Print

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

[Johann]

American Administrators Visit Ordained Female Pastors in China

See

http://www.atoday.org/article/1214/news/june-headlines/american-denominational-administrators-visit-women-serving-as-ordained-ministers-in-the-adventist-church-in-china

[christian]

American Administrators Visit Ordained Female Pastors in China

See

http://www.atoday.org/article/1214/news/june-headlines/american-denominational-administrators-visit-women-serving-as-ordained-ministers-in-the-adventist-church-in-china

Dont worry Johann there will be women ordinations in mass and just like the music styles of different churches some will except and some will reject. Thus in the end two groups will be formed in the church those that are considered fanatical and those who see themselves as progressive. A few will be considered fanatical and they will be persecuted while the vast majority will follow the trend of the nominal church and in the end will mirrow their counterparts. On the other hand the battle will rage on with some pointing out the fact that all the diciples were men and Jesus was a man. Some will see that and make the point that all were jews and none were Black Chinese or Indian. Some will remember the lady that Judged Israel and use that as a measurement. Some will use the fact that Ellen White was a woman. Some will use the fact how come the only black man at first rejected the call then later after careful study by a black man all of a suddenly did not understand it.  But on the otherhand a lady with a third grade education could understand it?

[Johann]

And some will refuse to bring the distinct Advent Message to the World at large because the General Conference has not managed to bring every church on earth in line with their understanding of church discipline. They wonder why the General Conference does not show their mandate and force the Church in China to abide by every detail outlined by a majority vote at a General Conference in session and thereby introducing persecution.

[Gregory]

Christian said.

Some will use the fact how come the only black man at first rejected the call then later after careful study by a black man all of a suddenly did not understand it.

You have your history wrong.  William Foy accepted the call and spent 3 months preaching the message.  Hazen Foss rejected.  William Foy accepted.  Yes, later he asked God to take that ministry away from him and God.

William Foy and Hazen Foss

William E. Foy, a member of the Freewill Baptist Church, who was preparing for the ministry, was given two visions in Boston in 1842—one on January 18 and the other on February 4. In the first of these revelations, Foy viewed the glorious reward of the faithful and the punishment of sinners. Not being instructed to relate to others what was shown him, he told no one of his vision; but he had no peace of mind. In the second revelation he witnessed the multitudes of earth arraigned before heaven's bar of judgment; a “mighty angel” with silver trumpet in hand about to descend to earth by “three steps;” the books of record in heaven; the coming of Christ and the reward of the faithful. He was bidden, “Thou must reveal those things which thou hast seen, and also warn thy fellow creatures to flee from the wrath to come.”—The Christian Experience of Wm. E. Foy, Together With the Two Visions He Received (1845).

Two days after this revelation he was requested by the pastor of the Bloomfield Street church in Boston to relate the visions.


[486]

Although he was a fluent speaker, he reluctantly complied, fearing that the general prejudice against visions, and the fact that he was a mulatto, would make his work difficult. The “large congregation assembled” was spellbound, and with this initial encouragement, Foy traveled three months, delivering his message to “crowded houses.” Then to secure means to support his family, he left public work for a time, but, finding “no rest day nor night,” he took it up again. Ellen Harmon, when but a girl, heard him speak at Beethoven Hall in Portland, Maine. (Interview of D. E. Robinson with Mrs. E. G. White, 1912. White Publications, D.F. 231.)

Near the time of the expectation in 1844, according to J. N. Loughborough, Foy was given a third vision in which were presented three platforms, which he could not understand in the light of his belief in the imminent coming of Christ, and he ceased public work. (The Great Second Advent Movement, pages 146, 147.)

NOTE:  None of the above references came from an Africian-American.  Your history is wrong here.

Yes, Delbert Baker is an African-American.  I do not understand why you thought necessary to say: ". . after careful study by a black man . . ."  Such does not add anything of value.  Rather it seems that you are making an adverst comment about Dr. Baker.

In any case, the major facts in Dr. Baker's book were discovered and known well before he wrote his book.

[christian]

Christian said.

Some will use the fact how come the only black man at first rejected the call then later after careful study by a black man all of a suddenly did not understand it.

You have your history wrong.  William Foy accepted the call and spent 3 months preaching the message.  Hazen Foss rejected.  William Foy accepted.  Yes, later he asked God to take that ministry away from him and God.

William Foy and Hazen Foss

No my history is not wrong, I was simply stating a fact that was repeated many times to me as a young boy. The reason Baker wrote what he wrote was to clear up the controversy surrounding William Foy. And my statement about a black man did not detract from anything it was a statement meant to stress the obvious changing stance of the church based on the changing of times.

William E. Foy, a member of the Freewill Baptist Church, who was preparing for the ministry, was given two visions in Boston in 1842—one on January 18 and the other on February 4. In the first of these revelations, Foy viewed the glorious reward of the faithful and the punishment of sinners. Not being instructed to relate to others what was shown him, he told no one of his vision; but he had no peace of mind. In the second revelation he witnessed the multitudes of earth arraigned before heaven's bar of judgment; a “mighty angel” with silver trumpet in hand about to descend to earth by “three steps;” the books of record in heaven; the coming of Christ and the reward of the faithful. He was bidden, “Thou must reveal those things which thou hast seen, and also warn thy fellow creatures to flee from the wrath to come.”—The Christian Experience of Wm. E. Foy, Together With the Two Visions He Received (1845).

Two days after this revelation he was requested by the pastor of the Bloomfield Street church in Boston to relate the visions.


[486]

Although he was a fluent speaker, he reluctantly complied, fearing that the general prejudice against visions, and the fact that he was a mulatto, would make his work difficult. The “large congregation assembled” was spellbound, and with this initial encouragement, Foy traveled three months, delivering his message to “crowded houses.” Then to secure means to support his family, he left public work for a time, but, finding “no rest day nor night,” he took it up again. Ellen Harmon, when but a girl, heard him speak at Beethoven Hall in Portland, Maine. (Interview of D. E. Robinson with Mrs. E. G. White, 1912. White Publications, D.F. 231.)

Near the time of the expectation in 1844, according to J. N. Loughborough, Foy was given a third vision in which were presented three platforms, which he could not understand in the light of his belief in the imminent coming of Christ, and he ceased public work. (The Great Second Advent Movement, pages 146, 147.)

NOTE:  None of the above references came from an Africian-American.  Your history is wrong here.

Yes, Delbert Baker is an African-American.  I do not understand why you thought necessary to say: ". . after careful study by a black man . . ."  Such does not add anything of value.  Rather it seems that you are making an adverst comment about Dr. Baker.

In any case, the major facts in Dr. Baker's book were discovered and known well before he wrote his book.

We have become a church of conflicting messages tossed to and fro by the changing times, with only one constance and that being tithe and the Sabbath. Now the topic and issue of the day is women ordinance, my belief being that it is being driven by the woman equality movement, with gays being next. Our church still practices prejudice in the separation of Churches and Conferences which is totally ridiculous. And we use Ellen White to defend the separation, when she was dealing with the condition in Her day. Why is women ordination even a issue now? What is the driving movement that is propelling it forward? Some will say it is because we are trying to get the message out and women ordination will aid in that. We could classify it as something else and still pay them but that is not the goal (I believe for many) as the reason for this movement. I personally have no problem with women ordination or anything of that nature. I realize men nor women are doing what we are suppose to do by in large (this statement is not meant for everyone but the vast majority)[b I mean when are we going to wake up and stop playing games with the message. These topics which I am an active participant are bogus since we aren't even keeping the Sabbath by in large or following the Health Message even in our (Adventist Hospitals) and I could go on and on showing the blatant disregard for council from the Bible and Spirit of Prophecy. So when people come in the church now in the end they are more confused than ever and not because they haven't been exposed to the truth but rather because of the dualism in the church. So every topic in the church becomes suspect because we won't even do what we are suppose to corporatly. Our church went from serving vegetarian food (for pot lucks) which was not good to serving meat and having the deacons carry a gun. And the churches are becoming more prejudice as time goes by instead of more inclusive.

[Johann]

Christian, since you please the great majority of fallen Christianity with your view on female pastors, you should tell them that, and you may get a special discount with them when they come and persecute you for keeping the Sabbath. There is a certain advantage in following the majority, even going in the wrong direction.

[Gregory]

Christian, you have raised a fundamental question:  What is the purpose of church?  What should be the standards by which we allow people to remain in the church?

You sound to me like you focus you attention on the sins of the majority which may be accurate.  You sound like you would prefer to expel 90% of the members.  There are others who would like to do that.  The problem is that some of those would probably see sin in your life to such an extent that they wold like to expel you

In a corrupt age/society, to what extent should the church be a place where those who want to develop their Christian lives can come for spiritual nurture, or should the church be a place were those who have reached a specific level of Christian life and practice can pass the test and be admitted?

The question is:  Do  you and I separate the weeds from the wheat, or does Christ and to what extent?

You sound to me like that is something that you have already done in your mind.

[christian]

Christian, you have raised a fundamental question:  What is the purpose of church?  What should be the standards by which we allow people to remain in the church?

You sound to me like you focus you attention on the sins of the majority which may be accurate.  You sound like you would prefer to expel 90% of the members.  There are others who would like to do that.  The problem is that some of those would probably see sin in your life to such an extent that they wold like to expel you

In a corrupt age/society, to what extent should the church be a place where those who want to develop their Christian lives can come for spiritual nurture, or should the church be a place were those who have reached a specific level of Christian life and practice can pass the test and be admitted?

The question is:  Do  you and I separate the weeds from the wheat, or does Christ and to what extent?

You sound to me like that is something that you have already done in your mind.

Interesting that you would say "you sound like you would prefer to expel 90% of the members" so you feel the sinning is that high? I was only thinking in the area of 75%. That was really funny since I did not state anything of the sort. You think the church is the place for the weeds to grow don't you? The presence of the tare is not an act of God but rather Satan. The identity of the tare is that they appear sincere like they are wheat when in fact they are there to do Satan's bidding. I at no time suggested that it is my job to uproot anyone, however, I am under no obligation to except sin even if I am a sinner. And the Bible says to him that knoweth to do good and does not to him it is sin. (The Churches purpose is to preach the truth and let the Holy Spirit read the Heart and soul of an individual).

[Gregory]

O.K.  I will accept your 75%.  I stated that you "sounded to me like" because that is how you came across to me and I did not know what you actually meant.

In my thinking, both you and I are wheat that has been corrupted by a weed.  We are wheat because we are on a spiritual journey that is dedicated to following Christ.    But, we have both been corrupted by a weed.  Over time, it will have to be Christ (HS) who removes that weedy influence from us.  You sound like you would like to remove from our fellowship those who do not meet you level of expectation for removal of the weedy influence.  Well, it just may be that there are those here who do not believe that either you or I meet their level of expectation of the removal of the weedy influence.  Perhaps, in their thinking, both of us should be expelled from SDA Fellowship?

I attend a SDA Chruch that is eclectic.  It welcomes all--people who are not SDA, those who are not Crhistian,  SDAs with differing beliefs.    We have an elderly man who has attended for three years.  He openly says that he attends because God requires him to attend.  He ocasionally works on the Sabbath.  He drinks an alcoholic beverage.  He has beliefs that are not SDA.  He challenges us and we challenge him.

Those of us who have observed him for the three years that he has attended are united in our belief that he has grown spiritually overa tthe past three years!  He is growing spiritually.  Let us say that the time comes when he will decide that God is calling him to formally unite with the SDA Chruch and our congregation.  If that time comes he probably will not be perfect and in accord with all of your standards and beliefs.  Should we deny him simply becasue he is not as mature a Christinan as you think he should be?  Well, there ae likely those here who beleive that you and I are not as mature a Christian as their standards require.   

[christian]

O.K.  I will accept your 75%.  I stated that you "sounded to me like" because that is how you came across to me and I did not know what you actually meant.

In my thinking, both you and I are wheat that has been corrupted by a weed.  We are wheat because we are on a spiritual journey that is dedicated to following Christ.    But, we have both been corrupted by a weed.  Over time, it will have to be Christ (HS) who removes that weedy influence from us.  You sound like you would like to remove from our fellowship those who do not meet you level of expectation for removal of the weedy influence.  Well, it just may be that there are those here who do not believe that either you or I meet their level of expectation of the removal of the weedy influence.  Perhaps, in their thinking, both of us should be expelled from SDA Fellowship?

I attend a SDA Chruch that is eclectic.  It welcomes all--people who are not SDA, those who are not Crhistian,  SDAs with differing beliefs.    We have an elderly man who has attended for three years.  He openly says that he attends because God requires him to attend.  He ocasionally works on the Sabbath.  He drinks an alcoholic beverage.  He has beliefs that are not SDA.  He challenges us and we challenge him.

Those of us who have observed him for the three years that he has attended are united in our belief that he has grown spiritually overa tthe past three years!  He is growing spiritually.  Let us say that the time comes when he will decide that God is calling him to formally unite with the SDA Chruch and our congregation.  If that time comes he probably will not be perfect and in accord with all of your standards and beliefs.  Should we deny him simply becasue he is not as mature a Christinan as you think he should be?  Well, there ae likely those here who beleive that you and I are not as mature a Christian as their standards require.

I have never said anything about removing anyone from the Church.--- I would like to say hello, I enjoy the exchanges we are having---. What my great concern has always been is when the church changes its doctrine to a lie. Individually, I believe we are all like the Prodigal son and need that kind of experience. Satan, in the last days has tried not so much to destroy the Prodigal son but diabolically he is now trying to destroy the Father's House. My contention is that he is trying to make the place the Prodigal return to like the pig pen he so longed to leave when he came to himself. I hope you can understand what I am trying to say. Individually, we all are sinners saved by Grace, myself included, however we must never be allowed to think the lie is a truth because then we have in essence created the unpardonable sin. And for Gods people who have known the truth to except a lie as the truth is most damming. Men and Women were indeed created equal, but with different rolls and Satan knows this. It has been his ultimate goal to distort the image of God. We know from Ellen G. White that if for any other reason the flood came it was for the fact that man had distorted the image of God. Women were made to carry the babies, have children and men were design to be the head of their families, and the church is a larger scale of that very thing. There is no lesser roll for women than for men but both hold extremely important rolls that God out of his wisdom, we living in a sinful world design for our own good.

[Johann]

A female elder in the New Testament?

http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=830

[Bob Pickle]

A female elder in the New Testament?

http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=830

And so should we conclude that Phoebe ruled over Paul? Is that what we are supposed to conclude from that article?

[Johann]

A female elder in the New Testament?

http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=830

And so should we conclude that Phoebe ruled over Paul? Is that what we are supposed to conclude from that article?

Who gave you the idea that a pastor/elder has to rule over someone?  If that is you idea I begin to understand your reluctance to accept the ordination of females

[Bob Pickle]

A female elder in the New Testament?

http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=830

And so should we conclude that Phoebe ruled over Paul? Is that what we are supposed to conclude from that article?

Who gave you the idea that a pastor/elder has to rule over someone?  If that is you idea I begin to understand your reluctance to accept the ordination of females

I'm just taking what the article says, and following it to its logical conclusion. Nothing more, nothing less.

Note in the article the section "Phoebe: A Prostatis", and beyond. Note that the article argues that the word should mean "ruler" rather than "helper." Then note that in Rom. 16:2, Paul says that Phoebe has been a helper "of many, and of myself also."

Thus, if the word in question really does mean "ruler" or "leader" as the article suggests, then we must conclude that Phoebe was a ruler or leader of Paul.

I would suggest that before we borrow the arguments of others to support our positions, that we think through what they are saying to make sure there aren't any holes in their logic, such as this article's idea apparent forcing us to conclude that Phoebe was over Paul.

[Johann]

A female elder in the New Testament?

http://www.sbl-site.org/publications/article.aspx?articleId=830

And so should we conclude that Phoebe ruled over Paul? Is that what we are supposed to conclude from that article?

Who gave you the idea that a pastor/elder has to rule over someone?  If that is you idea I begin to understand your reluctance to accept the ordination of females

I'm just taking what the article says, and following it to its logical conclusion. Nothing more, nothing less.

Note in the article the section "Phoebe: A Prostatis", and beyond. Note that the article argues that the word should mean "ruler" rather than "helper." Then note that in Rom. 16:2, Paul says that Phoebe has been a helper "of many, and of myself also."

Thus, if the word in question really does mean "ruler" or "leader" as the article suggests, then we must conclude that Phoebe was a ruler or leader of Paul.

I would suggest that before we borrow the arguments of others to support our positions, that we think through what they are saying to make sure there aren't any holes in their logic, such as this article's idea apparent forcing us to conclude that Phoebe was over Paul.

Why do yo get stuck on one word before you understand the rest? If you happen to meet the emperor of Japan on your way somewhere, does that mean he becomes a ruler over you immediately?