Print

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

[Bob Pickle]

You refusal to read David Newman tells me that you just don't dare in case it changes your Roman mindset.

I don't agree that Bob Pickle has a "Roman mindset".

One thing is that if that other site hasn't taken advantage of Johann's comments by using them to accuse me of being a Jesuit, it may just be dead. No comments posted there since Feb. 7.

[Artiste]

It looks dead to me...

[Murcielago]

One thought that comes to mind is a statement made to me by a pastor some time ago. I asked him about biblical premise for a policy, and he told me that the church is like a social club. There are social clubs to fit every taste, status and cultural boundary. Each club has its own rules and if one doesn't agree with them, that person can go find a club that suits better their needs. He explained that clubs are by nature exclusive. They provide a comfort zone for like minded people and walls to keep others out.

Although one might be upset by his analysis, it is accurate, in my opinion. Human nature requires that individuals be tribal, and religion is one of the greatest tribal dividing lines there are. Over petty religious differences families are split, friends become enemies, people are hurt, and people die. In my opinion, this is largely because each religious box (and sub-box) proclaims itself the one true way. Outsiders who laud it are always welcome, but insiders who raise question become a threat to the IDENTITY of their fellows and, as such, are the most hated of all. In my opinion, identity is the key factor in opposition to change, progress, reformation, acceptance of truth, and acceptance of differing views.

Although people may verbally embrace diversity, most people abhor it and will battle to the end for uniformity. Most people largely want everyone to look, act, speak, sound, and be exactly what they are. They want others to enjoy only what they enjoy, believe only what they believe, listen only to the music they listen to, dress only as they dress... and ultimately declare anything other than that to be nothing less than sin, and just cause, or even divine mandate, for mistreatment of others.

[Johann]

Potomac Conference Moves Ahead with Intention to Ordain Women
27 March 2012 | Bonnie Dwyer
| 4 PrintPrint Email Tweet FB ShareThis

In its meeting Tuesday, March 27, the Potomac Conference became the fifth North American Division conference or union to vote an action on women’s ordination during the month of March.

According to Dan Jensen, assistant to the Potomac Conference president for communication, it was voted unanimously “to request the Potomac Conference Standing Articles & Bylaws committee to begin a review process of its bylaws that would enable us to ordain women.”

This latest action adds to the one that was taken in January 2011, when the committee "voted, that regardless of gender, each qualified candidate for pastoral ministry should receive ordination….We will make this request at each Columbia Union Executive Committee until permission is granted."

On March 20, the Columbia Union Executive Committee passed the following action:

    Whereas the North American Division (NAD) Leadership has encouraged each union to be intentional in affirming women in ministry, we vote to establish an AdHoc Committee to study the issue of women in ministry and recommend to the Columbia Union Executive Committee how we can be intentional in affirming women in ministry. In addition, we vote to affirm our previous action requesting the NAD to grant us permission to ordain women in ministry.

The latest action by the Potomac Conference seems to indicate the conference is no longer waiting for permission from the Union or the Division to ordain women.

The Mid-America Union voted on March 8 to ordain women. Next came votes by the Pacific Union Conference, and the Columbia Union Conference. Each vote has recognized the local actions taken in the past to affirm women in ministry. Just last week, the Southeastern California Conference voted to convert its ordained/commissioned ministerial credentials to ordained.



http://spectrummagazine.org/blog/2012/03/27/potomac-conference-moves-ahead-intention-ordain-women

[Johann]

I have just been attempting to help you face the inevitable.

[Artiste]

I'm sure things will get worse before they start getting better.

By the way, all you folks here who are advocating women's ordination might find more like-minded company over at the Spectrum blog.

[Artiste]

Oh, I see that's where you got your information, Johann.

There are probably no conservative Adventists on this forum who approve of Spectrum blog.

[Johann]

Oh, I see that's where you got your information, Johann.

There are probably no conservative Adventists on this forum who approve of Spectrum blog.

There may be years between when I read Spectrum. Someone just sent me this news item and placed it on my FaceBook. That is why I am sharing it with you. It seems remarkable that the conference right at the General Conference Headquarters it taking this step now

[Artiste]

The Spectrum blog is populated by bitter ex-Adventists, and soon-to-be ex-Adventists, who gather to vehemently accuse the organized church of unkindness to homosexuals and evolutionists, among other issues.

They are delighted over the progress of women's ordination. 

(They also hate Elder Ted Wilson and most of the rest of GC leadership.)

[Bob Pickle]

Thus far each vote has seemingly been a bit nebulous as to what is actually going to happen.

Now Potomac states they will be looking at ways to revise their bylaws. In what way? To say that they don't have to adhere to the policies of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists? If so, would that constitute a secession? If so, are we about to witness the formation of the biggest offshoot in Adventist history?

Our church has already taken an action in which we stated that we are staying with the General Conference.

[Sheba]

wrong thread

[Johann]

Thus far each vote has seemingly been a bit nebulous as to what is actually going to happen.

Now Potomac states they will be looking at ways to revise their bylaws. In what way? To say that they don't have to adhere to the policies of the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists? If so, would that constitute a secession? If so, are we about to witness the formation of the biggest offshoot in Adventist history?

Our church has already taken an action in which we stated that we are staying with the General Conference.

Various pictures emerge depending on from which angle you see it. I see your description as if there is a competitive run ahead where each contestant (church units) anchored in the start holes waiting for the shot from a pistol, but hoping that the gun will not start the run for another 2-3 years. Some feel that this long wait is not essential, since it is not a competitive game going on but rather a development in the right direction.

It seem like you try to pull each of those back to the start by the tail, threatening to punish them for not abiding by the rules of the competitive game.

It reminds me of the astronomer who was forced by the church to deny the truth of his discovery that earth goes around the sun. To save his skin he made that false declaration, and he is said to have mumbled in his beard, "The earth still goes around sun." Today everyone knows he was right.

[Bob Pickle]

Johann,

I have no authority to punish any church entity for rebelling against a GC Session vote since that entity didn't get its way at Annual Council last October.

If they knew they were right, they wouldn't be voting on statements devoid of any Scriptural support. The voted statement would quote the very passage that explicitly grants them such authority, and thus far I haven't seen any such citations. The most ardent and vocal proponents can't even supply the lack of the union and conference voted statements by providing Bible verses.

It wouldn't surprise me if some of these constituencies refuse to go along with the few people on these various executive committees. For all the talk of constituencies, thus far not one constituency has voted for women's ordination this month. We have yet to hear of any union or conference committee explicitly asking their constituency to vote in favor of women's ordination.

As far as the astronomer of whom you speak, that's apples and oranges. The Catholic Church is not a constituency-based organization, where churches each have delegates that select officers and committees, who select officers and committees at the next level, and so forth, until a grand general conference session elects a pope. It doesn't work that way in Catholicism.

And thus with Galileo, you had a few men, not the world church of leaders and members, who said, "Galileo, this is what you should do." I don't even recall Galileo asking Rome to grant him permission to teach that the earth goes around the sun. Did Galileo make an official request along those lines?

In stark contrast, the NAD asked the world church via all the delegates at a GC Session to allow it to allow the ordination of women. The NAD didn't get its way, and like a spoiled child some in the NAD seem bound and determined to do it anyway.

Johann, did you raise your children that way? Did they come to you or your wife and ask for something, and you said no, and they did it anyway or got it anyway without your permission, without a Bible verse to back them up, and you simply smiled and acted pleased? I hardly think so.

[Johann]

Your view is quite different from mine, Bob. Different ways to look at things.

I was asked here to give an Ellen White quote where she "authorized" a woman for ordination. I gave you the quote. No reaction.

You have several times been asked if there is anywhere where Scripture or EGW forbids the ordination of women.No reaction.

Why?

[Bob Pickle]

I was asked here to give an Ellen White quote where she "authorized" a woman for ordination. I gave you the quote. No reaction.

I do not recall you giving any such quote. Where might it be?

You have several times been asked if there is anywhere where Scripture or EGW forbids the ordination of women.No reaction.

I think I've already responded to that, have I not?

Now if you or I are answering the same questions, perhaps multiple times, and the other is not noticing, then we have some challenges.