Batchelor Preaches with an Ordained Woman Pastor
by Monte Sahlin
By Adventist Today News Team, July 17, 2014
Pastor Doug Batchelor, senior pastor at the Granite Bay Seventh-day Adventist Church and director of the Amazing Facts media ministry, visited China in May. Despite his opposition to the ordination of women pastors, he met with Pastor Xiaomei Hong, one of many Seventh-day Adventist ordained ministers in China who happen to be women. Adventists there have been ordaining women to the gospel ministry since the 1980s.
On February 6, 2010, he preached a sermon (in the U.S.) against the extension of ordination to women serving as pastors. Video recordings of the sermon have been distributed on the Web and through DVDs. He taught that for a woman pastor to be ordained is not biblical, that there are "distinctions that God has made regarding the roles of men and women."
Because of how well known Batchelor's opposition to women in ministry has become, he was one of the members of the study committee on ordination the denomination's General Conference appointed in order to provide "balance." Adventist Today has been told that in the committee meetings he argued against women being recognized as ordained ministers.
Praise God ! May God continue to bless the work in China and may many souls come to a knowledge and conviction of Jesus and His saving grace.
Is the miracle here that Doug Batchelor would be in the same evangelistic effort with a woman pastor? Excuse me, but I think I just saw a pig flying.
When the mighty rushing wind of the Holy Spirit blows through your barnyard, not only pigs fly 8-).
You've got that right!
One thing I respect about Doug Batchelor is that he has seen enough spiritual growth in his life that he is willing to recognize when God is trying to change his mind.
He can't knock success!
So…. what about all the hypocrisy?
One face in the US, another face in China? Here is all that fight against WO, then in Chine he accepts those ordained women to work with him?
There are some serious explanations to be presented to Adventists outside China.
It appears that Pastor Doug's orthodox theology can be "adapted."? On the other hand, has it been confirmed that he knew that his female associate was an officially ordained minister in the Seventh-day Adventist Church? Might he say that he didn't know? Perhaps it was truly lost in translation?
I believe that Doug was handling the situation as God would have wanted him to do!!! In the Mission Field, many times a person has to handle a situation much differently than they would in America!!! Remember how God could not find a man who would be the Prophet He wanted to work for Him. For that reason He chose Sr. White. God showed that He wanted a man, but could not find one that had the courage to speak for Him. Pastor Doug used what God provided. Remember that Sr. White refused to be Ordained, but she functioned in the capacity that God called he to. I feel that Doug did the same thing in this situation!!!
"God could not find a man who would be the Prophet He wanted to work for Him. For that reason He chose Sr. White. God showed that He wanted a man, but could not find one . . ." What a facinating gloss on the topic of the ordination of women debate. I don't recall ever hearing this highly creative interpreation of how EGW was selected–i.e., "God showed that He wanted a man, could not find one." (By the way, EGW, in one case, did receieve credentials indicating that she was Ordained. The photographic evidence was published in Adventist Today several issues back.)
You say: "Sr. White refused to be Ordained."
There is no documentation that she refused to be ordained.
You simply do not know your SDA History.
So…, did God change His mind now? Is DB's behavior in China good only for China, or will he also start defending WO in the US?
I still believe it is mere hypocrisy, playing the game the way that can be more self-rewarding.
What's new with those religious icons?
stonesvalley- Not only are you correct but critics seem not to realize, insofar as I can see, that the Chinese SDA church is *not* a part of the Seventh-day Adventist church structure. If they are not worshiping in secret Chinese who profess Adventism must adhere to the Three Self church governnment ordained structure.
Efforts to denigrate Pastor Doug are futile and his well reasoned objections to WO make him a convenient whipping boy for the left.
Maranatha
This is fascinating. Not only did Brother Doug preach in close association with an ordained sabbatarian woman, the woman was not even an Adventist? Clearly I'm out of my intellectual depth here…Perhaps herein lies yet another tale of investigative interest to conservative Adventism….
stonesvalley said: "In the Mission Field, many times a person has to handle a situation much differently than they would in America!!!"
Why? Are you making allowances for cultural differences? If so, wouldn't we allow for cultural differences between Divisions of the Church? This would provide for the ordination of women in some cultures if desirable, while other cultures could continue to take the position that it doesn't work for them.
Personally, I think America is one of the greatest mission fields. The Adventist Church in China most likely has a higher growth rate than in the United States. So maybe we have to do things differently here in order to reach our culture.
Well, this gets complicated. You see, Adventists would rather die than succumb to non-biblical impositions of any state. So when the Chinese government declared that all Protestants would be denominated "Three Self" and would have to give up discrimination-of-gender in their preaching staff,
Adventists—well, you know the story, we in effect conceded that gender of clergy is not a biblical issue for which to stand tall against the Kalashnikovs, etc.
(Parenthetically, what if China also decrees that church services must be held only on Sundays, and that all preachers must engage in non-spiritual enterprise on Saturdays? Would we concede that right, as well, or would be standing for the truth though the heavens fall. I suggest we would be standing tall.)
So let's not be too hard on Brother Doug. While he personally may be uncomfortable with the ordination of women, he recognizes that the Church in the matter of China long ago acknowledged that there's no defensible biblical reason to deny women the hands and cloth of ordination…. He's doing the right thing, with the light he has, and I pray he continues to grow in that light. This is a perfect opportunity for Brother Doug to come clear and make a statement that removes him from the fray of ordination, as the Apostle Peter and others did in the New Testament Church on matters of baptizing Gentiles, enforcing circumcision of all Christian males, and conceding that meat offered to idols was not a form of idol worship. If doing so reduces contributions to Amazing Facts, so be it. More important than money is simply doing the right thing, at the right time, and God will bless even more….
Surely, holding church services on Sunday should not be against Adventists' beliefs as even the church prophet has written than in case of a Sunday Law, Adventists should be willing to meet in homes on Sunday to study the Bible.
Oh, the straining of camels to protect cherished doctrines! And not seeing what is of ultimate importance! If protecting believers' Sabbath sacredness is the most important of all doctrines, people will realize that rules are far more important than anything–the perfect defintion of legalism.
Please note for the record that the hypothetical law I cited also included a provision that all clergy would have to obey orders to work in secular employment on the seventh-day Sabbath, too. If this is considered trivial nit-picking, so be it, but for many Adventists of a more conservative bent it is a matter for which we would stand tall against Kalashnikovs, I among them.
In some cases we who practice the faith have made vows—perhaps foolish ones, but still vows, nonetheless—to abstain from alcoholic beverages and smoking of cancer-producing and/or mind-altering substances. Though I may be sorely tempted to break these vows, made in haste at a very young age before accountability, I have kept these vows and intend to do so infefinitely. Am I doing so for the sake of being saved? Absolutely not! I am doing so because my word is my bond, and these vows were made with solid intent to honor God. I think the vow to keep the seventh-day holy is also a good vow and should be kept, not as an avenue to salvation, but as a seal of Jesus' lordship in our lives….
~~Let us not forget that Doug Bachelor's diatribe a while ago not only was in error regarding his stand on ordaining women, he crossed the line in the minds of most when he empathically declared women were inferior to men. He will forever be classified as an Adventist misogynist, that is until he publically acknowledges his ignorance and apologizes. Perhaps he already has and I'm not aware. If Bachelor believes that he has enhanced his image by traveling to China to work with an ordained woman, he is mistaken.
"Crossed the line in the minds of most." I doubt it. Can you supply stats?
DB has become a pariah to many on the left because he has the courage of his convictions. Mayhis tribe increase.
Maranatha
Appears as pure politics given his stand on women, which, as has been pointed out, neither acknowledged as prejudiced against women nor apologized for.
Funny how previous comments of his towards "evangelizing" China never acknowledged the work of the women in that country who brought in how many thousands by the method advised by God through EGW. The counsel, door to door, person to person.
DB's method? Not door to door, nor person to person, but in front of large audiences. The female workers wanted souls for Christ. DB wants?
Well, you know, now that the "inferior humans" (aka women, according to DB) started the work and have run it for a while, maybe those women now reached the plateau of their (inferior) ability. Therefore, it's time for a "real man" to star taking care of business there…
Those women will soon repent for allowing him to break in their so far successful barracks! Just wait. Problems will start soon. Machismo is not cured that quickly…
On this Sunday July 13, 2014 as I was driving home from Portland, on his national radio program "Bible Answers" I heard pastor Doug Bachelor publicly supported his male headship in ministry doctrine. He is such a well spoken evangelist, and answers Bible questions so nicely from the public, I am very sad that he has not been open to being corrected by the fine presentations at the ordination of women committee he attended, from his antique and retrogressive ideas about the inferiority of women. One only wishes that seeing the wonderful fruit of ordained female pastors in China, he could question his previous judgments. He could be a powerful force for change. I'll keep praying for the scales of male superiority to fall from his eyes.
~~ "I'll keep praying for the scales of male superiority to fall from his eyes." Isn't that being judgmental? How do you know his motivation for articulating a position with which you don't agree? If I left the church tomorrow I would never forget the slings and arrows that so many on the left cast at those with whom they don't agree.
Maranatha
His sermons and web pages paint women as inferiors. To say that he thinks men are superior is not a matter of motive, it is simply noting his conclusions. Because God made men and women equal, we are praying that DB comes to realize this.
Oh, the irony!
Bad for the Chinese women. If he gets some steam there, soon all those women will be "
dis-ordained"….
I'm with tersaq's view.
Perhaps the prestige, glory, and pride of being an "Evangelist" in China was just too much for DB to pass up so his misogynistic arrogance was compromisingly hidden…
Ahh,… such is the power of glory!
What a surprise to see so much surmising and invective from grace-filled folks who think we ought not to judge. Maybe there's more desire for an investigative judgment than some folks are letting on.
I bet the rural population in China can't wait for the "Bible" studies about the IJ. They will cetainly be delighted hearing about 1844.
I wonder when will they be told about Glacier View…
Interesting you should mention Glacier View. I was at the seminary when that was coming down–heard Desmond Ford speak at B.S. I found many of the papers that emerged from Glacier View very enlightening in defense of the faith and SDA orthodox positions, and the church survived and has continued to grow. Yet just like the 1968 TET offensive in Viet Nam, a crushing defeat for the Viet Cong and North Vietnamese, was portrayed in the MSM as an American debacle, Glacier View is presented by the detractors of our church as if the truths we hold were confounded on all points. Au Contraire!
Judging is attributed to conservatives when they affirm sin as described in the Bible; judging is stock in trade for many liberals. Hardly seems fair.
Marnatha
Interesting comment by James White many years ago about Deborah:
"1. Deborah was a prophetess. She received divine instruction from Heaven, and taught the people.
2. She was a judge in Israel. The people went up to her for judgment. A higher position no man
has ever occupied." Review and Herald, May 29, 1879.
Two years later:
"Resolved, That females possessing the necessary qualifications to fill that position, may, with perfect propriety, be set apart by ordination to the work of the Christian ministry.This was discussed by J. O. Corliss, A. C. Bourdeau, E. R. Jones, D. H. Larnson, W. H. Littlejohn, A. S. Hutchins, D. M. Canright, and J. N. Loughborough, and referred to the General Conference Committee."–Report on Dec 5, 1881 GC Business Proceedings in RH, December 20, 1881.
Apparently at that time there were already some people willing to eliminate discrimination (of women) in our church. But it's obvious that those who discriminated prevailed and till now it's the "rule of the land" among us. What a shame!
Maybe DB has realised that change is occurring, and he doesn't want to be caught on the wrong side of history.
Or church politics.
Did Doug Bachelor cause the Wuxi Church to ordain the woman pastor for his evangelistic effort? Or did he seek out a woman pastor for his evangelism? It is apparent that his view about woman ordaination does not prevent him to work with one under the special situation in China. Do you call a SDA minister a hypocrite for drinking caffeinated drink if that is the only available drink under special circumstances? Yes, it is an amazing circumstance Pastor Bachelor faced but as a hypocrite — I think his critics is more deserving of that label.
Interesting defense of hypocrisy…
You derve it.
Your deserve it. [sorry for the typo]
So…, apparently hypocritical behavior is a good and commendable thing, right?
To judge and to label is not a good thing. If one is oppose to smoking yet has to work with a smoker in a common project at work does it make it hypocritical behavior. Granted woman pastor does not have the negative connotation of a smoker.
I think a more pertinent question might be why DB, as well as the American church, thought China needed us to intervene?
As I understand the China church it was heeding the counsel of Ellen White in doing person to person, door to door evangelism, and that quite successfully. I guess I'm confused as to what exactly DB, or his supporters in this effort, thought he could bring to the table that was superior (needed) to the efforts of the ordained Chinese women. Just a wee bit curious. 🙂
Who ordained the women pastors in China?
Excuse Me, Let's get down to why all of the strange things are happening. And you hypocrites please stop lying on Sister White. We have SDA members who hate the orginal message given to the early pioneers, and they hate the Godhead also. Many of the highest SDA leaders who run the GCSDA Corporation (inc. 1886), God, the sabbath, 10 commandments marriage, and the holy bible. Many again are undercover jesuits, with their secret order religions. The reason Douglas Batchelor and the other ministries are back peddle is they have been lying and deceiving for years about what the "Image of The Beast". And it is for good reason why they have done so. But before I go there I am an SDA Pastor and studied in 11 areas, 5 of these areas are law; to include biblical, business, canon law, constitutional law, and U.S. Civil Law. No one Adventist pastor I have personally met, has this much education. However, I never ever attended the unchristian twisted so called christian education of the SDA denomination. Because there is none! Every bit of property under the denomination that has a 501c3 Of IRS belong to the state, a legal fact ask any attorney! The Image of The Beast is the government/Babylonian state issued tax exemption. All the ministries associated with the GCSDA if you check their tax exemption all came from the state! On july 02, 1964, the U.S. celebrated the 50th Anniversary of the Civil Right Act . This gave rise to the following:
This can be found at http://www.eeoc.gov please look for types of discrimination. The Homosexuals are covered under GENDER. The females are covered under SEX, the sunday worship and pagan gods are covered under RELIGION. If any ministry attempts to abandon thier IOTB status tax exemption the govt?Babylon can force them to pay years of back taxes, and take all the property in their ministry. AN ABSOLUTE LEGAL FACT!!!! Another thing that is happening is SDA member into the secret orders are doing the same thing Constantine did, they are bring those pagans signs and symbols in their denomination. It is even in the sabbath school lesson, along with different versions of the bible. And The Three Angels symbol and message is gone. They can preach it, I have told this to other SDA ministers; because if they preach it an the IRS gets wind of it, they will be called to the IRS office for questioning.
"Many of the highest SDA leaders who run the GCSDA Corporation . . . are undercover jesuits . . ." Adventist Today believes in free speech and the evidence of that is that the previous quotation has been posted on this web site. Can you picture that opinion being allowed to be expressed on any official Adventist Church website? Now I am sure that many would say that such an extreme opinion should not be permitted to see the light of day. Because we might think that such a view is absurd should not be a reason for it not to be allowed to be posted if we really believe that there should be freedom of speech within the Adventist "Big Tent" even if the opinions expressed can easily be rebutted. Remember, the absurd opinion of one is the absolute truth of someone else. Let a million flowers bloom even if you have to allow the weeds to grow as well.
Hahaha. A good Adventist is one who believes in conspiracy theories. 1844, the Jesuits, Subday worship, etc. and the really good ones constantly string new facts together into new theories.
~~https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkmi_UTsjtE If you watch this video clip from the silly movie called Austin Powers. The papacy made an Mini Me through the state tax exemption. You see what most of you do not understand is something God said in Exodus 23:32,33. Well, the leaders have done exact what The Lord God Almighty have said, not to do. If Babylon/The Government told all the churches that have a state issued tax exemption to do the following the minister must comply. Where a wig, ear rings, lip stick, mascara, a bra, a mini skirt, panty hose, and high heel shoes. They would be compelled to comply, or else it is just that elementary. The IMAGE OF THE BEAST is the state issued tax exemption. Church And State are already united.
"The Image of the Beast is the state issued tax examption." These kinds of views yet again brings up the question if Adventism develops them from within or attracts from outside certain personality types who are only happy when they are creating or spreading conspiracy theories. I suggest the answer is both. Actually, I would suggest that things are getting a little better. If you go back to the 1930s, the development of conspiracy type ideas was the rule within Adventist circles rather than the exception. Now, those who talk about them are considered a little odd or perhaps just quaint–something like the slightly deranged but harmless aunt you hide in an attic room.
IMHO: The reason any rational SDA in today's egalitarian society would continue to oppose WO must simply be because their understanding of Scripture, especially the NT epistles of Paul, has led them to conclude that, since in a fallen world the original edenic equality cannot be maintained, God specified male headship in families and in the church. (Paul attributes this choice, at least in part, to the fact that Eve was deceived.) Of course others reading the same Scriptures have come to alternate conclusions, ranging from time and place considerations to the unfortunate accusation that Paul was a misogynist. This issue is divisive enough without folks on different sides of the divide trying through insult and intimidation to silence the other, claiming as political liberals do in questions such as man-made global warming, that the debate is over, (or that if folks have no current interest in something–e.g. the investigative judgment, we need not bother to enlighten them.)
Twenty-six years ago, when I was trying to determine whether (as some claimed) a definitive position on the human nature of Christ was the essential revelation from the 1888 GC pre-session, I found nothing in the EGW letters pertaining to 1888 to support that claim. Indeed, other than rapturously praising God for Jones' and Waggoner's presentations on justification by faith, Sr. White tried to avoid taking sides on several other doctrinal issues; but she pointedly lamented and declared how much God also lamented the sarcasm and invective hurled between individuals and factions on different sides of the issues. In 1988 as I listened to one SDA leader assert that the problem with those who favored a post-lapsarian nature for Christ was that they all become Pharisees and legalists, I told him I knew many holding that position who loved God and man and fully embraced justification by faith. And when shortly after that encounter, one in leadership with the 1888 MSC told me he felt those favoring a pre-lapsarian nature for Christ were worshipping a different Christ (just like Israelite Baal worshippers, he explained, claimed to yet be worshipping Jehovah,) I told him I had been on both sides of that issue so many times I hesitated to get too dogmatic, and that I didn't think the issue of Christ's human nature needed to divide and distract the church (any more than differences over the divine nature of Christ divided the nascent SDA movement–James White refused to make it a test of character); but that if those on different sides of Christ's human nature insist on calling those who differ with them Pharisees or Baal worshippers, then the church can't help but suffer division and rancor over the issue.
In stark contrast to questions pertaining to homosexuality, which unlike WO, the Bible is much more definite in proscribing, the matter of WO–or the lack thereof–in the SDA church, need not be a deal-breaker, regardless of where the GC comes down on the matter. What would be helpful might be a toning down of the rhetoric and a bit more charitable attitude towards those with whom we differ in our understanding on this issue.
The only reason why some people oppose WO is because they are undisguised (or actually disguised!) discriminators. They pretend it's a spiritual issue, but it's not. It's a character issue!
Bias is everywhere, and most of us have several. Yet must they necessarily prevent us from honestly searching the Scriptures? And for anyone to be able to divine whether another has come to a sincerely held and biblically based conviction re. WO, or any other issue for that matter, or has rather let his or her biases so predominate as to cloud ones vision, should we not in most cases need to be paying rent for having inhabited space in someone else's mind or heart?
In giving many Bible studies over the years, when it came to presentations on the law and Sabbath, as I was going over a number of "proof texts," only to watch the prospect all but ignoring the points I was making as he/she frantically flipped through the Bible looking for one misapplied text after another hoping to refute the clearest statements of Scripture, I was on many occasions tempted to recite Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." But so far, even in situations where I was convinced the verse was applicable, I have resisted the temptation to so personally judge and injure one claiming Christ as Savior. Shouldn't we be as charitable towards brothers and sisters in Christ who have embraced the three angels' messages, and leave the judging of heart and motive to One who is tender and cannot err, and whose Spirit is fully able to convict of sin, righteousness and judgment to come?
Hear! Hear!
How often on the Atoday web site I have read people questioning or impugning the motives of those with whom they differ. Sometimes after length dialog, motives are clarified. But often we are simply guessing, imputing our own baser motives to those with whom we differ, assuming those who see things differently must be irrational or angry or whatever.
By this shall all men know that you are disciples, by your arguments with one another.
thank you Jim Hamstra.
In order to gain much needed credibility for the virtually nonexistent biblical position for WO, many proponents of WO have resorted to using dirty tactics in trying to question the motives and involvement of Ps. Batchelor in the work in China.
The fact that Ps. Batchelor accepted the invitation to preach in China shows 1) that his love and passion for soul-winning for Christ is not deterred by the issue of WO, 2) that those not in support of WO aren't women haters, 3) that the issue is not about gender discrimination or unwillingness to work together with our wonderful and very capable sisters in Christ, 4) that he is not ashamed to be pictured with a woman pastor or to be part of the evangelistic team, 5) and that he therefore isn't one who bases his beliefs on prejudice, malice or gender bias – but upon his conviction and acceptance in favour of a biblical basis for his faith and one which keeps in line with our historical position as a church, together with not supporting the current theological position that is being doing it's rounds of late which compromises with cultural norms in seeking ways to reinterpret scripture in order to appease the cultural bias and the political correctness of the day.
From some of the comments on this blog it is becoming quite clear to me that WO is nothing more than a Women's Lib 'anything you can do , I can do better' complex which lies at the heart of the feminist movement.
Again I ask: "Who conducted the ordination of the women pastors in China?"
What is the position of the Church in China regarding elective and forced government led practice of abortion especially since we as a church teach 'thou shalt not kill?'
What exactly do you want the China church to do about your abortion issue? Rise up in arms against the government? I'm confused as to just why you would raise the question, to make them look bad, or what?
But I do have a question for all of you, that just hit me a bit ago:
Referring to the supposition that Adam gave up his supposed leadership to Eve….
Whoa! It just hit me, hard! They ripped the whole foundation out and replaced it with irrelevant, has nothing to do with salvation, God or Satan, but distracts from the enemy's lies…This is not good, not good at all!
The Genesis account has to do with Satan's first lie to us, the foundation of spiritualism, "ye shall not die". AND it has to do with learning about manipulative tactics, through which yet again our enemy succeeded quite well in making this all about "proving hierarchy from the beginning". No this is not good at all!
In the transcript below notice no mention of the lie of Satan? None! Whatsoever! What has become the focus instead? In addition, please notice DB also puts Eve wandering from Adam's side after the fall, not before. One has to wonder what fall, since the whole point of the Genesis account has been changed.
https://atoday.org/article/579/features/articles/2010/doug-batchelor-preaches-against-women-pastors?search=against+women+pastors
Women Pastors: A Biblical Perspective Feb 6, 2010, Doug Batchelor (transcript)
"But you see in the beginning, right after the temptation and sin entered our world that trouble began, when woman wandered from man’s side and then, she instead of listening to the clear instructions she had received from the Lord and from her husband not to take from that forbidden tree, she independently made a different decision. A new freedom, new power, was being offered to her by the devil; he said, “Don’t listen to what God said. Don’t listen to what your husband said. They’re hiding something from you. You listen to what I say and you will have enhanced experience.”
And so she did. Then she brings it to her husband and offers it to him and man now [defers] to his wife; instead of leading, he submits. And he takes her advice and all the problems that you see in the world today, both in our relationships and in the world, spring from this interruption of God’s design for the relationship between God and man and woman. And as a result of this—you can read about this by the way in the book Patriarchs and Prophets, page 53 and 54;…. Sin came into our world as a result of man neglecting and women disregarding the husband’s leadership role. And then a curse was pronounced. And you read this in Genesis chapter 3 verse 16, … Now through the ages, people—mostly those who have a moral liberal bias have tried to find some other way of saying that. But that word there means just what it says. It’s from the word “mashal” in Hebrew and it means, definition: according to Strong; to rule, to have dominion, to govern, to reign, to have power. God had to establish in the very beginning because the devil was going to be trying to destroy the family that there needed to be authority in the family. And so the Lord went back to his original design; man was created first. So things have changed. Oh by the way, you read on here in Genesis chapter 3 verse 17 “And then to Adam he says, because you have heeded the voice of your wife,” as opposed to the voice of God, “and have eaten from the tree of which I commanded you saying you shall not eat of it. Cursed is the ground for your sake; in toil you shall eat of it all the days of your life.”
And so we have seen the result of that now over time. Now all of history has been altered in the last 60, 50 years. Up until the feminist movement became very prominent for the first 1900 years, 2000 years of church history, it was understood that sort of the final authority within the church was to rest solely with husbands and the men pastors. "
…………………………………………………………….
So tell me please! Where is the mention of the lie Satan told in any of these people's presentations? Has it not been swept away by the headship people in order to "prove" another lie? God help us. Seriously!
Dear teresaq
You don't have to answer my questions. My questioning abortion and the Church's position on it is to assess the extent of feminist influence there. In addition to this I see a similarity between abortion and the TOSC 3rd option which is pro choice. The same pro choice argument is used for abortion and the TOSC WO third option. Politically correct cultural moods and rights form the basis of this position even though it is not in harmony with the Bible and one which promotes the false doctrine that culture supersedes Christ and Scriptures.
The push for WO has been a rather sneaky one I would say in which much has been done in the quiet. The majority of Adventists around the world are largely unaware of the mutiny within our ranks and the underhanded doctrinal compromise taking place in our Church today with the NAD leading the pack. The reinterpretation of Scripture to appease permissive cultural norms, atrocities and abominations have become the order of the day. Dodgy theologians with biased worldviews are wreaking havoc within our ranks. Openly disregarding the authority of the Church, the authority of Scriptures and threatening the Unity of the Church. They have sought to hijack the church and hold it ransom by going ahead with ordinations openly against GC policy in order to have their own way, kicking and screaming like spoilt brats.
In light of what is going on, the world Church should be extra cautious as to what theology comes out from the NAD, it's leaders, theologians, pastor's and their First World counterparts. Of course not all Adventists in this region have bowed down to the dictates of man and still hold true to a 'thus saith the Lord.' My prayers are with the many faithful Bible believing Adventists in the NAD and other partsof the world.
Uh, huh.
I have never heard of any one relating to the church who is pro-abortion, but the majority are for WO. You can't put them in the same box. Your language is harsh, arrogant, and too biased to respond any more to.
Drowning newborn babies in abortion buckets is harsh, arrogant and too biased yes? Where's a TOSC for this? The church has first to deal with the extent of feminist ideals like abortion before making a big hoo-hah for WO.
Are you writing about the Adventist church here or about something else?
Uh-huh. Propaganda, I see.
When I was in church school we were told the Catholics used secret lime pits to dispose of unwanted babies. I am still wondering where and who switched those lime pits for water buckets? Maybe if Adventists combined the water buckets and the lime pits we could create some new volcanos? And spare generations of unwanted babies yet to be conceived? (I know – wrong thread – but in the spirit of this dialog how could I resist?)
"Drowning newborn babies in abortion buckets" Perhaps we should be concerned with Mr. Hammond's (aka 22Oct) mental health.
I was thinking the same thing. Good lesson for all of us perhaps, if we take our eyes off God's character to concentrate on supposed defects of those around us…pretty soon that is all we have appetite for.
If Dr Taylor and teresaq get a kick out of having a go at me by misrepresenting what I wrote and taking pot shot ad hominems at my mental state in order to float their boat or perhaps quirk their smirk, then they can go ahead by all means – but of course I can also draw conclusions about them.
"quirk their smirk" First class, very good. Jolly good. Mr. Hammond can turn a phrase. Now if he could only think through carefully what he writes as he can turn a phrase . . .
Oh, well, we all have our strengths and weaknesses.
I must have inadvertently touched some liberal nerves here. Dr. Taylor should keep in mind that I only responded to Mrs. Ella M's 'harsh, arrogant, and too biased' words which she wrote above to me.
"I must have inadvertently touched some liberal nerves here."
LOL uh-huh. That's it. LOL
Perhaps it would be well to hearken to the voice of our friend Ella, as she commented earlier: "I have never heard of any one relating to the Church who is pro-abortion, but the majority are for WO. You can't put them in the same box."
I might also mention here that the pro-ordination sentiment for women has been strongly documented in Church discussions since at least 1880, with the influence of that well-know feminist radical, James White. The "feminist movement" in the United States did not materialize in any appreciable strength until a number of decades later. Points of recorded history….
"While he personally may be uncomfortable with the ordination of women, he recognizes that the Church in the matter of China long ago acknowledged that there's no defensible biblical reason to deny women the hands and cloth of ordination"
Not true. Why, Ed, do you say something that is not correct?
Maranatha
"The majority of Adventists around the world are largely unaware of the mutiny within our ranks and the underhanded doctrinal compromise taking place in our Church today with the NAD leading the pack."
Big mistake in the selection of the current NAD President. He on a fullblown course of insubordination.
Thank God for the "insurbordination" of the NAD President. May many follow his example. Several NAD Union Conference presidents already have. Now if some conferences would "accidently" forget to forward their "love offering contributions" to the GC, we might get something going. Long live insurbordination!
Dear Dr. Taylor, which God do you thank sir – the God of the Bible?
The God of the Old Testament prophets is the God of the Bible and most of the Old Testament prophets were an insurbordinate lot. Long live insurbordination! (LLI)
Insubordination. LOL How funny!
A people who are to follow only Christ only, but we still have people who want an earthly king instead. We are no different than the Jewish people when they rejected God as their king wanting an earthly one like the nations around them.
The mysterious ordination of women in China is a solely c-u-l-t-u-r-a-l one. Those who have been saying this are correct. Perhaps it was done inadvertently without prior knowledge of church policy – perhaps. If however it was calculated defiance by certain leaders then insubordination it is. Leaders should have known better. Obviously some ordained male pastors would have first started this practice but not without the prior knowledge of church leaders. Why did they hide this for so long? Surely such a move to ordain female pastors would be a major event for the world church. Why was it so hush-hush? Perhaps Pastor Batchelor has been called in to teach a biblical basis for our faith as opposed to a fashionable cultural belief system. From the interview of Ps. Rebekah Liu by Ps. Casey Wolverton of the Glenvale SdA Church in Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia, it is quite clear that cultural dictates have superseded Christ. In the interview Ps. Rebekah Liu attributed their cultural bias to the working of the Holy Spirit and emphatically stated that cultural changes were progressive and that they 'move' by the Spirit in whichever direction culture goes. That's why other cultural Adventists have been quick to jump on the Chinese bandwagon. That's why I have tied WO and abortion together with the leftists: feminists in the West and Communists in the East. What I also heard in the interview is that the worship style and obviously the music too is upbeat and contemporary like Hillsongs or Christian Rock perhaps used of course as entertainment to pull a crowd just like the One Project Emergents. Lowering church standards in order to compromise church doctrines and beliefs is one way to increase numbers and this is the essence of what female headship is about: Go with the flow and chop and change the Bible as you go.
Jesus warned that attributing the works of the Spirit of God to the spirits of demons, was the sin against the Holy Spirit which could not be forgiven. Why can this sin not be forgiven? Because this person is pushing-away the Spirit of God from their life. Rejecting God in any fashion is a dangerous course.
I think the admonition of Gamaliel is very apt. If this comes from man it will come to naught. If this comes from God we cannot stop it, rather we are in danger of battling against God.
Likewise the admonition of Peter, that if uncircumcised Gentiles received the Spirit who were the Jews to deny them baptism. Likewise the admonition of Jesus that if the Jews silenced the children then the rocks would cry-out.
God is God. God can use whoever He/Shey/They choose to use in whatever manner He/She/They choose to use them. It is not for us to confine God into a box of our own individual or collective construction.
Your notion of ordination is that it is hierarchical – only an ordained minister can ordain someone else. Since the ordination of women was not condoned or performed by the higher levels of leaders it is not authentic.
In the Bible it is the local church that ordains people for specific ministries, not previoulsy ordained leaders. In this regard a case could be made that ordination as practiced in China is more Biblical than the prevalent Adventis practice elsewhere. And more in keeping with the early Adventist pioneers who did not depend upon ordained clergy.
What matters to God is the ordination of the Spirit, not of humans.
http://www.lmn.org/
It's not really mysterious, Trevor, since part of the SDA church in China operates under Chinese Three Self governmental supervision and is not part of the SDA church organizationally. Liberals love to point to the pastorettes in China as though it is a breakthrough which it isn't at all since the SDA church has no conrol over the Three Self SDA church.
OTOH when some are converted to Adventism by such organizations as Laymens Ministries, a legitimate SDA support organization, (Link Above) converts cannot be shown even in photos because of danger to themselves and their families.
NAD support of WO is definitely culturally based and promoted by the feminists and their supporters. There is no Biblical basis or example for WO that is clear.
Maranatha
There is nothing in the article which justifies the title or many of the comments. The article says Doug met with a woman pastor. It doesn’t say he preached with her or they did evangelism together.
“…he met with Pastor Xiaomei Hong,”
One Chinese church leader usually mentions the legalistic bent of the typical believer, stating ~that the SDA church has the same theological perspective as 1930’s American Adventism i.e., legalistic. It’s likely much more aligned with the Standish Brothers, Ted Wilson, Doug Batchelor, etc. than it is with Drs. Heppenstall, Ford, Cottrell. and so forth. David Lin, whose ghost hovers over Chinese Adventism openly opposed Dr.Ford
American SDA leaders do not want Dr. Ford’s gospel perspective taught in China. Think Christianity with Chinese characteristics. That’s what the Three Self Church is all about.