Print

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

[Gregory]

To help you to understand, I will give you a very specific example.

When I asked permission of Koran SDA authorities to baptize outside of the U.S. Army, they were concerned that they understood that I did not meet one of the requirements that they had for their local clergy.  They hesitated to give me that peremisison.

They sought advice from U.S. SDA leadership.  The answer came back to them:  He is credentialed by the General Conference.  He meets GC standards.  The quesion you raise is not of concern to the GC.  He is not asking to be one of your local pastors.  You do not have any grounds to refuse him permission to baptize, even though you may have the authority to do so.  He had to ask you for permission and he did so.  Make your decision, but do not do so on the basis of the question that you asked.  It is not a problem.

I was granted permission to baptize and I did so.

[Johann]

Right, Gregory, the requirements are not universal, although they may seem to be in USA. As an ordained minister in the SDA church I have performed marriages in the United States, Sierra Leone, and Nigeria, without any questions or problems, and this would also be true in Iceland. I have also performed marriages in in Denmark and Norway, but I could not go back there and do it today. Unless something has changed since I was there, only certain SDA churches in Denmark are authorized for marriages, and the pastor of those churches is therefore authorized to perform a marriage. In Denmark I have had marriages in unauthorized churches where I had to send an application to the government for special permission to marry a certain couple at this church. That permission did not authorize more than one wedding at that given time.

In Norway weddings can be held at any SDA church provided the performing minister is the pastor of a SDA church somewhere in Norway, and he needs to be registered with government authorities that he/she is the pastor of a specified church. It does not have to be that particular church, but it must be a church in Norway. Here the universal ordination does not count as far as weddings are concerned.

[Snoopy]

We really are not consistent. 

I totally agree with that statement.  Additionally, favoritism and nepotism run rampant, in my experience anyway.

[Gregory]

Snoopy:  Sometimes.

I do not justify.  I do not excuse.

Denominations are a mixture of godly and human.  As human they are imperfect.  In their human element they may discourage people on their spiritual journey.

Some years back I went through a spiritual crisis where I re-evaulated my relationship to the SDA denomination.  My decision to remain came only after I decided that I would not allow anyone else to define the SDA Chruch for me.  Rather I wold define it for myself, I would determine what was representative of what God would ask of the SDA church and I would disstinguish between that and what I saw as human imperfection.

Out of that experience, I do not judge the spiritual walk that others take.  I do not attempt to impose my views on them.  Each person must make  their personal decisions as to spirituality, hopefullly led by the Holy Spirit and it is not my function in life to put them in a box.

At the risk of being misunderstood: Some people have been so injured in their relationship with the SDA Chruch that in order to experience the love of Christ and salvation, they must leave.  Hopefully they will be able to return at some point in their journey.  In any case the God who loves them will continue to seek to lead them spiritually.

Well, did I open up a Pandora's Box?   

 

[christian]

The answer is no i don't think Ellen G. White was prompted by the Gay or Woman's movement in her day. What I am saying is in this time we live I do believe that it is the case. I also believe that the ordination of women is a platform for women to become Conference Presidents and even General Conference President. The reason for it (women's ordination) is not strictly kept in the paremeters of gay and women's rights but it is also a money issue too. You know most of the early leaders of the church were not willing participates to the cause outside there love for God. The positions were not positions that paid money nor were they held as positions of honour, but for the most part were positions of sacrifice. There are many today in the position of Pastors, Elders etc... who want the position for the purpose of Honour not true love for God (not all) but some *this is my opinion not meant to individually judge motives.* Thus we have myriads of pastors who are not converted on the issues of diet, sabbath observance or even the roll of Ellen G. White. But the most frightening thing is that the church has taken the position that only God should have. My original statement was based on the status of the church as it stands. Even the positions of Elder, Pastor, Deacon, are not viewed in their right light because of the blatant stance of the church against itself. Like when Jesus came in the time of the Jewish church who were allowing divorce for any cause because of the hardness of the peoples hearts. Thus women now strive to be in the glorified position of Elder, Pastor, General conference leader etc... And we have only ourselves to blame because the positions have been glorified and made the portals for heaven and enlightenment.

I am really struggling to get your points, Christian.

Okay, here is my point. I believe that the church is in apostasy so bad you might as well ordain anyone who wants it. In the light of the churches position on topics that are clear as glass the church takes positions based the same as the nominal churches (what is appropriate and acceptable for the time). We, the church at large are simply a quasi Sabbath keeping denomination, saved by the fourth commandment. We have become such a denomination of contradictions, we mirror the church prior to Christ coming. You must remember that the church was the tool used to kill the Son of Man. We argue topics like the Jews of old and then ignore the very truth we have. We believe that anything we do as a cooporation is the will of God once we in session have approved it, so lets just let the majority rule, what is the use of debating. It is becoming more and more difficult for me to debate things as though we are Gods tool for spreading the Gospel no matter what we do. If we would just do what we know and have no conflict with the rest would take care of itself. Ellen White would say that a pastor that is not converted on the issue of meat eating should not be trusted,) I am paraphrasing)

[Johann]

Okay, here is my point. I believe that the church is in apostasy so bad you might as well ordain anyone who wants it. In the light of the churches position on topics that are clear as glass the church takes positions based the same as the nominal churches (what is appropriate and acceptable for the time). We, the church at large are simply a quasi Sabbath keeping denomination, saved by the fourth commandment. We have become such a denomination of contradictions, we mirror the church prior to Christ coming. You must remember that the church was the tool used to kill the Son of Man. We argue topics like the Jews of old and then ignore the very truth we have. We believe that anything we do as a cooporation is the will of God once we in session have approved it, so lets just let the majority rule, what is the use of debating. It is becoming more and more difficult for me to debate things as though we are Gods tool for spreading the Gospel no matter what we do. If we would just do what we know and have no conflict with the rest would take care of itself. Ellen White would say that a pastor that is not converted on the issue of meat eating should not be trusted,) I am paraphrasing)

Christian, you and I are so much in agreement that I might even read some of your post in connection with my Sabbath sermon tomorrow. You seem to have a burden on your heart, and so do I.

Eight months from now I have been a vegetarian for 80 years, so I am in agreement with your main grievance. Three months ago I went on our national TV and I still meet people who saw and heard me speak about my vegetarian experience.

With you I believe we need a real repentance and reformation also within our ranks. Yes, we still have a majority within our ranks who take pride in following the teachings of Babylon and reject the clear counsel of the Spirit of Prophecy.

Israel in the wilderness missed the Egyptian pots of meat and they rebelled. Meat for the home is still prepared in the kitchen. For many this is where the conversion begins because what you eat becomes a part of your being. Most of the eager vegetarians I meet are women. We must not stop them in their work for the Lord.

I think the pope is aware of this and he - together with the great majority of the so-called Christian World - are fearful of an awakening and a reformation.

Christian, I weep at the altar when I consider that even some of my good friends on this forum are blind to the facts, they throw the clear words of prophecy into the dust just to please the great majority of so-called Christians in the world.

Yes, the Pope controls the majority of Christianity. Add to that the Southern Baptists in the United States, and what a glorious majority you have. How long are they to remain a ruling force among us too?

Add even to that the majority and leaders in the Seventh-day Adventist Church today. Christian, it is an uphill struggle. This great majority fight hands and foot against the awakening as the Lord is revealing to a minority among us that the great prophecy of Joel might soon reach its fulfillment. A woman was the most important pioneer in our church. She was not ashamed of receiving an ordination, and she was so fortunate it was God Himself who ordained her. For that she had no qualms about receiving the recognition of her church as an ordained minister. She clearly stated that some women should be ordained, and she never put a single iota down on paper against the ordination of women. How blind can the great majority of the Christian world remain? Even among our own leaders? What is holding us back?

We must not let the demonic influences hold us back, Christian. It is still an uphill battle, but here we find a comfort:

"Looking unto Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith, we may go on from strength to strength, from victory to victory; for through Christ the grace of God has worked out our complete salvation" (Selected Messages, vol. 1, p. 364).

[Johann]

It seems appropriate to add the following quotations:

“We are not to make the use of flesh food a test of fellowship, but we should consider the influence that professed believers who use flesh foods have over others. . . . Will those who are supported by the tithe from God’s storehouse permit themselves by self-indulgence to poison the life-giving current flowing through their veins?”—Testimonies, vol. 9, pp. 159, 160; “While we do not make the use of flesh meat a test, while we do not want to force anyone to give up its use, yet it is our duty to request that no minister of the conference shall make light of or oppose the message of reform on this point.”—Letter 48, 1902, cited in Counsels on Diet and Foods, p. 401

What does this mean to us?

If this is not to be a test of fellowship, what is?

How important to us are some of those things that are not a test of fellowship?

Are we making things a test of fellowship that are not?

[Snoopy]

The answer is no i don't think Ellen G. White was prompted by the Gay or Woman's movement in her day. What I am saying is in this time we live I do believe that it is the case. I also believe that the ordination of women is a platform for women to become Conference Presidents and even General Conference President. The reason for it (women's ordination) is not strictly kept in the paremeters of gay and women's rights but it is also a money issue too. You know most of the early leaders of the church were not willing participates to the cause outside there love for God. The positions were not positions that paid money nor were they held as positions of honour, but for the most part were positions of sacrifice. There are many today in the position of Pastors, Elders etc... who want the position for the purpose of Honour not true love for God (not all) but some *this is my opinion not meant to individually judge motives.* Thus we have myriads of pastors who are not converted on the issues of diet, sabbath observance or even the roll of Ellen G. White. But the most frightening thing is that the church has taken the position that only God should have. My original statement was based on the status of the church as it stands. Even the positions of Elder, Pastor, Deacon, are not viewed in their right light because of the blatant stance of the church against itself. Like when Jesus came in the time of the Jewish church who were allowing divorce for any cause because of the hardness of the peoples hearts. Thus women now strive to be in the glorified position of Elder, Pastor, General conference leader etc... And we have only ourselves to blame because the positions have been glorified and made the portals for heaven and enlightenment.

I am really struggling to get your points, Christian.

Okay, here is my point. I believe that the church is in apostasy so bad you might as well ordain anyone who wants it. In the light of the churches position on topics that are clear as glass the church takes positions based the same as the nominal churches (what is appropriate and acceptable for the time). We, the church at large are simply a quasi Sabbath keeping denomination, saved by the fourth commandment. We have become such a denomination of contradictions, we mirror the church prior to Christ coming. You must remember that the church was the tool used to kill the Son of Man. We argue topics like the Jews of old and then ignore the very truth we have. We believe that anything we do as a cooporation is the will of God once we in session have approved it, so lets just let the majority rule, what is the use of debating. It is becoming more and more difficult for me to debate things as though we are Gods tool for spreading the Gospel no matter what we do. If we would just do what we know and have no conflict with the rest would take care of itself. Ellen White would say that a pastor that is not converted on the issue of meat eating should not be trusted,) I am paraphrasing)

Amen!!   

[Gregory]

In many ways a Church is simply people who have been called out from the world.  It is not a building.  According to the Bible, God's church consists of called out people.

As to the SDA denomination:  More than one denominational commentator has suggested that the SDA Denomination today is made up of five (5) groups that differ in belief and life style.  As an  interesting point, people differ as to the specifics of these five groups.   

My personal opinion is that I would rather have this denomination consist of five different groups than to see it split.   I say, leave some things to God and let God cast the weeds out of the flowers if need be.  I do not believe that I need to be doing that.

Further, I do not believe that every doctrinal or life-style issue is of equal importance.  I am a life-long lacto-ova-vegitarian.  But, I do not believe that such a diet is the most important part of the gospel.  I place at the center of the gospel the cross and the salvation that Christ has provided us in the fullness of God's love.  That is more important than the Sabbath, EGW, the state of the dead and whether or not one votes for a President in November who uses tobacco.  Some spiritual issues are more important and more central to the gospel message than others.  In fact, some spiritual issues are presented in a manner that they do not seem to be any kind of "good news" at all.

Yes, it can be said the there are members within the SDA Church who are in apostacy just as it can be said that there are some members who are followers of Christ.  It will likely be like this until the 2nd Advent.  I do not expect to find a perfect church, at least not one of which I am a member. 

[Johann]

We really are not consistent. 

I totally agree with that statement.  Additionally, favoritism and nepotism run rampant, in my experience anyway.

A constant fight with human sinful nature. The church should be a hospital, but healing is only available if the divine physician is allowed to do His work.

[Johann]

It has been suggested that even though Ellen G. White had the credentials of an ordained minister she did not function as such because she never baptized nor performed marriages.

Have you forgotten the story of the Apostle Paul? Didn't he state that he tried to leave all of the baptisms to others, with a few exceptions? How many couples did he marry? How many burials are recorded?

Does the record indicate that he did not fulfill the requirements for ordination? Was Paul ordained?

[Gregory]

The same for other people who we have ordained.

Take A.L. White--the grandson of EGW, for an example.  He was ordained but did not function as a typical pastor.

[Bob Pickle]

Nowhere in those 28 beliefs is ordination restricted to males.

I don't think you adequately addressed the issue. You had stated that the issue was one for the unions to decide, not the GC, and I pointed out that GC Sessions, not unions, decides doctrinal issues. It is therefore within a GC Session's realm to decide this question, which it already has, twice.

Bob, you misunderstand the process of ordination in the SDA Chruch.

I was referring to what I had read in GC/NAD policy. That policy calls for an examination, and states who is supposed to conduct the examination. The existence of such policies is proof that higher entities set parameters within which the unions' authority to authorize ordinations operates. Thus that authority does not mean there are no parameters determined by higher organizations.

[Bob Pickle]

Just because there are rebellious teenagers in the world is no evidence this is a rebellion.

If the unions and conferences involved make it crystal clear that they will not ordain a woman until permitted to do so by a GC Session vote, then there certainly is not rebellion against properly constituted church authority going on.

[Bob Pickle]

Johann has raised an interesting point:  In the early days of EGW, the developing SDA church was divided as to whether or not the Bible allowed EGW, as a female, to fill the role in the developing denomination that she claimed.

Could you provide some references? I am unaware of such a discussion.