Print

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

[Daryl Fawcett]

Here is the link to the Adventist Review regarding this:

http://www.adventistreview.org/issue.php?issue=2012-1528&page=16

Please read and then post your comments about this here.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Here is an interesting link:

http://www.nadadventist.org/article/1073742320/news/archived-news-stories/2012-news-archives/9-26-12-north-american-division-organizes-theology-of-ordination-study-committee

[Bob Pickle]

Out of the list of members of the NAD theology of ordination committee, which one or ones feel that ordaining women to the gospel ministry isn't biblical? The reason I ask is that I can see some names on that list that definitely are pro-WO, and thus the only fair way to do it is to ensure that there is at least one anti-WO person on the committee, since that would better ensure that all NAD viewpoints on the topic are represented.

[Battle Creek]

The same committees will be revising the 28 points of doctrines and have the revision ready for the next GC session. The main reason for the revision seems to be the development of language where the original words may not have the same meaning today.

[Daryl Fawcett]

As far as it is possible in the selection of members, there really shouldn't be any biased members, whether pro-WO, or anti-WO, on that committee.

[Battle Creek]

Out of the list of members of the NAD theology of ordination committee, which one or ones feel that ordaining women to the gospel ministry isn't biblical? The reason I ask is that I can see some names on that list that definitely are pro-WO, and thus the only fair way to do it is to ensure that there is at least one anti-WO person on the committee, since that would better ensure that all NAD viewpoints on the topic are represented.

The NAD committee is far from the only one dealing with this subject. There is a committee for each of the world divisions. In some of these divisions there seems to be a majority pro-WO, while in other divisions there is a majority anti-WO. Should that not be a sufficient guarantee that the anti-WO view is presented, even if the membership of the NAD committee should reflect the major opinion of the NAD unions?

Not only  this, but then there is a GC committee as another sieving apparatus before the matter is dealt with at various GC levels (Annual Counsel, etc) before it goes to the GC assembly. I have noticed, however, that some are hoping this is taken care of already by 2013/14, but wondering  how that can be accomplished?

Now I read that the WO is not the only matter the committees will take  care of. They will also deal with the task of reviewing or re-writing our 28 points of doctrines because the present wording has become obsolete. Who knows what that will include?

[Daryl Fawcett]

MEMBERS OF THE THEOLOGY OF ORDINATION STUDY COMMITTEE:

STELE, ARTUR A, Chair
Mbwana, Geoffrey G, Vice-chair
Porter, Karen J, Secretary
Boward, Tamara K, Recording Secretary
Arrais, Jonas
Arrais, Raquel C
Batchelor, Doug
Bauer, Steve
Beardsley-Hardy, Lisa M
Bischoff, Fred
Bohr, Stephen
Brown, Gina S
Brunt, John
Ceballos, Mario E
Chang, Shirley
Clark, Chester V III
Costa, Robert
Damsteegt, Gerard
Damsteegt, Laurel
Davidson, Jo Ann M
Davidson, Richard M
de Sousa, Elias B
Diop, A Ganoune
Donkor, Kwabena
Doss, Cheryl
Fagal, William A
Finley, Mark A
Fortin, Denis
Gothard, Doris M
Haloviak-Valentine, Kendra
Hasel, Michael
Holmes, C Raymond
Howard, James
Hucks, Willie
Jankiewiez, Darius
Kent, Anthony R
King, Gregory A
Knott, Esther
Knott, William M
Koh, Linda Mei Lin
Kuntaraf, Kathleen K H
McLennan, Patty
Mackintosh, Don
Miller, Nick
Mills, Phil
Moon, Jerry
Morris, Derek J
Mueller, Ekkehardt F R
Nelson, Dwight K
Nix, James R
Oberg, Chris
Page, Janet
Page, Jerry N
Paulson, Kevin
Peters, John
Pfandl, Gerhard
Poirier, Timothy L
Proffitt, Kathryn L
Prewitt, Eugene
Rafferty, James
Read, David C
Reeve, Teresa
Reid, George
Roberts, Randall L
Rodriguez, Angel M
Scarone, Daniel
Silva, Sandra
Slikkers, Dolores E
Small, Heather-Dawn K
Sorke, Ingo
Timm, Alberto R
Trim, David
Tutsch, Cindy
Veloso, Mario
Vin Cross, Tara
Wahlen, Clinton L
Warden, Ivan Leigh
Zarska, Carol

You can read more about this from the attached PDF file.

[Daryl Fawcett]

Looking at the members of this committee, it should make for an interesting study committee.

[Bob Pickle]

It looks to me like the list includes people on both sides of the issue, and that is the way it should be.

[Daryl Fawcett]

I agree.

Also, even though there are those on both sides of the issue, if they do the study without bias, they should eventually come to a conclusion.

[Battle Creek]

Now there are five Unions which have reached their conclusion on this question:

North German
Columbia
Pacific
Netherlands
Norway

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

I noticed Kevin Paulson made the group..he is a political animal and is known to be opposed to WO. My guess is that he was chasen for his political AND academic skills...in my honest opinion, he will bend his every effort to make sure WO is DOA in 2015!!!

The battle will be in the delegate counts long before the GC Session and Kevin is ACUTELY AWARE that it will be won or lost in the Delegate Selection Process!!!

I trust that IJN Akagi will expand his reach well beyond NPUC!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter

[Battle Creek]

At the first meeting of the over 100 member committee it seems like hermeneutics was the main issue studied. Hermeneutics means the method of studying the Bible. I understand the committee is stronly divided into two groups, those who follow the Ellen G White hermeneutics and those who follow the fundamentalist hermeneutics.

Kevin from New York has made this observation:

when I was at Andrews I would read a lot of corrispondence that Mrs. White wrote; the ones that I found most interesting was between Mrs. White and Steven Haskell, where Haskell kept trying to convince Mrs. White of the views of the Fundamentalists and trying to convince her that this was how her inspiration worked, and how she kept trying to encourage him to give up fundamentalism and saying that it NOT how her inspiration worked. (Haskell's argument won out in the church and is the views of the typical Adventist).

How is yours?

[Bob Pickle]

At the first meeting of the over 100 member committee it seems like hermeneutics was the main issue studied. Hermeneutics means the method of studying the Bible. I understand the committee is stronly divided into two groups, those who follow the Ellen G White hermeneutics and those who follow the fundamentalist hermeneutics.

Kevin from New York has made this observation:

when I was at Andrews I would read a lot of corrispondence that Mrs. White wrote; the ones that I found most interesting was between Mrs. White and Steven Haskell, where Haskell kept trying to convince Mrs. White of the views of the Fundamentalists and trying to convince her that this was how her inspiration worked, and how she kept trying to encourage him to give up fundamentalism and saying that it NOT how her inspiration worked. (Haskell's argument won out in the church and is the views of the typical Adventist).

How is yours?

I seem to recall a lecture by Michael Campbell about the 1919 Bible Conference in which he took the position that both sides at that conference resonated with the fundamentalist movement of those times.

Since fundamentalism was fighting the same things that Ellen White fought, such as the giving up of the beliefs that Christ's blood saves, and that God created the world in 6 days, I don't see how she could have pushed anyone to give up "fundamentalism."

The problem I see today is that folks have taken her thought inspiration position to extremes. Words express thoughts. If the thought is inspired, shouldn't we accept as true the thought expressed in the words we read? No, say some.

It's like the Catholic priest who told me that God didn't create the world in 6 days, and He didn't destroy the world with a flood. But the thought behind the stories was true, he said: God created everything and God will punish sin.

I assure you, that wasn't what Ellen White meant by thought inspiration.

[Gailon Arthur Joy]

Yes, and those same people that reject inspiration of EGW would now challenge the inspiration of the Bible Writers as well...in fact, let no-one stand in the way of "progressive" inspiration and  rationality!!!

Gailon Arthur Joy
AUReporter