Skip to content

93 Comments

  1. George Tichy
    30 January 2015 @ 10:19 am

    Great effort, great attempt, great hope.

    BUT, unfortunately, the “infamous question” will get a big NO vote in SA.
    The GC always knew exactly what to expect from the world church in terms of their vote. The GC knows the world church will never vote an YES on that question. Thus, their manipulation (TOSC, AC) will be finally fruitful in SA/2015. And who do they think they have been fooling for the past five years???

    Then, after the sad experience in SA, more Unions will just join PUC and CUC, and life goes on!!!

    • Elizabeth Wilson
      10 February 2015 @ 8:04 pm

      “There is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male and female. For you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

      • BREZHNEV
        24 March 2015 @ 8:47 am

        soooooooooooooooory that verse does not say ordain women.Jesus ordained 11 men Mat 28v18. Jesus ordained Paul,Paul ordained Titus and Timothy. Timothy and Titus ordained men in every city. There is no instance of a single female being ordained in the Bible. Do not mistake prophetesses for priests.Jesus is our High Priest in the Heavenly Sanctuary, how can we have a pristess preaching in Yahwe’s earhly Sanctuary?

        • William Noel
          25 March 2015 @ 6:22 am

          How many people were in the upper room at Pentecost when the Holy Spirit fell like tongues of fire? Many of them were women. If God trusted women enough to fill them with the full measure of His power then, why should we feel differently today unless we have adopted attitudes and concepts inconsistent with God?

          Ordination as it is practiced today is a continuation of Catholic tradition in which people were elevated to positions of authority over the common masses, a concept that is not found in scripture. Why would you want to hold to a Catholic teaching instead of scripture?

        • Elaine Nelson
          25 March 2015 @ 10:24 am

          ONLY in the KJV (apparently the favorite of many Adventists as being the original) is “ORDAINED” used. Four other translations, more accurate as there were newer manuscripts found, use the word “APPOINTED.” Ordained is the old term used by the ONE Christian church for most of church history.

          • bfk
            13 May 2015 @ 7:38 pm

            There is no gender we are all one in the body of Christ but the roles in the church are different. God speaks thru His word and it says 1 Timothy 3:1-4 A bishop (elder, overseer pastor)look up the definition biblical kjv. A bishop must be blameless THE HUSBAND OF ONE WIFE NOT THE WIFE OF ONE HUSBAND.temperate, sober-minded of good behavior,hospitable able to teach. One who RULES HIS house well having HIS children in submission with all reverence. Describe the male as a pastor,Elder and overseer in the church. If a man can’t rule His on house how will he run the house of God. It is written right there in the word kjv.

        • Floyd Householder
          13 May 2015 @ 6:09 pm

          Thank you for your comment. I agree.
          Floyd

      • Mwiya da Zaza
        25 March 2015 @ 3:45 am

        follow the context and do not mis apply the text……it has nothing to do with Ordination but salvation

      • Phillippa Turner
        10 May 2015 @ 1:42 pm

        This text is talking about one’s salvation , not ordination of women. Gone are the days when SDA were biblical scholars. The end is upon us.

      • jeremiah mokaya
        16 May 2015 @ 1:58 am

        my sister let us read the bible as whole not one verse. we are equal before God. That cannot be disputed. However, the same God has given us different responsibilities-man is the head of the family.

      • TC
        24 May 2015 @ 3:27 am

        … neither male nor female…So literally it would mean humans are now sexless? Of course not. All (regardless of their position in life) are now free to approach God directly.

      • Jeremiah
        29 May 2015 @ 1:14 pm

        It doesn’t do any good to give you all answers, but here it is– this is not speaking about headship, discipleship, leadership, earthly priesthood, but about the spiritual condition of the members of God’s Church. Cherry picking is great for cherry trees, but not for Bible truth.

      • lambert
        30 May 2015 @ 5:26 pm

        this text is often taken out of context. this text is simply saying that all people are free in Christ this text has nothing to do with women being ordained. there is not one text in the bible that ordaines a woman as a preist. this is a misguided way of taking God”s word out of context.

  2. Linda Taylor
    30 January 2015 @ 11:01 am

    I am in shock concerning the comment by Dilys Brooks! “If the GC votes No, it’s just a church speaking – not God. This person had better read EGW again. The “church” in GC session is the highest authority on earth. I feel the statement was totally out of line.

    • Ervin Taylor
      30 January 2015 @ 11:20 am

      Well, some may view the statement as being “out of line,” but we need a lot more individuals saying what happens to be true–even if it might be thought of as being “politically incorrect”. Fact: The GC is not the Adventist Church and it certainly does speak for God.

    • Nico Grobler
      07 May 2015 @ 11:39 pm

      Yes, I agree Dilys’ statement was rough and unasked for.

    • Carol
      09 July 2015 @ 10:08 pm

      Linda, Ellen White was ordained. My Oh My. Now what do we do?

  3. Sylvester Nzumbi
    30 January 2015 @ 12:19 pm

    Israel also said to Samuel we want to have King, so that we may be like other Nations. When Israel rejected God, He accepted their rejection. So now we want to be like other so called “Christians”.

    • Edwin A. Schwisow
      30 January 2015 @ 1:32 pm

      One of the great arguments non-Adventist denominations make against the Adventist Church is that God would never allow a true church to have a woman as one of its authoritative leaders.

      I fear that a rejection of women in ministry will ultimately be seen historically as a repudiation of the authority of Ellen White as God’s anointed messenger in raising up this denomination, and by extension the repudiation of this denomination as possessing a special end-time role. Little is written or said about the impact of rejecting women as general leaders in the denomination, but among those who study and perceive the principal of the thing, to reject women as possessing the capacity to lead by the indwelling power of God is to play directly into the argument of those who claim Ellen White and by extension her church are not now, and never have, operated according to a standard biblical model….

      • Interested Friend
        02 February 2015 @ 10:00 am

        Finding WO as not Biblical and rejecting specious arguments of the PROS is not at all related to the Inspiration of EGW. That’s what is called a straw man, Ed.
        Maranatha

    • Teresa
      30 January 2015 @ 7:33 pm

      I can’t agree with you more. Inspiration declares Christ to be the only Head of His church and King of His people, yet, just like the Israelites wanting a human in place of the invisible we want human “heads” in the church. The Papacy started with one human head, the pope, but protestants feel the need to top that by having many mini-popes.

      We can’t just “settle” for Christ as the Head of our church.

  4. William Richardson
    30 January 2015 @ 1:37 pm

    I believe EGW vigorously disagreed with the outcome of one of the votes at the GC of 1901 and suggested that the decisions made were not God’s. I think it is quite presumptious to suggest that the GC is even close to the “voice of God.”

  5. Stefan Burnham
    30 January 2015 @ 2:25 pm

    Consider this: How do you really know the pastor’s TRUE gender?

  6. Trevor Hammond [22oct1844]
    30 January 2015 @ 2:58 pm

    Mr. Schwisow says: “One of the great arguments non-Adventist denominations make against the Adventist Church is that God would never allow a true church to have a woman as one of its authoritative leaders.”
    —–
    I have not come across this argument ever being of any significance against the Adventist Church, let alone it being a “great” one.

    • Gregory Matthews
      30 January 2015 @ 5:10 pm

      As both a retired U.S. Army and Department of Veterans’ Affairs chaplain I have worked quite closely with non-SDA Clergy. They have been quite free in telling me that they cannot understand how a denomination that placed Ellen White in a leadership role could debate a question on the ordination of women.

      The fundamental Biblical issue is not that of ordination. It is that of spiritual leadership. The Bible either allows women to have a spiritual leadership role or it does not.

      The role that Ellen White had in our developing church and the present day role that women have in China should tell us that God places people in spiritual leadership positions regardless of g ender.

      • margaret jaeger
        09 February 2015 @ 5:36 pm

        I’m not an Adventist but I do respect the denomination. Regardless, I believe this person posting, Gregory Matthews is telling the truth as found in God’s word, I agree with his statements. A woman doesn’t have to be ‘Lording it’ over any man by being a leader, a teacher in the pulpit. Imo, to restrict their place in any church is to say that God doesn’t speak to women because they are women. He even told Abraham, why didn’t you listen to Sarah..? She told you what ( I) said and you brushed it aside….didn’t He..?

      • Gabe
        04 July 2015 @ 8:35 am

        I agree Gregory. Thanks for your comment!
        China seems to be ahead of the rest…

        I do often wonder how the ‘celebrity’ preachers of the church have impacted the membership. I have seen so many media (almost exclusively from the against-WO-camp) doing the rounds – some not presenting accurate information. It seems as though members are only accepting these ideas, without regard to self-study, on the basis of the person who says it. “Pastor So-and-so said it, so it has to be true.”

        This phenomenon has started to injure the local ministries of pastors. Unfortunately, our church has generated celebrity speakers who the people flock after, instead of Christ. I don’t know how this problem would be resolved…..

        May the testimony of the Gospel prevail, and not a celebrity-coated emotional/fear-invoking appeal.

  7. Ken Lockwood
    30 January 2015 @ 3:45 pm

    The Ellen G. White Encyclopedia has an excellent article on “women in ministry” which can be very informative relative to this discussion.

  8. virginia coombs
    30 January 2015 @ 6:51 pm

    “The “church” in GC session is the highest authority on earth.”
    In whose eyes? Only from an SDA standpoint. That was told to the judge in the MariKay trial and it didn’t work for the GC then.

  9. Ryan H.
    31 January 2015 @ 4:18 am

    I live in a ‘Division’ where there are weekly announcements by the SDA pastor telling us that “the SDA church is against Women Pastors and Women Elders. The SDA church does not like homosexuals. And the SDA church demands and requires 5% offering along with the required 10% tithe!” Trust me – the ‘world church’ will vote ‘NO’. It saddens me to my core. Last time I checked – none of those three things are accurate. We believe in women pastors and elders, we love homosexuals, and tithe+offering are a free will gift. The pastor told me the SID had asked all pastors to make the announcements. God help us.

    • Marvin Tomlinson
      01 February 2015 @ 12:06 am

      God? What’s God got to do with it? Everybody knows that we frail mortals are the only ones who can decide who is called to the ministry. Only we are the ones who determine whom to ordain.

      • Nico Grobler
        07 May 2015 @ 11:58 pm

        Dear. Marvin, God has everything to do with it! I am very saddened by your outspoken arrogance to even question God’s role in the church. Are you placing sinfull human beings above God? Is the will of man bigger and better tah God’s will? My dear friend please go, sit diwn and reconsider your thoyghts.
        Kind love and regards.

  10. Ryan H.
    31 January 2015 @ 4:30 am

    The quotes were:
    ‘official GC statements’
    1) ‘women are not allowed to be elders nor pastors in the SDA church’
    2) ‘paying tithe and offering is required’
    3) ‘The SDA church is against homosexuals’
    – Expect SID to unanimously vote ‘NO’ to the any move towards women’s ordination anywhere in “god’s church”, unfortunately…

    • Gerald
      06 February 2015 @ 11:48 am

      This is not correct. The SAU, a Union within the SID, has issued a statement that it finds no Biblical or E G White counsel prohibiting the ordination of women to ministry.

      • Nico Grobler
        08 May 2015 @ 12:05 am

        Dear Gerald,
        If God had meant that women can be or should also be ordained He would without any doubt, have said so.

  11. Pita Foliaki
    31 January 2015 @ 4:38 am

    Both speak about being lead by the spirit. Both say it’s biblical. Both have reasoned well about the consequences of the others view.

    Opinions are given for both sides. One adds to another’s opinion or states another’s shortfall of not seeing the bigger picture or not considering well other facts at play.

    both go to church on Sabbath, both claim to love Christ, both sing praises to the most high, both believe what they are doing is acceptable, both have the same beginning and so on.

    One thing I know for sure is this. I am not ashamed of this movement. I am privileged to be a part of it.
    but I understand, though I may be seriously wrong, that one is being misleading, though claiming God’s leading. I am afraid by the situation for, to my observation and knowledge thus far of Scripture, Satan has a hand on one system.

    Whichever side is on the wrong road, I know God will continue to fight for them till they fully reject Him.

    This is my observation,my reality at this present moment. Not a fact for you.

    The truth will triumph. God is in control and God has a people. This, as a man without hair is bald, is the ultimate fact in this case right? For this is what I believe at the present.

  12. Allen Nash
    31 January 2015 @ 10:24 pm

    Having accepted the challenge to study this subject for myself I have been amazed to understand the issues of 1 Tim. 2 & 3, 1 Cor. 11 & 14 and how it fits with Jesus COMMAND to ALL to GO, TEACH, MAKE DISCIPLES and BAPTIZE.

    Jesus words trump all in my book.

    Having watched the almost 2 hour utube broadcast and personal message by the three presented as speaking for the SDA Church and I am most unhappy that in the later only a casual reading of verses was done and in the former no study of the Bible was done. Talking about the Bible and understanding verse by verse, thought by thought are two different things.

    I am yet to hear a thought FILLED presentation in favor of a male only clergy. Do we vote to require all to either wear their shoes when going into worship or take them off? No! And why not? Because the application of the principle of honoring and doing things decently and in order plays out differently in different cultures. What we do must be for the strengthening of the church (body of believers).

  13. Bill Smith
    01 February 2015 @ 1:32 am

    * * * * *
    We already have over 320 women pastors, including more than 120 in North America. These female pastors preach, pray, baptize, perform weddings, and lead a church. Many women pastors hold a “commissioned” credential since the GC voted to allow it in 1990.

    Some of these female pastors have been recognized in a “commissioning service” complete with prayers, Scripture readings, a sermon, a charge, and even the laying on of hands. The ceremony has an eerie resemblance to an ordination ceremony, but don’t worry, it’s not the same thing. (Sorry, Shakespeare, you were wrong about “a rose by any other name. . . .”)

    The “commissioned” credential is fine, but the “ordained” credential is evil. Haven’t you read that in the Bible? It’s explicitly stated in Hezekiah 3:16 (“Thou canst commission thy female pastors but verily thou shalt not ordain them, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.”) (Other favorite verses include “God helps those who help themselves” [Hez. 3:2]” and “Cleanliness is next to godliness” [Hez. 3:5].)

    In sum: “Yes, Virginia, there really is a place for a woman in the ministry. She can serve as a pastor, as long as she doesn’t have an ordination certificate hanging in her office.” Surely, even the blind can see the logic in that! In fact, it’s just as logical as saying: “You can live with your fiancée but you can’t marry her.”

    • Carlos Lopez
      01 February 2015 @ 7:27 am

      Thanks for clarifying the issue. It is not a debate about women being pastors, or being formally recognized as called to the ministry. It’s really just a debate about what title to print on their certificate: “ordained” vs. “commissioned.”

      That is merely a game of semantics. Poor Shakespeare would roll in his grave. By the way: “You can live with your fiancée but you can’t marry her”? That’s a classic!

    • Dan Fabia
      09 February 2015 @ 11:46 am

      thank you. I like your presentation…it makes sense. I’m praying for the GC abd all members of SDA worldwide that God open their hearts and enlighten them on this topic that is polarizing and dividing the church.
      Why can’t these do called experts and scholars read the bible as it is? They are looking beyond the words and interpreting it on their own. The SDA in general are so legalistic and wants to follow the world to conform. What’s next? To perform marriage between people if same gender?
      These false prophets are leading even the God’s elect away from God. I pray…..

    • Melany
      15 June 2015 @ 7:55 am

      HEZEKIAH is NOT a book in the Bible. I hope that is an honest mistake my friend.

  14. nancy
    01 February 2015 @ 7:50 am

    Our church is doing what Pastor Ted Wilson requested as well. We are conducting Bible studies on this subject to make all of our members aware of the issues being voted on this summer at the General Conference session.

    • Alicia Hamlin
      01 February 2015 @ 10:45 am

      Nancy, look at Bill Smith’s post above. The whole vote this summer is a farce, because the church has already been “ordaining” women, with the General Conference’s blessing, since 1990. They’ve simply been calling it “commissioning” instead of “ordination.” You can call a horse a “cow,” but it’s still a horse.

      If they really want to have any significant debate, they should vote whether to have women pastors at all, or whether to recognize their ministerial calling at all. But they can’t have that debate because the issue was settled 25 years ago. Now the only issue left to decide is whether to print “ordained” on the certificate instead of “commissioned.” (The history of the terms “licensed,” “commissioned,” and “ordained” is based on IRS rules for parsonage allowance tax deductions: http://www.AdventistsAffirm.org/article/140/women-s-ordination-faqs/3-how-money-got-us-into-trouble . “Commissioned” is a term coined by the IRS.)

      God does not care which word they use. “Commissioned” and “ordained” are the same thing in His eyes, and the female pastor does the same work regardless of which word is used. So it’s crazy for this fictitious “issue” to even be an issue at the 2015 GC.

      • nancy
        01 February 2015 @ 12:39 pm

        Alicia, I may have not made my comments plain enough. If we have been reading our Bibles with open minds we know full well that the Bible does not sanction this activity. What we have been reading is that God when he created our parents established roles for each of them that still stands today as a monument of His creative power. To “dicker” with that arrangement is to deny that God exists
        at all.

  15. my2cents
    01 February 2015 @ 1:30 pm

    nancy wrote:
    “What we have been reading is that God when he created our parents established roles for each of them that still stands today as a monument of His creative power. To “dicker” with that arrangement is to deny that God exists.”

    What the Creation account actually says is that—
    Male and female bear God’s image EQUALLY.
    Male and female are given the SAME ROLES:
    —be fruitful and multiply
    —rule over the earth and animals

    Here it is, neither adding nor subtracting from the Word,
    “Then God said, ‘Let Us make MAN in Our image, according to Our likeness; and LET THEM RULE over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.’ God created MAN in His own image, in the image of God He created HIM; MALE AND FEMALE He created them. God blessed them; and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it; and RULE over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over every living thing that moves on the earth.'” Genesis 1:26-28

  16. Alicia Hamlin
    01 February 2015 @ 1:30 pm

    Nancy, I’m not arguing with your position on the substantive issue. I’m just pointing out the duplicity of the GC leaders in resisting women’s ordination by making those same biblical arguments, when the GC already voted 25 years ago to allow women pastors to be “commissioned.”

    Ted W. says: “We should not ordain women because men are supposed to be the leaders.” Yet, the 1990 policy already allowed women to be pastors/leaders and be “commissioned” (which is virtually identical to being “ordained”) for the past 25 years.

    Obviously the GC is not going to backtrack and vote to stop having female pastors or stop “commissioning” them. So it doesn’t matter what the Bible says about male headship in the church. All that really matters is what terminology to put on the certificate and ID card that the female pastors receive after the ceremony where the conference leaders lay hands on them and pray to commit them to ministry.

    The 2015 GC vote amounts to nothing more than this: will we continue calling women “commissioned,” or can we call them “ordained.” It’s a silly word game that actually has nothing to do with the underlying biblical principles that you are studying, because the female pastor’s job function is going to be the same regardless of which label is printed on her certificate.

  17. nancy
    01 February 2015 @ 1:50 pm

    Separate roles but equal status!!!!!

    • Alicia Hamlin
      01 February 2015 @ 2:43 pm

      But that is not what the vote is really about this summer. It’s only about a game of semantics: how to label the credentials cards that female pastors are already receiving. It’s not about what work women will do, but rather what title they will carry while doing it (either “ordained” or “commissioned”).

      • nancy
        01 February 2015 @ 3:29 pm

        Our church has taken a vote on this ourselves. If we are forced to accept a female Pastor (ordained or commissioned) we will not attend church any Sabbath she is in the pulpit.

        • Gerry Chudleigh
          02 February 2015 @ 8:51 am

          Nancy, have you considered how many of the things you have stated here are not actually mentioned in the Bible? “Separate roles but equal status” is from Grudem, Piper, Bacchiocchi and Pipim, not the Bible. Church pastors are not found in either the Bible or the early Adventist church, and neither forcing pastors on congregations nor members protesting by refusing to attend church is mentioned in scripture. Ordination to pastoral ministry is something we humans created to better finish God’s work on earth. The Bible does not endorse, condemn or define it.

          • Alicia Hamlin
            02 February 2015 @ 10:30 am

            Correct. The Bible does not prescribe ordination per se (although there is the OT concept of anointing); ordination is a human Catholic concept (in the NT church, leaders were simply “elected”). So what we call it is superfluous.

            The church has clearly recognized God’s calling upon female pastors since 1990. Based on that policy, we have–and will continue to have–women pastors whose role is virtually identical to male pastors.

            It doesn’t matter what you call them (“commissioned” or “ordained”); they are still virtually the same thing. If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it is a duck. Why not call it a duck?

          • Alicia Hamlin
            02 February 2015 @ 10:41 am

            “The concept of ordination has no basis in the Greek text of the New Testament. The Greek text indicates that in each town, the believers elected a number of mature and respected local believers, as elders.

            “The practice of ‘ordaining’ people is of Catholic origin. It has no basis in the Greek text of the New Testament.

            “The New Testament does not contain any mention or instruction regarding laying of hands on those who were elected as elders.”

            http://www.biblepages.net/ie02.htm

          • Nico Grobler
            08 May 2015 @ 12:17 am

            Gary, dewr friend – how do you read your bible?

  18. Nathaniel Moore
    01 February 2015 @ 6:19 pm

    What is this great hubbub in the SDA church about ordaining, or not ordaining women? In the ritual, I see a person, or group of persons, laying hands on, or above the head of a person- all of them kneeling.
    Suppose some, or all, of those hands are unworthy or filthy,is it important whether the head on which they rest is that of a man or a woman? What makes a man more appropriate to be ordained than a woman? In many of our churches there are many highly qualified and devoted women sitting in the pews listening to a handful of semi-illiterate males in the pulpit blundering their way through a badly prepared sermon, boring and embarrassing the more alert members of the congregation. It makes sense for the church to take advantage of the talents that God has placed in the church for the advancement of his work and for the salvation of the lost.
    If this ordination ritual is abolished from the church, and the discrimination between male and female is abandoned from the church, members can team together to carry out the commission of the Great Master, saving men from error and destruction. Male men in the church leadership are hiding behind old customs and ‘machismo’ to keep women in subjugation and hinder the progress of the gospel.

  19. Gerry Chudleigh
    01 February 2015 @ 9:17 pm

    Alicia, it seems to me that the great debate ahead will be over what the 2015 vote actually means. It believe it will mean what it says, nothing more and nothing less. None of the three positions assembled at the end of the TOSC process are on the “ballot” so delegates are going to listen to presentations on each of the three positions, then vote on something entirely different. The only option the Annual Council voted to present for a vote at GC session is the option to let each division, under the leading of the Holy Spirit, make its own decision. A yes vote will signal each division that leaders and members there can decide not to ordain women pastors, they can decide to ordain women pastors, they can decide to commission women pastors, they can avoid making a decision at all — whatever they decide will best enable the members in their territory to fulfill the mission of the church. A yes vote simply says the decision will be made by at division meetings, not at a GC meeting. A no vote will reject that solution without suggesting any alternative. We will simply be back to where we were five years ago: with a long-standing tradition of recognizing, hiring and assigning women ministers but not ordaining them, and with no policy allowing or not allowing the ordination of called and qualified women.

    • Alicia Hamlin
      02 February 2015 @ 3:49 am

      Gerry, your description of the ballot is accurate in terms of letting each division decide independently, but you have to consider why they arranged the ballot this way: because they know that North America favors using the term “ordination” instead of “commissioning” — whereas the overseas divisions are largely against ordination (but they are okay with “commissioning,” which has been the policy since 1990).

      If the ballot is approved, and the divisions actually proceed to vote separately, their only real options are to keep the term “commissioned” or change it to “ordained.” They certainly are not going to back-track and abolish women pastors or quit commissioning them.

      So the read debate here is not about whether to have female pastors or what their duties should be in relation to men and “biblical male headship”; the crux of the issue is what to call the women (how to label them). Since they will exist either way, and will do the same tasks and functions either way (either “commissioned” or “ordained”), it’s just a game of semantics.

      • Gerry Chudleigh
        02 February 2015 @ 8:23 am

        Alicia, you make a lot of sense, and this is what I meant by debating what the vote means. There are probably at least two ways the vote is more than semantics. First, many of the people arguing for a No vote in San Antonio have never accepted the commissioned pastor as equivalent to an ordained pastor. They are currently arguing that the GC Working Policy sort of implies that only men can be full ministers, and that the point-in-time votes of 1990 and 1995 sort of serve in place of voted policy. To them, a Yes vote would be a huge deal, opening the door to women in ministry — where divisions approve.

        Second, and closely related, while there is no church policy saying that a pastor must be male, there is a policy (E 60) saying a conference president must be ordained. The NAD voted that the best way to express this in the NAD is to say a president must be “ordained or commissioned,” but the GC officers objected because that would clearly open the door to women presidents, which would have upset some people. To a large degree, the San Antonio vote is a continuation of that E 60 discussion. A yes vote would declare that, where divisions approve, the world church will be ok with women serving as local, union, division or GC presidents. That will, over time and with division approvals, include women’s voices in everything the church does.

        • Interested Friend
          02 February 2015 @ 2:00 pm

          “That will, over time and with division approvals, include women’s voices in everything.”

          That is already the case in almost all church activities. Sadly in its pursuit of following the feminist agenda and political correctness there seldom appears an emphasis on the woman’s responsibility in the home. The feminist movement is mainly about female empowerment.
          Maranatha

          • Lane Hartzinger
            02 February 2015 @ 2:53 pm

            Any honest man knows that women rule the world. Any man who thinks otherwise is self-deceived. When you really think about it, men spend their entire life trying to please women. Take Samson for an example. “The hand that rocks the cradle rules the world.” Why not give them some credit?

          • Gerry Chudleigh
            02 February 2015 @ 3:55 pm

            “… almost …”

  20. Interested Friend
    02 February 2015 @ 1:54 pm

    It’s unfortunate the LLUC did not include, in the interest of being balanced, speakers who articulate a view other than what Roberts apparently is promoting. Has he forgotten that *all* of us are asked to contribute the the University, I believe it is an annual request.

    Regardless of one’s view with respect to WO the University church leadership should be wary of espousing a view minus a representation from a legitimate opposing view.
    Maranatha

  21. Alicia Hamlin
    06 February 2015 @ 8:18 pm

    Both of sides of the debate are flawed, because ordination is not even a biblical concept. It is a ceremony invented by Catholics long after Bible times. Of course the Bible does not condone women’s ordination, because it does not prescribe _any_ ordination. . . .

    “The concept of ordination has no basis in the Greek text of the New Testament. The Greek text indicates that in each town, the believers elected a number of mature and respected local believers, as elders.

    “The practice of ‘ordaining’ people is of Catholic origin. It has no basis in the Greek text of the New Testament.

    “The New Testament does not contain any mention or instruction regarding laying of hands on those who were elected as elders.”
    http://www.biblepages.net/ie02.htm

    Yet, the GC gave its blessing to women’s ordination (under the code name “commissioning,” which for all practical purposes is the same thing) 25 years ago.

    We already have “commissioned” female senior pastors and conference departmental leaders. So why not call a spade a “spade” and “ordain” them? That is the real issue for this summer: which label to use. It’s a game of semantics.

    But, as Gerry pointed out above, it’s a game with a consequences, because the powers that be have decided that only an “ordained” minister can become a conference president.

    They apparently base this rule on Hezekiah 3:17, which allegedly says:

    “What, know ye not that thy conference president shall be ‘ordained,’ which shall be thy code word for ‘male’? For although a female may be thy ‘commissioned’ senior pastor, it shall be an abomination if she becometh thy conference president; for surely Eve was deceived by the serpent and was cursed, and thus all women are cursed and inferior.”

    Since we already have female senior pastors with the GC’s blessing, the core issue for the vote this summer is to determine whether to let the various divisions make their own decisions about whether they will allow a female to become qualified to be a conference president.

    We already know the overseas divisions are dead-set against it. I’m sure they will all be brushing up on Hezekiah 3:18 before the vote: “Thou shalt not let thy female species become qualified to serve as a conference president, for in the day that thou doest so, thou shalt surely crawl upon thy belly like a slug.”

    Sorry, Virginia, you can be anything you want to be, except a conference president. You can be a “commissioned” senior pastor, or even a conference treasurer or conference secretary. You can even be the president of a corporation or a nation. But you can’t be a conference president. You’ll have to wait until heaven to be equal . . . in ecclesiastical matters.

    Perhaps the real fear is: if a woman gets qualified to become a conference president, she could eventually potentially become the General Conference president. Surely that would be the greatest abomination of all. (Was that the title of a Whitney…

    • Alicia Hamlin
      06 February 2015 @ 8:21 pm

      Surely that would be the greatest abomination of all. (Was that the title of a Whitney Houston song in the 80’s?)

    • Chrisfanus
      17 April 2015 @ 11:04 am

      There are a lot of opinions expressed . and that is just what it is opinions (which anyone is entitled to, of course) hairs are being split over whether “ordination” is in the Bible or not. Truth is the word “ordination” is not in the Bible, but then neither is millennium, pre-lapsarian, post-lapsarian and a gamut of theological labels which describes certain concepts to facilitate understanding those issues.

      The act of “ordination” is in the Bible however, as is the “established order” of a governing body which under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, directs the church to make decisions that affects the whole church. Barnabas and Paul were “ordained” for ministry by the Church at Antioch, Cf. Acts 13:1ff) The Holy Spirit instructed the prophets and teachers present to set apart, separate, dedicate as translated from the Greek “Aphorizo”. Ellen White stated that Barnabas and Paul were “ordained”. The real fear is that the deception and underhanded tactics employed by NAD et al, since 1970 will open the door for more aberrations that will be perpetrated by the church.

      The Bible as an “ongoing Authoritative source of instruction and right living, are being compromised by this feminist push for WO. Richard Davidson is wrong when he claims that there are no evidence of “male headship” in Genesis 1 and 2. The Bible is clear that Adam is held responsible, for Eve’s “greed”. The whole word is still suffering under that curse announced in Genesis 3. The Bible from Genesis to Revelation has no female priests, no women writers in the Canon of Scripture. Ordaining women is mainly a feminist exercise to be like the world out there, just as the case were with Israel’s demands for an earthly king.

      • Nico Grobler
        08 May 2015 @ 12:34 am

        Thank you Chrisfanus. You have summed this entire issue up very welll in your seond and last parsgraphs.

    • Stephanie Miller
      05 July 2015 @ 9:53 am

      There is no book of Hezekiah in the Bible. The person commenting and “quoting” from that reference is having a little fun at our expense, stirring the pot of riled emotions in this thread. We do well to search the Scriptures prayerfully for ourselves and avoid controversy, which Satan loves, for where there is strife unity suffers.

  22. Bruce Chittenden
    06 February 2015 @ 9:21 pm

    Regarding the words “ordained” and “commissioned” being a matter of speaking to the same thing: Is there any difference in the salary of one who is ordained and one who is commissioned?

    • Alicia Hamlin
      06 February 2015 @ 10:47 pm

      In at least some of the SDA unions, all pastors with similar assignments are already paid equally, regardless of gender. Men and women pastors receive the same salary, medical insurance, parsonage allowance, retirement benefits, and all other areas of remuneration. https://session.adventistfaith.org/responses .

      The only thing a commissioned pastor cannot do is ordain local elders, deacons, and deaconesses, and cannot be a conference president (in most unions). Otherwise, it’s the same thing with a different name. Under the 1990 General Conference policy, commissioned ministers can preach, lead the church, be the senior pastor, conduct funerals and weddings, baptize, conduct communion, and do just about everything thing else a male pastor does. It really is just a game of semantics, other than the specious conference president issue.

  23. Christina
    10 February 2015 @ 4:03 am

    I have seen many Christians who do all unnecessary arguments, one thing they forget the very important thing, that is keeping the ‘SABBATH (the day of Worshipping the Lord our GOD).At the end. every one will be judged by 10 commandments not by long long speeches . you need to Surrender GOD completely ,HIM and keeping his day of worship which is Sat-ur-day not SUN-day .

    • Todd Bunson
      10 February 2015 @ 5:45 am

      Christina: but some SDA churches also have worship services on Sunday. For example, the Huntsville, Alabama, where the First SDA Church started having Sunday worship services (in addition to Sabbath services) on Feb. 8. http://www.al.com/living/index.ssf/2015/02/seventh-day_adventist_sunday.html Sabbath is the divine day of rest, but it is not the only day on which we can worship God.

      • Elizabeth Wilson
        10 February 2015 @ 7:15 pm

        Huntsville First Church is not promoting Sunday sacredness, and they are not detracting from the sacred rest of the Sabbath. God commands one day of rest, but He is happy to be worshiped every day.

      • Chrisfanus
        17 April 2015 @ 11:14 am

        True, we must worship God every day of our lives. But God set His Seal only on one day, the Sabbath day. The early church assembled on the Sabbath for worship. Paul addressed members on other days too. But the moot question is, will the day of the Lord and the day of the Sun eventually be interchangeable as happened in the Early church? The Prophet established a unchangeable paradigm when he stated, “to the law and the testimony. If they do not speak according to this word, there is no light in them”. Our mantra has changed from “Sola Scriptura” to “sola Theologian” we are being led astray in the same way the “theologians led the Jews astray in Jesus’ day.

  24. Alicia Hamlin
    20 February 2015 @ 10:34 am

    Check out the OrdinationTruth blog on the women’s ordination issue: http://goo.gl/b6gjph .

  25. Alicia Hamlin
    10 March 2015 @ 2:39 pm

    Gender equality in ministry is a “post-Calvary biblical mandate. . . . both males and females have manifestations of all gifts of the Spirit, including pastoral leadership.” (Council for Family Research)
    “Even on My servants, both men and women, I will pour out My Spirit.” (Acts 2:18)
    God does not discriminate. https://OrdinationTruth.wordpress.com/equality/

    • Chrisfanus
      17 April 2015 @ 11:21 am

      Women in OT times has been used of God, women in New testament times and up to the present time has been used by God. When I joined the church the had an honorary title. A mother in Israel. They were the true servants of God. That title and the deeds that bestowed that honorific, has been largely been eroded, for the desire to be like the men. Amazingly, the Bible prophets are silent about this major event that are being pushed on the church. Neither does EG White promotes WO.

      • Nico Grobler
        08 May 2015 @ 12:41 am

        Thank you Chrisfanus. You have summed this entire issue up very welll in your seond and last parsgraphs.

  26. Dorothy Lennox
    14 May 2015 @ 11:14 pm

    There should never been a meeting in the first place for General Conferences to discuss this matter on Women Ordination, the Bible does not support it, it is therefore heresy, if you vote for this, you are on that train heading to perdition, I warn you with love hoping that you will repent and stop changing God’s word, your reward is, if you continue to do this and teach men to do so, you will be called the least in the kingdom of God, which means you wont be there. Men and women like these who are leading God’s people astray should not be supported by tithes at all because they do not endure sound doctrine no more. Which is to be? God’s word or your word?

    • Claudio Rodriguez
      01 July 2015 @ 7:11 am

      Thank you Dorothy, well put!

  27. Trevor Hammond [22oct1844]
    23 May 2015 @ 10:49 pm

    Dear Gerald

    If the SAU Conference has issued such a statement claiming that “it finds no Biblical or E G White counsel prohibiting the ordination of women to ministry” then the statement is without doubt one that was issued without the full knowledge of its members and without proper due consultation with its members. It is also a very reckless way of reasoning. In fact nowhere in the Bible or writings of EGW is there counsel that women should be ordained to the leadership position of Elder, Overseer or Bishop, whom we would call pastor’s in this sense today. The Bible in both the Old and New Testament does not support this statement. The statement issued is an incorrect position and does not represent the majority of members in the SID Union Conference. It is therefore very likely that the majority in this particular Union were not properly consulted and represented. It strongly suggests that pro-ordination lobbyists have being allowed to propagate their agenda in stealth without the knowledge of Union members and it seems rather obvious that it was done underhandedly to say the least. This may very well be a pattern with the current spate of attacks on the Church calling for Female Headship which I think is what it really all boils down to.

    • Trevor Hammond [22oct1844]
      23 May 2015 @ 10:55 pm

      Typo – Sentence should be: The statement issued is an incorrect position and does not represent the majority of members in the “SAU Conference.”

  28. Trevor Hammond [22oct1844]
    23 May 2015 @ 11:27 pm

    Ryan says: “I live in a ‘Division’ where there are weekly announcements by the SDA pastor telling us that “the SDA church is against Women Pastors and Women Elders.”
    —–
    This is not true. There is not much being said or announced with regards to Women’s Ordination in the Churches in the SAU Conference in South Africa. In fact nothing is being said: which raises suspicions into the agenda and reasoning behind those who make such allegations. More people know about Trevor Noah’s new job in the US than the current cultural mutiny taking place within the ranks of NAD and their pro ordination counterparts. It is quite clear from the comments here and elsewhere that the SAU has a similar pro-ordination faction within its ranks.

    Let’s put it to the test. Perhaps Ryan can record the alleged weekly announcement in his church or any church for that matter in the SAU speaking against Women’s Ordination, Tithe’s and Homosexuals (note where such reasoning is leading) and email it to me at 22oct1844@gmail.com. Where is this ‘document’ that was sent out to pastors instructing them to make these announcements?

    Ryan has pointed three issues that are closely related in the problems with WO. 1] Women’s Ordination (Female Headship), 2] Tithe’s (Congregationalism)and 3] Homosexuals (the acceptance of Homosexual abomination as a Christian Virtue). That’s where pro-ordination enthusiasts like the NAD are heading for and are currently in the process of getting this done by force in the form of blatant disregard to church policy, procedures and doctrines, and by the use of ruse tactics.

    In fact the issue is not about whether women can be ordained by the laying on of hands: they can be ordained. The question is: Be ordained to what? Elders, Overseers and Bishops or Pastors in this sense? Methinks not. The Bible and the Sprit of Prophecy inspired writings, do not support the ordination of women to these roles of Christian leadership and service. That is the bottom line.

  29. Jeremiah
    29 May 2015 @ 1:08 pm

    Yes, if anything, Loma Linda Church is all about balance. Oops, I get dizzy when I lie.

  30. biggie akayombokwa
    24 June 2015 @ 5:10 pm

    Who can give me a verse from the scripture which reads ” thou shalt not ordain women to pastoral ministry or eldership”? There is nothing said in the scripture whether to ordain them or not. So just pray and stop arguing about things u don’t even understand.

    • Reality
      24 June 2015 @ 6:55 pm

      You wish scripture, in setting the bounds:
      2 Peter 1:
      20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
      21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

      1 Corinthians 14:
      34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law.
      35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

      1 Corinthians 7:
      39 The wife is bound by the law as long as her husband liveth; but if her husband be dead, she is at liberty to be married to whom she will; only in the Lord.

      I guess if her first husband dies, someone in the Lord could at least teach her; still kind of hard to do anything in silence.

      Titus 1 excludes Elders:

      1 Timothy 3 excludes Bishops and Deacons:

      I think maybe the question, within precedence should be, where in the BIBLE does it say you can ordain a woman; who is commanded to submit within subjection “in everything” to a husband who may or may not be a Christian (Ephesians 5)?

      Who already has a job in Titus 2.

      • Carol
        09 July 2015 @ 10:21 pm

        If women are to keep silent in Church then why are they up front doing the SS Program, and making announcements and etc? According to Paul, If we are going with scripture, (verse 34) maybe the guys ought to be doing all that stuff and us women just show up. Just think ladies, no responsibilities, we’re off the hook. I love it!

  31. Rob down under
    26 June 2015 @ 5:47 am

    WO at the upcoming GC will arguably be the most polarising event in the history of the church this far. It will far eclipse the arguments surrounding righteousness by faith, the daily, Ford’s influence on our theology, the nature and of Christ, the publication of Questions on Doctrines, etc.

    Regardless of one’s position on WO, the outcome will bring about discord, division and demise within our ranks. Part of the reason has to do with the fact that whatever position is voted, it will cause rancour amongst those who did not see the outcome as desired. The upheaval will bring about fragmentation akin to Congregationalism. Every church, union, division etc doing what is “right” in their own eyes.

    Although God’s church will be triumphant and will go through to the end, it will start to take on a very different appearance.

    Don’t underestimate where this vote will lead us!!!!

  32. Estel
    30 June 2015 @ 5:11 pm

    Hello
    SDA church leaders

    I can’t rich to understand the women ordination is causing such wasting time, and money. At the same time it is creating such confusion, doubt and division inside the denomination.
    My question to leaders who are agree in women ordination. Did you read the BIBILE? GOD commands are crystal clear that man is a head of the family and church, and JESUS is head of the church. There is no text in the BIBLE states that women should have authority in the church.
    Respectfully I state as follow, from the beginning the weakness of woman lead to SIN and Adam was deceived by Eve ( Eve wanted to be like God).
    REMEMBER Eve was easy deceived by Lucifer.
    That is clear example for all of us. I think some women wants to become pastor as a man and at the same time they are looking for financial power.
    And why most SA church leaders are not thinking are they blinded? Because this issue is creating confusion and division. I can’t comprehend.
    It is really sad what is happening into SDA church and I think Satan is working hard into the church to divide world members and cause deception.
    All I can do pray to LORD and ask for his divine guidance and protection and be with the all minority SA church leaders are not agree with women ordination. And they should vote NO to women ordination and STAND FIRM FOR THE TRUE and continue with the mission with strength, courage and ask God lift up their spirt. Don’t feel disappointed
    The BIBLE has the authority.

  33. Mr Teaspoonman
    03 July 2015 @ 3:13 pm

    Saints, we are living in the last days and in the Laodicea period, the lukewarm church. This is the church God says it makes him sick in the stomach.If the first six churches of Revelation never entertained the women ordination issue, who are we indeed in the Laodicea error to entertain an issue that has got nothing to do with nothing. God has been using women through out and only now the so called scholars think that they need the ordination of women. This church has been existing the past six thousand years and the giants of faith who were so close to God than this generation of PHDed leaders never even thought of or entertained this issue of women ordination that dividing the church. Watch the space, the majority advocates for women ordination are men, angry and very militant people. I am glad our God is still in Control and with his true followers, he will prevail.

  34. Andres Wall
    06 July 2015 @ 1:50 pm

    I just need to say that this clearly cause disunity within the body of Christ and honestly I don’t understand how woman’s that are ordained if they really feel that Jesus called them and they really read the bible and supposedly understand it, how they can have this position knowing that is not biblical. I’m sorry, but if I call myself Jesus after reading the bible, am I right or wrong? I think that the answer is logical, therefore the same in here apply. The reality is that who is not according to God’s word is against it and who is against it is not with God, is with the enemy.

  35. Nan Rice
    08 July 2015 @ 7:38 pm

    My question is what does any this have to do with my salvation or the salvation of the women who are pushing for ordination? It is a distraction and one of many which I am sure we will face as we get closer to the end of time. We need to put or energies into finding ways to tell others the good news of Jesus’ soon return and stop allowing Humanism and our egos to crowd out the sound of Jesus speaking to us. Get back to prayer, study and sharing our faith and stop “politicing. My love and my prayers are with all who are struggling with this issue. “Even so, come Lord Jesus.”

  36. BeavisB
    28 July 2015 @ 10:05 am

    atoday.org has potential, you can make your site go viral easily using one tricky method. Just search in google:
    Kimting’s Method To Go Viral

  37. CAROLINE COVELL
    13 September 2015 @ 12:49 pm

    I find it very interesting about the argument on this subject “Women Ordination.” The argument is so focused on the individualism and desires, rights, and what women can do. Never once the argument is about what the pastors do according to the Bible. Women like to get into this “Job” because pastors do not do the job that they should do as Jesus showed them in the Bible. Today’s pastors work almost one day a week, deliver a sermon and arrange people to come to speak. They work like an administrator. Then they want to train the members and let the members go to the field to deliver the gospel, while they are the people who are eating from the gospel, but do not work for the gospel. They want to members to work for the gospel and they “train” the members, like Jesus train the disciples. If they look at the things Jesus did and what he asked the disciples to do, this job is not fit for women. Look at the hardship the disciples experience while delivering the gospel. In one church, the pastor told the members to go and deliver pamphlet for Bible seminar, but he went to play golf because he teach golf in the weekend. That is why women want to get into this job because it is an easy job: sermon once a week, attend church business meeting once a month, and train members who want to become a lay worker.