I find this reply rather patronising....there is a clear, unequivocal command to keep the Sabbath holy.

The matter of women's ordination is not the subject of one of the 10 commandments, and other people studying the Bible have come to different conclusions on that matter than yours, Ray. Please note, I am not commenting on whether I think your interpretation of the Scripture on the ordination issue is right or wrong. I do have a problem with the form of argument you have just employed.

I think the main point being made, though, is a valid one, which is that as a Bible-believing church, we should not take our orders from culture or society but from the Bible.

The fact that some people come to different conclusions is no sign or proof that the Bible is not clear. There is virtually nothing which the Bible teaches, even on the clearest points, that is not questioned by someone. That is nothing. The important question is the quality of the study and what is discussed and how the issue is dealt with, not merely whether someone comes to different conclusions. You can find different conclusion drawn on just about every conceivable Biblical topic.

How could you make a whole one hour sermon on "The Ordination of Women"? I would not want to watch that because there are just so many more important issues to address, and because I can't imagine how you could make such a topic interesting for a whole hour.

Are you sure they just didn't just think it would be too lame to watch and decide to find something more interesting to fill the time slot with, and then some rumor got out of hand?

I can imagine a church doing something that's against inspired counsel and then not want that decision to ever be called into question. But at the expense of calling the judgment of Amazing Facts into question? If that's the case, they need to address this.

But the problem is, there's not much to work with, so it can become a mute issue:



It seems like there are certain things women should be ordained for, but not others obviously. Back then even ordained women never conducted weddings, funerals and baptisms. But Ellen White never really gave any attention to the issue:



But if women are conducting baptisms, weddings, and funerals, then they need to stop. It just upsets people and there's no need for it.

I'd hate to have to watch this video. Can someone just sum it up? I'm sure he's just gonna talk about Deborah and Dorcas and some other women that did stuff...

But here's the file: here

The other videos on this whole page look pretty good --> Agents of Hope: God's Great Missionaries

If you have a download manager, here:

I agree that our observance of Biblical commands should not be culturally determined.

But I maintain that to take a point on which I presume the vast majority of people here agree with - observance of the seventh day Sabbath - and to infer that if one does not agree with an interpretation of a more obscure point, one may as well throw the Sabbath out the window as well......is patronising.

Let us keep the discussion on logical, not emotive and sarcastic, grounds.

The following comment I quote from Nan was made in regards to the illustration I posted regarding which day to worship on.

Nan responded with:

"But I maintain that to take a point on which I presume the vast majority of people here agree with - observance of the seventh day Sabbath - and to infer that if one does not agree with an interpretation of a more obscure point, one may as well throw the Sabbath out the window as well......is patronising.

"Let us keep the discussion on logical, not emotive and sarcastic, grounds."

My response is:

The idea that the subject of who should be ordained is a minor or obscure one is not a reflection of the facts. However, it is a reflection of what has been percieved to be the fact in the past. From my extensive study as well as information that my mind was lead to when I was not even conducting formal research, is that this topic of who should be the spiritual leaders in God's church is a major theme of the Scriptures.

This should not be of any surprise, since the people tend to follow their leaders. So, if the leader is not following God, then the people will usually not follow God either. Witness the apostasy of Israel and Judah, etc.

Also, the history of spiritual leadership and the Sabbath have walked in lock-step down through history. The parrallelisms are amazing.

So, my comment was not intended to be patronizing. If that came through, I appoligize, it was not intended to be so. I only intended to illustrate the falacy of using social trends to have any affect on our understanding of what God's word says. As near as I can understand, that is keeping the subject on a logical basis. Read the many passages from both the Bible and Ellen White that I have presented in other posts. Those are as factual as I can find.

A sad thing has happened in this discussion (the whole discussion, not just this one). The real issue is not whether women should be ordained. That is a perphial facet. Included for sure, but not the heart of the subject. The real issue is whether, as a church, has God given us the authority to ordain anyone who will accept ordination? The gender aspect only serves to obscure the real point.

In fact, the practice of ordaining men who never qualfied as spiritual leaders opened the door for women to demand equal treatment. However, what they want to be equal with is a practice that God does not approve of, nor has He given the church the authority to enact.

Jesus said that He did nothing on His own initative, see John 5:30, etc. NASB. We are to follow His example. Since ordaining anyone who will is based solely on the directives of humans, ordaining anyone who will is most certainly not by the instruction of God. Therefore, right off it should be suspect.

One more thing, however, it is often claimed that the Bible is silent on this topic. When I hear this, I wonder just how much of the Bible that person knows? Even without going into deep study of this topic, we have the instructions of the apostle to the Gentiles, which included many if not most of us, found in his letters to Timothy and Titus. See 1 Timothy 3:2, 12, and Titus 1:6 for a start.

(NOTE: This change in the instructions for ordination was prophesied by Isaiah in chapter 66:21. This is the ONLY fulfillment recorded in the Bible that fulfills this prophesy.)

A "husband of one wife" can only apply to a male. If one examines the original Greek, that concept is made so clear that it allows for no other meaning.

In this same vein, people have told me: "We do not have priests today, so this does not apply." This is a game in semantics. Spiritual leaders back then were called priest. Spiritual leaders since then have held various titles such as Bishop, Pastor, Elder etc. The common denominator for all is that they are the ones God has instructed us to install as our spiritual leaders. That is the important issue, not the name.

Happy Sabbath!

Maranatha :)
Ray

John317 asked:

"Do you see the Waggoner and Jones message as identical to Luther's view of justification by faith?"

No, not identical, only that they were dealing with the same topic. They expanded on previous positions. It is sad that their wonderful ministry ended in the way it did. However, I'm not sure that Jones and Waggoner bear all of the blame there.

Happy Sabbath!

Maranatha :)
Ray

I agree with you there, Nan. This is one subject that definitely needs that.

I'm so glad that Ellen is joining us here on The Adventist Forum. Good to have her. She should post more often.

The quote regarding women appointed to visit the sick, look after the young, and minister to the necessities of the poor, is exactly the job discription of the deaconesses.

"Deaconesses are to do their part in caring for the sick, the needy and the unfortunate, cooperating with the deacons in this work."SDA Church Manual pg93

Yes, Ellen White indicated before it happened that these men might leave the church, but she said that it wouldn't indicate that they weren't given a message from God to the church.

No doubt they were hurt badly by the fact that they knew God had given them a message to the church and yet so many in the church, and particularly many in leadership positions, who should have been excited to hear the truth, instead rejected them and their message. That had to be a great disappointment and shock.

But their experience was similar to Christ's, about whom it says, "He came to his own [people] and they did not receive Him [i.e., they killed Him]."

It makes me wonder, how would we or I receive them if they came with their message today? Would we receive or reject Christ?