Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[anyman]

Anyman, all vanity will keep you from the gates.

I see no where in Scripture where it says the wearing of a wedding ring (or if I were female the wearing of pants) will keep me from heaven. What will is the failure to accept the free gift of salvation and allowing God to work His will in my life. I can not work my way into heaven and that truth was given to us clearly through the lives of the Reformers. If in my ever growing relationship with God, He convicts me that there is an area of my life that needs change He will lead me in changing my life. To focus on jewelery is to miss the point of God's acceptance of each who diligently seek him.

Your insistence on these superficial issues reminds me of a "parable" a pastor once shared during a sermon.

It seems that there was a man who met Peter when he arrived in heaven. Peter offered to show the man around, excited the man accepted. As they walked the streets of gold they passed numerous churches. The first was filled with song spilling out of the windows and the man asked Peter who that was, to which Peter responded, it was the Southern Baptists. Further along the road was the sound of the most sincere prayers floating from the open doors. Peter explained that those were the Quakers. They continued to walk and Peter continued to share who was worshiping in the churches along the way. After awhile Peter turned up another avenue and as they did he told the man that he couldn't speak until Peter indicated it was okay. They walked in silence past another church. A few blocks down the road Peter told the man he could once again talk and of course he asked who was worshiping in the last church they passed. Peter said, "That was the Seventh-day Adventists. We had to be quiet because they think they are the only ones up here."

A very powerful story about the triumphalist mind set. No man has all of God's truth. God has revealed all that man is capable of comprehending. We have no idea who will be in heaven. What will you do if Osama bin Laden is standing next to you as you step onto the streets of gold? If you can not love him and accept him as he is here on earth, how will you ever do so in heaven? You won't, you will be miserable there. We are called to love all and grieve the sin that controls their lives.

There is a reason God directs us NOT to judge another man. We can not know the heart. We do not know the place in their spiritual journey they occupy when we meet them. There is nothing wrong with modesty and simplicity. Your concept of that however is not definitive for all others, and rightly so - that is a conversation between each of us and God. The heart is where God find's His home and we can not know what He is doing there with each individual. I am reminded of three of quotes from Brennan Manning:

"But when we are securely rooted in personal intimacy with the Source of life, it will be possible to remain flexible but not relativistic, convinced without being rigid, willing to confront without being offensive, gentle and forgiving without being soft and true witnesses without being manipulative."

"The love of Christ embraces all without exception."

"None of us has ever seen a motive. Therefore, we don't know we can't do anything more than suspect what inspires the action of another. For this good and valid reason, we're told not to judge. Tragedy is that our attention centers on what people are not, rather than on what they are and who they might become."

God knows who we are in our hearts and that is all that matters on that great day. We are lucky He isn't like we are - filled with judgment and arrogant righteousness.

[Bob Pickle]

No it is arrogant to add, take away and justify opinions that never have been written or stated.

Would that include the opinion that women are not qualified to be ordained pastors and elders? Nowhere does EGW or the Bible state that.

I think some common ground for all of us is the position that men are not qualified to give birth to babies. So we can agree that there are some differences in roles between the sexes that are impossible to bridge.

The Bible does place men in the role of spiritual and family leadership rather than women, and it seems that most women want men to fill those roles.

Some might characterize the office of prophet as being an office of leadership, but there appears to me to be some differences between the two.

The problem is that one cannot ordain women as ministers/elders without making of none effect certain passages in Paul's writings, passages which utilize logic based on creation and God's curse after man's fall.

[Murcielago]

Men cannot give birth, but neither the Bible or EGW state that women cannot pastor, and although men cannot give birth, women do succesfully pastor, as they did throughout EGW's career. And the church did not take it's stance against women until she was gone, as she took no such position. And at no time did she rebuke the practice, forbid it, state that that it was wrong, or in any manner suggest that her female contemporaries who were pastoring should stop or be stopped. I could be wrong, but from everything I have seen brought up by Bachelor and on here, this seems to be a very clear example of man adding and taking away as no one has been able to show any statement forbidding women from the ministry.

Bachelor did make the statement that women are less intelligent than men by an average of 5 point on the IQ scale as part of his argument against women, but I found that to be nothing more than reaching for straws in a lost argument, and utterly offensive at best.

[tinka]

Hmm, I never can say that I ever gave examples of St. Peter jokes and they are simply foolish. and do not waste my time with such rhetoric in simpleton nonsense examples.

It is also quite obvious that there is no need for some to read SP. It is not essential or important for a self made Christian. Self made are symptoms of total liberalism in all things and this could be fatal for one thing.

EGW secretary made very clear how careful she was in her statements and why. True she did not make the above statements as her given intelligence gave the correct view on what woman "should do".  You missed the part where the letter was written back explaining to where and whom had the authority and she gave the correct meaning of what she meant in a previous article.  She corrected their view. and the church for sometime did likewise....until it raises its head again.

 If that was her stance she would have stated that woman should get into the movement. But she did not tell them to get out and go be preachers and get into the women movements. She gave very sure pictures of what they should do. and yes, women can prove they can do anything a man can do ..until there is not difference. So how far do you want to go? I agree with Batchelor on the intelligence of women in these matters.

You see it made no difference putting the exact writings on here as wording was not carefully read word for English word or there would be no come backs or doubts. She writes in clear distinct message.  Justifications are just not between the lines.

[Bob Pickle]

And at no time did she rebuke the practice, forbid it, state that that it was wrong, or in any manner suggest that her female contemporaries who were pastoring should stop or be stopped.

In actuality, what she did was rebuke the practice of having ministers simultaneously serve as settled pastors of churches as a general rule. In other words, she allowed for some exceptions, but she opposed making the exception the rule, as it has become today.

Can you cite some examples of female contemporaries that were pastoring in Ellen White's day?

[Johann]

Some years ago I was challenged to do some research on the development of some of our local churches in Denmark. I plowed through old church records and read articles in our church magazine. Officially it seemed like some of the brethren got most of the credit for the progress, and yet I discovered that one of our most successful evangelists in the beginning of the 20th century was a woman. She preached as much as the male pastors or evangelists, both on Sabbath and at public meetings. She played the guitar and sang as well. She prepared groups of people for baptism. The reports indicated she went to different places alone to establish new churches. The new members were baptized by the conference president.

Her official title was "Bible Worker" although she did the work of pastors and evangelists. I have actually seen her guitar which probably still exists.

[anyman]

Tinka,

Mrs. White would be appaled that you require women to look at her for how to live a Christian life. I don't doubt that she would correct you and remind you that every Christian is to keep their eyes on the life of Christ for the only example of how a Christian should live their life. His ways are to be our ways. His Father calls whom He will to be ministers. Man on the other hand has decided that he knows best who should and should not be recognized as being the service of the Creator. If men are to be the only ones ordained to spead the Gospel "officially" then why did two men reject the call that Mrs. White accepted. God then chose a women, setting the example for us to follow - He calls men and women to preach and we dare to second guess Him. Christians do far more to slow the work of God than non-Christians do.

[tinka]

The appaling would come in view of your directions. In fact you should know why that EGW was the 3rd that excepted. Since you are such an expert on the in between scenes of her writings. I absolutely know why so what is your answer as your statement would not be of that if you knew what you were talking about.

[anyman]

I am very clear as the the sequence of events that led God to call Mrs. White. Numerous church history classes at an SDA institution give me a very deep background in the subject. However, I am not sure you are clear on the subject. If you would like to dig deeper I can offer a couple of titles where you can find the details.

Again, you have failed to respond to any questions and provide any references that support your position. To date in this thread you have nothing more than your "say so" as a means to support your position. You have offered no Scripture or Spirit of Prophecy references to support your position. You have based your position on nothing more than your "take on things." Why don't you begin by answering Johann's very pertinent question in regards to where one might find Biblical support for man's institution of the ordination process. Provide some Scriptural references and Spirit of Prophecy corroboration to support your claim that women should not be ordained preachers of the gospel. Then provide quotes from Mrs. White where she tells anyone that women should not be ordained. Provide references where she expressly rejected the churches official recognition of her as a minister of the gospel via ordination.

Again, it is God's place to call men and women to the ministry of preaching. Man can not second guess God. You can either trust Him or not. I choose to trust Him and hear His message whether it be delivered by a man or a woman. Church ordination is not required of God.

[tinka]

are you blind or something? look back on pages where inserts are posted. Just your usual manner as in all that you say and do. Its halarious in your statements to Bob and your misunderstandings. You do do not read his words proplerly either and come back with entirely a whole different secenario then what he said. Sounds like you could do better at housekeeping or something or stay in the business of maybe real estate ??besides stating your own opinion what somebody else is actually saying.

[anyman]

I have read every post in this thread and have yet to read anything in your postings that unequivocally indicates that Mrs. White spoke against the ordination of woman. It appears it is you who is reading intent between the lines. You have not provided any quote from Mrs. White where she expressly speaks against the act of ordaining women. The reason you haven't is because you can't. Your own postings say she was cautious with the subject. That alone indicates that she did not speak against it. She realized it would be a touchy subject and must have felt the time was not ripe for dealing with the subject. Her caution could have been as much because the social climate of the time was not advantageous for woman to be accepted as preachers of the Gospel as your speculative interpretation.

You can continue to insult but that doesn't make your case. Oh, and I've never been in the real estate business in my life and I do quite well keeping my house clean along with all my other responsibilities. As for RJP, you are more than welcome to partake of his folly . . . but Scripture doesn't have much positive to say for those who engage in evil folly.

Now, again, if you can provide a definitive quote from Spirit of Prophecy or verse of Scripture that supports your claim that woman should not be ministers of the Gospel there are many here who would like to read it. Until then, your position is unsupportable.

[tinka]

I did and you just can't grasp it. nor the legal documents your so confused about. I really do not understand the time given you back on any post by anyone. end.

[anyman]

Full document: http://www.scribd.com/Ordination-Final/d/28999707   

"Recently a nationally known television personality in Adventist circles spoke at some length on this subject in a public forum. His remarks were televised, have traveled far and wide on the internet, and have reopened discussion of this important subject.

    It would be very easy to view his remarks as nothing more than an emotional polemic designed to galvanize his base to support his particular position at the upcoming meetings and to dismiss them out of hand. His arguments, though, bear careful and thoughtful scrutiny because they are the major arguments put forth by the Jewish spiritual and national leadership in Old Testament times and by the New Testament Church’s leadership in the dark and middle ages and even today when it is argued that women should not be ordained to gospel ministry.

    One thing we do not wish to do is to “muzzle Paul!” At the same time, we need to use good hermeneutics as we seek to determine just what he meant in certain places and instances. As Peter said so eloquently, “ . . . our beloved brother Paul wrote to you according to the wisdom given him, speaking . . . as he does in all his letters. There are some things in them hard to understand . . .” 2 Peter 3:15-16

    Using the conservative Historical-grammatical method, it is fair to try to determine what of Paul’s statements are personal and cultural and what are based on sound theology. Even when he is talking about clearly held beliefs we need to ask which are his opinion and which are a clear “thus says the Lord.” The statements most often used to combat the notion of ordaining women are as follows:

    Colossians 3:18-20 - Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord.

    This passage sounds pretty clear-cut. In the family, wives are to subject themselves to their husbands. In the original Greek it is even clearer - wives obey your husbands!

    What those who like this verse rarely do is to quote the parallel passage in Ephesians 5:21-33 where Paul says, “Be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ.” Ephesians 5:21 (In fairness, the speaker referred to above did, albeit very much out of context.) The identical word is used in both passages. Paul goes on to describe what he intends in Ephesians 5:33 when he says that each one should love his wife as he does himself and the wife should respect her husband. The meaning of the subjection Paul admonishes wives to have for their husband is not blind obedience, but respect. Men are challenged to give up themselves (their pride, power and desire to control) for their wives as Jesus gave up himself for the church. Love always gives up it’s desire to dominate and serves. Paul clarifies his meaning when he says that husbands are to spiritually lead their wives to God by giving up themselves and becoming servants in love to lead them to a relationship with God.

    This is far from the power and pride of position that evidences many who wish to use this passage to exert their predominance over women."

[tinka]

EGW statement is more then sufficient for me.  I read all your link and find the continual efforts of denial, replacing and making it justified with a person that seems to use all the justifications in page after page of opinions in between lines of Paul & similitude's or links that would change church's beginning foundations.

She gives Direct why answer --reasoning and Statement of EGW:

SHE HAS OFTEN SPOKEN OF THE PERILS THAT SUCH GENERAL PRACTICE WOULD EXPOSE THE CHURCH TO BY A GAINSAYING WORLD; BUT AS YET I HAVE NEVER SEEN FROM HER PEN ANY STATEMENT THAT WOULD SEEM TO ENCOURAGE THE FORMAL AND OFFICIAL ORDINATION OF WOMEN TO THE GOSPEL MINISTRY, TO PUBLIC LABOR SUCH AS IS ORDINARILY EXPECTED OF AN ORDAINED MINISTER.{DG 255.2}

gainsay
"to contradict," c.1300, lit. "say against," from O.E. gegn- "against" + say. "Solitary survival of a once common prefix" [Weekley], which was used to form such now-obsolete compounds as gain-taking "taking back again," gainclap "a counterstroke," gainbuy "redeem," and gainstand "to oppose." Related: Gainsaid; gainsaying.


gain·say   (g?n-s?', g?n's?')   
tr.v.   gain·said (-s?d', -s?d'), gain·say·ing, gain·says (-s?z', -s?z')
   To declare false; deny. See Synonyms at deny.
   To oppose, especially by contradiction.

So what do you have here??? Her exact answer and fact written way back then.


With one word "Peril" up against another man's opinion pages long against one word. A word that used by her to superseed all opinions. A word to me that meant trouble, evil or bad problems.

One word that I understood was good for all ages and generations or eras.

I believe her and sealed in my belief. She was God's messenger. Each word important and each word "guarded" with Holy SPirit at the helm.

 DB referenced in the article was a cut down within but not really mentioning his name. DB studies words and parallels but not in the way this person does to bring in new doctrine or change the old foundations.

Rev.22:19  And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life....

that means the Book including what Paul wrote. and to whomever that "read between the lines for their own unsupported opinions for the church to follow".

[anyman]

Full article: http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/wo/haloviakchapter.htm

"Lulu Russell Wightman

Lulu Russell Wightman was the most successful minister in New York state for more than a decade. Her ministry began when she was licensed as a minister in 1897 and continued even after she left New York state to engage in religious liberty work in Kansas and Missouri in 1908. The results from Mrs. Wightman’s ministry rank her not only as the most outstanding evangelist in New York during her time, but among the most successful within the Adventist Church for any time period. As a licensed minister, Mrs. Wightman pioneered work that established companies or churches in a number of places in New York where Adventism had never gained a foothold before.

In 1901 the New York Conference president sent this note to John Wightman, Lulu’s husband: "Enclosed find a small token of appreciation from the Conference Committee for your work in assisting your wife. "2 Mrs. Wightman was the licensed minister, and the conference sent money to her husband in appreciation for his assistance to her. How is it that such a thing could occur? Mrs. Wightman was one of more than 20 Seventh-day Adventist women who were licensed as ministers in the 19th century. Was there something wrong with the 19th century Adventist Church? After all, there is no scriptural authority for licensing women as ministers, but that is precisely what happened in the church during Ellen White’s day."

"Ellen White’s 1895 Statement Concerning Ordination

Here’s what Ellen White said in 1895—and it is truly a landmark statement:

Women who are willing to consecrate some of their time to the service of the Lord should be appointed to visit the sick, look after the young, and minister to the necessities of the poor. They should be set apart to this work by prayer and laying on of hands. In some cases they will need to counsel with the [local] church officers or the [conference] minister; but if they are devoted women, maintaining a vital connection with God, they will be a power for good in the church. This is another means of strengthening and building up the church. We need to branch out more in our methods of labor. Not a hand should be bound, not a soul discouraged, not a voice should be hushed; let every individual labor; privately or publicly, to help forward this grand work.12

No matter how one interprets that statement, it is clear that Ellen White is proclaiming that it was possible for Seventh-day Adventist women to be ordained "with perfect propriety." The act of ordaining women had not occurred prior to that time. If we look closely at the statement, I believe we will see that it resolves the dilemma we seem to be in today. It seems to me there are two major aspects to consider: (1) can a woman truly be a minister, as we understand ministry, and (2) would we be acting against Scripture to ordain a woman?"

"Once it was recognized that a woman could be ordained to something, the ordination question was resolved, because women were already licensed as ministers and defined by Mrs. White to be appropriately involved in the most relevant ministries then embraced by the church. They were doing the vitally necessary pastoral labor; they were working along Christ’s lines of ministry; they were preaching the Word; they were ministering in the fullest sense as defined by Mrs. White.

Indeed, she observed: "We need to branch out more in our methods of labor" and we should neither "bind" nor "discourage"  those who embraced this kind of ministry either as ordained lay workers (those who labored "privately") or as ordained conference employees (those who labored "publicly"). Notice again her statement: "Not a hand should be bound, not a soul discouraged, not a voice should be hushed; let every individual labor, privately or publicly, to help forward this grand work."16 The nature of the Christian Help Work ministry, to which her statement clearly refers, had both lay and official aspects; and women clearly were eligible for ordination to it."

"We can see that Ellen White considered women as ministers during her time and that she favored the act of ordaining women. Women were "pastors of the flock of God" during the time when "pastoring" was a newly emerging vital ministerial concept. And ‘‘men and women’’ who acted as the ‘‘Lord’s helping hand,’’ and who were working as Christ did in combining a pastoral-evangelistic ministry to the "oppressed, rescuing those ready to perish," would be considered "priests of the Lord" and "ministers of our God," according to Ellen White’s analysis of Isaiah 61:6.30 Obviously Ellen White did not believe that because there were no women who served in the Old Testament priesthood, women were forever prohibited from the organized ministry.

The nineteenth century Seventh-day Adventist Church, largely because of the influence of Ellen White, was remarkably innovative as it grasped opportunities to exhibit a dynamic and versatile definition of ministry. Ellen White consistently defined ministry by those relevant functions its ministers performed. And it is obvious that women were allowed to perform all those relevant functions, excepting those which the church defined as belonging solely to the ordained minister.

When the church seemed to founder on the question of whether women could be ordained, Ellen White, in 1895, resolved that issue. She went further as she described why the early Christian church ordained Paul and Barnabas. The principle she expressed has obvious relevance to the question of women and ordination to ministry: "In order that their work should be above challenge, He instructed the church by revelation to set them apart publicly to the work of the ministry. Their ordination was a public recognition of their divine appointment to bear to the Gentiles the glad tidings of the gospel."

"As Mrs. White reflected upon the post-1888 focus upon justification by faith, she clearly perceived its implications concerning the nature of ministry:

We must look more to the presentation of God’s love and mercy to move the hearts of the people. We must have a sense of both the justice and mercy of God. Those who can blend together the law of God and the mercy of God can reach any heart. For years I have seen that there is a broken link which has kept us from reaching hearts; this link is supplied by presenting the love and mercy of God.33

Nine days after that statement Mrs. White addressed the ministers at the 1891 General Conference session and conveyed the sentiments of that address to her diary. The statement transcends all arguments concerning the ordination question. Ellen White is not here espousing a cause, for she penned the following to her diary as her understanding of the nature of ministry:

The Lord has given Christ to the world for ministry. Merely to preach the Word is not ministry. The Lord desires His ministering servants to occupy a place worthy of the highest consideration. In the mind of God, the ministry of men AND WOMEN existed before the world was created.  [The premise that God had a preconceived concept of ministry for both men and women before He created the world destroys ideas of subordination and offers very telling evidence about Ellen White’s concept of the role of women in ministry.] He determined that His ministers should have a perfect exemplification of Himself and His purposes. No human career could do this work; so God gave Christ in humanity to work out His ideal of what humanity may become through entire obedience to His will and way. God’s character was revealed in the life of His Son. Christ not only held a theory of genuine ministry, but in His humanity He wrought out an illustration of the ministry that God approves. Perfection has marked out every feature of true ministry. Christ, the Son of the living God, did not live unto Himself, but unto God."