NEWS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE TO ALL SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTISTS

NPUC Supporting Pastors
PO Box 19424
Spokane, WA 99219

OrdinationTruth.com
contact@ordinationtruth.com


North Pacific Union Conference (NPUC), North American Division, February 4, 2013: Today the NPUC Supporting Pastors launched the OrdinationTruth.com website. At launch, twenty-eight ministers formally lent their support, choosing to be named and listed as Supporting Pastors. As more pastors learn of this encouragement toward unity, it is anticipated the list will speedily grow.

Those within the Union advocating in favor of Women’s Ordination are preparing for a special constituency meeting of the Union where NPUC could move ahead of the world church. The Supporting Pastors came together to respond to this emergency. They respectfully ask that the NPUC Executive Committee rescind its November 2012 decision and that no special constituency meeting to act on Women’s Ordination be held before the 2015 General Conference session.

In 2012, two of nine North American Division union constituencies voted to act independently of the world Seventh-day Adventist Church (SDA). Those two unions moved unilaterally to ordain women as pastors. The SDA Church rejected similar initatives in 1990 and 1995 General Conference sessions. In Adventist polity, an ordained minister carries authority to function across the world field. Union conferences do not have authority to determine whether women shall be ordained within their territories; this decision rests with the combined Church represented by the General Conference. A group within the NPUC also launched a union-wide initiative intended to lead to a special meeting. But such action at this time could align the North Pacific Union with other insubordinate unions.

OrdinationTruth.com is intended as a fresh venue where information can be shared highlighting Christian teachings about unity, order, and gender in the Church. The site also exists to help assure that the conversation about Women’s Ordination in the Union is balanced. The Union paper has carried only one side of the question. Immediately, and in weeks and months to come, OrdinationTruth.com will carry news, articles, and studies addressing questions of unity and Women’s Ordination, especially within the territory of the NPUC. There is also an e-mail list where interested persons can participate as the situation unfolds. For these materials, more detailed positions, and participation options, persons are directed to http://www.OrdinationTruth.com.

Initially published documents include an overview document as well as, “Ordination: God’s Purpose versus Satan’s Designs,” found in the FEATURES section of the site.

The NPUC Supporting Pastors seek to work in harmony with the NPUC and invite prayer for Union leadership and support for the world church in this difficult hour.

# # #
The Seventh-day Adventist Church is a Protestant Christian denomination of 17 million members operating in 230 nations. The NPUC (North Pacific Union) Supporting Pastors are Seventh-day Adventist ministers called to serve in Alaska, Washington, Oregon, Upper Columbia, Idaho, and Montana conferences. In particular, they are led to give voice to the understanding of Seventh-day Adventists who (1) seek to work in harmony with the world church as represented by the General Conference, and/or (2) who cannot conscientiously support as an appropriate practice Women’s Ordination in the present situation. NPUC Supporting Pastors recognize the General Conference of the Seventh-day Adventist Church located in Silver Spring, Maryland, USA as the ultimate organizational authority within SDA polity.

62 thoughts on “Pastors Call Halt to NPUC Women’s Ordination Action

  1. I’m glad to see this. I am very happy to see the focus on unity. I believe God can guide us – as a church – to the right understanding of His will in this area. We have had special directions to “press together, press together”. So let’s do that!

    Reply
  2. I am also glad to see this and pray that their Union will listen and revisit their decision.

    I also hope other Unions will also pay close attention.

    I am also very happy to see the focus on unity.

    I believe all Unions in the NAD and other Divisions should allow the Theology of Ordination Study Committee do their work and present their report to the GC in 2014 and to the GC Session in 2015.

    Reply
  3. Totally agree that we should wait for the GC to make the decision. We should allow the Theology of Ordination Study Committee to work. It’s refreshing to see Pastors willing to stand for right. I appreciate the call for unity.

    God Bless you all,

    Linda Brehm

    Reply
  4. Then stick to the issues of unity and order in the church, not giving the other side pro or con for female ordination, or even discussion ordination. If you do then it is pretty patently obvious that this isn’t concerns about unity as it is not having female ordination, period, regardless of the claims that these pastors will abide by whatever the 2015 GC will issue.

    Reply
    • Everyone has to have a working understanding or opinion. I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and believe they mean what they say. I also intend to abide by the GC decision myself – whatever it is.

      God is guiding the church. Imperfect as it is, I believe God is displeased when the authority He gave it is ignored. If God isn’t leading this church, now is the time for us (the church) to humble ourselves and start following Him – together!

      Reply
    • I agree, Kevin. This is not the place to discuss opinions for or against women in ministry, whether or not they should be ordained, or the significance and need for or the lack thereof in ordination itself. Any such deliberation would not likely tend toward unity.

      Of course we all have opinions. We also all have reasons for our opinions, and both sides have Scripture to back them up. The honorable thing to do here is to lay it all aside and wait–*really truly* wait–until the General Conference has spoken. Anything else betrays the stated desire for unity to be merely a push for uniformity…or so it seems to me.

      Reply
    • Kevin, you’ve made an excellent observation. However, the above notice states, “The Union paper has carried only one side of the question.” Is this true? If so, how can it be remedied? That’s a pretty serious charge in light of what official, GC-session-voted denominational policy states, and in light of the study commission process now going on.

      Reply
      • I don’t think it really matters about what the paper did or didn’t do on their postings. This has been advertised as concern for unity, but it is really a mask for an anti-WO position, which they have a right to hold. That is not my issue. My concern is that if you advertise one way, stick with what you promised. Don’t use it as a lure to get the “real” message out that is other than that which was promised. I believe that they have a valid point to be concerned about unity and they should put forth effort toward it.

        Reply
        • Kevin,

          The way I see it, in calling for unity there will also need to be an effort to counteract misinformation, even at risk of coming across as anti-WO.

          For example, the initial CUC ad hoc committee report stated that the 1881 GC Session voted to ordain women. Though the final report was corrected so that it no longer said this, a certain leader still publicly stated at the CUC constituency meeting that the resolution in question was adopted in 1881, when in fact it was the ONLY resolution that wasn’t adopted.

          When this discrepancy was brought to that leader’s attention, a defense of the false statement was published by a colleague of his, I think on an AToday blog. It came out that someone somewhere at some point in time had relied on a condensation of the official Review version of the minutes published in Signs, but when asked to produce a copy of the Signs condensation, no one did, leading me to believe that no one had in recent times bothered to obtain and read a copy of it. (It wasn’t available on the GC archives site.)

          My point is really this: If we are going to achieve unity on this divisive issue, the discussion must be approached fairly and honesty. The misinformation and political games must cease. I for one will have a difficult time accepting as divinely led a decision based on easily proven falsehoods.

          It’s not like what the 1881 GC Session really did is the only example. There’s the claim that the GC Sessions that voted down WO didn’t really vote down WO. And the claim that current GC Working Policy isn’t against WO.

          Now that last one is really weird. In two different pieces a former church administrator publicly claimed that there were no restrictions based on gender in Working Policy L45 and L50. And yet L45 speaks of a ministerial candidate’s “wife,” and L50 uses the word “man.”

          If folks want to change the policy, OK, but let’s not lie about what the current policy really says, and then use that lie to accuse the GC of overreaching its authority. Such shenanigans will not promote unity. But in calling for a cessation of such shenanigans in the interest of unity, I just might get accused of promoting the anti-WO position.

          Reply
          • Actually, one only needs to read what the site is about and it isn’t about concerns for unity, it is about feeling only one side of the issue has been presented. I just feel the call for unity is not really that as it is the presentation of the other side, which this site has every right to do.

            And the working policy is in conflicting language within itself. I don’t have the references at hand. I think it also has more to do with interpretation of the working policy than anything else.

            But the point is this can has been kicked down the road for far too long. Maybe, at last, the study committee with help us sort it out. Maybe.

          • Kevin, if you do locate contradictions in the GC Working Policy on this topic, please send them my way.

            Regarding L 45 and L 50, the two articles I referred to weren’t dealing with a matter of contradictory interpretations. In the one, L 45 05 was referred to and it was declared that there was no reference to gender in the policy. Yet L 45 10 clearly calls for the examination of the ordination “candidate, with his wife.”

            In the second article, the qualifications for ordination of L 50 were cited, and the statement was made that gender was not one of them. Yet the list of 15 qualifications are prefaced in the GC Working Policy L 50 by, “Before the church sets a man apart by ordination he should have given satisfactory evidence of:” Thus, each of the 15 qualifications inherits the gender of this prefatory sentence that ends with a colon.

            NAD Working Policy has the gender reference in L 45 10, but not in L 50. When that difference came in I do not know.

  5. The Bible is very clear on the headship of man in the home and in the church. It is not a cultural matter as the NAD has been saying, but a Biblical doctrine. Therefore, the General Conference’s refusal to allow the NAD and the TED to move forward with giving what they call “parity” to women pastors was according to Scripture and the laws established by the Seventh-day Adventist Church. When unions ordain women pastors, they have violated Scripture, the General Conference vote in session, the General Conference Annual Council vote, and their own constitutions.

    We are thankful for the NPUC pastors and workers who have not remained silent in the face of this rebellion. We will continue to support the world church and all who stand with her. We understand that those pastors in the NAD who will stand with the church are standing on the Bible and with Jesus. As such, they have stood directly opposed to those who are not standing on Scripture.

    It is not easy to stand for truth. Jesus encourages us with these words: “Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad: for great is your reward in heaven: for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.” Matthew 5:11,12.

    We will continue to pray for each of you that are standing with the world church. It will see revival and reformation. It is a promise!

    Reply
      • Jen, I will share what the Scripture says, but you have other issues to consider. The world church has said no to the NAD and the unions have rebelled. They have violated their own constitutions, thus giving an example of lawlessness. The argument put forward by the NAD and TED is that “culture” demands women rule over men as president, fireman, and soldier in the heat of battle. But, culture does not trump Scripture.

        The Bible says “Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.” Gen. 3:16. The principle is clearly stated and for a reason. Some would do away with this because it is in the Old Testament, but that would not be right. It is reaffirmed in the New Testament also.

        “But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.” 1 Tim 2:12. Some would argue that Paul was only speaking according to the culture of his day. Yet, that is not what the text says when read in context. “For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing, if they continue in faith and charity and holiness with sobriety.” 1 Tim 2:13-15.

        Notice that the woman is the glory of man. “For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.” 1 Cor. 11:7-9.

        “For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.” Ephesians 5:23,24.

        Jen, this headship of man is a hateful thing for the world and the world has come into the church. Some, like Obama, would place my wife and daughter on the front-line of battle. I have no desire to have my daughter and wife drafted into the military and have them in war. Is that what you want? Parity between men and women?

        Reply
        • Amazing discussions. Lots of things turned upside down Since I arrived as a student at Emmanuel Missionary College, Berrien Springs, in 1952. Our teachers taught the Bible, and many courses were squarely based on the writings of Ellen White, since the teachers believed in the Spirit of Prophecy. We never heard of many of these modern terms which flourish today.

          One of those modern terms is Male Headship. Our teachers had too great an admiration for the work of Ellen White in our church at that time to ever incorporate such a foreign element in our vocabulary. That changed considerably with the arrival of Samuelle Bacchiocchi with a fresh doctorate from the University of the Vatican where he had even received the gold medal from the pope himself. He gathered a number of liberal disciples around him and it seems like one of their smart strategies was to start a new theological society where with their books, magazines, and booklets managed to convince many of their readers that their new views were the real old conservative ideas. Yes, conservative, because they were acceptable by the ancient Roman Catholic Church, where several of them had their deep roots.

          This is causing the greatest of confusion today, just this smart idea of switching labels, fooling many of our members to believe all of the new innovations in the church is the real old truth. And these smart people are using a lot of quotations from Ellen White as well, hiding the fact that they are in reality getting us away from all of what Ellen White says which does not support their liberal views.

          Reply
    • God chose E. G. White to be His last day prophetess, He did not choose a man. hmmmmm (this statement is for those who think because all men were picked for deciples, that’s a good enough reason to only use men in Pastoring).
      To some men who think women are to be under a man in everything and that he is the head of her no matter what…. you’d best be a Godly man w/o question leading your family in daily devotions, prayer, and study!! Many women are heads of households, and even work to take care of their entire family, including their husbands financially! Women were created not to be door mats, (and many are just that), but, to be”help mates,” women should not do every single little thing for her husband, children etc. This is EXHAUSTING MENTALLY AND PHYSICALLY! I do not believe that our Creator is prejudiced against women in this matter. Remember where He took the rib from folks..it was Adams rib, not his foot. Because we are female…why does that make us less of a person in the eyes or estimation of many? I DO NOT believe God thinks this way! It is true that we mostly have all (and who gave that to us), of the burden upon us in raising children, cleaning, cooking, washing, some do all the yard work as well and yes, even working outside of the house..which leaves little time to minister to others accept in her own household. Any women who does all of this alone is being used. However, if the husband were a true head of household, he would help her with all of these chores to give her rest…some do, but, MOST do not and call it womens work of all things! Women were NOT made to be servents, cooks, childbearers and workhorses! A helpful husband leaves his wife time to share her faith with others… and yes, even Pastor to others. Here is such a simple example….pot luck. Women cook for it, serve it, clean up after it, and men sit and enjoy it, eat it, and hardly ever think to help with any of it thinking it their due and expecting it! Being female, does not make it and all of the other mundane house hold chores…OUR JOB! In centuries past, women had it even harder…were treated like chattel, like the Muslim women are even today. We are not chattel or animals to be treated as beastes of burden! We have savvy intelligent minds and given more time to study the Bible and share what we learn with others, we could do a GREAT work that is not being done swiftly enough today. Granted, the woman Pastoring should be of the highest moral character! Dress modestly…not dressing for other women so much as for men by the way….and she should love her God with all of her heart and and mind… possibly choosing not to have children or marry as that takes up so much time!! Serving in positions that we have traditionally been allowed to fill needs to change. We do not live in Bible times of the past. (We live in a time when EVERYONE needs to do Gods last day message and give it to the world)! Men should help with childrens classes…for example..and if you say no to that…why no? Women do not instinctively have the know all and be all of rearing children. We had to learn! We had to learn to cook, we had to learn to clean, we had to learn to be a wife, none of this is automatic! So men can learn to do the same things. It is mostly men who seem to resist a women being ordained. This is troubling. Will their way of life change? Possibly, and actually, most likely if their wife wants to spend most of her time giving and pastoring to others. This is NOT Feminism folks. I am not one of those…however, I am aware from studing Biblical times …and even to this very day…that women are kept in “their places.” It’s a demeaning feeling. Granted, there are some women who can only be wives and Moms. That’s ok if that is their desire, however, those of us who diligently study Gods word and feel the urgency to help finish our mission…we should have that opportunity! We have allot to offer the Lord and CAN work like beasts of burden if necessary….and if we choose to work for the Lord, He will open the way! Amen

      Reply
  6. Many have already waited, really truly waited, for decades. Many decades. Some have died waiting. That is why this call for unity does indeed look like merely a push for uniformity.

    Saying “As more pastors learn of this encouragement toward unity…” makes it clear that some leaders are directly linking compliance with the concept of unity, instead of waiting to see what unity the Lord will bring us into. I am afraid it will ever be thus.

    Reply
    • Lean,

      If many have waited decades, why the sudden rush for certain Union conferences to suddenly bring this to the table AFTER the GC announced in 2010 that it would have a committee to study the theology of ordination that would bring recommendations to the 2015 GC? It seems obvious to many that the election of Ted Wilson caused some to feel that they had to act before the GC closes the door to WO forever. Yet, that shows a clear lack of trust in due process within the organization. If conferences churches in these Unions took the same approach and went directly against church policy on other issues, we all know what that would be called by these same Union members. . .

      Reply
    • Well said, Lean. This has gone on for much too long. Something that could have been properly dealt with literally decades earlier, but the Church has kept kicking this can down the road hoping votes would deal with the issue forever. Surprise! It didn’t.

      And I see it as highly doubtful that the 2010 GC announcement of a committee was actually going to get off the ground, if it hadn’t been for the union moves, first in Europe, and then over here, and especially when it began over here. And that may not have happened had not a mishandling of a vote in Autumn Council in 2011 taken place (at least that is what I have been told). People have been waiting for decades with some going in the ground before this issue has really been dealt with by the church. I hope now that the study committee will be able to reach a godly consensus in this agonizing issue.

      Reply
  7. Great website, very informative and also very much needed. Let’s continue to do our best to work collectively for the unity of our precious church. I am a women who is fully supporting the GC in regards to WO. May the LORD continue to bless your website and thanks again for taking a stand!

    Reply
  8. I have a little difficulty in understanding those who have stated they will accept what the GC decides, no matter what. With the statement that “God is guiding the church”. Why not join the Roman Catholic church who hold the same view?

    I think Protestants decide for themselves individually what the bible teaches, and then affirm they will abide by scripture, no matter what the church decides. All spiritual matters are subject to scripture, not “the church”.

    We all hope for biblical unity, but if not, it is always scripture over and above “the church”.

    Reply
    • That’s a concern I have had too. I guess the answer for me is prophecy. John foretold the apostasy and eventual rejection of the Roman Catholic church many years before it was even born. But God has indicated that the Remnant church would not take the same path, even though it would almost seem to. All that we can know for sure about the future is what God reveals in prophecy. Everything else is guesswork. I choose to believe what He has told us.

      As far as scripture being the standard we should abide by, this is true. But what happens when every man and his brother has a different sincerely held idea of what the Bible is saying? This is where the disunity we see everywhere comes from. On confusing points like WO, our collective wisdom and discernment is better than that of each individual. Pride of opinion is not a virtue. We need the Holy Spirit’s guidance on issues as confusing as this one. He is guiding a church, not so much stray individuals. Biblical unity will never really come about until we are willing to submit our private judgment to the collective judgment of the whole congregation – trusting in God to Guide us.

      Reply
      • “On confusing points like WO, our collective wisdom and discernment is better than that of each individual.”

        And this is the Roman Catholic position, Eric. Did you know EGW said this, ” In the balances of the sanctuary the Seventh-day Adventist church is to be weighed. She will be judged by the privileges and advantages that she has had. If her spiritual experience does not correspond to the advantages that Christ, at infinite cost, has bestowed on her, if the blessings conferred have not qualified her to do the work entrusted to her, on her will be pronounced the
        60
        sentence: “Found wanting.” By the light bestowed, the opportunities given, will she be judged. . . . {LDE 59.3}

        There is no “unconditional election” for any church community. If so, there never would have been a rebellion in heaven.

        Reply
        • There is no “unconditional election” for churches, but God know the end from the beginning. He has told us what will happen. Ellen also said this:

          “God has a church upon the earth, who are His chosen people, who keep His commandments. He is leading, not stray offshoots, not one here and one there, but a people. {FLB 282.2}
          “There is no need to doubt, to be fearful that the work will not succeed. God is at the head of the work, and He will set everything in order. If matters need adjusting at the head of the work, God will attend to that, and work to right every wrong. Let us have faith that God is going to carry the noble ship which bears the people of God safely into port.” {FLB 282.3}

          This is where I’m coming from. We sometimes forget that we are the church. We, together, will choose to follow God’s leading. Our church is not organized like the RCC. Our church is us.

          Reply
      • Somewhere I read that there is “no private” interpretation of what God says and that we have an anointing of the Spirit that teaches us all things and that if we walk in the light as He is in the light we have fellowship. So I am a bit lost when you talk of guesswork. Prophecy or other scriptural themes: all of it is ministered to the believer by the Spirit of God and it is Paul’s position that believers will come under His guidance to a unity of the faith. The only people I understand to eventually lose their way are those who have no love for the truth. So we have scripture and we have looked at this matter twice already and have concluded it is a scriptural non-issue. We have dismissed it or have we not been conclusive. If not, why?

        Reply
  9. The real issue here is whether or not the World Church in session is the voice of God. If it is not, then Unions and churches can do as they wish. But if it is the voice of God, then for Unions to move ahead would be rebellion against God. Frankly ordination does not make anyone, mail or female, NY more successful at soul winning. I have known people in my 45 years in the church who felt called to ministry who never sought or received ordination for any church office, but went out in the fields of labor winning souls and serving their God.

    Men and women who seek to serve their God without recognition are generally the most faithful and successful in their calling. The World church has spoken on this issue in two previous sessions. Time now to be about our Heavenly Father’s work. This issue only delays the work God has given us to do. Not one more ordination or a thousand will cause the work to be finished any sooner. Laying issues like this aside and concentrating on the work at hand just might mean we will get things accomplished sooner.

    Reply
    • I agree with the article by Elder Jim Cox. We do not need a title to do the Lord’s work. It is a message from the heart that helps people to see God as He truly is that is important. And if we believe in the Seventh-day Adventist Church it seems reasonable to respect the General Conference. If people see us going all directions we are not going to win them to the Lord, which should be our only objective.

      Reply
  10. The NPUC, specifically the Oregon and northern churches are very progressive. Let us not forget in the eighties how they pushed the “celebration” movement into their churches, schools and camporees. Whether celebration churches are wrong or not is another issue, but their continual effort to push their liberal agenda brings great division upon our ranks

    Reply
  11. How can one cite scripture to support the male gender as head of the home and church yet ignore that God chose a female to found the church? Just seems a curious stance. Does it really matter if a church or even union is more progressive (or celebration or liberal), if thar chur h body is doing the Lord’s work and spreading His Word? I’m reminded of ‘Let he who is without sin…’

    Reply
    • I guess, EBMM, one could ask the question, “Why did God choose a male (James White) to be the founder of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and only chose a female (Ellen White) along with another male (Joseph Bates) to be co-founders?”

      That’s the way our official histories have read for a long, long time, that James White is the founder, and Joseph Bates and Ellen White are co-founders. It wouldn’t surprise me if this is been the way we have always looked at it. While Bates was the evangelist and Ellen was the prophetic voice, James was the organizer, publisher, and astute businessman.

      Reply
    • Good points EBMM. I just found this site and it is interesting! Whomever founded our church, it was a joint effort non the less. However! EG White was chosen by the God of the universe to give her visions and a monumental work to do… not to her husband! AND, she was a sickly, feble women. To be given the solomn task to write all of those inspired books (for us all)…taking considerable care to write what God wanted her to write….and also be asked to stand up in front of congregation after congregation and preach what God had instructed her to speak even when ridiculed.was her mission ..was a gift to us from God! Women in “her day” were even less “appreciated” then women today. Our gender does NOT make us stupid humans. We are often looked at as good for only for certain “uses,” but, we know that we were created for SO much more in the service of God!

      Reply
  12. Great website… keep up the good work. The real issue is teaching our young men how to be Christ-like leaders in the home, whcih prepares them for leadership in the church. If Satan can successfully attack the families in our churches, then he can cause many of our churches to be spiritually weak and asleep. Dysfunctional families = Dysfunctional churches. Visit this website for more info on this topic —> http://www.AdventisVoice.com

    Reply
  13. I am very glad to see this website and the stand taken by the various pastors opposing the premature action advocated by the leadership of the NPUC regarding WO. The Feb ’13 issue of the Gleaner clearly marks out on the position of pro-women’s ordination by the NPUC leaders at the Union level. Many of the local conference leaders are of the same mindset. (It is rather odd that the same issue of the Gleaner carries a pull page ad on the back cover regarding homosexuals in the SDA church.)
    Many of the SDA laity in the NPUC have lost confidence in the leadershp of the NPUC and local conferences as well, this effort and website will go a long ways to recovering that confidence!

    Reply
  14. Based on the material proferred on this website, I sense that the “Supporting Pastors” hold their position as a “conviction” based on the Word of God. However, their statement “Whatever the Seventh-day Adventist Church decides in 2015. . .about Women’s Ordination, we, the NPUC Supporting Pastors, will support” strongly indicates, that indeed, they hold their position only as a “preference”. Convictions are worth dying for, preferences are not. We have counsel on this very thing:

    “The opinions of learned men, . . . the creeds or decisions of ecclesiastical councils, . . . the voice of the majority — not one nor all of these should be regarded as evidence for or against any point of religious faith. Before accepting any doctrine or precept, we should demand a plain ‘Thus saith the Lord’ in its support.” The Great Controversy, p. 595.

    Reply
    • You make an excellent point there, Lester. I hadn’t looked at it that way, but you’re right. How can they go along with whatever the GC decides, if they don’t believe it’s biblical?

      Reply
    • Lester, I think we can appreciate your concern. Have you reviewed the Supporting Pastors’ response to this question? In the questions and responses page, look for the question near the very end, “What if Women’s Ordination passes in 2015?”

      Reply
      • Thank you for directing my attention to your answer to the question “What if the Seventh-day Adventist Church votes to approve the ordination of women in the 2015 General Conference session?
        While Women’s “Ordination is not the Sabbath, Creation, the State of the Dead or the Sanctuary message—pillars of God’s movement for which we would go to war were even one pin removed”, history bears out that the “war” was started with the very spirit which is the driving force behind Women’s Ordination.
        (Lucifer) “Not content with his position, though honored above the heavenly host, he ventured to covet homage due alone to the Creator. . . . God Himself had established the order of heaven; and in departing from it, Lucifer would dishonor his Maker and bring ruin upon himself.” Patriarchs and Prophets pp. 35 & 36.
        Please note that Lucifer is continuing to use the same strategy on us that brought him down.
        (Eve) “Eve had been perfectly happy by her husband’s side in her Eden home; but, like restless modern Eves, she was flattered with the hope of entering a higher sphere than that which God had assigned her. In attempting to rise above her original position, she fell far below it.” PP 59.
        (Miriam) “But the same evil that first brought discord in heaven sprang up in the hear of this woman of Israel, . . .” PP 382.
        (Aaron and Miriam) “Regarding themselves as equally favored by God, they felt that they were entitled to the same position and authority.” (as Moses) PP 383.
        (Korah) “In the rebellion of Korah is seen the working out, upon a narrower stage, of the same spirit that led to the rebellion of Satan in heaven. It was pride and ambition that prompted Lucifer to complain of the government of God, and to seek the overthrow of the order which had been established in heaven. Since his fall it has been his object to infuse the same spirit of envy and discontent, the same ambition for position and honor, into the minds of men.” PP 403.
        (Saul) “At Gilgal, but a short time before, Saul had presumed to officiate as priest, contrary to the command of God.” PP 625.
        I believe you have supplied an update to this list in your “The Push 1, 2 & 3” that you show on your website side bar.
        No capable general (especially Lucifer) is going to launch an attack against his enemy where they are most prepared and waiting to defend, instead he will attack us where we are least prepared and least expecting. I fear that those who are entrenched and waiting for the approach of the enemy from the direction of the “Sabbath, Creation, the State of the Dead or the Sanctuary message” are going to get shot from the rear if they don’t turn some of their guns around and focus their attention on where the fire is coming from (Women’s Ordination) before it is too late. Those who are standing around waiting for the vote at the 2015 General Conference Session would best keep their heads down as live ammunition is being used in the interim. This is not paintball.

        Reply
    • Thanks for this quote from the G.C., Lester. I don’t see many SDA’s really taking this quote seriously. Many, if not most, are more than willing to submit to any church decision no matter what their personal convictions are on this subject. And if they will submit on this subject, why not any and every other bible doctrine?

      The issue of the order of authority in the church is a minor matter compared to the larger issue of individual and personal accountability to scripture. What the church decides won’t alter my convictions unless someone can “prove all things” by scripture and persuade me by scripture alone.

      Wasn’t this Luther’s position? How can ours be any different?

      Reply
    • Since I posted the above comment, it appears that you changed the word from “support” to “respect” in the following quote, “Whatever the Seventh-day Adventist Church decides in 2015. . .about Women’s Ordination, we, the NPUC Supporting Pastors, will respect” ( was, support). I think this was wise and a move in the right direction.

      Reply
      • The word “respect” is too ambiguous to make clear what they mean. In fact, this is one of the major problems we have in the world today. People carefully couch their meanings in ambiguous phrases that may have several interpretations. We need to be very clear on what we mean, especially in sensitive issues like this one.

        Reply
        • The word was changed. We had “respect” originally in the Questions and Responses section that we had gone over as a group. Right before went live with the site we added the front page sidebar, where one person wrote “support.” We have discussed this since and chosen to stay with the wording originally chosen by the group and used by EGW in 9T 260, 261.

          Reply
  15. The courage of the men and women who support this Website has brought hope and strengthened the resolve of the faithful. Let us pray that those seeking to goad the world church into changing its stance through pre-emptive and illegal actions will be brought to a halt.

    Reply
    • I guess you mean that you hope God is brought to a halt. It may surprise you and ilk that people in communion with God have chosen to lead and not succumb to cultural norms and disingenuous promotion of Scripture.

      Reply
      • God never acts out of harmony with His Word. People may “feel” called to a certain responsibility, much as Miriam inquired in her complaint against Moses, “Hath He (the Lord) not spoken also by us?” (Num. 12:2). But whenever God’s creatures aspire to positions or responsibilities God has not assigned them, the result is disaster. From Lucifer to Eve on to Miriam, Gideon, Saul, Jeroboam, and Uzziah, the record is clear.

        So-called “progressive” Adventism seeks to progress beyond what God says–whether with regard to origins, salvation theology, Biblical sexuality teachings, and much more. It is the work of another spirit, and has been for several decades. It is indeed time to call a halt, and to advance in the direction God has designed for His end-time church.

        Reply
        • Kevin–to compare the massive amount of study by SDA’s best scholars who support women in ministry with Miriam and Aaron’s [remember the golden calf] obviously self-centered action is intellectually dishonest or simplistic, emotional reaction. You also, sad to note, further the guilt by association approach to the discussion–“whether with regard to origins, salvation theology, Biblical sexuality teachings[!]” by lumping those who disagree with you as part of a larger group that you apparently hope might push some negative buttons and elicit a negative reaction. Further, as you know, this has been studied and supported for 35 + years.

          You state: “God never acts out of harmony with His Word.” Who would disagree with this statement. Again you use inuendo and insinuation. If you think those you disagree with are acting out of harmony with his word, you should say so and explain. Your use of platitudes–glittering generalities in propaganda language–is a disservice to the discussion.

          This is not going to go away. You may “win another round” but the discussion is with the church until Jesus comes. So, you would do well to be a little more considered in you approach to these discussions.

          Reply
  16. I want to respond to the reason why a couple of Unions went ahead to vote women’s ordination when the study group was formed in 2010 with results to be given in 2015, Perhaps the following items have caused people to realize that it is time to follow the dictates of conscience and not a confused body of believers.
    – Whereas women have been called by God to to a specific task for Him and they are bound by church rules that do not allow them to fully carry out the task,
    – Whereas the ordination ceremony itself has pagan origins,
    – Whereas the issue of women serving as pastors has been discussed for more than 100 years,
    – Whereas Ellen White was in a position, placed there by God, that was higher than any current pastor, senior or otherwise.
    – Whereas we are not to accept the dictates of any organization, church or otherwise, that does not follow scripture,
    Therefore, I hope and pray that those studying this issue will be completely open to scripture and to the correct interpretation of it in light of the fact that God has called and asked both males and females to speak for him throughout the history of this world.
    CbG

    Reply
    • “I have often been instructed by the Lord that no man’s judgment
      should be surrendered to the judgment of any other one man. Never should
      the mind of one man or the minds of a few men be regarded as sufficient in
      wisdom and power to control the work and to say what plans shall be followed.
      But when, in a General Conference, the judgment of the brethren
      assembled from all parts of the field is exercised, private independence and
      private judgment must not be stubbornly maintained, but surrendered.
      Never should a laborer regard as a virtue the persistent maintenance of his
      position of independence, contrary to the decision of the general body.”—
      9T 260.

      Reply
    • Called by God, could you please help me understand something? You’ve stated a number of things as if they are proven fact. Could you please explain how the ordination ceremony that Jesus conducted for His 12 disciples, which Ellen White discusses in the chapter in DA entitled “He Ordained Twelve,” was pagan?

      I also wonder why you believe that God wants our tithe-paid ministers to primarily serve as pastors of churches. Such a position goes directly contrary to the counsel God gave us in the Spirit of Prophecy.

      You state that the issue of women serving as pastors has been discussed for more than 100 years. How can this be? The resolution the 1881 GC Session considered but did not adopt was not about women serving as pastors since our ministers were not serving as settled pastors of churches at that time.

      Reply
  17. I need a little help here. It appears from what I saw of the web page that this is a group of pastors in the PNW who are attacking their administration. Isn’t that in conflict with the talk of unity by said pastors?

    Reply
    • It appears that more than a little help is needed. Where is there “attacking their administration”? Please be specific with the reference. Your comment reminds me of King Ahab calling Elijah the troubler of Israel.

      There is a very clear Bible principle: It is not possible to serve two masters.

      The order of authority is very simple: God->prophet->GC->union

      There is no true living prophet at this time that I know of. There is no plain Biblical or Spirit of Prophecy command that we must have women ordained. We have the example of Jesus to follow and clearly He had no problem with setting aside 12 men, no women. Therefore it does not appear that the decision of the world church on women’s ordination violates a direct command of the commands and example of Jesus.

      There is a careful study of the subject going on right now to see if all of the relevant Bible and Spirit of Prophecy have been adequately considered.

      Since the decisions of the General Conference in full session do not appear to violate Scripture, and there is a significant amount of effort and expense to make sure the church is not closed to new light (nor open to old error) there is no moral imperative for the unions to create disunity in the church by defying the world church counsel.

      For there to be unity there can be only one authority, one master. In conferences where the Unions are out of harmony with the world church, pastors have to decide (at the risk of their jobs) whether they support everyone “doing what is right in his own eyes” or whether there is a world church they are a part of.

      We have a chance in this issue to find out who has moral courage to take a politically incorrect and unpopular stand and then be blamed by the superficial for disunity!

      Reply
  18. I search the scriptures, but find no imperative from God that part of our end time mission is to delve into side issues cause disunity and sidetrack us from our main mission. And what is that mission? Preach the gospel to all nations, and all people. Nothing else! So the devil knows if he can get us running down rabbit trails and chasing our own tails, he wins another round while we head back to the wilderness from the Jordon river for more hot laps around the desert. WO, the current push for the acceptance of homosexuals in the church (not just in thier sexual preference, but in thier sin) the spiritual formation issues that have thier roots in Loyola’s spiritual disciplines, the so-called theistic evolution teaching in our schools, etc etc etc are all part of the devil’s diversionary plans and too many of us have bought into it. It is high time to wake up, attend to our real duties, and not be deceived by the devil’s ploys.

    Reply
  19. One would think WO is a new fundamental belief! Not so long ago, the Anglican Church ordained its first female Bishop and of course she is not a “husband of one wife”! This is not a new “truth” but the maturation of liberalism and feminism which is ok for the world if it so chooses. What I do not get is since when does the world cue God?

    Reply
  20. Since ministers in general work for God. He hires them by calling them to the ministry. What is His policy? Are there biblical precedents? Are there clearly laid out hiring policies or conditions? If so, why are we meeting to discuss this when we have already been informed how God hires workers and where He places them? I will tell you what I think. If we blink on this and ordain women to any position in this church and we are in a quandary right now because we were foolish enough to ordain women as Elders: but if we ordain women we can never stand in a court of Law and plead that Adventists believe in sola scriptura!

    Reply
  21. If we discuss homosexuality as an agenda, we should also discuss thieves murderers and child molesters and rapists as special groups and whatever we do for homosexuals, we should do for all these groups or we are practicing discrimination and neither God nor the world will support us!

    Reply
  22. It is unfortunate to see the Church that has been sola scriptra sola fidei now loosing the track. If God has never thought of it in the past, Jesus has never thought to ordain women during His time among His desciples, the Apostles never tried it, then the accuser has stood to fight with the Church. SDA denied sunday because it is not in the Bible, if women ordination is accepted then the catholic church may sue SDAs in International court as criminal for accepting it and reject a peaceful day (sunday) which unites the nations and religions.
    Any way, we are praying ” Don’t leads us into temptation, but deliver is from evil”

    Reply

Leave a reply

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong> 

required

*