Complete, accurate, and revealing!
Complete, accurate, and revealing!
Once again faced with facts that contradict a cherished belief their is no defensible response.
I guess George one benefit is that I and others would not have known about this. The is very instructive and will have to go through this over the next week as time permits.
Yes I know there are many that say this issue should take a back seat or better yet be sent to the back of the bus. I am not one those, like William Johnsson, I consider this a moral issue and it’s time to voice that sentiment.
It would be good if we all spoke up. Lets also speaks up when a conference fires a pastor because he wants to homeschool his children instead of sending them to the Adventist school.
Ah, er, where can I send the check…? The analysis was so insightful I really owe you something. My other therapists have never been able to break through all the defenses like you have…
But I think you left out the dishonesty part. Only a slight oversight. May have to reduce the check, though…
The texr Galations 3:28: 28 “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” is being misinterpreted to help justify WO. This text is making reference to salvation and certainly does not mean that there is no difference between male and female. We are living in an age when the devil wants us to believe that there should not be a distinction between male and female.
This is a gross, offensive accusation directed against those who do not support discrimination of women. Who is talking about there not being a distinction between male and female? This statement is completely misleading and therefore ill intentioned.
I have no problem with people stating their beliefs, but accusations to others with mention to Satan, those are completely un-civil and un-Christian. And, also, unacceptable.
So much time and energy is devoted to the issue of WO in the SDA Church and the issue of racism is for the most part ignored. Is racism not also about the lack of equality?
Has any white leader ever had the courage to address this issue by writing a book on it?
I am a member of a congregation where black members were told not to volunteer to take part in an evangelistic event that was focusing on reaching whites.
The objections to WO is theological for many people. Unfortunately, the church allowed the training and hiring of female pastors without first settling this matter. This is the root cause of the problem on WO, which has created the problem we are facing today.
The majority of the world church is not convinced that females should be pastors or elders. This was evident by the comments and vote in San Antonio and in other past GC sessions. It is not that these members view females as being second class or inferior; they just believe that there are differences in roles.
The leadership of the General Conference, in my opinion, believe that it is their responsibity to enforce the decision made in San Antonio. (I know there are those who want to say that the vote addressed Divisions and not Unions.)
My advice is to be patient and let God settle the matter in His way. This is His church.
A favorite author of mine and many others to be sure wrote the following…
Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.
For me and I know many others in our church understand that we must never be cowards when apparently Godly men, under the guise of piety, devise means to subject us to ungodly coercion and spiritual chains to restrain conscience.
Perhaps money is the great equalizer…
when it comes to “Property and Trust” she IS listed fully-
a duty which Ca state law demands a duly ordained Conference President oversee.
So-when the state requires the church complies.
There are state requirements in Europe as well-which obviate discrimination-
so with respect to these religious discriminatory policies, local exceptions to CHURCH MANDATED COMPLIANCE can be granted-WITHOUT PAINFUL AND GRAVE CONSEQUENCES. Appears, when it serves the mammon-based interests, compliance is optional…
The incongruity is not casual-it is pivotal, and, sadly intentional.
Just this fact should be sufficient to justify no confidence GC leadership.
You are so right on this, Carol. As it should, this, if it went to court, would be considered in a completely different light than was the case of Silver vs. Pacific Press for wage discrimination.
Laughable. Everyone can see your point. You support discrimination. No matter your excuse it’s still just an excuse for a violation of one of God’s basic principles that all are equal in his eyes.
I both agree and disagree. Where I disagree is that it is also talking about the equality of all believers in the eyes of God and that applies to the Holy Spirit’s calling of people to work for Him in a variety of ways as He sees fit, NOT according to the traditions or opinions of individuals. What we should be asking is what results a person’s ministry produces. For a dozen years I’ve been leading a ministry that is far outside the boundaries of what traditionalists consider a “legitimate” ministry, but the results it has been producing put them to shame because the church is strengthened and people are becoming believers in greater numbers than the defenders of tradition are producing.
No. The matter was settled. Women were admitted to ministerial training programs and accepted as pastors. Then people began objecting and the opposition grew from there. Now it is unsettled.
Jesus ministered in a society with some of the most severe inequality, prejudice and racism in world history. He didn’t get distracted by those things and stayed focused on ministering the redeeming love of God and teaching His followers how to continue that ministry. If you’re concerned about lack of equality and racism you’re allowing yourself to be distracted away from what God wants us doing: ministering God’s redeeming love to the people you meet.
As far as I know, the vote on WO was presented at past GC Sessions prior to San Antonio and was voted down each time. The colleges and universities may have begun to train female pastors but this was never given the vote of approval by the GC. As I noted, the majority of those who object to WO do so, in their mind, for doctrinal reasons. Only GC can settle doctrinal issues.
Such approval was never necessary in the first place because decisions on who was to be and not to be ordained has for many many decades been, by constitution bylaws, only within the purview of the Union Conferences.
I hear what you are saying. However, you have to think of the opposition. You don’t have to agree with what they are saying but it would be great to understand why they object. They don’t see it from the perspective of the right of the unions to decide who to ordain. They see it as a doctrinal issue and therefore not a right of the unions but that of the General Conference.
They may well see it as a doctrinal issue but how long has it been since they actually looked at the doctrines of the church? It’s glaringly not on the list. Opposition to something does not make a person or a group of persons right.
All one need do is look at the example of the Apostles who, when faced with a very similar problem, chose a very radical, inclusive, and unifying course while honoring diversity of beliefs within the community of faith.
The current course of the GC is not a Godly course because it not only ignores the apostolic example but also denies, even repudiates, the conscience of women who are called by God to the ministry.