Print

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

[Bob Pickle]

Isaiah 4:1  And in that day seven women shall take hold of one man, saying, We will eat our own bread, and wear our own apparel: only let us be called by thy name, to take away our reproach.

One preacher pointed out that unmarried women who have gotten pregnant can remove their reproach by getting married, and that thus this text fits what Babylon and her daughters are doing: They take the name Christian but want to do as they please.

[Bob Pickle]

I will point out that the constitution and bylaws of the MN Conf. was replaced on April 29 with a new document, a document that made a similar change as the one proposed for PUC. But, in the case of MN, the delegates were never informed of that change. Major changes were never made known, and thus these had to be pointed out in a 2-minute speech from the floor, which is totally unrealistic.

However, I don't think that some of the powers that be were aware of the implications of the new language.

Regarding whether the MN Conf. can differ from the GC and NAD, any difference would have to be in the bylaws themselves, and thus any future difference would have to be incorporated into the bylaws by, I think, a 75% super majority. So that does raise the bar.

[Bob Pickle]

The GC Session is the entity that recognizes the PUC. If the PUC refuses to recognize the authority of the GC Session, why would the GC Session have to continue to recognize the PUC?

[Daryl Fawcett]

Wouldn't the same be true of the CUC?

The GC Session is the entity that recognizes the PUC. If the PUC refuses to recognize the authority of the GC Session, why would the GC Session have to continue to recognize the PUC?

[Bob Pickle]

Wouldn't the same be true of the CUC?

The GC Session is the entity that recognizes the PUC. If the PUC refuses to recognize the authority of the GC Session, why would the GC Session have to continue to recognize the PUC?

Yes, it would be true of the CUC as well.

[christian]

Those two words can potentially make a huge difference in what can be allowed in the union.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, changing the practice of women's ordination could be only the beginning.

In contradistinction, the CUC vote was narrowly confined to the issue of WO.

In their full implication, the change of these words is as important as the difference between love and sin, light and dark, saved or lost. Think about it. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." James 2:10. There can be no half-hardheartedness. There is no such thing as half-loyalty. To stray on one point is to betray one's entire purpose. We are either united or we are not. Unit can only take place when believers are of one mind and one accord, agreed in truth and practice. "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" Amos 3:3.

None would dare tell JEHOVAH that they will be obey Him in most things but in some they will choose to do as they please. And if we wouldn't do this to God, then how dare we do this to His remnant church and corporately choose to say "We shall do as we will" on these certain points, casting away all the light given to us a people, and primarily the Sanctuary Message. Woe unto the conferences, unions, and bodies of believers who dare do this at this hour for they are openly rebelling against the King of the Universe.

Oh, blow it out your ears, we have done far worse already. The actions being taken here and in other Conferences are simply a culmination of past events that have long since stripped the church of its Spiritual base. We are simply repeating history but in a more mocked way. Do you think Jesus would be more welcome, is more welcome, in the church today than in the time of the Scribes and Pharisees? Go back sometime and listen to the sermons of Evangelist like C.D. Brooks and the like and compare them with the sermons today, many of the Big name preachers would be looked at a fanatical and completely out of touch with the church of today. ----The apostasy of the church is a welcome sign because before the church can be cleansed the wheat and tare must grow up. The delination between the two groups of people must be clearly seen and the lines made clear for our sake. When Jesus came as a baby to earth the time was ripe for the messiah, previous before that time the intentions of those in charge of the church were clearly viewed and the people were ready for the saviour of the world. ----Women have for so many years seen men in position of authority not show themselves to be men and thus now the time has come that women see no distinguishing factor between the course men take and the ability that women have. And because in a marked way the savior is not manifested in the church through miracle's or communication, women are like a single mom, ready to step in and do the job. Many a woman have been educated in the ministry and see themselves every bit as qualified as men to do the task at hand. The women are right they are very much just as capable as men, though that is not God's desire, it is absolutely a fact. I keep asking the question does God not audibly talk to the leaders of the church as he did in Biblical times? I have not heard anyone say " and the word of the Lord came to me" and revealed the truth. I can guess that we would be so afraid if the Lord did talk to us and so utterly lost for words. And here is perhaps the most evident and telling condition of the church, it is no longer in fear of God. The fear I am talking about is not the fear generated by punishement though we dont have that either. I mean we don't have the fear generated by love.

[Gregory]

http://www.aubsda.org/assets/396424

The above website is a SDA denominational response to a number of question in regard to the PUC meeting today (August 19, 2012) that addresses questions and comments that have been raised here and in other places.

[Murcielago]

Wow! Any job openings for Elder Castillo? Lol! I'm not sure he'll be welcome back in Silver Spring after today. Like he said, he may be coming back to CA a lot sooner than later after that speech.

[Murcielago]

Motion to change the bylaws fails. 65% yes, 35% no. Lost by 1% as a 2/3 majority is required.

[Murcielago]

That the Pacific Union Conference approve ordinations to the gospel ministry without regard to gender: yes 79%, no 21%.

[Bob Pickle]

http://www.aubsda.org/assets/396424

The above website is a SDA denominational response to a number of question in regard to the PUC meeting today (August 19, 2012) that addresses questions and comments that have been raised here and in other places.

Gregory,

That propaganda piece contains outright falsehoods. Wouldn't it be far better if when you post such links, you also point out which statements in the piece are false?

[Dedication]

The GC Session is the entity that recognizes the PUC. If the PUC refuses to recognize the authority of the GC Session, why would the GC Session have to continue to recognize the PUC?

Because a lot of financial support comes from the Pacific Union Conferance
Because one of Adventists most prestigeous hosipitals and universities are within the PUC
Because it is a large concentration of Adventists in the PUC  --  Churches:  696     Members:  217,370  (appr. 20% of all of NAD's Adventists are in the PUC).



And if they did that to the PUC they'd have to do it to the Columbia Union, too?
 Churches:   651    Members:  128,915

[christian]

Those two words can potentially make a huge difference in what can be allowed in the union.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, changing the practice of women's ordination could be only the beginning.

In contradistinction, the CUC vote was narrowly confined to the issue of WO.

In their full implication, the change of these words is as important as the difference between love and sin, light and dark, saved or lost. Think about it. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." James 2:10. There can be no half-hardheartedness. There is no such thing as half-loyalty. To stray on one point is to betray one's entire purpose. We are either united or we are not. Unit can only take place when believers are of one mind and one accord, agreed in truth and practice. "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" Amos 3:3.

None would dare tell JEHOVAH that they will be obey Him in most things but in some they will choose to do as they please. And if we wouldn't do this to God, then how dare we do this to His remnant church and corporately choose to say "We shall do as we will" on these certain points, casting away all the light given to us a people, and primarily the Sanctuary Message. Woe unto the conferences, unions, and bodies of believers who dare do this at this hour for they are openly rebelling against the King of the Universe.

Really, do you really believe what you just wrote? We have been doing what we want and obeying him in some things, but pretty much doing what we want. We are so much like the Jews of old and just refuse to see the light of day. The church has been on the wrong road when it comes to the primary mission of the church for some time. It is the churches goal to prepare the individual to stand in the last days, which mean totally depending on God. Now we teach the people they cannot overcome all sin, moreover, we fail to help them understand it is possible to live without sin and God requires it. Righteousness by faith is a must for these last days. -----The big argument here is not so much about women's rights as it is who controlls the money. It really is not about ordination at all, but it is about equal pay and a women being a pastor or General Conference leader, or President of the Conference or General Conference. ---- This argument is supplemental to the root of the problem a lose of connection to the very one we should represent God. The times that we live in promote the equality of men and women with no distinguishing of men or women. We are simply connected to the influences of the world at large. The church is already caught in one of the most diabolical schemes of history we teach men to keep the commandments and then tell them it is impossible to keep them. It is not a wonder that now all kind of sin has crept into the church. Every sin is allowed in the church in the form of movie going and the listening to worldly music. Many a Pastor and member need to be disfellowship-ed on those things alone. Those are worse than adultery and none tithe paying etc... Sin has distorted the image of God so much in the church that the church member no longer know the difference from right and wrong.

[Dedication]

"All the policies, purposes and procedures of this Union shall be in harmony with the working policies and procedures of the North American Division and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists."

Vote is to change to:

"In general, the policies, purposes and procedures of this Union will be in harmony with the working policies and procedures of the North American Division and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists."

Those two words can potentially make a huge difference in what can be allowed in the union.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, changing the practice of women's ordination could be only the beginning.

In contradistinction, the CUC vote was narrowly confined to the issue of WO.

In their full implication, the change of these words is as important as the difference between love and sin, light and dark, saved or lost. Think about it. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." James 2:10. There can be no half-hardheartedness. There is no such thing as half-loyalty. To stray on one point is to betray one's entire purpose. We are either united or we are not. Unit can only take place when believers are of one mind and one accord, agreed in truth and practice. "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" Amos 3:3.

None would dare tell JEHOVAH that they will be obey Him in most things but in some they will choose to do as they please. And if we wouldn't do this to God, then how dare we do this to His remnant church and corporately choose to say "We shall do as we will" on these certain points, casting away all the light given to us a people, and primarily the Sanctuary Message. Woe unto the conferences, unions, and bodies of believers who dare do this at this hour for they are openly rebelling against the King of the Universe.

O.K. this is a prime example of what I was refering to on another thread.

Suddenly we see this impassioned loyality and total obedience to the GC policies.
Yet, I would wager that most of the conservatives that are now so strong in insisting the GC votes are next to the voice of God, have, in times passed not been all that supportive of the GC at all.

Just take the vote on marriage policies passed by the GC in session, in the year 2000, in Toronto.
I can't even remember the details but I do remember the fury expressed against the vote.

It was some of the same people (not on this forum) who voiced rather "rebellious" thoughts about the vote, that now advocate total obedience "in all things" not "in general" to the GC policies.
Conservatives usually don't show that much support for the General Conference, so it's interesting that in this issue they are ready to make it the "voice of God" in all policies.



On the other side -- there is A LOT of things going on in this beloved denomination, that is out of line with our established beliefs, and that has long ago wonder far afield from total obedience to GOD.   This is definitely not "the beginning>'

 I do agree we need to follow God all the time.

[christian]

"All the policies, purposes and procedures of this Union shall be in harmony with the working policies and procedures of the North American Division and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists."

Vote is to change to:

"In general, the policies, purposes and procedures of this Union will be in harmony with the working policies and procedures of the North American Division and the General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists."

Those two words can potentially make a huge difference in what can be allowed in the union.

As has been pointed out elsewhere, changing the practice of women's ordination could be only the beginning.

In contradistinction, the CUC vote was narrowly confined to the issue of WO.

In their full implication, the change of these words is as important as the difference between love and sin, light and dark, saved or lost. Think about it. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all." James 2:10. There can be no half-hardheartedness. There is no such thing as half-loyalty. To stray on one point is to betray one's entire purpose. We are either united or we are not. Unit can only take place when believers are of one mind and one accord, agreed in truth and practice. "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" Amos 3:3.

None would dare tell JEHOVAH that they will be obey Him in most things but in some they will choose to do as they please. And if we wouldn't do this to God, then how dare we do this to His remnant church and corporately choose to say "We shall do as we will" on these certain points, casting away all the light given to us a people, and primarily the Sanctuary Message. Woe unto the conferences, unions, and bodies of believers who dare do this at this hour for they are openly rebelling against the King of the Universe.

O.K. this is a prime example of what I was refering to on another thread.

Suddenly we see this impassioned loyality and total obedience to the GC policies.
Yet, I would wager that most of the conservatives that are now so strong in insisting the GC votes are next to the voice of God, have, in times passed not been all that supportive of the GC at all.

Just take the vote on marriage policies passed by the GC in session, in the year 2000, in Toronto.
I can't even remember the details but I do remember the fury expressed against the vote.

It was some of the same people (not on this forum) who voiced rather "rebellious" thoughts about the vote, that now advocate total obedience "in all things" not "in general" to the GC policies.
Conservatives usually don't show that much support for the General Conference, so it's interesting that in this issue they are ready to make it the "voice of God" in all policies.



On the other side -- there is A LOT of things going on in this beloved denomination, that is out of line with our established beliefs, and that has long ago wonder far afield from total obedience to GOD.   This is definitely not "the beginning>'

 I do agree we need to follow God all the time.

I am in total agreement with you here when it comes to a double standard. But for sometime we as Adventist have often picked and chosen what we wanted to follow, partially because we really do feel we are the literal voice of God, and secondly because money dictates our stance. There is a big difference between being the voice of God and the mouthpiece for him.

When there is no advancement in spiritual growth the result is that everyone begins to reevaluate their position. The next thing to happen is a shift in position as is the practice of corporations when products are not being sold or goods and services are not profitable. In order to serve the public and become profitable two things must happen. First, the corporation must give in to the public demand for a different or changed product or the product must become consumer friendly.

The Sabbath is becoming a commodity that is not saleable in and of itself therefore it must be packaged in a consumer friendly package. And since the United States is by in large going toward a gender neutral society Adventism must follow in the same practice. I was watching a wedding show where the host makes weddings come true for people who otherwise could not afford the dream wedding. In six out of the seven episodes that I saw the pastor that officiated the wedding was a female, the host of the show or the creator of the show was gay.

This march towards female ordination is simply an acceptance of the times we live in. The argument for or against it is good, but I can tell you that the outcome is a forgone conclusion. Just as the early celebration movement was met with scepticism and controversy for sometime only in the end to be pushed on the members by the pastors. The few conservative members left were simply pushed out or in the end became the most rowdy and celebratory of the group. The women ordination of elders in our church was met with the same scepticism and controversy but the outcome was a foregone conclusion.

My conclusion is this, let ordination of women to the ministry go through and the many other things that are on the horizon happen, it is only then that the true designs of people will be seen and the tare and the wheat bear fruit. This is an exciting time to live Jesus is about to perfect his character in people and then he can finally come back to this earth. These issues must play themselves out so peoples eyes can be clearly opened. All the schemes of man will fail, because the things God are asking of us are contrary to our very nature. In the end there will finally be those who along with the other nine commandments keep the commandments of God. In the mean time lets try it, lets see if women are any more successful than the men because for sure men have been a terrible failure for the most part.