I don’t think being a life long Adventist gives anyone more qualification. But, If you listen to DB speak, after a sermon or two, you come away with the fact that he doesn’t believe in righteousness by faith, even though he will say that he does. It is always a qualifier that you can’t do this and you must do that in order to be saved. In other words, he’s a Pharisee.
Isn’t Righteousness by Faith the rock-solid bedrock foundation of the Protestant movement?
RBF seems to create a tension directly within Adventism by the required necessity of keeping Sabbath to be “saved.”
While the Sabbath is a symbol of the post-Christ-Event on the cross of now ‘resting’ in Christ’s righteousness, it somehow gets twisted as a requirement for righteousness.
Anybody can decide whether to pay tithe, and to whom to pay it, regardless of what the NAD or Fulcrum7 says. But “diverting tithe” is the only sin the church will eagerly do something about.
If you are against WO and think that the NAD is wrong, pay your tithe in the form of offering to your local church.
If you are for WO and think the GCis wrong, pay your tithe in the form of offering to your local church.
Just don’t pay it to Spectrum or Fulcrum7 because that will make the NAD and the GC mad.
There’s nothing in the Bible that says you’ve got to pay tithe to a conference, the NAD or the GC. You’ve got the pen and can direct it however you want.
Your completely wrong. There are cases of women who have abused their marital relationship, but the fact is that men are guilty in far greater numbers. That doesn’t make it right. But the fact is that the church still punishes women far more sternly than it does men. My wife is a retire therapist and she had dealt with a great deal of this kind of one-sided ness and your simply and Carlos makes a very good point. This would be one more reason why we need more women in leadership positions. The old White Guy mentality must stop.
You really don’t want to use Gen 1 in any other context than an allegory. Plane and simple. There was no day 1 through 3 because it says God created the sun moon and stars on the 4th day. The author of Gen 1 did not understand the solar system. You cannot have a day 1,2, or 3 without the sun. And for that matter, you can’t have light, which was supposedly created on day 1.
If that doesn’t work, then trying to use it to prove a point is just a plain worthless argument.
How would they even know?
They wouldn’t. Many probably do.
Tim - Getting back to your story of Genesis 1.
The story of Genesis 1 REALLY DOES not conclude until Genesis 2 verse 3.
Someone made a HORRIBLE ERROR when they did the Chapter – Verse thing.
The Second Story of Creation [presumably written by someone else] begins on
Genesis 2 verse 4.
It is possible that you are right. Of course, we don’t know the real statistics so it is impossible to really know for sure.
Of course, WO and LGBT are different questions but this is not really the problem. For many anti WO (and, in fact, the pro WO as well), what matters is the articulation of the argumentation. If one can use the same articulation and replace WO by LBGT, a lot of people would accept it. We can see this today when the LGBT movement is using the same arguments as those used in the civil rights movement thus turning their struggle into one for civil rights.
As for knowing if there are prescriptions against WO… well, this is the point of the debate…
This is not that simple. I remember reading an article from someone from another denomination (unfortunately, it was years ago and I don’t remember the reference) who showed what happened in his church where, after being opposed to WO, they finally accepted it and, after that, the LGBT used the same arguments as for the WO issue to be fully accepted in the church and now they have LGBT pastors.
So, it seems that those who link WO and LGBT have some examples to support their claims.
I would disagree a little bit here.
First, speaking of hysteria is somehow unfair and linking MH to racism is a little bit extreme. And we want to remember that it is a religious issue not a civil rights one. A church is not a pure democracy. In a church, God’s rules are supposed to prevail. People can accept them or leave.
Second, when we read the Bible, we see that God, though being a non-respecter of persons, established some distinctions and restrictions. For example, we all know that only the males of the tribe of Levi could be priests. Even the males from the other tribes couldn’t access the priesthood.
So, we have to examine the issue carefully before saying that such and such actions are discriminatory as they could also be legit (even if we don’t like them).
I totally agree that LGBT have civil rights. America is not a theocracy and a religious test cannot be applied. This is why it is important not to mix the two contexts, the civil one and the religious one.
Well, what I know is that it is a difficult question and there is a lot of confusion and passion. The guidance of the Holy Spirit is, more than ever, a necessity if a) we want to discern God’s will; b) we want to be able to accept it.
Can you be specific? I wonder if these unelected officials are given a seat at the GC as voting members? I wonder if they remuniated themselves with their own written policies that are not GC compliant? I wonder if they maintain their own building? I wonder what percent of the tithe they absorb to function as general administors?
The truth about Adventism under Ted Wilson is bad enough, why make it worse. The North American Division brings more sense to the table. qualified women in the pulpit should be a moment of rejoicing. Present Truth is Christ is Creator, Redeemer and coming King of King . In the mean time He sends His Spirit to comfort and guide us. To some He calls to proclaim His Truth, gender is not a consideration. God gave us work and rest let us use each in His name.
Nathan I find you to be logical and fair. We should consider this aspect as well;
To arbitrarily state that you want 1000 more women pastors is about as TOP down heavy handed statement as you can get giving that if there were 2000 churches asking for women pastors they would have already had them. Truely ironic given the proponents decry what they see as the GC making top down mandates.
You cant force 1000 women Pastors on churches who dont want them.
George wants the ratio of women pastors the same as the ratio of members as if this will result in some divine equality, but it is a delusion based solely on his personal whims.
The NAD statement should have read that they will seek to find qualified Pastors for local churches and include the churches preference for a male or female in their search criteria.
This is only a continuation of a problematic system where anyone can go to Andrews etc and get a degree and expect to be hired as a pastor. I can tell you that there are many conferences and Unions where budgetary concerns are limiting the number of FTE salaries available. So much so that from time to time they let Pastors go and redistrict giving the remaining Pastors more churches to lead.
In more than 1 conference they were given the opportunity to reduce their salaries to allow the couple Pastors being laid off to stay. They declined.
So much for honoring the calling of the Lord they all claim to have.
stskeels and nursing –
Here in Macon, GA we could use an SDA woman pastor to minister to the homeless.
Let her sit on the park bench on 3rd and Cherry in front of the fountain and pray and
give comforting Scripture to the homeless. There is one woman, not a pastor, not
an SDA who does this every day. Who goes to the Methodist church at lunch time and eats with
them every day. Gives them hugs, smiles, and is their friend, their Spiritual Advisor.
I am sure other cities and towns in GA could use the same.
Pastor and Nurse [medical person] working together is one of the evangelical combinations
that Ellen promoted.
We need to OPEN OUR SPIRITUAL EYES to see the possibilities of Service that God has
for Pastors besides just taking up space on Sabbath mornings behind the pulpits of our
Theres a hymn, “Trust and Obey” that sums up righteousness by faith. If you do not act on your faith (the trust part) by obeying (the obey part) then you are not going to be saved. The obeying is not a works righteousness, but the outgrowth of faith. You can do nothing on your own, only by submitting to God. But to say obedience is not necessary is “cheap grace” and a warping of the concept of righteousness by faith.
but this isn’t a real risk, unless the standards of the bible and egw are set aside, and the standards of the world are substituted in their place…of course if the standards of the world govern our church, there is no point in having the church…
this isn’t a real debate…that is, it isn’t debatable whether we have explicit biblical and egw proscriptions or not…we have explicit proscriptions against LGBT, while we do not have explicit proscriptions against WO - end of story…of course the anti-WO crowd acts like there are explicit proscriptions against WO…but like trump’s followers, which many in the anti-WO crowd in fact are, they’re living in a fake world …this biblical and egw distinction between LGBT and WO doesn’t rest on interpretation or argument…it can’t be challenged…
it is true that in many mainstream non-adventist churches, WO has been followed by LGBT…but let’s understand that these churches aren’t necessarily governed by the bible, and they are definitely not governed by egw…all of them accept a sunday sabbath, despite explicit saturday sabbath texts…this being the case, is it surprising that they set aside explicit LGBT proscriptions, as well…what’s going on is not some nexus between WO and LGBT…what’s happening is the setting aside of the bible, which of course opens the way to anything that comes along…without the bible, the non-adventist churches hardly need WO to pave the way for LGBT…their setting aside something as plain as the saturday sabbath has already made them sitting ducks for any error, however extreme…
is it…if it walks, quacks and looks like a duck, why not acknowledge that we’re looking at a duck…
this is another poorly thought-through conservative point…the fact that males outside of Levi couldn’t access the priesthood shows that something other than maleness was a qualifying factor…if anything, this particular talking point unravels the MH argument…
there is no point in praying for the holy spirit on an issue that basic logic and thought can solve…this is because god doesn’t propose to do for us what he has left and equipped us to do for ourselves, LP:267…
Other Denominations [Christian], and other Religions [ like Conservative Jews]
believe that EVERY HUMAN IS A CHILD OF GOD,
Because THAT IS TRUE, God LOVES and ACCEPTS ALL.
That is WHY they find it OK for Gays, Lesbians, Transgender, UNSURES can
worship and find joy in friendship with God within Community of Believers.
They ALSO believe that EACH Human Being deserves happiness and deserves
Companionship and friendship of some type.
They BELIEVE that God calls EVERY Human Being into Service. This includes
ALL Humans with a Brain, no matter HOW that Brain is wired from Conception.
They are OK with what Service God calls to do. And rejoice in Each Persons Call.
Seventh day Adventist Denomination believers DO NOT accept these WE BELIEVE
that other Christians do. This makes ALL SDA raised GLTIO-Unsures “unloved”,
“unwanted” unless they PRETEND to change and PRETEND to be Heteros,
PRETEND to be “cured”. PRETEND that what is preached from EGW and the Bible
is REALLY true, that there could be “more truth” that is not being discussed there.
The biggest problem SDAs have is BEING SURE that God DOES NOT Love, that
God DOES NOT Accept ALL Humans, that NOT ALL Humans are Children of God.
I am answering again because this is such an important issue.
If you have questions, I would suggest two books:
The Cost of Discipleship by Bonhoeffer or Faith and Works by EGW. Both very good on this issue.
A quote from Ellen:
Fatih and Works, 24
“If you would gather together everything that is good and holy and noble and lovely in man and then present the subject to the angels of God as acting a part in the salvation of the human soul or in merit, the proportion would be rejected as treason.”
You are right, the 1000 number is very “over the top.” It would help matters if leadership would not use unrealistic numbers to share their “dreams” for the future. I wonder if the 1000 number was a world number that got sucked into the NAD.
To hire that many female pastors would require a moratorium on all male hires, or at least a quota system, for several years. It is fun to imagine what it would look like at Andrews if a system like this was announced. The dudes would lose their minds.
“The Cost of Discipleship”, by Bonhoeffer is a very practical book.
By living by his beliefs he was able to endure prison. He was able to endure
walking up to the gallows.
Not only that, but he was able to train many pastors who did not follow the
National Church and give in to the Empire of Adolphe Hitler.
Perhaps when Doug completes the building of HIS university, the enrollment at
Andrews will go down. Leaving many spots open for others to be accepted.
1000 Pastors. President Jackson did not give a time frame for accomplishing this.
100 women entering the Freshman classes spread over the number of colleges we
have in North America would be easy. That would be 1000 in ten years graduating
with their Bachelor Degrees. There are SDA pastors who take Masters and Doctorates
at non-SDA universities.
Perhaps the European Unions could look with the same futures. 25-50 women enrolled
as Freshman, Over 10 years that would be 250 to 500 women with their Bachelors Degrees.