhaps Uriah Smith, James White WERE WRONG!

After all, THEY were Programmed by the Churches THEY GREW UP IN. And
likely brought those pre-conceived Ideas INTO the SDA Church Traditions.


#49

Harrpa,

It is you who have decided to disregard what the Bible means by priesthood of all believers. In the Bible, this principle has never meant that women could act as priests.

So, it is an argument that cannot be used today to justify women ordination.


#50

Steve,

The same argument could be used against the WO proponents. Maybe they have been programmed by the society (the Western world) they grew up in and now are trying to bring those preconceived ideas into the SDA church.

All of this to say that the “perhaps” or “likely” will lead us nowhere. We need evidence.

To say that Uriah Smith or James White were programmed without any proof is not enough, above all when the same could be said of anybody.


#51

Why not? Of course it does. When Jesus died and the temple cloth ripped it signified the elimination of the Old Testament priesthood system and the direct access through Christ to the Father by everyone, not just men.

The spiritual gifts outlined in the New Testament have no gender disclaimers.

You believe in the Headship Heresy of only-males-can-be-gifted-by-the-Holy-Spirit-for-Spiritual-Leadership. Do you also denounce The Trinity?


(Frankmer7) #52

There is no priestly class and no literal priests in the NT outside of Jesus himself. Thus, the concept of the priesthood of all believers in the NT includes all who are in him. All believers is literal. It means all! Not all except females who are excluded from certain giftings or functions because of their chromosomes.

How do you qualify all?

Frank


(Mens Sana) #53

We are equal in value and dignity, not in role. We are not identical, either.

I believe you’re so much infected by the “progressive” ideology of this world, that you want to bend even the interpretation of the Scriptures to fit that ideology.

Paul’s explanations of his views aren’t cultural and are in line with the rest of the Bible. Your views are exclusively cultural and against the Bible.

It’s your choice. Nobody forces you to be a member of this church/ organization.

This is ridiculous. You victimize yourself and pose as a martyr because you rebel against the Bible and against the doctrine of the church? Sorry, but this kind of emotional manipulation doesn’t work with me.


#54

Here we see it again. Once more in a long line of anti-WO who urge anyone disagreeing with their point of view to just leave.

Male Headship is NOT the doctrine of the Church or even policy. Male Headship is reaching of the Adventist hand across the gap to grasp Evangelical Calvinism’s degrading of Christ in the Trinity as lesser and subjugated to the Father.

The doctrine of the Church on this issue is Fundamental 14.

Those in our church who support our foundational and Protestant belief in the Priesthood of All Believers and who are punished and disciplined for that are not engaging in “emotional manipulation” and “martyrdom.”

It’s your choice to believe in the subjugation of Jesus Christ in the Trinity, the basis for Male Headship Heresy. But the Trinity is a foundational belief of Christianity.


(Mens Sana) #55

Who is “we”? Why don’t you speak in your own name?


#56

No, it doesn’t because when it is used in the Old Testament, it didn’t mean that women could be priestesses. And when Peter speak about it, he makes a direct reference to the Old Testament.

So, it is not a good argument in favor of WO.

(please note that I am not speaking about the validity or not of WO here. I am just speaking about the argumentation)


(Mens Sana) #57

Nobody said women aren’t important.

God didn’t make men and women identical. They are equal in the sense that they are equally valuable, but they have different roles. A man can’t be a mother, for example, no matter how much you’d want to. So men and women aren’t “equal” *(in the sense you suggest) in this matter.

Nobody said that women shouldn’t be part of a ministry and shouldn’t have any function in the Church.

There were 5 woman prophets in the Old Testament, so, please…

No matter how much mental gymnastics you perform, the Bible cannot be interpreted in the way you suggest, if you are honest, logical, sane and not culturally biased.


(Tim Teichman) #58

I think, maybe, you’re mixing up the meaning of equal and identical.

Gender makes us different, but we can sill be equal at the same time.

Apart from reproduction, there is very little to no reason to force anyone into roles, which each individual should be free to pick for themselves. There is no value in promoting the idea that there other gender-specific roles, which in reality don’t exist - just like race doesn’t actually exist biologically.


(Mens Sana) #59

I said exactly the opposite. Equal doesn’t mean identical, in features or in roles. The person I replied to seem to mix them.

As I said, we are equal in value before God, but that doesn’t mean that we should do exactly the same things.

The Bible says something else and maybe you should accept it, by faith, if you don’t understand it.

Gender differences do exist, biologically. Racial differences are also biological.

You are free to do what you want, but don’t force an organization based on a different doctrine to accept your non-biblical beliefs.

It’s not only the reproduction, but even if you consider only reproduction, the consequence of it is a big difference in roles, in family and society.

This is just your opinion, which for me has no value, no offense. I try to be a Christ-ian, not an Eichman-ian :slight_smile:


(C.B.S.) #60

*(in the sense you suggest…
the Bible cannot be interpreted in the way you suggest, if you are honest, logical, sane and not culturally biased.

This bible interpretation - is as you can read - a honest one from the Mennonite World Conference! It would be wiser to read all before addressing to the wrong person And what is more important NOT to claim that your interpretation is the right one. It can’t.


(Mens Sana) #61

TOGETHER a man and a woman are the image of God: They are created to become one and “create” other human beings. Also there was an order in Creation. The man was created first, and the woman was created from the man, to be his helper.

According to THE BIBLE, God says He is our Father. Jesus, who is also God, is His Son, the head of the Church and the head of every man. The man is the head of the woman.
“But I want you to realize that the head of every man is Christ, and the head of the woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.” - 1 Corinthians 11:3

You like it or not, there is a hierarchy in heaven and there is a hierarchy on earth, in the family and in the church. The hierarchical relations from heaven are mirrored on earth. This is what God said, not me.

Don’t you think there is a weird coincidence that in a time when the world is secularized as never before in human history and Christians and Christian churches are worldly as never before, there are Christians who suggest that the Church and its doctrine should be changed in a way that is identical with the secular ideology about genders?