Now, if we check out carefully the churches that have accepted women as pastors and priests, we have to admit that it looks probable that acceptance of gay pastors is the next step after full acceptance of women's ordination as ministers.

If the church believed this statement as you are presenting it, Robert, they would not have women teachers....

You are entitled to your opinion no matter how outragous and comic it is. More so, how dangerous and belittleing of women.

belittleing of women

Then please explain it.

Thanks,

Robert

You are entitled to your opinion no matter how outragous and comic it is. More so, how dangerous and belittleing of women.

Re: "It is very obvious that either we have to say the New Testament teaches that only men should be pastors or we have to say that the Bible is not the final authority for doctrine and practice. . . .

Those are the only two possible alternatives that I see."

O. K. Those are the only two alternatives as you see them. But, does that mean that there are only two alternatives in reality? Is it possible that there are others that you have not yet discovered? I do not mean to be sarcastic when I say this, so please do not take it as sarcastic, but, do you take that position that you have enough Spirit filled understanding of the subject that you can be certain that there are no more than two alternatives?

I personally think that there is another alternative. But, I do not desire to state that as I do not think that specific is the major point. My major point in this post is to suggest that there may be more than the two alternatives that you have cited.

Very insightful post, 317. I agree fully with your assessment of homosexuality sharing a fundamental link with gender confusion & feminism. Very accurate.

Berit Kjos has well documented this link in her book "A Twist of Faith."

regards,

olger

What is there to explain?

I just do not see the church literally following Paul's advice.

...If we cannot understand and practice "there is neither male nor female," then intelligent, spiritually seeking women will continue to leave the Christian faith in droves and turn to paganism, Wicca and other belief systems where their participation and talents are valued regardless of their sex.

aldona

O. K. let this be opened up.

Re: Women and leadership:

Ellen G. White was an ordained SDA minister:

a) She over a period of years, and several times, was issued the credentials of an ordained SDA minister.

b) In the personnel records of her time, she was listed as an ordained SDA minister.

c) Yes, she was not ordained in a public ceremony.

d) The qualifying factor to be an ordained SDA minister, is the credentials. Those make her an ordained SDA minister.

Coming from a "secular" work environment where it is taken for granted that men and women are equal and capable of doing the same work...and then coming here and reading this sort of stuff...is very depressing and disheartening...

If we cannot understand and practice "there is neither male nor female," ...
aldona

In brief, there are *two* major viewpoints on the role of men vs. women in the church.

The first is *egalitarianism* -- women and men are precisely equal.
The second is *complementarianism* -- women and men are equal but not identical, with differing roles.

I subscribe to the second.

Why, in brief?

First of all, look at Jesus' close relationship with women in the gospels, and his revolutionary step of teaching women -- something that, IIRC, was not common among Jewish rabbis even in the 19th century (Luke 10:38-42).

Women were NOT excluded, as they have been in some other religions. They also exercised -- at a minimum -- the gift of prophecy in church, and were allowed to pray aloud in church (1 Cor 11:5), and as mentioned earlier Dorcas and Priscilla played major roles in the early church.

You'll notice also that one entire book in the NT (2 John) is addressed to a woman -- "the chosen lady and her children". If I'm reading this correctly (Colossians 4:15), the church in Colosse met in Nympha's -- I think that's a female name -- house.

Thus it is well spoken: "There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus." (Galatians 3:28).

-------
I want to bring up a point about the head covering -- I believe it's a "hat" -- mentioned in 1 Cor 11 above. I could be wrong, 'cause I'm speculating, but IIRC a "hat" was the sign of a freeman in ancient Rome. Slaves could never wear hats. Only freemen could. That is why, if you look at the seal of the US army, there is a "liberty cap" in the center of the seal, representing free men.

That is why men weren't allowed to wear hats -- because they were slaves of Christ, and to wear a hat in his presence would have dishonored him. Likewise, women were required to wear a hat for the reason fictional witches wear the pointy black -- it sets them apart, grants them authority. That's why a woman who prayed or prophesied had to wear a hat -- it gave her authority as free in Christ. IMO.

-------
So women and men are equal in Christ. But this does not mean they act the same. Paul instructed that the man was to be the head of every household (1 Cor 11:3). He also left instructions that women could not teach in the church (1 Cor 14:34) or have authority over a man (1 Timothy 2:12).

Why is this? I have been searching for the answer to that. Here are a couple of reasons, *I* think.

First reason is to look at the metaphor Paul uses: Men love women as Christ loved the church (Eph 5:25). In mysticism, we are the "female" to God's "male". He is the dominant party. Modeling women ruling over men would, in this metaphor, model us ruling over God, and that's problematic.

Women and men aren't the same. They are two different genders, with two defined roles. I read that "gender-bending" and "gender confusion" were common in first-century Greek culture, and was indeed a significant part of pagan religious practices.

It ain't that way in the Bible. As Douglas Adams would say, the men are men, the women are women, and the little furry creatures from Alpha Centauri were REAL furry creatures from Alpha Centauri. So much of the NT is written with that in mind -- men and women are equal. Women do NOT have to pretend to be men. Men do NOT have to pretend to be women. Instead, they are equally loved by God in their unique, individual roles as male and female.

And the roles seem to be set up as they are in many other mammals -- as bulls with cows, roosters with chickens, stallions with mares, rams with sheep, so men with women. The male in each case is a dominant creature with horns.

This sound troublesome, until you consider what happens when the opposite occurs. As an example -- anyone see the Simpson's TV show? Homer is worthless -- it's up to Marge to be the moral example in the home. And the male son follows Homer and ignores Marge. This is because, on a fundamental level, men don't accept the leadership of women. They only follow those who are like themselves.

So "headship" in this context means "be the example". Don't leave it to your wife to set the example in the house -- do it yourself. Be someone the rest of the family can look up to, not someone who throws all his responsiblities on the woman -- she's got her hands full doing her own job without doing yours, too.

It also means "love her as Christ loved the church" (Eph 5:25). And Christ loved the church by leaving his comfortable place in Heaven, washing the feet of his church, and finally dying for it. If you want to be a true husband in Christ, you have to do these things for your wife as well. She is NOT a convenience, but a "heir... with you of the gracious gift of life" (1 Peter 3:7). That same verse goes on to say that if we don't treat our wives well, God will not listen to our prayers.

Many people fundamentally misunderstand the nature of "leadership" in the body of Christ. It is NOT a matter of lording it over people (which many 19th century Christians misunderstood it to mean) -- but to be given authority over someone is to be their servant (Mark 10:42-45).

Part of the reason for the ban on participation in the NT was because of the vast difference in education, religiously, between men and women. Remember, men were given a serious education and women were not. Teaching both genders would be like having high school kids and grade school kids in the same classroom, lecturing at the high school level. The teacher wasn't about to stop every ten minutes to go over elementary material -- instead, each elementary student was assigned a high school tutor, who would go over the tough material outside of class, thus preventing loss of valuable time.

Well, in modern America women have no less knowledge of the Bible than men do. They could participate on equal footing.

Another thing: One thing being married has taught me is that "submission" doesn't mean what I thought it meant. As a free man under Christ (1 Cor 11:3) I also have shepherds. I have learned -- through painful experience -- that as a free man, they have no right to compel me. I am Christ's slave, not theirs.

Remember: God's way is free and willing submission, doing things his way because he *asks* us to, not because we're *forced* to. Even Jacob got Rachel's and Leah's acquiescence to flee from Laban (Genesis 31:4-21). And even in an absolute monarchy, things go better if the subjects give their free and willing consent, as opposed to passively resisting every step of the way, which they have no choice but to do if they do not give their free consent.

So - men and women are equal in God's sight, but they have different roles due to their differing biology and psychology.

And I hate to say this ... but IMO what we see in Saudi Arabia today and what we saw in 19th century Europe vis-a-vis treatment of women is a ghastly counterfeit, a mockery, of the true relationship between men and women. In those relationships, women are dominated and ruled over as if they are domestic animals. This is not right. Our society, perhaps, has gone the other way in insisting there is no distinction between men and women whatever. Somewhere in the middle lies the true Biblical path.

I should also add: advancing technology has opened up many fields and abilities to women that would have been closed to them in previous centuries. I believe this is God's gift to them. Learning to take advantage of these opportunities while preserving the unique glory of both men and women is an ongoing process. I doubt we're going to be done with it anytime soon.

If we cannot understand and practice "there is neither male nor female," then intelligent, spiritually seeking women will continue to leave the Christian faith in droves and turn to paganism, Wicca and other belief systems where their participation and talents are valued regardless of their sex.

Just to set the record straight ... Ellen White DID receive a Full Pastors salary and it was equal to all other Pastors .....

This is a long quote (edited slightly by me)....but I think well worth reading. It is not from an SDA, rather by a Christian admin on a pagan forum. He is attempting an explanation of the role of women in the church as portrayed in the Bible vs contemporary thought:


Sir Longpost's Quote on Women and the Church

So if they can't have it their way they will leave Christ? In that case they were never apart of Christ, but rather driven by selfish ego!

Again, that phrase [there is neither male nor female] in its context has nothing to do with ordination and everything to do with salvation by faith!
Robert

Again, that phrase [there is neither male nor female] in its context has nothing to do with ordination and everything to do with salvation by faith!

Just to set the record straight ... Ellen White DID receive a Full Pastors salary and it was equal to all other Pastors not superior because she was a Prophet in addition to being a Pastor.

And I agree with the other statements that to do away with Ellen Whites leadership over the GC MEN would mean that you would have to also do away with ALL words of Ellen White as a prophet. Either we accept Ellen White's strong leadership in the SDA church of her time OR we have to reject her because she was a women.

The issue of the second coming ... When I look at it ... the Second Coming has already come and gone. Yet, all the Adventists continue the tradition of looking for the second coming. I guess they can't count.