Survey Report: What Adventist Young Adults Think about Ordination Decision
August 31, 2015: A survey among Adventist young adults predicts a very large negative impact due to the vote against ending the exclusion of women pastors from ordination at the General Conference (GC) Session in San Antonio. The survey was conducted by a research team based at Andrews University prior to the Session and is reported in a special report from the Beyond Beliefs study of Adventists from the Millennial Generation, defined by the project team as age 18 through 32 this year.
A total of 86 percent of the young adults indicated that they agree with the ordination of women clergy, while only 14 percent disagree. About the same response was given to a question about how they would respond if the GC Session did vote yes on women’s ordination; 85 percent said they would respond positively and only 15 percent said they would respond negatively.
This is quite a different picture than what was suggested during the discussion on ordination at the Session by Natasha Nebblett, the president of the conservative young adult organization, Generation of Youth for Christ (GYC). She spoke against extending ordination to the women among Adventist pastors, but clearly did not speak for her generation broadly.
What is now the most relevant item in the survey is the question about how they would respond if the GC Session voted no, as it did. Three out of four indicated some degree of negative response and only 26 percent said it would not affect their perception of the denomination at all. In fact the most damaging result of the vote may be the degree to which Adventist young adults are simply disconnecting their faith from the denomination’s activities all together. Despite the very negative response to a no vote on women’s ordination, only 16 percent said it would result in their withholding tithe.
Is the next generation of Adventists more liberal? Another item in the survey indicates that it is not that simple. Asked if they identify as conservative or liberal, the majority of respondents said “I am a bit of both” (43 percent) or “I don’t like these labels” (16 percent). Only one in four actually identified their perspective, with 15 percent liberal and 10 percent conservative.
The explanation embraced by most of the experts that Adventist Today consulted is that the Millennial Generation refuses to buy into the “culture war” between conservatives and liberals that has so engages their parents in the Baby Boom Generation. The Beyond Beliefs project is focused on exploring the understanding among today’s young adults of the 28 Fundamental Beliefs of the Adventist denomination. More information is available on line at www.beyond-beliefs.com and reports can be purchased from Amazon on line.
I assume this survey was taken among young Adventists in the USofA or in North America? Without knowing the answer to this question it is not easy to assess the results.
I would really like to see a similar survey taken in South America or Africa. Then we could compare the results from different parts of the world.
It was an international sample, but the precise nature of the sample has yet to be published. I agree with your assessment, but we decided to go ahead and release the little piece of information we had. The full details should be published by the research team soon. — Monte Sahlin, AT Executive Editor
As Isaiah 3:12 says. As for my people. Children (young adults) will be their oppressors and women their leaders (woman’s ordination). This matter is bible prophesy being fulfilled as well as Ellen White. The church would be casting off its foundations. Modern eve’s will strive for positions not theirs.children would be disobedient. Isaiah 44 talks on the issue of women going after other religions and men allowing them just like Adam did in the garden and like is happening now. Just as the story of queen Vashti tells how how rebellion is spread in rebellious women. The bible tells us what us happening. But the wheat and the tares are being g separated. Those who hold to the bible and those who follow the dictates popular with the world. The bible says women would go for a man only to be married and not want him or his money because they make their own. They take a man by name only just to say they hot married. All who can be shaken will be shaken. All who fail on one matter of the bible will fail completely.
I have posted the same bible verse in regards to this WO issue.
This article is the result of a survey. What is needed is more widespread and comprehensive surveys. The delegate vote was 60-40 no. Is it rocket science to get surveys from most SDA churches to see what the people say? Get survey results on how many SDA have ever read the whole bible once and read their SS lesson before class. How satisfied are members with the sermons they hear weekly? How hard would it be to get Survey Monkey going by the SDA general conference. I have brought this up with pastors and SDA officials. Some local conference officials implement it but many are very hesitant for whatever reason…loss of control or afraid of results?
I notice that Adventist Review is itself pro women ordination. Really it is irresponsible to state that Adventist youth decided this or that when only a fraction of the youth have been surveyed. Why not give the bigger picture. I also believe that AR should let the WO matter lie. Why are we still holding surveys after the matter has already been settled? I smell mischief. Please stop dividing members and let us now concentrate on building a strong United church. As a world wide paper you should lead in helping this happen.
How can a united church be built with fanaticism (Rom 10:2)prevailing?
Amos 3:3 Can two walk together, except they be agreed?
Jesus is uniting His church (followers of Jesus). The SDA church is not united. The denomination is basically a marketing vehicle that promotes a few truths that 99% of Christianity has abandoned.
Are you trying to contend with Jesus shaking the SDA church?
It has been Laodicea and in need of revival and reformation for decades.
Beware of being an institutional-groupie.
Anne-
You have expressed clearly what many of us would second. Most unfortunately those who favor WO can’t get over their loss and are still licking their wounds.Those on the left are *not* going to let the matter die although there was a decision by the GC in Official Session.
Why should millennials be given more attention than pre- or post millennials? Must the church pander to them?
Why disparage what the young woman from GYC said? Because it was so convincing?
There was no General Conference decision about WO made at the San Antonio sesssion. It was a majority vote of delegates who voted NOT to allow divisions to make their own choice about WO in their territory and their vote has not been written into formal working policy.
The current working policy DOES allow unions to determine who in their conferences will be ordained. Permission is not necessary from the G.C.and never has been.
The administration has presented this vote as a G.C. policy, but it has never been the written policy and women may be ordained and the G.C. cannot revoke those women who have already been ordained. Their authority is limited to suggestions only and implying it cannot be done.
As a 79 year old retiree, I am fortunate to be itinerate and visit a variety of SDA churches each year, both in USA and Europe.
Dismayingly, some congregations are so geriatric, I actually feel YOUNG! Children coming up front for “story hour” are disproportionately few, relative to the attendees, and some have been brought by their grandparents or great grand parents.
The 30-60 year demographic are absent.
In a desperate action some congregations use “praise music” to attract the “millenials”. This is counter productive as it alienates the older group.
I agree with Jim Hamstra, that a world wide survey would elicit a different response.
But western youth are overwhelmingly EGALITARIAN.
Conservative young Republicans in the USA are staunchly for “gay rights” and gender discrimination is totally “politically incorrect”.
So the vote at SA was against the trajectory to equality. For the young, it has become a CIVIL AND HUMAN RIGHTS ISSUE. This leaves the GC “with egg on its face”, not only in their lack of fair play for women, but for gays.
This unfortunate outcome will be very damaging and deleterious for our church IMAGE, both for our younger demographic, and in our outreach to educated and modern potential converts.
Robin “In a desperate action some congregations use “praise music” to attract the “millenials”. This is counter productive as it alienates the older group.”
I think its time to not worry about alienating us old people and give the young the reins! My comfort level is not important when it comes to eternal things and the young are more valuable then my comfort level!
One point to consider is that not all millennial like praise music. Mine didn’t. I think my local praise team is in the 45 to 55 zone. We need more substance.
YES, more substance. The key part of worship service is the sermon. Most are not relevant to living. They are theological nurture/therapy sessions that either go into ancient bible history with some shallow tidbit or are an SDA superficial remedial talk. So much focus in on past history or on future/eschatology that people are not equipped to cope with issues today. The aroma of institutionalism is so prevalent. Many are told to share Christ. Such a generalization but without details. It is subtle verbal abuse. Church has become a place where clichés and religious expressions are parroted week after week and few receive real edification. Whoever is reading this, Do a Google on Christian clichés. Those who have really read the bible know how it counsels to teach/explain so that people have …understanding.
Philip gave the Ethiopian ..understanding by explanation.
“I agree with Jim Hamstra, that a world wide survey would elicit a different response.”
I do not know what the international response would be. I was asking a question – not predicting the answer.
Yes.. I posted that the SDA GC could implement Survey Monkey. Let the voice of all of the people be heard. Does anyone care what the members think or do they just want to tell them what to think?
Jim Hamstra, it was an international survey. They told us that in the comments. So now that you know that it was international, what is the problem with the survey? I see none.
Never said the survey was wrong.
Still waiting for the survey of the responders.
Make that demographics of the responders.
That equality of all believers is not our banner just shows how prehistoric the leadership is.
They are so far behind the times. These should not be the issues of our day. There should be equality, knowing full well we are ALL made in the image of God. We are all His/Her Children!
This will be the downfall of the present leadership. The fact that Mr. Wilson’s name was brought back twice due to concerns about his leadership, with him basically ignoring the questions being posed about his abilities just shows he is ruling by fear, not love.
I no longer call myslef a member because I was not even interviewed in 1981 for a pastoral positiion because of my gender.
Yet, one classmate got caught plagarizing not once, but TWICE, was out drinking and drugging, and womanizing, even though he was married.
And another was doing all of the above as well, except plagaizing, but living with his girlfriend. Both got interviews and appointments. My grades were better and I know my heart was in the right place. The plagarizer went to quite a few churches, having multiple affairs at each one before finally being kicked out. He is now a used car salesman, which seems pretty fitting. The other just keeps getting moved.
Until are all treated as equal, my money will go to Kinship and Seventh Gay Adventist. Both organizations the practice equality for all!
Yes, what do young people, who have been brought up on a steady diet of entertainment in the church, and whose spirituality is under question, think?
Would these young people be able to understand the hermeneutical principles involved in this discussion? Do they realise it comes down to interpreting the Bible, not simply a question of equality?
Excuse my poor typing–in the first line of my post above, “itinerate”should read “itinerant ”
LEO, I am in complete agreement that most Adventist youth will not even understand the word “hermeneutical” let alone delve into the complexities of Pauline verbiage — even the new modern English translations leave his messages incredibly dense and opaque.
Do not under-estimate the ethical/moral/spiritual leanings of our Adventist youth. The bigotry and bias of the heretical Headship Dogma, recently imported into Adventism from suspect Calvimist sources, will be offensive to most right thinking young people.
Equal opportunity, fair play, civil rights and tolerance are the hallmarks of good breeding, of which our Adventist youth have an abundance.
( I cannot speak for the Generation
As I say, more substance, more service, more study into spiritual things is stronger than arguments over types of music.
I disagree with you because many of the youth I know are deeply thoughtful and serious in their pursuit of God. That they see things differently than you should not necessarily be seen as holding false views or embracing of error because, where that charge is made many times the views of older Adventists are based more on particular cultural traditions or misapplication of EGW writings than scripture. Listen to them and you just might learn something worthwhile.
Hebrews 10:”25 Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching. 26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, 27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.”
Ephesians 4:”3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; 5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all. 7 But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ.”
There is only one Body; no place for individuals. There are many GIFTS: “For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ”
“13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ: 14 That we henceforth be no more children, tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men, and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive;”
There are only individuals until they become part of the BODY; then they are part of the BODY, not individuals.
I think you perhaps are confusing the dysfunction in the church that is the result of the absence of the Holy Spirit with a need for uniformity where everyone has to be the same and the standard of measure is your viewpoint. That view is a big reason why the church in North America is in such deep trouble and growth has stalled.
There is great diversity in the body of Christ and there are many individuals because the Holy Spirit gives different gifts to individuals. Not everyone is a hand or an eye and no part can say to another that they are not needed or not part of the body because they are lesser or different. Becoming part of the body of Christ does not force everyone to fit into the same mold because we each have our personal experience with redemption and thus need to express our praise and adoration to God according to our experience with Him. Neither should we expect one person to minister in the same ways as another. If everyone were a preacher, who would minister to the sick?
There is great strength in spiritual diversity and the church grows where the Holy Spirit is allowed to develop individuals in their diversity. I am eyewitness to the power of God to bring widely different people into harmony where their different gifts can grow the church by working in harmony. That happens when you recognize the gifts God has given you and respect the diversity of gifts and experience He has given others.
Do these youth, Bill enjoy talking about Jesus? When you change the conversation to the topic of Jesus, do they light up and get excited or do they turn off?
Do these youth spend more time in the “word” (aka Bible) rather than watching foolish TV shows, going to parties, texting on mobile phones etc?
Do these youth have a worldly ambition to amass the most money, make a name for themselves, etc .Or is their greatest ambition to share Jesus with a lost and dying world?
There is a revival of youth looking for intentionality in applying the truth of Jesus redemption in their daily lives and they are finding strength and community outside the traditional church. They believe in NT “body” and find there is a mask without transparency or vulnerability in the local church so they will find Christ followers where ever they can be found. These young believers are finding like minded people in the most unlikely places….. Just like in Jesus days on earth. So grateful GOD doesn’t hide.
“The bigotry and bias of the heretical Headship Dogma, recently imported into Adventism from suspect Calvimist sources, will be offensive to most right thinking young people.”
Robin-
Such bitter and condescending language is not at all helpful. Why not admit the promotion of WO is an adaptation of the feminist agenda with a view of accommodating culture as well.
If we would stick with the bible, nothing but the bible only, we will out that this women ordination thing is another way for us to do the same thing Eve & Adam did in the beginning – “want to be like God.” Also, the same thing the Israelite of old did – “want a king like others did.”
We, SDA should not repeat the same error if we are striving for heaven.
A behind the scenes movement due to the WO issue is a refocus on hermeneutics.
Most SDA pastors are not involved in expository sermons. They present topical therapy sermons. Because of this , the members are not exposed to competent ways to deal with understanding scripture. What the church is suffering from is the culture of complacency and cynicism. The world fills the vacuum left by the lack of truth/scripture.
John 17:17 Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.
Please enter this information as application to subscribe to this forum. I want ro hear and know more what is going on. God bless.
This is a study of 150 extended essays and 700 people who answered a 90 question survey, by a Norwegian and Australian couple Jan and Leanne Sigvartsen; along with Paul Peterson. Paul works at Andrews and Jan is getting his PHD there.
NAD, Clergy.ed and Andrews funded the research and for the low, low price of $26.78 you can order the book.
Yes the surveys are going international on future surveys and studies; soon, from the statements on the websites.
I guess it does show our failures to teach?
I knew Adventist was very human and imperfect, but at the same time knew it stood for conscience, for resisting power and control and domination,moo raining to be a grassroots organisation, for decrying conformity and traditions, for avoiding creeds, and so many other noble things.
This General Conference is a watershed in the church losing my allegiance. All these things I thought it stood for are officialky worked against. Power is being concentrated, hierarchical kingly power increased, conformity not conscience, detailed credal statements becoming more detailed and prescriptive, conscience being vanished by conformity,etc.
This is not the church I know or grew up in.
Farewell Adventism.
I see less and less of the Jesus you introduced me to.
Hit your knee and pray; HE is always there. HE will guide you; just let HIM.
I think most of us know that a survey can “prove” anything. It depends on how you ask any given question, and then who you ask.
Absolutely, Bill. So are you inferring that this particular survey is “false”? If so, I would like to see your evidence.
I understand, but there is hope. The church is dying where the Holy Spirit is resisted and there is revival where He is embraced.
That contrast was illustrated to me this past Sabbath when I was traveling in another state and felt like the Holy Spirit was telling me to not visit the local SDA church, but I went anyway. At my home church we openly embrace the gifts and guidance of the Holy Spirit, but not at that church. During Sabbath School when I raised the possibility of the Holy Spirit working through us today, both the Sabbath School teacher and the head elder vigorously resisted the concept and so when the class ended I took their hint and departed. That was the worst Sabbath experience I have had in a very long time and I can hardly wait to be back with my church family tomorrow.
The problems you see at the GC don’t have to have a negative impact on your relationship with the church. Instead of being distracted by them, focus on your local church and your role there. You and others should be seeking the Holy Spirit and asking Him to guide and empower each of you to be catalysts for positive change so that your local church family can be the spiritual body both you and your community need.
You discovered that all churches do not embrace the Spirit. If your local church is feeding you, that is where you want to be. But everyone is not so fortunate, so what then?
We should never look to the church but to God. Adventists have made the church more important than God’s love in many instances. Is God found in any church, or in people who demonstrate love? They are not always the same.
Elaine,
I already knew not all churches embraced the Holy Spirit. Most at least pay lip service and tolerate a few members pursuing Him, but encountering one where He was so fully and forcefully rejected by the leadership was startling.
“That was the worst Sabbath experience I have had in a very long time”
Why? because someone dared to disagree with you, Bill. Come come now surely you’re not suggesting that a great SS experience is when everyone agrees with William Noel. Isn’t that part of a robust discussion, to discuss various views and hear different opinions
Conferences, Unions Pastors do not save anybody. We are all responsible for our salvation by looking to Christ and listening to His Holy Spirit. We are all sick and need a Redeemer (Christ). If I had to depend on people for my salvation, I would have left the church long ago. I search the Scriptures and depend on no one but Christ. All these issues that the church are facing are diversions that the devil is setting in our way. We are becoming self-serving in other words an I,I,I generation with Lucifer characteristics. Don’t be so critical of the leading organizations, for they will be responsible for their actions if they are not following God’s principles. Keep your faith, and if you feel that your faith is failing, get on your knees and ask God to revive you, and get back to Bible study.
Amen! Being religious has taken the place of Christianity. Shocking with all the power play. Gospel is the least will be the greatest.
Welcome Levi, and Dr Ongo. We value your presence here in the Name of Jesus, and hope you will enter into the ongoing dialogues, not just say adieu. Yes, surveys are as Bill says, perhaps questionable, as to content, however to the question of “W O”, the preponderance in the 80 percentile is undoubtedly a substantially large majority favoring. i think also most of the response is from the USA. Can the Church, in the future survive, as it has grown accustomed to, should upwards of 40% of these achievers, who will undoubtedly become the larger aquisitioners of assets, give their tithes elsewhere (given their egalitarian beliefs), and or leave the Church
because of the fundamental traditional core??
Earl,
Yes this survey is maybe a two edged sword.
Firstly it does not bode well for future contributions to fill Adventism’s treasury.
On the other hand, these equality minded young people dedicated to fair play, will form the future constituencies of our conferences and union conferences, hopefully shaping more favorable outcomes for non-discriminination.
As to church budgets, my travels to various congregations have this year, been troubling and demoralizing. In perusing the various church worship bulletins, I see an unprecedented recent change: There has suddenly, in the churches I visit, been a dramatic shortfall in donations to church budget. The monthly church giving has suddenly fallen below the church’s monthly maintenance expenses.
This change preceded the General Conference session, so cannot be attributed to fallout from that.
I realize that in most congregations I visit, there are a preponderance of retirees on fixed incomes, but that has been the case for years. We are supposedly coming out of a recession so giving should be on the upswing.
I have grown attached to many of these comgregstions
, love their pastors, and find the members admirable. So this sudden lack of giving, which will result in an obligatory curtailment of services, is for me demoralizing.
Have any other responders to this blog noticed a similar change in their churches?
The church is already split spiritually. How it will split physically is not really known. But those of you who endorse WO can be more than hopeful that you will eventually carry the majority.
In the first place, people hate to have to make choices especially about religious issues. And if they can be persuaded to “simply go along” on any issue as being non-salvational, they will certainly do so. Since WO is already the accepted norm in the SDA church, it is apparent those who support it will “win the day”.
And any logic would tell us that if women can be church elders, they can also hold any other level of administration all the up to GC president. It is all, or nothing. And all is the logic in the present situation.
You may have to eventually abandon the name Seventh-day Adventist, but that is no barrier for most who hate the name anyway and what it stands for. It is an “EGW” stigma and many reject her ministry anyway. So, the minority may get our name back without the constant bickering over many bible issues that are a part of the traditional SDA message. Perhaps the most significant and controversial would be the Investigative Judgment that so many oppose and deny.
I guess we will see in the near future just what transpires. I guess the name will separate the wheat from the tares and this is why the name was approved of God according to EGW.
Are you seeking the guidance of the Holy Spirit to heal the rift? Or, are you just complaining and promoting what is causing it?
A great deal is made in some churches of young adults’ callowness and herd mentality. This may well be true of some youth, but it seems also true (generally) that older Adventists tend to judge younger members’rather hurriedly and with thin-veneer evidence. Personally and with my friends in college, I had some of the deepest, most moving, most life-altering studies and discussions of my life, between the age of 18-22. There was nothing superficial or uninformed about those discussions. We were limited some by paucity of information on some topics, and a bit shy on emotional intelligence in some arenas and occasionally hopped up on hormones, but we were by no means callow or just part of some hippie herd (remember those shaggy times?). I have not forgotten those days, and I do not dismiss young Adventists as somehow of inferior insight, compared to us oldsters. I would be prone to study very carefully what our beloved Church can learn from this survey, and from those who filled out the survey sheets.
Yes and maybe the name that will be given to the new church will be The liberal SDA church. That sounds interesting. I wonder what God thinks about this foolishness!!!
Oh, no! Nothing with “Seventh-day Adventist” in it because you’ll get sued over using the name without permission. 🙂
“Oh, no! Nothing with “Seventh-day Adventist” in it because you’ll get sued over using the name without permission. :-)”
It’s called “identity theft.”
How would you like it if someone raped a woman, and then used your name to identity themselves?
I don’t think you would be mocking and scorning with ridicule that your name had been used in vain.
“The church is already split spiritually. How it will split physically is not really known.”
When and if it does the liberal churches will likely not look anything like an SDA church if what I read here and on Spectrum is any indication.
Robin, i desire not to harm your hope, however, the total
world economy is on the cusp of near total collapse. Keep most of your assets in your own hands for safe keeping, not in Banks or the stock market, definitely not in Bank safety deposit boxes, where Government padlocks the Banks and raids all assets. This is a strong possibility between now and the end of 2016.
One might wonder if Mr. Calahan is an adherent of talk shows on the Fox network and listens to other right wing conspiracy advocates. “Government padlocks the Banks and raid all assets”? On the other hand, perhaps Mr. Calahan’s remarks are meant as a spoof of those who see conspiracies behind every bush. If so, well done!
According to Monte Sahlin, any survey answered by less than 1000 subjects may not reflect a complete accurate result on the subject. Did not see in the article how many young adults were surveyed.
“It was an international sample, but the precise nature of the sample has yet to be published… The full details should be published by the research team soon.”
I find it disingenuous that you revealed this without giving the size of the sample. I could interview 10 persons and give a result of 86% fort or against. The size of the sample is important to determining the accuracy. Statistical percentage does not automatically mean that the result is accurate. Also releasing this info without additional details is in my opinion intent on misleading.
And how the questions were worded could have much to do with the outcome. Example: “Do you agree that it is only fair, in a modern world where 17th century thinking has been abandoned, that any sexist practice such as preventing women being ordained to ministry; so that there would be no hindrance to them using their Holy Spirit awarded spiritual gifts, should cease within the Adventist Church?”.
I mean, even I may say yes if it’s posed in any sort of skewed manner. And you can bet your last dollar, and come out financially ahead, if you put your money on Monte Salene being capable of skewing the outcome with craftily worded survey questions. He has an agenda and no survey he crafts will ever turn out differently than his preconceived opinion.
“I could interview 10 persons and give a result of 86% fort or against. ”
Please explain how you can get an 86% result by interviewing 10 people.
“Also releasing this info without additional details is in my opinion intent on misleading.”
Absolutely, but it serves the purposes, I suppose, of the liberals as some will never read anything which gives a complete picture.
“The bigotry and bias of the heretical Headship Dogma, recently imported into Adventism from suspect Calvimist sources, will be offensive to most right thinking young people.”
Robin-
Such bitter and condescending language is not at all helpful. Why not admit the promotion of WO is an adaptation of the feminist agenda with a view of accommodating culture as well.
“I find it disingenuous that you revealed this without giving the size of the sample. I could interview 10 persons and give a result of 86% fort or against.”
Maybe it serves a purpose in that it gives first impressions that AToday may wish to give; probably many will never see the details of the survey.
I am happy the vote at the 2015 GC went the way it did. For over 100 years local conferences have picked candidates for pastoral ordination and submitted their list to the appropriate Union for approval. Any Union may approve a women should they so choose.
If the action had passed it would be possible for any Division to forbid women’s ordination in their territory. It did not pass, so Unions continue to have the last word.
The Divisions are under the almost total control of the GC with no member input. Had the action passed it is likely that women’s ordination would be stopped.
Of course many people think that the “No” vote means that the GC has forbidden women’s ordination. No so!
The accuracy of the study is one thing, relevance another. The former is assessed by statistical analysis, the latter seems as yet fully imagined.
It seems unlikely that anyone embraces a given religion for cultural reasons. Successful religion seems an inside out rather than an outside in experience. The Three Angels’ Message can be read to confirm this or distorted to interpose the church between a person and their salvation.
It is a measurable fact that structural imposition is increasingly less attractive, while personal inspiration is increasingly compelling. For example, 5% of Brazilians embraced Pentecostalism when Catholicism was dominant in our parent’s day, while over 40% of Brazilians are Pentecostal today.
So, even if the Catholic Church were to have admitted both men and women into the priesthood, Pentecostalism may well have attracted the youth so long as Catholicism maintained the claim that the priest, i.e. the church, is the sole mediator of personal salvation.
Seventh-day Adventists trying to be culturally relevant is irrelevant. Rather, ministering the Three Angels’ Message in the daily lives of members and non-members alike ahead of time is prophesied to be compelling. The Gospel of Jesus is revealed in personal faith and trust and in becoming social is universally seen as people loving one another as Jesus also prophesied.
Words are unnecessary, but always welcome when shared in love, though never a substitute for love.
How can teaching the Three Angels’ Messages be compelling if they aren’t made socially and culturally relevant? The reason the SDA Church is growing so slowly (or shrinking) in large parts of the world is we’ve become socially and culturally irrelevant. So, what makes you imagine people will start listening unless we’re presenting the Gospel in terms that are relevant, meaningful and applicable to them?
We have spent a lot of time trying to separate ourselves from the world. Now we come to a point of near total success as the world obligingly separates itself from us.
Brilliant!
And some think this is a fulfillment of prophecy?
Well, that wouldn’t be the first time the collective we didn’t get prophecy right.
And as Paul explained to the Corinthians, this cannot be a surprise because none
of us get prophecy right.
So can we please just quit with the prophecies now?
“But all we would have left is the Gospel!”
Brilliant!
The survey doesn’t give a world wide picture on the answers, therefore we cant take it as a true picture on the ordination, above all the group surveyed is small.
It appears the majority of the church are prepared to put aside a voted belief in favour of tradition or false unity. cf. FB 14.
Unity in the Body of Christ.
The church is one body with many members, called from every nation, kindred, tongue, and people. In Christ we are a new creation; distinctions of race, culture, learning, and nationality, and differences between high and low, rich and poor, male and female, must not be divisive among us. We are all equal in Christ, who by one Spirit has bonded us into one fellowship with Him and with one another; we are to serve and be served without partiality or reservation. Through the revelation of Jesus Christ in the Scriptures we share the same faith and hope, and reach out in one witness to all. This unity has its source in the oneness of the triune God, who has adopted us as His children. (Rom. 12:4, 5; 1 Cor. 12:12-14; Matt. 28:19, 20; Ps. 133:1; 2 Cor. 5:16, 17; Acts 17:26, 27; Gal. 3:27, 29; Col. 3:10-15; Eph. 4:14-16; 4:1-6; John 17:20-23.)
Many, younger and older, have jumped down the rabbit hole and have realised how deep it is!
Adventism – welcome to postmodernity.
This does not surprise me. The best target for the enemy to attack is our institutions of learning. I just recently witnessed a member being made a pastor and this person’s wife is the senior pastor of a Sunday keeping church; talking about treading on apostasy.
Unfortunately the romantic notion of our kids leading the church in the future is destroyed when we think of the current generation of institutionalised, feminist, politically correct children we are breeding in our schools and colleges. This lot will need alot of guidance from older more experienced Adventists if this is their response. It only again highlights the need to inject into the church alpha masculinity which will dilute this nonsense and return the church to an aggressive army and not an episode of Oprah….
Amen! Too much TV talk show “reality” has infiltrated the church.
Put very well danny
Re the young people who answered, “I don’t like these labels”: Perhaps they are the ones who “get it”.
It is possible for a person to have high enough personal standards as to be considered “conservative” in that sense while, at the same time, not trying to impose his personal standards on others and thus to be “liberal” by the classic definition.
When asked whether they were liberal or conservative, how many of the young people were answering according to their views on the redistribution of wealth by governments (what I call the Robin Hood syndrome)?
Until or unless the “survey” defines these terms, it is essentially meaningless.
Instead of arguing about music styles for worship services, let’s (Christians) take a closer look at the question of who decides who decides. I submit that the thing that is driving young people away from worship services in church buildings (in other denominations besides our own) is the sense that they will not have any say in such matters until they are at least middle aged. When that perception was rife in the mid-nineteenth century, the advent movement emerged, led almost entirely by young people.
More please. Our young people have been watching and listening to ALL of you. They are disappointed in what they hear and see. The beautiful irony is they are VERY aware of some precious Jesus loving elderly saints who continue to love and exemplify everything they know of Jesus.
I’m 71. My mother had taught school. before she attended college if I remember correctly. So she knew the grammar of the following wasn’t correct but she was accustomed to saying, “What kind of church would our church be if everyone in the church was just like me.” Poetic license, I guess you call it.
I grew up thinking I could make a difference. Our parents were leaders so my siblings and I grew up assuming that all adventists were leaders–people who studied their Bibles for themselves and didn’t follow an organization or “dynamic” speakers.
My wife and I were discussing this last evening (she’s 63). She said she thinks the youth need to be encouraged to do things for themselves, even if, for example, they don’t always use the kinds of music she and I appreciate.
The Lord can use the humblest saint–can speak to any of us, young or old alike–not just the men upstairs in black suits.
We need to avoid innovation for the sake of innovation. If someone has an idea of a new way of ding things, he should consult with as many other people as he can, especially the older members, to see whether there might be a good reason for doing things the way they are accustomed to doing them. But “that’s just the way we do it” isn’t a reason.
Tradition for the sake of tradition is as debilitating to young Christians today as it was in the 19th century.
It is indeed sad that there are high profile individuals within the church that will not permit the issue to rest. They seem to appear hell bent to have it their way no matter how terribly it damages and divides the church. I’m not seeing the pondersnce of articles being published by the members on the non ordination of women side. It’s almost totally the proponents that just will not shut up. Enough already
I would like to know how many women we now have in our schools taking the ministry courses? perhaps these were the ones surveyed
If the vote had gone the other way can you imagine if people were still writing anti-ordination articles. Let is rest folks and go forward in unity rather then whining and pouting….
Even the Southern Tidings had a response from the Southern Union supporting women for “lead pastors” due to the Biblical teaching of priesthood of all believers. Let me see this was also said in the old testament times and men were chosen by God to be priest.
Well at least they put the article in the right place page 33 under Obituaries how symbolic if they would let this issue rest in peace and work in the way God has ordained in his Word and example.
Maybe folks should listen again to the testimony from the GYC leader herself on this matter. There is an army of youth that God will use like Gideon’s band… where truth trumps numbers.
Unity? Will never happen. SDA are a contentious bunch and once one hot potato is done with, another fills its place.
His Word
Ervin, i don’t watch television. i do not form my opinions by
selecting popular conspiracy subjects from the internet. i
am a life long sponge of political history, reality, and knowledge of godless man’s greatest desire (thousand year Reich, first hand observance)to gain control of Earth’s people. This was tried previously by the forerunners of the United Nations. Now it has become a reality, and you should concern yourself with what flows from the United Nations this month of September. Their Agenda 2030 will be launched, which is a plan to have the whole world sign onto, (which will be endorsed and promoted by Pope Francis)
which dictates under UN political mandate, orders to all nations. The environmentalists agenda is being fully adapted (to save the globe). The Capitalist system is to be abolished. With Socialiam (MARXISM) THE GLOBAL ONE WORLD
PROMOTION, the order of the day. This will be a world of the ELITES, and slaves. The weak, the sick, the mentally disturbed (which will be diagnosed by committee) the elderly, the children, the racially and ethnically inferior, various religious factions, etc etc, to be “mercifully euthanized”, for the benefit of those of extreme wealth, their bureaucratic sycophants, serfs, and slaves. Optimum estimated global population surviving will be approx. “ONE BILLION SOULS”. All to be completed by the year 2030. Brother, you can say i’ve flipped my lid, but this the master plan. Watch the UN.
Steve I think the issue here is about how well this survey was done and were there any bias involved. It is evident to me that Andrews University has a bias towards women ordination so in effect it’s like asking the meat industry performing survey about whether people liked meat. A far more accurate survey would have been if each church received the questionnaires and asked all it’s members to answer.
However, these questionnaires are pointless unless the NAD want’s to see how well it has indoctrinated it’s members and young people with this unbiblical teaching. I remember when I was at Uni our professor asked how many of us believed in evolution. I think it was like 70% did and 30% didn’t. Then throughout the year he indoctrinated us and the following year he again asked how many of us believed in evil. I can still see the look of dismay on him when the numbers hadn’t changed.
“Steve I think the issue here is about how well this survey was done and were there any bias involved. It is evident to me that Andrews University has a bias towards women ordination so in effect it’s like asking the meat industry performing survey about whether people liked meat.”
Very well said and some may push back but I’m sre I’m not the only one who agrees with you on this issue.
At General Conference Session my wife and I personally saw many instances of visitors and delegates moving in various directions regarding Women’s Ordination. There was earnest discussion, and being multilingual, we were able to follow the train of thinking as the issues were examined. From our experience I can say: (1) The delegates did not arrive at San Antonio with decisions set in cement; (2) Acceptance i0n principle of women as ordained ministers is significantly increasing; (3) Those moving in that direction are by no means identifiable as sold out to liberalism, generally; (4) Identifiably conservative voices were clearly moving toward acceptance of women in ordained ministry.
Bottom line, the question since the Session is considerably more complicated, and we do well not to paint the camps in starkly blue and red colors. The survey cited in this news item strongly concurs with the observed reality at the Session that younger delegates and visitors seemed more prone to accept women’s ordination; those of older vintage seemed more likely to speak out against it, often in very decisive language that seemed to offend more often than enlighten, at least from what we observed from the discussions held where we stood….
AT took the following stand at our booth: “It is God who ordains; we as God’s people either acknowledge or deny the evidence set before us, in our sphere.” The most popular material at our booth was pro-ordination writing, published by…
Continues from Above….
AT took the following stand at our booth: “It is God who ordains; we as God’s people either acknowledge or deny the evidence set before us, in our sphere.” The most popular material at our booth was pro-ordination writing, published by established, conservative writers and speakers. Passersby specifically requested these ordination-related materials, and we were happy to oblige, as we were with materials on other, less-pressing questions, such as youth issues, science and creation, justification and sanctification, Adventist fundamental beliefs, and much more.
Ed-
I’d be interested in hearing a conservative’s view of the GC. Can you really be objective while promoting WO?
sorry evil = evol.
Adventist today and its editors are no doubt Pro WO. After the session and even before the session all their reports and publishing have either centred on writers who support WO. They lambast those perceived to be against WO. now a survey trying to deduce the youth in the church are not happy with the voting at the session is being show cased from Andrews university all to support WO. Such propaganda will never suffice. You be in your apostatised USA where your Supreme Court has boldly endorsed sodom and Gomorrah. Are you not ashamed to live in such a country if you are indeed waiting for the soon return of Jesus. Thank God the church today has more non Americans and Europeans than it use to be else the truth would have sank with apostate America and Europe. Who said this bogus survey has a world wide coverage? You sit in your North America and make self-incredible research and called it as some thing from the church. How many people from Asia, South America and Africa were reached? Adventist Today must discuss the recent Supreme Court issue on gay and lesbians or what is making America to become more the second beast of Rev. 13. Shame on Adventist today and its editors for consistently advocating on WO sentiments which always seeks to sharply divide the rank and file of the church
I am opposed to the ordination of women. My wife is even more opposed to it than I am. We live in Michigan, U.S.A.
I believe central issue in the great controversy is how to rule the universe. God’s way is love. Satan’s way is coercion. Those who use or attempt to use coercion to promote religious beliefs, religious practices or religious prohibitions (even those who give tacit approval to the use of coercion) will discover too late that they are on Satan’s side.
Condemn the United States if you will for refusing to impose religious beliefs, religious practices or religious prohibitions on the general population but people who understand religious liberty principles will stand for religious liberty every time.
The vote in San Antonio was not about whether to ordain women. It was about who decides who decides. I don’t think my convictions should be imposed on you. Our denomination started out opposed to hierarchy, creedalism and dogmatism. Some of us will always be opposed to those things but it now appears that our denomination is dominated by people outside of protestant countries. I places that were never predominately protestant, there are many members who actually prefer hierarchy, creedlism and dogmatism.
There is a difference between uniformity and unity. The question is whether we can accept as brothers in the faith those who understand the Bible differently than we do.
“There is a difference between uniformity and unity. The question is whether we can accept as brothers in the faith those who understand the Bible differently than we do.”
And the obvious answer is “NO”.
The church is not a “clearing house” for every Tom, Dick and Harry’s view and conclusion. Bible Adventism was especially raised up and ordained by God to be a very articulate and definitive means of grace to explain salvation and the mechanics of salvation in the historical process of human history.
The liberals want to deny and destroy this truth by claiming any and everyone’s opinion is valid and we have no objective stated view of the bible with non-negotiable mandates to define the SDA church.
Neither does it challenge anyone’s religious freedom just because they can’t advocate any and every view as a viable option to the stated objective givens that are non-negotiable. No one is forcing anyone to be a member of the SDA church. Religious freedom is a civil right, not a church right. Go start your own church if you don’t agree with the church doctrines.
But we believe in a non-negotiable continuity that does not believe you can teach what you please as your right in the SDA church, without discipline and possible dis-fellowship.
There is no “unity” in this kind of diversity. We demand uniformity that the liberals refuse to accept and oppose.
You missed the point: you could be wrong and others could be right. But, apparently you don’t think it is possible for you to be even the slightest bit wrong. More than that, you seem to think you have been commissioned by God to endlessly expose, condemn and correct the errors in everyone other than the man in the mirror and do it on topic that only got claimed as a Bible doctrine when it was convenient to oppose WO.
Take the plank out of your own eye before you try taking the speck out somebody else’s eye.
How open are you to the possibility that the Holy Spirit might be nudging the church in a new direction because we haven’t been doing what He told us to do in places like North America. Remember when Jesus was riding into Jerusalem on the donkey and the Jewish leaders asked him to tell his followers to be silent? He answered that if they were silent then the rocks would cry-out. We’ve failed so miserably at spreading the Gospel in North America under male leadership that maybe it’s time for the “rocks” to start crying-out and doing the work the men have been failing to do. And if you think the ordination of women is an issue that contrasts with your mindset now, just wait and see what else God might start doing that we haven’t thought about!
Beautifully said William Noel! We keep arguing for or against something for 50+ years now, or more, depending on who you talk to. Yet, study after study shows it should not be an issue.
The vote went the way it should have because giving the GC control over WO would be horrific. They are still trying to control it, even though they have NO SAY whatsoever in the issue, they are still trying to. Very sad.
Dictatorships, like the one in office now, only leads to rebellion from what I have seen. Even my wonderful father, at 84 sees no problem with it. (which he did when I was in theology in 1981.)
The woman who leads China now started out with 10 or 11 people. Now, church is 7,000 to 8,000 people! In a communist country. Are the nay sayers saying that women can’t be used to spread the Gospel, yet we have EGW (overused, but still our founder) and this woman in China, along with many others. I felt God’s calling at 7 or 8. We were Catholic then and I wanted to be a nun, but thought I hope they let women lead at some point, like with Mass and sacraments. I just transferred that calling to Adventism when we became Adventists. I didn’t see gender actually. I heard my calling.
I left the church because they didn’t believe in equality then, 1981, and still don’t. Until they can practice the teachings of Jesus, to accept respect and love all, I know it isn’t doing the work of God because that is NOT His/Her message.
William, this goes far beyond any singular issue being discussed in the SDA church today. WO vs. Male headship is on one issue.
This is all based on a system of understanding truth and we have at least two different systems that are diametrically opposed. The fundamental system of truth that EGW and the pioneers of Adventism set forth and endorsed, vs. a modern system that opposes it, and wants a whole new system of theology to determine Adventist truth. The various issues are simply the fingers and toes of each system.
Now here is the enigma. Some oppose historic Adventism as a basic system of legalism. And some oppose the modern agenda as a basic system of antinomianism. So, it could be the legalists fighting the antinomians and visa versa.
If so, neither side understands either EGW or the bible. And if this is the case, then at some point, both sides will find a common ground in error and both sides will oppose truth. Like the Saducees and Pharisees, eh? They both hated Jesus and His ministry.
If you develop a system of understanding truth that you know is contrary to EGW, then the honest thing to do is simply “abandon ship” like some others have done. If her system of truth is faulty, you will not “reform” the church, period. Anymore than Luther could reform the church of his day. It was, and is built on a faulty system of doctrine that they will not abandon, period. And if EGW is faulty, the church is equally doomed to eternal error.
But it may be that she is not faulty, but misunderstood. After all, Rome claims they are not faulty, only misunderstood by Protestants. This present an interesting scenario that calls for a different basis for evaluation.
As a Protest, I think I understand Rome sufficiently to know I could never endorse her basic doctrine of salvation. And like Luther, I know I can not change the view of the Catholic church, only I can show why according to scripture it is wrong.
On the other hand, I believe EGW is misunderstood by those who think she established a system of legalism comparable to Rome. She never suggested a believer could merit heaven by the help of the Holy Spirit as Rome teaches. She never taught merit was in any response to how we relate to God.
She did teach there was salvational value by way of the moral law to obtain a fitness for heaven. But a fitness for heaven is not the same as a legal right that you have acquired by keeping the law of God. This distinction between the legal and moral value is imperative to not only oppose legalism, but to also oppose antinomianism.
So, the moral law is not a legal code, or a legal mandate that we must follow to earn and merit heaven. It is a moral code comparable to a family law that every member of the family must agree to for the sake of harmony in the family.
And, if you rebel against the family law, you will eventually be dis-inherited and no longer be a part of the family. And this is the issue.
I never said EGW was the problem, but the way people misuse and abuse her writings by grossly forcing meanings into them that she never said and as the basis for accusing others of being in error. She clearly told us to use the Bible and the Bible ONLY as the basis for our faith and EVERY teaching and belief.
Male Headship was the Old Testament model for spiritual leadership but in Hebrews, Paul makes clear declarations that the old system has been changed and is no longer binding on believers. Because we are all followers of Jesus, who is our single and lone high priest, all believers are equal in the eyes of God. We are ALL are called to minister in the power of the Holy Spirit as He decides and He empowers regardless of their gender, ethnicity, race or social status. By embracing and refusing to abandon Male Headship, you are just like the Judaisers who commanded believers to obey the Ceremonial Law, even to the point of requiring adult men to be circumcised.
I prefer to obey the clear commands in scripture to treat all believers equally and not oppose the power of God as you are doing.
There is no need to use hateful or judgmental language, or make generalizations. It does nothing to draw the church family together.
Do not think that being pro WO means not basing ones belief on the Bible. In fact for me, I have studied each passage carefully before finalizing my decision.
Where is it suggested that AT did the survey or that a staff member of AT is the one who organized it? Where does it say the survey excluded South America, Africa, or Asia? Why the rush to judgment? Why not slow down and show a bit of trust that just maybe the survey has been done properly. If it has and meets the generally accepted standards of such studies the point is well taken.
On the other hand let’s suggest for a moment it was only from the Western World, do you NOT CARE about this age group in that part of the world?
For the subject of WO not being a fundamental belief it amazing how worked up this topic makes people.
The subject is not over because the Bible still speaks, and SDA Working Policy still leaves the decision as to who is ready for ordination with each Union. That is policy and it has not changed.
Allen, this is a salvational issue that will not be decided by the church, but by every single individual who will be held accountable to God for their decision.
Each group will join with those who they agree with. And it will not be resolved by political agendas. People keep trying to play down the intensity and importance of this issue by claiming it is not a salvational issue. God has ordained the order of authority in the family, the church, and society in general. It is a male headship humanity that God has created. No amount of human speculation and explanation will change or alter what God has ordained in the beginning, even before sin was a factor.
The bible is clear and beyond ambiguity on this issue and EGW has affirmed it many times through out her ministry.
Objective givens don’t need to be stated, unless and until they are challenged by those who oppose them. Male headship has always been the norm in society, the church, and the family. It was an objective given. Now it must be defended because a liberal element has challenged the obvious and so it must be clearly stated to avoid any confusion on the matter.
The SDA church refuses to “man up” and deal with the issue clearly and objectively without duplicity. Politics and a call for unity has transcended the clear word of God and more and more division will result with more mass confusion because our leaders, did not lead.
Bill Sorenson,
I am befuddled by your statement that WO is a “salvation issue”! Born in 1936, I was taught from Cradle Roll onwards that salvation was through the death of Christ on the Cross and His Blood, not from any doctrine.
And WO is not even a fundamental belief, let alone a “doctrine”. The heretical Headship Dogma, never historical with Adventism, was recently implanted from suspect Calvinist sources.
This elevation of WO to a pre-eminent “salvation” issue must imply to you, that Catholics, Mormons, and Jehovah’s Winesses, all of whom hold to the exclusivity of the male priesthood, would be “saved” ahead of SDA’s who are pro WO?
How has the subjugation of women become a “salvation” issue, when for centuries it has been a tribal/folklore cultural custom? Sharia Law?
You raised concerns about the name “SDA” and the Investigative Judgement.
I love the SDA church, but my church affiliation will not save me, only Christ’s blood will.
Whether I believe the IJ or not, is irrelevant to my salvation.
We are the ONLY Christian body to have EVER promulgated this tenuous abstruse doctrine. How can it be “salvational”? If it were, it would doom ALL other Christians who do not espouse it.
SDA”s required to give a Bible Study on IJ would be at a loss, because since disastrous Glacier View, I never hear a sermon on the topic, even tho I travel widely.
WO is a “storm in a teacup”, a “mountain out of a molehill”. —not…
“Bill Sorenson,
I am befuddled by your statement that WO is a “salvation issue”! Born in 1936, I was taught from Cradle Roll onwards that salvation was through the death of Christ on the Cross and His Blood, not from any doctrine.”
I am sorry you have been deceived for so long, Robin. Christ’s death on the cross is doctrine. But it is not the only doctrine for the whole bible is doctrine.
Thus, Jesus said, “Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.” And this is the whole bible.
Neither did God leave it up to any man or person to decide what is salvational and what is not. The whole bible is salvational. So again, I am sorry you have been deceived so long about this issue.
Bill Sorensen,
I am mortified and disconsolate, that by your opinion, the Adventist church “has deceived me for so long”
Regrettably I must have had the misfortune to attend churches which preached salvation by grace, not the legalism and judgementalism than some Adventist congregations have been notorious for.
In Acts 8:26-40 I read about the Ethiopian eunuch, who while reading the text in Isaiah, asked Philip “who is the lamb to be slaughtered”? After a mini bible study, where Philip explained about Christ’s death and It’s resultant salvation, Philip happily baptized the eunuch. No time for the eunuch to read “the whole bible” or digest the Headship Dogma, state of the dead, etc! It was Christ’s salvational death, and no other belief, which converted the Ethiopian and saved him.
At age 79, nearing my final years, I clearly need to find a new church since Adventism, according to you, has failed me so abysmally.
Since Headship Dogma is so “salvational”, I am in dire need of it.
Which of those denominations confessing the male priesthood theology, would you advise that I join, the Catholics, the Mormons, the Jehovah’s Witnesses or Orthodox Judaism?
I will haste to re-position myself so that I can be “saved”.
Robin,
Discussing anything with Bell Sorenson is like wrestling with a pig: he enjoys the attention and takes it as confirmation of his relevance on issues that are spiritually irrelevant while getting you muddy.
To me the sad thing is that A. T. has become a two issue journal.
You can almost predict articles related to W.O. or the age of the earth.
I am not sure anyone making comments has changed their opinion on either issue after all of the repetition of articles and comments.
It would be amazing to have an edition with articles on something different.
It is “present truth” isn’t it, Tim? It is what matters in the church today. So it is what gets the attention.
I hear you and wish the moderators would flip the “off” switch on both of them because we have a whole lot of more significant topics worthy of discussion.
Earl does more research into world issues than most of us take the time to even consider what is going on in the world around us! It’s time for us to keep our eyes and ears focused on world events and what’s behind them and who’s who in molding our future?
“What embitters the world is not excess of criticism, but an absence of self-criticism.” G K Chesterton Yes, that beam in our own eye.
“The Reformer is always right about what is wrong. However, he’s often wrong about what is right.” G K Chesterton.
Women’s Ordaination is not now and never has been a “salvational issue” in the SDA church.
One of my favorite EGW quotes is: “pretentious piety is nauseating to the Lord”
Please feel free to apply this where applicable… 🙂
“Women’s Ordaination is not now and never has been a “salvational issue” in the SDA church.”
The SDA church is not the standard for what is salvational and what is not.
During the 25 years my wife and I lived in Salt Lake City, there was never a month that I didn’t think of a question to ask of the LDS “missionaries”.
Sometimes I asked those questions of missionaries who came to our door. More often, I went downtown and asked those questions of the missionaries serving on Temple Square. The first several years we lived there, I was asked this question by the missionaries, “Are you a member of the church?”
Each time, I answered, “I’ve never been LDS but I’m a member of THE church?”
Every time, the response was, “Oh? What Church is that?”
Every time, I answered, “I’m a member of the church that consists of all true believers, regardless of our denominational affiliation.”
Eventually, I wrote a 2-page paper on the subject with the idea of offering it to any missionaries who might subsequently ask me, “Are you a member of the Church?”
The next time I was asked that question, I answered as before and then offered the missionary–a very nice older gentleman–a copy of my paper. I told him he could read it at his leisure. He wanted to read it on the spot. Then he said, “This is very interesting. Do you mind if I share it with some other people?” I gave him an extra copy.
He must have sent it right “upstairs” because I was never asked that question again. The LDS first presidency realized that it created an unnecessary barrier to dialogue with protestants.
“The SDA church is not the standard for what is salvational and what is not” We are agreed on this.
Unfortunately for your point of argument however “male headship” is definitely NOT a Biblical salvational issue either!
I understand it is futile to point this out to those that are of your persuasion but I feel it is important to mention this so people won’t assume that your argument is “accepted” as “Biblical” by the SDA church.
Salvation is actually a medical term that means “healing”. In the “Biblical context” it refers to God / Christ bringing healing for the damage done by sin. He brings the universe back into “at-one-ment”. That is why Christ is often referred to as the “Great Physician”. That is also why He healed so many who had “faith/belief” to request and accept His healing. It was the “cornerstone” of His ministry to correctly represent His Father.
NO WHERE in Scripture is “male headship” represented as an integral part of that “salvational process”.
I would encourage each person to study these issues on their own and then come to their own conclusions. Unfortunately there is “a whole lot of heat and very little light” when discussing “womens ordaination” over the internet sites. 🙂
“Unfortunately for your point of argument however “male headship” is definitely NOT a Biblical salvational issue either!”
And obviously you have a point of view, Fred, that more than a few in the SDA church do not agree with. Many understand that it is a salvational issue and neither your opinion nor mine will make this true or not.
So, suffice it to say, there will be no “unity” based on any political agenda by the church. We can only wait and see who will stand on one side or the other, and then make a decision based on this situation.
You said about salvation. “Salvation is actually a medical term that means “healing”.”
Salvation in the bible is more comprehensive than healing. Healing is only one aspect of salvation. Salvation is based on crime and punishment and someone must pay the penalty for sin. So we see that Jesus is not just a spiritual “doctor”, He is also a lawyer and judge that judges the final outcome of every individual based on law.
Like so many, you limit words and word meanings to a less than dynamic and comprehensive meaning, and in so doing, corrupt and pervert both the law and the gospel.
I don’t expect to get much valuable information coming from someone who has a limited view of the bible and its teaching on sin and salvation. But let me make it clear, I don’t deny that there is an aspect of sin that is defined as healing and restoration.
Sin has legal and moral implications that make sin more comprehensive than many…
accept and defend. Obviously, male headship is not based on “healing” but law, order and justice. And God will define the order of authority He has ordained for the human family, and has not left it up to man to decide for himself just how law and an order of authority should be implemented and administrated in society, the home, or the church.
Did God give it up to men to practice polygamy? Did He ever condemn polygamy? Did he bless those many patriarchs who had many wives?
God gives humans free will to choose and does not withhold His blessing because man would.
“I don’t expect to get much valuable information from someone who has a limited view of the Bible and its teaching on sin and salvation”
Very well said and I agree with you!! 🙂
Fred said in response to my statement.
““I don’t expect to get much valuable information from someone who has a limited view of the Bible and its teaching on sin and salvation”
Very well said and I agree with you!! :)”
So Robin in an earlier post.
“Whether I believe the IJ or not, is irrelevant to my salvation.”
And this conclusion is typical of the liberal agenda that claims we are not saved by obedience to the law. And it is accepted in the conservative community as well. I have heard Doug Batchelor affirm this as well as other “so-called” conservative ministries.
So, if we are not saved by obedience to the law, it doesn’t matter what I know or don’t know, it doesn’t matter what I believe or don’t believe and doctrine is not relevant to salvation. And there could be no judgment to determine what I know, do, or believe since it is all not relevant to salvation.
The conclusion I have stated is the one and only conclusion that any rational person could possibly come to who is able to reason.
This theory was derived from the idea that since we can’t know everything, we don’t need to know anything. And in the end, the less we know, the better off we are.
In fact, if there is anything we need to know, it is this. We don’t need to know anything. Now we are totally and utterly released from the law as playing any part in the salvation equation. And any “investigative judgment” to determine our salvation is necessarily out the window.
It is the classic modern Evangelical doctrine that states, “The law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ” and now that we are “in Christ” the law has function for the believer. After all, Paul said, “Now that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.”
So the law has no function but to show us and convince us that if we accept Jesus, the law is negated and has value. How then is a Christian to know how to live an acceptable life?
The Holy Spirit. Just as William advocates. It is simply a “spirit ethic” that ignores the ten commandment law because that would imply “doctrine” and we don’t want any doctrine, or knowledge, or anything else that could or would make us accountable and affect our salvation. And any Investigative judgment by God to determine if we have accepted our duty and obligation as members of His family is out the window.
We have no legal obligation, we have no moral obligation, we have no obligation on any level since we are “in Christ” and ignorance is the best option. We must reject any idea that if and when we “do our best” Jesus will make up the difference. What difference? There is no accountability on any level.
Whether you agree to what I have stated, or like it or not, it is exactly and precisely the one and only conclusion of those who attack EGW and bible Adventism. The theory is certainly based on ignorance, but it won’t allow you into heaven nor justify your theory.
It is the classic modern Evangelical doctrine that states, “The law is our schoolmaster to bring us to Christ” and now that we are “in Christ” the law has no function for the believer. After all, Paul said, “Now that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.”
So the law has no function but to show us and convince us that if we accept Jesus, the law is negated and has value. How then is a Christian to know how to live an acceptable life?
The Holy Spirit. Just as William advocates. It is simply a “spirit ethic” that ignores the ten commandment law because that would imply “doctrine” and we don’t want any doctrine, or knowledge, or anything else that could or would make us accountable and affect our salvation. And any Investigative judgment by God to determine if we have accepted our duty and obligation as members of His family is out the window.
We have no legal obligation, we have no moral obligation, we have no obligation on any level since we are “in Christ” and ignorance is the best option. We must reject any idea that if and when we “do our best” Jesus will make up the difference. What difference? There is no accountability on any level.
Whether you agree to what I have stated, or like it or not, it is exactly and precisely the one and only conclusion of those who attack EGW and bible Adventism. The theory is certainly based on ignorance, but it won’t allow you into heaven nor justify your theory.
Bill,
Your picture of God is very “fearsome” and ignores Christ’s definition of “law”. The law of “love” is what Christ demonstrated and espoused during His ministry.
I certainly respect your sincerity but sincerity doesn’t always signify/correspond to truth.
To imply that your view of Scripture is the only “rational approach” is quite striking to say the least.
The understanding of morality and law certainly has to be guided by Christ’s statements and example. Your “interpretation” is very narrow to say the least, but if that gets you to heaven then that’s great. Paul had a very similar “picture of God” as you do. God reached out to Paul on the Damascus Road and “altered that picture”. Who knows what the future holds for you…
All the best to you!
“Bill,
Your picture of God is very “fearsome” and ignores Christ’s definition of “law”. The law of “love” is what Christ demonstrated and espoused during His ministry.”
This is not the issue, Fred. I am well aware the law is based on love. It is called “the law of Love”. And this is no “new” doctrine. The law is based on love, faith, grace and the gospel.
But the issue the liberals advocate is no law, period. It is no doctrine, no teaching, no knowledge, no nothing, period.
I understand their convoluted view and how they come to their conclusion. They assume since no law we keep can merit heaven, then there is no law at all. So they equate the moral law as having merit value, and to avoid “legalism” they must throw out the moral law.
The moral law has no merit value. It never did. Adam and Eve were not meriting the favor of God and earning a right to remain in God’s favor. The sinless angels do not merit the favor of God nor earn a right to remain in heaven.
Yes, Rome claims there is merit value in keeping the moral law as well as other laws the church ordains. We don’t escape error and condemnation and false doctrine by Rome, by agreeing their is merit in keeping the moral law, and then throw out the moral law to avoid legalism. The moral law is not a legal document nor is it a legal mandate of what you must do to be saved and merit heaven.
The moral law is a family law. God’s family. And if you don’t keep it, you will be thrown out.
And as a lost sinner, if you don’t agree to keep it, you won’t be let in. And the investigative judgment will show who has accepted the family law and keep it to the best of their ability.
Wherein we come short, Jesus makes up the difference. But we are still judged by the moral law to determine if we are going to be saved and go to heaven or not. To refuse to accept this truth will shut you out of heaven and no true believer or angel in heaven would want you there unless you agreed with what I have stated as pure bible doctrine just as EGW has clearly stated in the Great Controversy.
Jesus merited heaven for us, and this is why we come in His name. Jesus is our legal right to heaven. But He is not our moral fitness. And to convolute the difference will never prepare anyone for eternity.
And “all the best to you” as well, Fred.
Bill Sorensen,
I am mortified and disconsolate, that by your opinion, the Adventist church “has deceived me for so long”
Regrettably I must have had the misfortune to attend churches which preached salvation by grace, not the legalism and judgementalism than some Adventist congregations have been notorious for.
In Acts 8:26-40 I read about the Ethiopian eunuch, who while reading the text in Isaiah, asked Philip “who is the lamb to be slaughtered”? After a mini bible study, where Philip explained about Christ’s death and It’s resultant salvation, Philip happily baptized the eunuch. No time for the eunuch to read “the whole bible” or digest the Headship Dogma, state of the dead, etc! It was Christ’s salvational death, and no other belief, which converted the Ethiopian and saved him.
At age 79, nearing my final years, I clearly need to find a new church since Adventism, according to you, has failed me so abysmally.
Since Headship Dogma is so “salvational”, I am in dire need of it.
Which of those denominations confessing the male priesthood theology, would you advise that I join, the Catholics, the Mormons, the Jehovah’s Witnesses or Orthodox Judaism?
I will haste to re-position myself so that I can be “saved”.
“In Acts 8:26-40 I read about the Ethiopian eunuch, who while reading the text in Isaiah, asked Philip “who is the lamb to be slaughtered”? After a mini bible study, where Philip explained about Christ’s death and It’s resultant salvation, Philip happily baptized the eunuch. No time for the eunuch to read “the whole bible” or digest the Headship Dogma, state of the dead, etc! It was Christ’s salvational death, and no other belief, which converted the Ethiopian and saved him.”
I am sorry, Robin, that you have been deceived again. This man was well read in scripture and was no novice as you seem to think he was. The only thing he did not understand was the Christ event vs. the ceremonial law.
I really doubt that the SDA church deceived you. You seem to be able to do that on your own as in the case of the man that was baptized.
In the end, every one lost is self deceived because they refused instruction and opted for a delusion. You need not accept my explanation, but when you attack God’s instrumentality in the person of EGW, you have set yourself on the road to perdition.
I suggest you listen to her testimonies as she will instruct you in what the bible teaches and show you the way of salvation in the bible.
Your sarcasm and scorn and contempt will not help you in the least. Read the Great Controversy and “listen and learn”.
And as Fred would say, “all the best to you as well.”
Bill Sorensen
Your gullabilty never fails to impress.
There is nothing in the Acts text that says the Ethiopian was well read in the scripture. Firstly he was not a Jew, and Ethiopia in the lower Nile valley was a huge distance by slow camel caravan from Israel, so probably no Jewish synagogue there.
Are we also to believe that the thief on the cross, was a literate Jewish scribe, who had fallen into a life of crime, and that he too, was well read in scripture?
He probably was a gentile, Samaritan, Greek or Roman, and as usual for that era illiterate, so probably had no scriptural knowledge, but was promised salvation by mere belief.
In the two millennia since Christ’s death the majority of humans have been illiterate. These billions/millions did not have a vast knowledge of scripture, but many are no doubt saved by belief in Christ”s sacrifice.
My dear mother, a life long Adventist, devout, exemplary, conservative, on her deathbed was terrified that she was eternally lost. Legalist Adventism made her fear that some sin of commission or omission that she had forgotten, would doom her. She knew her “righteousness” was “as filthy rags”.
Mercifully, she was in a Catholic hospital. The wonderful hospital chaplain, a compassionate and caring nun, was able to convince my mother that like the thief on the cross, all she had to do, was to affirm Jesus and his death for her.
She died peacefully awaiting the coming of Jesus.
We are not saved by works.
Robin,
The need to find a different church you have spoken about is a powerful driver in the painful decision so many are making because of the views of people like Bill Sorenson. I’d like to suggest that your solution may be not in leaving the SDA church, but in establishing a new congregation where the church culture is focused on celebrating God’s love and ministering in the power of the Holy Spirit.
Fifteen years ago My family and I were part of a very tradition-bound church where about all you heard about were debates on irrelevant points of prophecy and the need to keep the Law. As a result, I was dying spiritually. Then we got a new pastor who challenged us to plant a new congregation and a surprisingly large number of us responded. The actual process of planning and planting that new church took about two years and was not easy in the face of all the opposition we met, but we did it anyway. The result is that today my church is the one people will sometimes drive up to two hours to visit and see if all the good things they’ve heard are true because they want to enjoy the blessings. I praise God for the wonderful work of transformation that I have seen Him deliver for us. No, we’re not perfect and we have challenges, but we first seek God’s guidance and watch Him lead. Without my church I am fully convinced I would not still be an Adventist.
If God can work such a miracle for us, I know He can do it for you.
William,
Your story about starting a new congregation is encouraging but I have a question. How long can a new congregation continue to provide the kind of inspiration you describe after the conference assigns a pastor who a) places more emphasis on behavior criteria for denominational membership than on salvation by grace alone through faith alone, b) uses Ellen White’s writings in ways that imply that the Bible should be interpreted by her writings c) refers to an organization as “the church” or d) any combination of these things?
You are correct, Bill, in a partial sentence of yours, “You need not accept my explanation”. Thank God we only need to accept the Lord, Jesus the Christ. You remind me of the orthodox Jews, who made their people totally miserable about what they had to know, and what they had to do, to satisfy God. Salvation is intended for every one ever to walk on this Earth, and God makes it so simple, TRUE LOVE, for GOD and TRUE LOVE for your neighbor. No IFS, ANDS, OR BUTS, OR HOWEVERS.
CHRIST said in Matthew 5:
18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
You folks need to stop idolizing yourselves. I do not see a gospel of earl or robin, but you do state one truism; the GIFT and SACRIFICE was for the entire world. Maybe you can start Loving your neighbor and stop preaching the commandments of men as doctrine. We have DOCTRINE and it was provided and belongs to HIM; everyone has the privilege to partake and not be deceived in your vain babbles.
I am sorry, did the Church fail you or did you fail the Church. The Holy Spirit should have led you to remembrance. Were you not taught as a child or able to read; with nothing to remember? The requirements are pretty simple:
1 Timothy 2:”12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.”
1 Timothy 3:
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;
12 Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well.
Please explain why you wish to remove HIS authority and replace it with yours.
Concerned Christian,
By all means, let the women be silent in church.
Let the men teach the Cradle Roll, Primary and Junior Sabbath
schools. (and change the tiny tots diapers as needed)
Let the men be pathfinder leaders and vacation bible school leaders and Junior Camp councillors!
Maybe the women shoiuld be relegated to washing the dishes after potluck!
And while we are about it, let us discard EGW, who spent decades going from campmeering to campmeering , conference to conference, church to church even as far afield as Europe and Australia.
Shame on her, she was clearly contravening Timothy’s dictates.
She most assuredly was NEVER silent in church.
The heretical Headship Dogma, not historical with Adventism, but recently imported from suspect Calvinist sources, claims women are incompetent and lack leadership ability!
EGW, in an era when women were truly second class citizens, achieved a formidable, fearsome, fantastic feat in establishing the Adventist church.
This belies the very basic premise of the heretical Headship Dogma.
Obviously, the Holy Spirit is leading her in a different path than you think He should. Here’s the difference between you and the Holy Spirit: He is God and knows what He is doing. That He has a different view shows clearly that you don’t know what He is doing and that you persist in telling others what you think they should be doing shows that you are not submissive to Him and probably have never met Him.
William Noel on September 8, 2015 at 4:19 am said: “Robin,The need to find a different church you have spoken about is a powerful driver in the painful decision so many are making because of the views of people like Bill Sorenson…The actual process of planning and planting that new church took about two years and was not easy in the face of all the opposition we met, but we did it anyway. The result is that today my church is the one people will sometimes drive up to two hours to visit and see if all the good things they’ve heard are true because they want to enjoy the blessings…”
The sharing by Brother Noel about his reaction and subsequent experience is a gift and an inspiration to all of us. There does come a time when it is futile to stand still in our Christian journey. I learned that when God called me to plant a church, he intended for me to go on a journey with him. The beginning and end of this journey are not results, but the love of God in Christ. That is the promised land! Church planting is uncomfortable and dangerous work. When Jesus calls you to take it up, he intends to draw near in previously unknown ways. If you’re willing to respond in your soul to where God is calling you, you can take people with you. The other side of the coin is this: Don’t commission yourself to a journey that belongs to someone else. Your journey may take you on an entirely different path. Pray. Be open to God’s leading.
Sam and William, we hope you will give us our name back since you have abandon EGW and her understanding of the bible. She has defined bible Adventism. If you don’t like her definition, then you are doing the Christian thing to start your own church. But we would like our name back so you won’t misrepresent us and we won’t misrepresent you.
You see, EGW describe her understanding of the bible this way….
“The Key to a Complete System of Truth—The subject of the sanctuary was the key which unlocked the mystery of the disappointment of 1844. It opened to view a complete system of truth, connected and harmonious, showing that God’s hand had directed the great advent movement, and revealing present duty as it brought to light the position and work of His people.—The Great Controversy, 423, (1888).”
Since you have rejected this “system of truth” that she advocates for the foundation of the SDA church, you are doing the right thing to start your own church.
You represent many who hate and despise EGW and her ministry. But some of us still think God gave her this “complete system of truth” and we see that it is in full harmony with the bible. We are also aware the church is dividing as she said, “Two parties will be developed” and there will be no unity between them.
I will suggest this in conclusion. God knows how to “force” those who abandon the bible to finally admit they are outside scripture. Some group will do this.
I never said I abandoned EGW, so please quit lying. I merely follow her instruction to use the Bible as the sole basis for every teaching, doctrine and belief. Your continued claims and charges are total falsehoods revealing that you respect neither God, other believers or the working of the Holy Spirit in others.
“I never said I abandoned EGW, so please quit lying. I merely follow her instruction to use the Bible as the sole basis for every teaching, doctrine and belief.”
William, I never want to misrepresent what anyone says or believes. But even your response shows you only accept her ministry if and when she negates it by pointing you to the bible to show that she is wrong. Don’t play games, William. I know what you mean. Man up and admit you don’t accept her ministry.
Again, if I am wrong, then affirm to me that you believe in the statement I posted about 1844 and the investigative judgment she “system of truth” she affirmed in this quote.
““The Key to a Complete System of Truth—The subject of the sanctuary was the key which unlocked the mystery of the disappointment of 1844. It opened to view a complete system of truth, connected and harmonious, showing that God’s hand had directed the great advent movement, and revealing present duty as it brought to light the position and work of His people.—The Great Controversy, 423, (1888).”
Do you believe Jesus entered the Most Holy Place in 1844 and began the work of the investigative judgment as she affirms? And the rest of the interpretation found in the Great Controversy?
If so, then I was wrong to accuse you of otherwise because of my misunderstanding of this issue. Sorry about that.
I refuse to get involved in your debates about the irrelevant because I have actual soul-winning to do. Your devotion to debating makes it clear that you are avoiding doing what Jesus told us to do: become empowered by the Holy Spirit so we can be effective in spreading His love. When will you start obeying the command of Jesus?
Concerned Christian,
You quote Timothy 1 2:12–
“Suffer not a woman to usurp authority over a man”
Some have maintained that TIMOTHY barely made it into the canon of scripture and should be expunged.
As Adventists we either have to discard Timothy or jettison EGW’s TESTOMINEIS TO THE CHURCH.
The “Testomonies” are a compilation of letters written by EGW, most of them to MEN.
They are largely rebukes, reproofs, reprimands, blistering upbraids, condemning censures. The few reproaches to women, were to mothers, scolding them for what their sons were doing (masturbating),
The males in Adventism,, were totally dominated by this woman, all the way from teenage boys, exploring their sexuality, to powerful professional men like Dr Harvey Kellogg! Men “quaked in their boots” on receipt of,a letter from EGW.
Surely no other woman in the nineteenth century , other than QUEEN VICTORIA, had such “dominion” over her male subjects . And her reprimands were severely damaging to many repitations.
Shame on her, she was in direct confrontation and contravention, or the scriptural edict, not to usurp “authority” over men!
I would rather throw out Timothy for his misogynist denigration of women, than scrap EGW. Which would you prefer?
We need to expel our female organists, they make such noise with their postludes, when they should be “silent” !
Also our female pianists, soloists, choir directors! AWAY WITH THEM!
“As Adventists we either have to discard Timothy or jettison EGW’s TESTOMINEIS(sic) TO THE CHURCH.”
Robin-
You can’t be serious. Calling Paul a misogynist is a leaf out of the feminists’ book if you really mean it.
I’ll pray for you.
I am skeptical about the conclusions of this survey report because I question the reliability of the polling data and the lack of a comprehensive approach. It is easy and fairly safe to throw these thoughts out into the blogosphere, but it is a different story when one is trying to make an eternal difference through actual relationships in the lives of real people in a local church on Sabbath mornings when we catch a glimpse of a few youth at church. I don’t believe that it is appropriate that one should try to affix the blame for the loss of our youth solely on the doorstep of the local churches. One of the problems, however, is that our youth are not even aware of the battle for their souls that the enemy is raging against them. Early and continued antichristian indoctrination, the lack of a Biblical approach to honor, respect, commitments, and faithfulness, and the breakdown of the nuclear family play a key role in the dissatisfaction that youth express with the church. Yet, these are areas over which the local church has comparatively little opportunity in which to make an impact. Then there is the responsibility of the individual himself. Where did the youth truly engage? Were they serious about the Lord? Where are they now? Is the church a convenient scapegoat?
Attitudes within the home regarding honor, authority, respect, commitments, and faithfulness will have a greater impact on a child than whatever is taught in the hour-and-a-half per week at church
“…the breakdown of the nuclear family play a key role in the dissatisfaction that youth express with the church.”
Absolutely and the absence of a mother to nurture her children is likely a prime factor. Many mothers could remain home if they and their spouses would economize; I know from my personal experience and that of my parents and others. I fully realize there are exceptions.
Bill Sorensen,
You state:
“The sanctuary was the key which unlocked the mystery of the disappointment of 1844”
For me, there is no “MYSTERY”. The Millerites were MORTIFIED and humiliated. Scorn and disdain was heaped upon them.
Neighbors gleefully disparaged them. They were held in contempt and derision!
So in absolute desperation, they tried a face-saving measure. They concocted a cobweb of tenuous and abstruse texts, to explain that they had not really been deceived.
And so was born the Investigative Judgement.
I am a “fence sitter” on this doctrine, since in no way is it central to my salvation.
If it was meeded to “be saved” other Christians would be eternally lost, along with many Adventists.
In the 150+ years since the “invention” of this doctrine, there have been thousands of eminent theologians in countless seminaries. That none have affirmed this doctrine, is disturbing to me.
Glacier View was disastrous for Adventism. It was polarizing, divisive and alienating. Much talent and finance was lost.
The outcome? In the decades since Glacier View, I have never heard a pastor preach on IJ outside of an evangelistic campaign. Our own pastors recognize the fragile underpinnings of IJ.
If our members were required to give an impromptu bible study on IJ, they would be at a total loss
WO causes similar division and the potential loss of young, educated, affluent members.
TO WHAT END?
Robin, I am well aware of your scorn, ridicule and contempt of EGW and I know you reflect at least some others who post on A Today.
You would rather throw out the bible than endorse her teaching as you stated about the letters to Timothy. I am sorry you have felt betrayed and deceived by her ministry. I doubt not that others have influenced your mind on this issue, and will to some extent be held accountable for your present attitude.
None the less, you will still be held accountable to God in the end and can not and will not be able to plead that you were deceived by others. Your case is typical of many who have been led astray and many more who will yet be deceived and opt for delusions that are pleasing to the carnal mind.
You would have been better off to ignore those who deceived you, either willingly, or by way of their own ignorance for the same reasons.
The gospel was perverted and twisted from its biblical context by Dr. Ford and he has deceived many who willingly opted for his own personal delusions. He has a record in heaven he will not care to face for his duplicity and attack on the truth God gave the SDA movement by way of EGW.
It is one thing to abandon the truth like Canright. But quite another to deliberately claim loyalty to the church while systematically attacking the foundation of truth like Lucifer did in heaven. Some may escape the snare. Sad to say, most won’t.
Bill Sorensen on September 8, 2015 at 8:22 am said:
“Sam and William, we hope you will give us our name back since you have abandon EGW and her understanding of the bible…”
Brother Sorenson you are a certifiable Pseudologist, from the Greek ψευδολόγος, one of the best!
I have been called many things in my life, but if there has been but one constant, one barb, one arrow flung my way time after time, it is the accusation that I am, in essence, nothing more than a sinner saved by God’s grace.
I suspect even you and I, and Bill, are all in the same category.
I love brother Sorensen!
Most of the prophets delivered the inspired God given truths
entrusted to them, plus their own indelibly brain printed thoughts , as well as those of the scribes through several translations, and Ellen White was no exception. Bless her soul for leading me to the CHRIST. We here don’t hate the Church, or EGW, just because you think so, We love the Church, and we love Ellen White. Because we believe you gentlemen are wasting your time in rebuking, while presenting your never ending dialogues, that those you wish to present God to, you are scaring them toward the devil, who lures them with kindness and pictures with few words. Brothers, you are intent, however “NO ONE” wants the verbiage
and haranguing, and rebuking you constantly do, as a Johnny One Note. Hey Guys, back away and give some serious thought to my suggestions. i’ve mentioned this several times now. Do you get the message. God can use your enthusiasm for His sharing His Gospel message, but you are involved in a negative approach, and you don’t know the damage you are doing.
Suffice it to say, Earl, that your post applies to you and many who gather on this forum for massive doses of affirmation in your doubt, skepticism and unbelief, not only about EGW, but the bible itself.
The fact is, Earl, I continue to post simply because there may well be “lurkers” who never post but read your continued attacks on the truth and they need to hear the clear truth that you convolute and corrupt to your own destruction.
So, as long as I am allowed to post, you will hear more of the same, whether you like it or not. You can tell each other how enlightened you are since you have abandon EGW and her bible message. I am sure this was the agenda of those who mocked Noah and every prophet since his day. Paul’s goal was that “he might save some.”
He was well aware that most would never accept his message. And EGW was well aware that near the end, many, if not most would also reject her testimony. What every one can do, and I am sure some do already, is simply skip my posts, just as I do many of yours.
You may see that I have not commented on Dr. Taylor’s presentation concerning creation. And I have only skimmed over a few comments to see the over view. Feel free to do the same on any comment you see I have made on any subject.
The first result of a person having received the gift of the Holy Spirit is that the church grew in direct response to their ministry. I have visited many churches in recent years and the ones tht were not growing were where someone like you was caught-up in endless argument about EGW and trying to prove to everyone how right they were about minor items in prophecies instead of ministering the love of God. Mr. Sorenson, you are not growing the church and your “rebukes” condemn others and drive them away from God instead of drawing them to Him. Please stop and learn the ways of God.
Chances are that Brother Sorensen will never read these thoughts. They are intended for all of us as we opine.
“The most fatal illusion is the settled point of view. Since life is growth and motion, a fixed point of view kills anybody who has one.”
― Brooks Atkinson
“It does take great maturity to understand that the opinion we are arguing for is merely the hypothesis we favor, necessarily imperfect, probably transitory, which only very limited minds can declare to be a certainty or a truth.”
― Milan Kundera, Encounter
“One’s opinion should only be as strong as one’s knowledge on the matter.”
― Eric Hirzel
“De tonto poeta y loco tenemos todos un poco”
–Leumas Ileg
(English translation–“Of silliness, poet, and being a bit crazy, we all have a little in all of us.”
Anybody who really works at it can eventually find a dozen or so people who will agree with everything he says a about religion (or politics, for that matter). The only way that ever happens, however, is if they can all agree to consider a single person to be THE authority on the subject.
I’m quite sure that, when Ellen White was living, there were people who “accepted” everything she said or wrote, not only as “the truth” but as the best way to explain a given doctrine.
I’m also quite that if or when those same people left the camp meeting (or wherever they had heard her speak) and went to other locations to preach, if they had exchanged sermons, very few pastors would have wanted to deliver other pastor’s sermons word for word–with the exception, of course, of those parts of the sermon that were direct quotes from the Bible or Ellen White.
So why is it so hard to accept the advice to become thinkers and not mere reflectors of other men’s thoughts?
Believing Ellen White was inspired is one thing. Believing she was “verbally” inspired is quite another.
Take what Ellen White wrote about the Roman Church, for example. Compared to what other protestants were saying and writing in the nineteenth century, she was actually quite restrained. She was writing what her protestant neighbors already believed.
In the twenty-first century, we need to use language appropriate for a very different audience.
I’m answering this post having edited the “Beyond Belief’s” book, which has been published. This research began in 2013, with qualitative data gathered thru Spring, 2015. Of the approximately 700 millennials surveyed thus far, close to 30% were born outside the US and 17% of the participants were studying at Andrews on a student visa. This seems pretty representative as a baseline study, none of which has been for purposes other than providing solid data for the church to base decisions on. Understand, these millennials are the future of the church in North America and may figure prominently in the world church administration someday.
It is incorrect to state that a larger, worldwide survey would elicit different results. How is this fact? It seems more likely that similar results would be found, as the large ‘foreign’ millennial population reveals. PEW research suggests millennials are pretty similar throughout the world, largely due to internet access and social media.
This research had IRB (Institutional Review Board) approval, followed the protocol on research of human subjects, and asked neutral, non-leading questions where participants also were able to add their own response. 90 questions (some very extensive and complex) were asked concerning in-depth aspects, most of them relating to the 28 fundamental beliefs.
See part 2, below:
PART 2:
Three questions relative to women’s ordination were asked: one was the participants feeling towards women’s ordination (6 point scale ranging from strongly opposed to strongly in favor, with no neutral); secondly, what the response would be if the church ordained women (4 point scale); and thirdly, what the response would be if the church did NOT decide to ordain women (4 point scale). How could this be any more objective?
Feel free to access this and other reports online which the Sigvartsen’s have generously made available for free: http://www.beyond-beliefs.com/reports.
The Sigvartsen’s are in the process of replicating the study to include all the world regions as well as other age cohorts (Silent Generation, Gen X, and the Baby Boomers) to test the results and ensure validity. They have generously made this data available for free to all qualified researchers who are committed to transparent research. Their generosity to date has given us a here-to-fore unknown glimpse into current thought.
So where is this free copy of the study that was funded by NAD and Andrews; but graciously provided for free? I checked the link provided.
Hey, I did read the Beyond Belief 1 sample chapters about the Holy Scripture.
53% said it was a guide for life.
31% said the BIBLE was accurate.
28% said it was a source of inspiration and comfort.
19% said it was inspired by the Holy Spirit.
Appalling; but there may be a little hope.
56% did say it was the Foundation of Adventism.
Now this is what we have and are teaching our kids (18-32 years old) folks. Then we wonder why we fail?
See part one, above:
If you see the glowing report about SDA institutions of higher learning in the current issue of the Review one would surmise they have almost reached the epitome of perfection.
If reports are correct, and I have little reason to doubt them, too many SDA profs are not themselves convinced that the tenets of the SDA church are correct. It seems logical that too many have faith problems having acquired higher degrees in institutions whose profs hold quite dissimilar beliefs.