Print

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

[princessdi]

Alex, there is constradiction because God was appointing women as political and spiritual leaders. Paul said that he would not.  On the surface there is a comflict, if Paul considered himself a follower of God.  I don't know how much more set aside then to have God personally set you aside for His service.  So, if women like Miriam, Deborah, and Anna were chosen to be prophetess', Why should we take Paul's word over God's when he says he would not hae women serve in that compacity. 

Please explain why a woman can preach, but can't pastor?

NOTE- Perhaps, I should have been more clearer....My issue is a woman pastoring a congregation. I used the word "preach", but I should have said "pastor."

It is COMPLETELY unbiblical for a woman to be a pastor and ask to be ordained.

[Alex L. Walker]

Well, I for one, believe that there in no contradiction. I do not see how Paul could have been any more clearer in the book of Timothy.

He plainly states the requirements in Timothy.

Women are not to be ordained! Women have no more right to pastor a church than a practicing homosexual.

I am sure you do not disagree that a practicing homosexual should not be over a church, correct?

Women should not be ordained or pastor. It is completely contrary to Gods word.

[Johann]

Tinka, I have made a copy of this post of yours and placed under Sabbath School, because I feel that here you are giving your testimony. And this is what our lesson is about, How to give our personal testimony of our faith.

I'd like to invite you all to participate inn this discussion. Take a look at the testimony of tinka, and see how it funktions. Study your current Sabbath School lesson and see how it fits in? And do that over in the SS ssection.

Thank you,  tinka!

OK! The SBC including myself have issues with the Adventist on grave sleeping...That is NOT biblical either. Neither is the Adventist position on hell! There are many strong differences between Adventist and the SBC.

Maybe an easy way to look at this Alex is this:

There is only One "Immortal"

If all that sin-- does not die, them we are Immortal too

Most believe, we have a soul or (ghost) that goes back to heaven after we die, and the wicked go down to hell. There is no Hell except the grave is called that and death called a sting.

Hell or more real is the Hell fire  "fire of destruction after the 1000 years  that Satan is loosed on earth with his angels. Even the wicked dead until that time.. know nothing under the sun, hear, worship, love or look out for others as so now very popular to believe. It is not biblical.

It is the breath of life that (only is returned to God as he gave it the moment of birth) Breath of Life and Spirit in that context is the same
Then at birth called now a "living soul"

All souls shall die, or if one dies on the side of Jesus, it mentions we are asleep in Jesus,

People that have went to sleep in Jesus or died do not know anything that is going on under the sun

We are only mortal and Only God Immortal.

The first Resurrection is for those who sleep in Jesus and righteous, No Spirits or ghosts of human beings, go anywhere until that time. Only the invisible Holy Spirit is in ghost form  not humans.  Satan yet has that power but not us.   The second Resurrection is for the unjust after the thousand years, If you read in rev. it is plain, very plain
 

In your belief, maybe or for sure the Catholics, believe we will be looking down from heaven for eternity to watch eternal burning of bodies. Not so either, It only means "until" stubble" and never more a chance for eternity. as they will be as they never were " forever" or finality of the wicked.

The Heavens and earth are made new and Creation is then witnessed by the saved and then Holy City descends in the place of original Garden of Eden,

It is important to find truth for your own individual satisfaction. At least we will be accountable for doing so.

That is why it says to beware of false Prophets



 It's a wonderful feeling to follow and read actual Biblical timeline. It is wisdom and feeling of being secure in God's word. It don't take long to read Rev


EGW was only called to present 3 rd Angels message and the inspiration to make fine details of "prophecy " more clear. Never did she give out doctrine of her own but gave better insight to symbols and put all History together to show Bible was "Infinite truth." and to correct fanaticism of a lot of people and to warn them of wrong and doctrine  directing back only by Biblical scripture. You must realize also people that like to "progress to change" will not be happy with reading as she "always pointed back to scripture" and nothing more and she did not call herself a "prophet" like the people did.

Our religion is simple but only for those that give self up to truth. SDA has only been the last stepping stone from Martin Luther, Lutherans, Methodist, Baptist etc, etc, to present day to finally bring back "all " the law of God and people from early ages no longer knew. After that Jesus comes. and truth is spreading very fast but few will heed.  Most Adventist, do come in because of History of original Sabbath change but don't really can't seem to shake self wants and changes on how to abide in simple love back to Jesus with almost no change of their characters. Yet we have some of the best Evangelist, preachers, and teachers and christians in the whole world that God is still leading that will multiply from other folds and as the sands of the seas while a lot of Adventists will be lost because of the advantage they were given. 

[Gregory]

What should be done in the event that there are no males available to lead a congregation?  The SDA chruch has had in the past, and has today congregations that have no male who is capable of leading: a congregation.  Should that congregation be disolved?  Should it be ordered not to meet and by whom?  Should the women who lead out in its spiritual activities by directed to quit?

What do I  mean by "no male capable of leading a congregation?

1) A child of one of the female members.  Yes, I know that the history of Christianity has stories of God raising up children to lead and preach--some of whom were female.

2) A male non-member who attends.  I attend a SDA Church today that has a male who in not a member of any Christian group, but has attended this SDA Chruch for several years.  He has made spiritual progress and has grown in his knowledge and priactice Christianity.  But, he is not yet ready to become a member.

3) A male who may attend, but is struggling with issues in his life that deny him the prevlige of spiritual leadershlp over a congregation.

O.K.  Let me take this in another direction:

The military of the United States has thousands of people who claim SDA background and who are assigned to locations around the world to include places where there is no opportunity for them to worship with local congregations.  Yes, SDA military chaplains serve these people as much as is possible.  But, it is often impossible for them to personally serve SDAs in these locations.

NOTE:  Presently, females are allowed to serve in all of the individual services (Army, Air force, Navy, Coast Guard, Marines and the USPHS).  In addition, females, with some exceptions, are allowed to serve in the majority of the military jobs.  The American public has little knowledge at to how much our ability to go to war depends upon our ability to send females into combat.

Adventist Chaplaincy Ministries (ACM), a part of the organizational structure of the SDA Chruch has a plan to attempt to meet the spiritual needs of small groups of SDA military who are isolasted from contact with SDA Clergy.  In that plan, it authorizes groups to meet and it accredits a miliatary person to be the spiritual leader of that group.  ACM Then attempts to coordinate administrative support to that group.  What should ACM do:

1) If the only SDAs present in that area are female?  This can happen.

2) Males who may attend are quite irregular in attending?  Combat opperations may make such the norm for some people.

3) Males who attend may not be in a positon where they can/should provide spiritual leadership.


I would really like to see some of those who believe that females should never take posiitons of spiritual leadership respond to these situations.

[tinka]

Where 3 are only gathered together and present makes a wonderful opportunity for discussion and Bible study and a good prayer time. Extreme circumstances always has its simple solutions with out finding away to justify.

[Gregory]

A voice of reason.

However, keep in mind that this group of 3 may be advertised through military channels as being the place for SDA in the area to meet together to worship.  IOW that group of 3 will be presented in the area as an organized SDA group.

[tinka]

Hmmm, smile

Is the "organized church" essential for the "worship" of God?

Not sure the "organized" church will still be intact going through the tribulations of time of trouble. But the "righteous church of remnant" will.

and in all scenario's God is the "organized Head" into all situations and in this situation you do all that can be done under His directions.

The extreme situations will be bearing down soon enough. We really won't be thinking of "organization" as organization that seems to becoming more and more corrupt. But until then each true person of God will help lift in their capacity "without papered credentials".

[Alex L. Walker]

I agree with you, Tinka!

[Gregory]

When the time comes where there is no organized church, and the church is underground existing only in small groups, will there be any small groups that are led by a female?

??  Isn't there some kind of a verse in the Bible telling us that in the last days, just before the end of time and the Second Advent, that our sons and daughters will prophecy?   In those days, will the sons and daughters who prophecy exercise spiritual leadership?

Well, I believe it was Peter who stated: "Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, they will prophesy."  Acts 2:18   [Read the 17th verse also.]   

[tinka]

When the time comes where there is no organized church, and the church is underground existing only in small groups, will there be any small groups that are led by a female?

By then i do not think so as we will be led by the directions of Holy Spirit and cared for and all our needs met by angels.

??  Isn't there some kind of a verse in the Bible telling us that in the last days, just before the end of time and the Second Advent, that our sons and daughters will prophecy?   In those days, will the sons and daughters who prophecy exercise spiritual leadership?

Absolutely, they will and they have as we read and who they were starting at the time of 3rd Angels messages. Many will have dreams and led but 9 out of 10 they won't run after credentials because they did have dreams or visions. I've had a couple of dreams very early in life, and one shortly after my husband went to rest.

Well, I believe it was Peter who stated: "Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, they will prophesy."  Acts 2:18   [Read the 17th verse also.]

 In the magnitude poured forth of 3rd angels in visions in a lifetime of writings of EW  according to that verse- I truly believe she was the last messenger addressed in scripture right as the era is told. There is no need for another unless one feels God gives vision to make change and that happening, I would not believe.  That scripture has already happened. What new is there?  Would one come forth to announce the change of Sabbath?? I would not believe any new change. that verse is what happened to a very small group like you have been talking about only now that small group is at the end of time.(your scenario)

The visions were put forth in 1844 era to both men and woman and they had the whole weight or burden to the whole world  on their shoulders to relate back the final message to worship the Creator and make whole the 10 commandments that had been changed   

[princessdi]

Well, I for one, believe that there in no contradiction. I do not see how Paul could have been any more clearer in the book of Timothy.

He plainly states the requirements in Timothy.

Women are not to be ordained! Women have no more right to pastor a church than a practicing homosexual.

I am sure you do not disagree that a practicing homosexual should not be over a church, correct?

I do agree... a practicing homosexual is sinning by way of fornication.  What sin is a women committing? You want me to believe that God would deny a woman to serve Him in this way because HE made her a woman?

Women should not be ordained or pastor. It is completely contrary to Gods word.

But not contrary to God's own actions, Alex. He placed women in spiritual authority over men all through the Bible.  The prophets in the Bible were spiritual leaders, higher than the Levites.  Everyone, including the priests and kings had to submit to the spiritual authority o a prophet.  God appointed many prophetess' in the Bible.  I have to take God's actions over Paul's words.

[Alex L. Walker]

I suppose Paul was just a sexist?.....

[Bob Pickle]

EGW was greatly impressed with this man, even if some of you might not, when I tell you this story about him:

I am not impressed by the falsehoods he stated, probably unintentionally, at the 1919 Bible Conference. That doesn't mean God didn't use him at other times.

Referring to your last question here below I'm tempted to ask you: Did that really occur? Was this just a false report by one of his enemies? How can you be sure, even if one of your trusted friends have assured you it is true?

Johann, anyone in the world can read Daniells' misstatements in the published 1919 Bible Conference minutes. He spoke of Conybeare and Howson causing trouble over LP and of finding word for word, page after page the same when comparing their book and Wylie's with material by Ellen White. Both those statements were very serious misstatements.

[princessdi]

No more than any other man in those times of patriarchal societies.  Those are the little details we have to take into consideration.  I believe it also played a part in the compilation of the Bible as we know it.  You are correct that the men would not ordain a woman, but you notice that God did set them apart fo His service all the time.

I suppose Paul was just a sexist?.....

[Bob Pickle]

Confusion?

Let me make it clear that during my half century of ministry for the Lord I have never baptized a person wearing an ornamental ring. I have never in these discussions rejected the counsel of EGW on wearing ornaments or ornamental rings.

If only we'd read all of what is stated in the quoted material we would not have these heated discussions. Some of us read only the portions which seemingly support our preconceived views. Please read again this part of what tinka has already posted:

[YEARS LATER, W. C. WHITE, ON ELLEN WHITE'S REQUEST,
     RESPONDED TO AN INQUIRY FROM A MINISTER'S WIFE IN EDINBURGH,
     SCOTLAND, ON THE POINT:
        "NOW REGARDING THE QUESTION RAISED IN YOUR LETTER. THE WEARING
     OF A GOLD RING AS A MATTER OF ORNAMENT IS A USELESS PRACTICE, AND
     CONTRARY TO THE BIBLE INSTRUCTION REGARDING THE SIMPLICITY OF DRESS
     AND APPAREL. THE WEARING OF A RING AS A TOKEN OF LOYALTY IN THOSE
     COUNTRIES AND AMONG THOSE PEOPLE WHERE SUCH A CUSTOM IS SO THOROUGHLY
     ESTABLISHED THAT DEPARTURE FROM THAT CUSTOM WILL BE UNIVERSALLY
     MISUNDERSTOOD IS, IN MY OPINION, QUITE ANOTHER MATTER, AND I THINK
     THAT IF YOU SHOULD FOLLOW THE COUNSEL OF MEN AND WOMEN OF EXPERIENCE
     WHO HAVE LABORED IN GREAT BRITAIN AND IN INDIA, THE LORD WILL NOT
     COUNT IT TO YOU AS A VIOLATION REGARDING THE SIMPLICITY OF WOMEN'S
     APPAREL.
        "POSSIBLY YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN THE STORY OF MY WIFE'S
     EXPERIENCE WITH THE WEDDING RING. WHILE SHE WAS ATTENDING BIBLE
     SCHOOL IN AUSTRALIA, I BECAME WELL ACQUAINTED WITH HER, AND WHEN THE
     TIME DREW NEAR FOR OUR MARRIAGE, I PROPOSED THAT IT BE IN TASMANIA
     AT HER FATHER'S HOME. REGARDING THIS SHE WAS NOT ENTHUSIASTIC, AND
     UPON INQUIRY, I LEARNED THAT HER FATHER HAD VERY DECIDED OPINIONS
     REGARDING THE DUTY OF THE WIFE TO WEAR THE WEDDING RING, AND MY WIFE,
     KNOWING THAT AMERICANS LOOKED UPON THIS MATTER DIFFERENTLY THAN THE
     BRITISH PEOPLE, SUPPOSED THAT I WOULD OBJECT.
        "SHE DID NOT CARE FOR IT PERSONALLY, BUT I PURCHASED A RING, AND
     WE WERE MARRIED WITH IT BECAUSE HER FATHER'S FAMILY AND ALL HER
     FRIENDS REGARDED IT AS ESSENTIAL. AFTER WE HAD BEEN MARRIED A FEW
     MONTHS, AND HAD SETTLED DOWN IN OUR HOME WHERE WE WERE WELL KNOWN,
     SHE LAID ASIDE THE RING, AND WHEN I ASKED HER WHY SHE TOOK IT OFF,
     SHE SAID IT WAS IN THE WAY WHEN SHE WAS WASHING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT
     BECAME OF THE RING, BUT SHE HAS NOT WORN IT SINCE. I THINK THAT IN
     THIS EXPERIENCE IT WAS HER DESIRE TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTION OF PAUL
     WHEN HE WROTE, 'WHETHER THEREFORE YE EAT, OR DRINK, OR WHATSOEVER
     YE DO, DO ALL TO THE GLORY OF GOD.'
        "BY THE WEARING OF THE RING DURING THAT PORTION OF OUR EXPERIENCE
     WHERE ITS ABSENCE WOULD HAVE BEEN WONDERED AT, AND CAUSED UNNECESSARY
     PREJUDICE, AND BY LAYING IT ASIDE AS SOON AS THAT EXPERIENCE WAS
     TERMINATED, SHE HAS FELT THAT SHE WAS DOING THAT WHICH WOULD BEST
     SERVE THE CAUSE OF OUR MASTER."--DF 121, WCW TO MRS. W. E. INGLE,
     APRIL 14, 1913.]--DF 121.  {4BIO 197.1}

Notice the clear distinction made between ornamental and wedding rings in this letter EGW asked her son to write. He makes it clear that there are different customs in America and in other countries, and that the Brethren in these other countries should be consulted on what is appropriate there.

A few months after we came from America to work in Denmark in 1958 our conference president gave us "orders" to purchase and wear wedding rings. We did not have any, so we had to order them 4 years after we were married and we had the date of  our wedding in Berrien Springs back in 1954 engraved in the new rings.

I had noticed how certain young ladies had been staring at my fingers, and since there was no ring there had seemingly come to the conclusion I was not married, because this is the age old custom in Europe. If a married person takes off the ring that is a clear signal to some that the person does not feel an obligation to be faithful to the marriage vows and is prepared to have some "fun".

There is nowhere a statement by Ellen White where she cancels the instructions she gave to areas outside America. Let Ellen White speak for herself without you messing things up by telling her she must adhere to your private interpretation. As late as 1913 she tells her son to clarify the confusion and let people know where she stands. Has God given you a vision about canceling her instructions?

Again: This does not apply to her instructions about ornaments - in case you are still confused!

Note that your quote says nothing about Willie wearing a ring. Thus, what he describes does not violate the only published counsel of Ellen White on this question: American missionaries serving in countries where the custom is considered obligatory should not for that reason wear wedding rings. But citizens of that country may.

Am I remembering the counsel in TM correct? And why does the Norwegian version of that quote omit part of it?