“The Number One Abuse of Human Rights”
by Andy Hanson, July 13, 2015: “Would you join an organization that promotes the notion that women are in any way inferior to men ‘in the eyes of God’?” That was a question put to me when I heard that the Adventist Church, in General Conference session, voted that women cannot be ordained. My answer was an emphatic, “No!”
My response reflects my belief that this decree violates women’s basic human rights. Jimmy Carter makes the following argument:
Our overall commitment at the Carter Center is to promote human rights, and knowing the world as I do, I can tell you without any equivocation that the number one abuse of human rights on Earth is, strangely, not addressed quite often, is the abuse of women and girls.
There are a couple of reasons for this that I’ll mention to begin with. First of all is the misinterpretation of religious scriptures, holy scriptures, in the Bible, Old Testament, New Testament, Quran and so forth, and these have been misinterpreted by men who are now in the ascendant positions in the synagogues and the churches and in the mosques. And they interpret these rules to make sure that women are ordinarily relegated to a secondary position compared to men in the eyes of God.
This is a very serious problem…Scriptures are misinterpreted to keep men in an ascendant position. That is an all-pervasive problem, because men can exert that power and if an abusive husband or an employer, for instance, wants to cheat women, they can say that if women are not equal in the eyes of God, why should I treat them as equals myself? Why should I pay them equal pay for doing the same kind of work? *
For this reason alone, the Adventist Church should support the ordination of women in every country in the world. And churchmen in any country who oppose that idea should be reassigned. No GC claim that violates the human rights of women can speak with “the highest authority under God.” **
_________________________________________________
**GC Working Policy:
- Highest Organization.
“B 10 20 General Conference and its Divisions
The General Conference is the highest organization in the administration of the worldwide work of the Church, and is authorized by its Constitution to create subordinate organizations to promote specific interests in various sections of the world; it is therefore understood that all subordinate organizations and institutions throughout the world will recognize the General Conference in session as the highest authority under God.
B 15 10 Adherence to Policy Required — 1. The General Conference Working Policy shall be strictly adhered to by all organizations in every part of the world field. The work in every organization shall be administered in full harmony with the policies of the General Conference and of the divisions respectively. No departure from these policies shall be made without prior approval from the General Conference Executive Committee…
“Scriptures are misinterpreted to keep men in an ascendant position.”
I won’t go into all the reasons that some disagree with you,
Andy. But I will deal with a larger issue that we don’t really consider that much. Namely, all the constant confusion in not on our church, or even Protestantism in general, but all religions of the world.
The Catholic church has always considered Protestantism a novelty and what we would call an “off shoot movement” by Adventists. They still believe they have been called and ordained by God to be the one and only final authority in all religious matters. And even in political and financial matters as well.
The lack of stability in the world on all levels is because the
Catholic church has not been consulted as the authority on every issue. That the whole world is “self destructing” is proof that only they can bring ultimate and final stability.
The fact the world is certainly “self destructing” is beyond question. That Adventism is not even in its own circle able to bring about unity and stability is on some level the final sign that such a possibility is non-existent. They claim the bible is beyond understanding by the average Christian and can simply point to the mass confusion in Protestantism, including Adventism, to affirm this claim.
So, Rome sits back and simply waits until what they claim is obvious will also become obvious to everyone else. And this issue transcends any bickering in the church on any issue.
Here we go again – always blame Catholics! Come on, look inward & quit with the blame game.
President Carter, a man of impeccable integrity, resigned from his position as a Sunday School teacher in the Southern Baptist Convention because he could not agree with their subordinate position of women.
Where are the Adventists who agree with him would resign their positions?
A good question Elaine. And on the other side of the coin, where is a GC president who will man up and state that unless the church supports male headship, he will not lead the church?
His statement was that no matter what the church decided, he would support. Some strong convictions, eh?
Both sides need to quite playing games and demand accountability according to their convictions. Instead, we have a political church that thinks unity is more important than loyalty to the word.
So, the confusion goes on and on, and no possible solution by the method the church has embraced to determine truth, and what to do about it.
He did that in 2009, but he still teaches the same class he always did. My son’s history class attended it a few weeks ago.
Here is Elder Fagal of the white estate’s letter responding to someone who observed that.
Thank you for contacting the Ellen G. White Estate. Mrs. White was not an
ordained minister, though she was granted the credentials of an ordained
minister, which sometimes results in confusion on this point. From 1871
onward various organizations in the church issued her ministerial
credentials (typically they were valid for two years at a time, so they
needed to be renewed). The printed form for such credentials says that
so-and-so (fill in the blank) is an ordained minister of the Seventh-day
Adventist church. I’m sure this has led some people honestly to conclude
that she was ordained. But in some cases on Mrs. White’s credentials, the
word “ordained” was neatly struck out. In 1909 a “Biographical Information
Blank” that Mrs. White filled out for the General Conference asked “If
ordained, state where, when, and by whom.” Her answer on this line was an
X, the same answer that appears on the question about remarriage. She had
not remarried after her husband’s death, and neither had she ever been
ordained.
Oops meant to post this under larry’s comments below about E G White’S ordination credentials.
What is more arrogant, blasphemous, hubris and sanctimonious than to proclaim itself the remnant church?
Plus, to insert words into scripture that have no biblical basis.
When are we going to let go of WO and start focusing on actually doing the work of God instead of arguing about how it can or cannot be done? All this arguing is getting really old and if you want to find a reason why people will leave the church quicker than the debate over WO, it is all the arguing people keep doing.
And this is why the Catholic church will take over, since people admit they don’t really know what is what.
While I believe God raised up the SDA church for a specific purpose, many involved in the early movement were woefully ignorant of the bible on many issues. Some were Arians and had it not been for EGW, the movement would have almost immeadiately become a cult. She supported the principles of the Trinity.
After her death, there was no real progress in advocating basic fundamental bible truth. The church still doesn’t admit and openly embrace the doctrine of original sin. In which case the fall of man, atonement, nature of Christ, salvation and other fundamental related issues are so obscure, there is no unity even on the basics.
Yet we claim as a church we are going to enlighten the world about salvation and the second coming. The phrase “Righteousness by faith” is so obscure it has a dozen explanations and meanings in the SDA church.
If we can’t even explain to ourselves the meaning of sin, atonement and salvation, how do we think we will tell the world what is true or not in its biblical context?
So, Rome will take over simply because what ever God intended for Adventism can not possibly materialize in all the confusion in the church today on almost every issue.
Humility is not a part of sinful human nature, and church leaders are not about to admit they need instruction. Just like Jesus’ day.
We’re supposed to be spreading the good news of salvation. We’re supposed to be living examples of God’s transforming power so that people will be drawn to Him. But it appears from your remarks that you are paying far more attention to the Catholic Church than to God. Yes, we’re told what the Beast of Rome will do so we can be aware of the times in which we are living, but the urgency God has given us is not to merely know those times, but to bring the lost into the Kingdom of God. Being obsessed with the Beast of Rome does not bring people into God’s kingdom.
So we still teach Ctholic Rome is Antichrist? Pope Francis certainly seems to be trying to do the work of Jesus in today’s world. How about we abandon the magical belief in the reality of prophecy and get on with healing the world through loving acts. Our medical ministry actually benefits human beings. How many of our churches offer showers and laundry facilities to the homeless? Our churches could offer post office boxes to receive Social Security checks, mail from Family and even storage locker space to the homeless when they need hospitalization. Christlike behaviors can be modeled anywhere.
Amen! You’ve got the ministry model Jesus demonstrated for us!
We need to expand our concept of “ministry” to focus on theology that translates into acts of mercy and kindness because that is what God wants us doing instead of arguing theology. I’ve seen a beautiful example of this over the past year or so as my wife ministered to a woman whose health was failing after many years of heavy drinking and smoking. We (and mostly my wife) made many trips to her mobile home to deliver food from the church food pantry, to clean, to dress wounds that were slow to heal and other things. I even tried to prevent a rat from getting into her kitchen! (I failed). This Sabbath morning we were awakened by news that she had died. She never became a member of the church but we saw amazing improvement in her life through my wife’s ministry to her and a phone call from her daughter confirmed that she had thought of my wife as her best friend because she was the one who was showing her God’s love. So I expect to see her in the Kingdom.
And so the debate continues as if this were a matter of theology. The vote that was taken was NOT about theology. Rather it was a question of whether the same ordination practices should apply in every Division of the GC, or whether each Division could determine its own practices.
Of course, Jim, it was not about theology, but it should have been. They avoided the obvious to advocate unity. Theology creates a split. It demands a decision based on conviction. But if you admit you don’t know, and then claim it is not theological, you can avoid any dynamic commitment and just continue, business as usual.
And do you think you can be “about your Father’s business” when you can’t even explain basic bible doctrines? Apparently, you think you can, Jim. But what ever salvation you present, if it is not scriptural neither is it salvational.
Ambiguity never saved anyone. There are “Christs many, and Lords many”. But there is only one true bible Christ.
“…but it should have been.” Admitting you are detached from reality is a good first step toward discovering reality. 🙂
“do you think you can be “about your Father’s business” when you can’t even explain basic bible doctrines?”
Well today I am at my home church for the first time in a month, and the last time in another month.
I will lead a Sabbath School Bible Study about “Captain Naaman and the Little Maid”. Then I will preach a sermon about “Why Am I an Adventist?” The focus of this sermon will be on getting to know Jesus by studying the Bible, and eagerly anticipating His return, whenever it may be. In the process I will examine some the various answers to the question “What Is an Adventist” offered-up on this web site and elsewhere within our “big tent without walls” 8-). I do intend to mention William Miller but not the Papacy, nor Ellen White for that matter. My presentation will include Power Point slides, pictures and even music.
In the evening I will present regarding our church finances (best year in recent memory) and our budget for the new Fiscal Year, at a church “Family Meeting to discuss our future direction.” More PowerPoint slides and spreadsheets and charts.
All in a rather busy day for Yours Truly.
(to be continued)
It is truly unfortunate that in your eyes, Bill, I am not fit to do many or most of these things today. Apparently those in our congregation who asked me to do them, feel otherwise. I am amazed at your ability to discern from a distance, and having never met me, what those who know me best fail to see.
Please pray for me and with me, that God will use me to bless others today, despite my deficiencies.
Andy, what you have written is right on! And here is the writ large NO vote! Now what? President Carter resigned from the church that denied full equality to women and joined another. Is this our only viable option? Are we to stick round and wait out the current foolishness? Our Adventist Babylonian Captivity? The rise in my frustration meter is in direct proportion to the reports that come from San Antonio. Right now the needle is near max. Wonder if others have a parallel experience?
Larry,
Elaine Nelson says Jimmy Carter is a man of impeccable integrity. Six days ago Carter said this: “uffPost Live’s Marc Lamont Hill asked Carter on Tuesday whether he believes Jesus would approve of gay marriage, and Carter said he does.
“I believe Jesus would. I don’t have any verse in scripture. … I believe Jesus would approve gay marriage, but that’s just my own personal belief. I think Jesus would encourage any love affair if it was honest and sincere and was not damaging to anyone else, and I don’t see that gay marriage damages anyone else,” he said.”
I believe it was the Apostle Paul who said, Follow me, even as I follow Christ I wouldn’t follow Jimmy Carter. To quote him – He doesn’t have any verse in scripture.
If you had the power to transform the Adventist Church – why do I sense it would be unrecognizable when you were finished. Adventist Babylonian Captivity, Indeed!
Larry and Andy. Thank you for your clear statements on the morality of human rights, and women’s ordination in particular.
Through 20 years as an Adventist minister, it became abundantly clear that Hierarchical Power was more important than people, and truth for that matter. If I were willing (I’m not) I could list many examples from personal experiences and observations, one’s that could sicken and enrage you.
Rather than stay with this supposedly spiritual organization and be a faithful fake, I chose to face the harsh reality of shoving off SDA moorings, without financial support. That was 1980. My only regret is the loss of contact with friends such as yourselves, except for one who has become my best friend over the last few decades.
I have never publicly criticized the church. I pastored two large UCC churches who were basically committed to the love of human beings and human rights. That was an organization I could support. But like most, if not all Human Rights organizations, its power is waning in this increasingly savage country of ours.
Thank goodness the Millennials are in the process of creating a new Liberal culture in opposition to the Fundamentalist Right, which certainly includes the leadership of your church. As with other Fundamentalist churches, the young people are grasping Community Service and Human Rights their model for living. I know. My beloved daughter is one of them. If there is a God, surely It too, is applauding.
Maybe you need to have someone neutral ask your daughter?
My daughters are involved in many schools, camps and teachings. They see a great change also; but in many cases the information is a reflection of what was drilled into the children. When they ask for the truth and conviction, as only they can, the truth comes out. This Millennial and subsequent creation also seems to include respect for parents.
In many cases they seek, or are even jealous of, the surety, sanctity, protection and providership of a strong family. Their hearts long for this seemingly unobtainable goal; because they have never felt, been taught or exposed to it. I see many growing and thriving Churches that offer such. Maybe there is a great outpouring and you are missing it? Maybe you are the problem?
Just some thoughts within love.
Larry, if the church remains faithful to scripture, male headship will win out. The Sabbath is not more clear than the biblical doctrine of male headship. God ordained it in the beginning and nothing man can do or say will alter what God has ordained.
Before sin ever entered this world, God ordained male headship, marriage between a man and a woman, and the 7th day Sabbath. None of these things can, or will be altered by human authority. And to attack them is to attack God and His authority to delegate authority to who ever He chooses.
And as one has well said, “Just because you won’t accept it, won’t change it.” Gerald Wolfe
Well, the Bible is ok with polygamy so where does this one woma one man thing come from. Making Eden the model for the rest of the age as Richard Davidson does creates a God who is impervious to change ( not really scriptural) and unable to see the evolution of human culture. If Jeses was correct and marriages do not exist in Heaven what is the tumult about it here relevant. Marriage began to protect property inheritance thence need for polygamy when a wife infertile. Marriage contracts remain useful but since SDA reject doctrine of sacrament, we can accept divorce.
David, “the Bible is ok” applies only if you see it for what it is, ink on paper. Interpreters glean what they wish from it. The Bible reflects ancient cultures and the biases of its compilers and authors. It is the source of nothing but opinions. Believers align in a row the words they like, ignore the rest, and apply whatever words conveniently fit their preconceived notions without regard to authors intent. and then act as if their considered opinion is an edict from “God.” The more likeminded people they enlist the more certain they are of their “truth.”
So, from a religious point of view everything and nothing is OK based on the Bible.
In a nutshell, that is the history of Christianity post Christ.
There are lots of us “Underbelievers”. Nice to meet you
Maybe how one interprets this Bible depends on the character of the individual. And it is character, after all, that decides our choices and behavior. The one who loves most will see a God of love and fairness. He has placed in all of us a faith that can grow or diminish. The Bible can be “used” for our own selfish purposes. Or God can use it for our spiritual formation and growth.
There are countless legitimate ways to conduct a moral, faith-directed, Christian life. So, leaving the Adventist church is not a big deal. That is, for theological reasons anyway. Interview anyone who has moved on and you will find no grief over belief abandoned. Adventism, because of its history of self-aggrandizement and failed prophecies with manufactured doctrines of support, curries little lasting nostalgia when other options are exercised.
But that doesn’t mean it is easy for other reasons. The gorilla glue adhesive of relationships, familiarity, family history and connections, traditions, incomes, professional appointments and commitments, institutional roles, and a host of other human attachments likely explain why there is (what appears to be) quite a large contingent of intellectually departed but physically present members.
It raises the issue of ethics. Who is getting paid to represent what they don’t really believe? Who is pretending, if not paid, that they do believe what they don’t?
No judgment intended. Just an observation.
Well, Bugs, A-today has been reasonably open to most comments by all kinds of ideas. And I am aware nobody agrees with everybody on anything. It makes for some pretty open ideas and conclusions. We might consider it something like a big bible class where anybody can have a “say so”.
But the final fact is, there is no real accountability for the ministry to know what its identity is, or state any final conclusion of its intended purpose. It is simply called “Adventist Today”. And it certainly does resemble the lack of identity that the SDA church has today. Adventism is no longer Protestant in the classic definition. The bible is not the final rule of faith and practice, but the church now places itself above the bible and requests support and unity simply for the sake of unity. In the end, this philosophy will not fly. It is part of the self destruction that began a few decades ago when the church endorsed Pluralism over clear biblical teaching and mandates. It is developing more and more into a non-Christian cult led by politicians who “sell” their agenda over and above the word of God.
But we have many independent “cults” surrounding Adventism who all claim to be advocating the 3 angels message. Do they have any accountability to anyone? NO. Just as A-today has no accountability to anyone. 3ABN is a cult. Any ministry that has no members is a cult. It will be governed by one person, or sometimes a few, but there is no official membership to demand…
accountability. Which means they can delete or ignore any comment or challenge they deem unfit or over and above the “spiritual icon” that controls the ministry.
Like a Sabbath school class, where the teacher refuses to let a member comment because they don’t like what might be said. But in an independent ministry, they have every right to do this. Maybe not so much in a SS class. It is an official church fellowship where a member should have every right to comment.
So, I mention all this for a purpose. Sometimes I post comments at ADvindicate. And they published an article about women ministering to women and used the Samuel Pippim incident as a spring board to make their point. And then give details by the woman of how she was abused by Pippim. My comment was that it was totally out of line and should never have been published.
They deleted my comments. And they have every right to do so. And I am not “cry babying” about what they did, only to show how a cult can control any conversation and create a ministry that claims to be open to discussion when it fact, it has a false spirituality of duplicity.
The real point is this, cult ministries have no accountability to anybody but themselves. They have no members. I don’t mind that, but I think people should know this and consider the implications of this fact.
Hey, A-today might delete this post. They have a right, don’t they?
From what you have just stated it appears you might be homeless! I guess my question for you Bill, is where do you fit in all of this?
I don’t know if you remember or not, Bugs, but I wrote a comment about the difference between acceptance and tolerance. I am a SDA church member. And many people accept me as a viable SDA. I think some others tolerate me especially in positions of authority in the Conference.
As long as they hold final control, they really don’t consider me a real threat to their authority so as I said, they tolerate me as somewhat harmless.
I was head elder at a church a few years ago, and there was a real split in the spirituality of the church and the conference. It wasn’t just me, but a whole group of “conservative” elders that opposed WO and the rest of what we considered the “liberal agenda” in music…etc.
Many, if not most of the church members agreed with the conservative spirituality, but people are pretty much intimidated by conference leaders, so they gave in to the pressure.
You may not believe it, but I am not a trouble maker. I simply left for the sake of my wife and myself and we now attend a church closer to home.
It is a long sordid story, so I’ll let it go at that. The one thing I refused to do was transfer our membership to the church we now attend, it has women elders.
As a side note, I was part of the “Brinsmead awakening” and they hated him with a passion. But it was where I learned my Reformation Theology even though I only saw him a couple of times. Dr. Ford followed and the church began the split in earnest after that.
Bill,
A strong argument can be made that no religion, including SDAism, is accountable to anything other than itself. As has been argued before on A-Today, the natural world provides abundant evidence that the Earth is billions of years old, that life is billions of years old, and that death existed long before modern humans appeared on the earth. But SDAs deny all this because SDAism does not find it necessary to be held accountable to that which contradicts their artificial and unsubstantiated beliefs.
“Bill,
A strong argument can be made that no religion, including SDAism, is accountable to anything other than itself.”
This is true, but it includes accountability to its members. My previous point is that independent ministries have no “members” and are solely accountable to themselves.
If you disagree with the church of which you are a member, you have a right to challenge what you feel is contrary to basic church doctrine.
And as I pointed out before independent ministry have such accountability.
As to your comment about creation and related issues, I seriously doubt if you could find many as members of the SDA church who would agree with your supposition.
I would think over 95% of SDA church members agree with the Genesis account of a 7 literal day creation week.
” independent ministry have such accountability.”
I meant no such accountability.
“I would think over 95% of SDA church members agree with the Genesis account of a 7 literal day creation week.”
Yes, of course you are correct. That is why I’ve concluded that religions are a cross between a social club and a multi-player game — a la the Scribes and Pharisees of yore. No real attempt to find objective truth, just a somewhat arbitrary set of beliefs followed by posturing to figure out who best can conform to an arbitrary norm.
Excellent observations! Leaving SdA’ism is like cutting loose an enormous millstone from one’s shoulders!
It has never been about keeping women in a subservient position for WO opponents. It’s really about holding to God’s word as our rule of faith. It’s about how we interpret God’s word and that’s the finality of the whole argument.
That’s right, Dennis. Those who advocate WO build a “straw man” to attack, when no true bible advocate thinks male headship is about abuse of authority. That men has abused their role of authority is more than obvious, but this does not negate the principle of male headship as ordained by God even before sin.
It is a challenge to God’s authority to appoint leadership roles and ordain men to exercise that authority under the authority of Christ. To use the argument of equality in this context is simply not scriptural.
It all depends on the kind of God you worship. As I said before how we interpret the Bible has to do with our character–the only thing we take to heaven. It’s such a subjective thing, we don’t all have the truth and any one who thinks they do cannot be trusted, nor can they know God.
This is the biggest problem with male “headship”–it seems so out of touch with the principles of Jesus and His comments about those who want the highest seats in the temple. He is against human headship of any kind. God is our Head. Is headship theology something like an antiChrist putting man in the place of Christ our Head?
I was just shown, on FaceBook, several photos of GC documents from 1909 showing EG White was an ordained minister. What gives?
That settles it. It was on Facebook.
Accidentally posted this above in the wrong spot.
Elder Fagal of the White Estate responding by letter to someone who asked about her credentials.
Thank you for contacting the Ellen G. White Estate. Mrs. White was not an
ordained minister, though she was granted the credentials of an ordained
minister, which sometimes results in confusion on this point. From 1871
onward various organizations in the church issued her ministerial
credentials (typically they were valid for two years at a time, so they
needed to be renewed). The printed form for such credentials says that
so-and-so (fill in the blank) is an ordained minister of the Seventh-day
Adventist church. I’m sure this has led some people honestly to conclude
that she was ordained. But in some cases on Mrs. White’s credentials, the
word “ordained” was neatly struck out. In 1909 a “Biographical Information
Blank” that Mrs. White filled out for the General Conference asked “If
ordained, state where, when, and by whom.” Her answer on this line was an
X, the same answer that appears on the question about remarriage. She had
not remarried after her husband’s death, and neither had she ever been
ordained.
Well, of course it is true! As is everything on the internet. See, you agree, Tim, it is settled! Sorry I brought it up!
Anyway, there are three pictures of old looking signed forms looking legit saying she was an ordained SDA minister. Tim, in spite of the perfection of FB and the internet I still have an ounce of suspicion about faked documents, maybe birth certificates, too, so that’s why I posted the question here. I would be pleased to post the pix to anyone who would provide an email address if there is interest. I personally don’t care one way or the other.
See, I should have read this note first. Question answered!
I personally looking for current form to become a PhD. Of something! Surely will find it on FB or the internet!
Please don’t hassle me on “HEADSHIP”. We know it is the most important issue in theology. Certainly much more important than the Gospel message of God’s love, equality, and where we’ll spend eternity.
Mr. Calahan, do you sir then also have issue with the male headship of Christ?
Some commenters seem to believe we’ll be saved by the church!
Not true!
We’ll be saved by the loving grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and His Omnipotent Heavenly Father. All WE have to do is BELIEVE! God longs to bring us home to heaven with Him! He will save every single believer unless they actively resist.
Let the Organization dispute and fret among its leaders; we don’t care! We’ll continue to study the Scripture and look for His glorious appearing. I don’t need another sermon from an ordained [or unordained] minister to convince me. I just love the God who has led me all these 80+ years. I joyfully look for His soon appearing; and in the meantime, I’ll absorb the truths all over again from my rereading of the Bible.
And prayer.
Neither will gender neutrality or equality save us ma’am.
Neither will male headship!
Nor unbiblical female headship.
And so if women wanted to be lesbians…thats ok too?
“Those who feel called out to join the movement in favor of woman’s rights and the so-called dress reform might as well sever all connection with the third angel’s message. The spirit which attends the one cannot be in harmony with the other. The Scriptures are plain upon the relations and rights of men and women.”[Testimonies for the Church, vol. 1, Page 457]
Although this EGW quote relates also to a caution regarding gender neutral dressing habits, the message is quite clear that there is a correlation between the women’s rights movement being out of harmony with the third angel’s message. Ellen White did not support feminist ideals.
What is good about this article is that it puts the fight for WO in correct perspective: it is a culturally driven one. The theology pitch is just a smokescreen. It has a secular egalitarian feminist agenda which will by default include the acceptance of homosexual marriage as humanist ideals are embraced more and more by society over the word of God.
Where does the idea of ordination come from? I can’t see that it’s Biblical. When Paul outlines the five-fold ministry of apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers, he calls them “gifts.” They were not a titled position. There was no such thing as an ordained pastor. Why not do away with the entire ordination thing and just allow people to minister according to their Holy Spirit giftings?
Sir, the office of elder is not a spiritual gift. Ordaining someone by the laying on of hands is a Judeo-Christian practice that is found in both the OT and the NT. Ellen White also speaks of this practice. Jesus also ordained the twelve disciples.
A lot of us have asked for that; but I think some men would feel castrated! Or at least lose what they consider power.
One could also say that some women would feel manly in their desire for manpower. Many feminists in the WO narrative seem very much to be men haters from what can be gathered from such comments.
It all depends on the kind of God you worship. As I said before how we interpret the Bible has to do with our character–the only thing we take to heaven. It’s such a subjective thing, we don’t all have the truth and any one who thinks they do cannot be trusted, nor can they know God.
This is the biggest problem with male “headship”–it seems so out of touch with the principles of Jesus and His comments about those who want the highest seats in the temple. He is against human headship of any kind. God is our Head. Is headship theology something like an antiChrist putting man in the place of Christ our Head?
Christ is male and he is head of the Church. The epitome of male headship I would say. Do you also have a problem with that?