-
Ty Gibson recently placed a lengthy article favoring TOSC position 3 on the internet. In his brief response Clinton Wahlen gently points out glaring problems in Gibson’s approach. Elder Wahlen serves the church through the General Conference. He is associate director of the Biblical Research Institute.
FIND IT HERE.
4 replies on “Clinton Wahlen response to Ty Gibson”
Excellent job Clint, as always.
Point 3 below shows a very disconcerting UNTRUTH in Wahlen’s article. I hope it was an honest mistake and not a glaring lie. Or maybe I’m mistaken? Study it for yourself.
I don’t see Wahlen’s remarks as too sound… did you read that article? According to his numbers in his 1st point:
1. Titus 1 only mentions “overseer” and refers to them as a “he.” No prohibition of women overseers. And Gibson did not “altogether ignore” Titus 1 as Wahlen says. Gibson referenced Titus 1:7. Also, Gibson’s reference to “management” in Timothy is playing by the same rules as those using Timothy to refrain women from ordination.
2. How does every mention of diakonos add to the conversation? Was Gibson supposed to expound on each one?
3. This one is most concerning… Gibson doesn’t reduce headship to those verses at all. In fact, Wahlen says Gibson leaves out headship references such as Heb 13:17 and 1 Peter 5:1-4. These verses do NOT use kephale, the “head” word in Greek. Wahlen is accusing Gibson of something here that is not even true. I’m not sure how Wahlen justifies making those erroneous references (or maybe it was a mistake?)
He also offers no other alternative to Gibson’s understanding that headship is all men over all women. Wahlen denied that but doesn’t say what headship actually IS. I’m going with the Bible in that it’s a marital relationship, not church leadership related. And if it even was, what to do then with EGW? That really needs some explaining. Which I’m sure is somewhere I haven’t seen yet.
4. Fair point. I think this is easily a cultural thing. And what about the authority of Deborah? Did her authority only hold over other women? Doubt it.
5. I don’t know why Wahlen would bring up EGW. She’s the best case FOR ordaining women. Whalen says EGW uses “ministers” to denote those with license to preach. And those were all male. Did EGW go against her own conscience then in preaching throughout her life? Fact is, EGW HAS authority and taught and preached and God called her to do all this. What does an ordained man able to do that she wasn’t supposed to? Make decisions affecting men? Much more to say on her but that’s enough.
6. I don’t even follow what Wahlen is saying there. The context in 1 Peter shows Paul is an elder and talking to fellow elders.. so what? Gibson’s logic on “shepherd” in Peter and a spiritual gift listed in Ephesians as that same Greek word shepherd makes sense. It’s root in both cases is poimen. Apparently the spiritual gifts list is for men only then too? No.
7. There is no “such an insistence on ordaining women” in Gibson’s article. Gibson says the Bible does does not promote or prohibit WO specifically and therefore neither should we. But we should beware that we don’t say no to what the Spirit is saying yes (example- EGW)
Again, explain the authority and teaching of EGW in conjunction with not ordaining women.
Also, a two-tier type license and ordination system we have is not even Biblical. Is it? Did I miss some verses in Hezekiah or something?
Wahlen’s second main point about underestimating disunity is altogether no reason not to legitimize women’s abilities to lead and have authority, even, and especially in, a spiritual sense.
Thank you for your correct Biblical presentation. I thank God that there are still real ‘Adams’ left in God’s church who understand that God made mankind to reflect the relationship model of the Godhead. There is a clear hierarchy of authority in Heaven – in the Godhead and also for the angels. If I were to be counted worthy of citizenship in Heaven, I would be happy to fill the least position. I can’t even express how heartsick I was to read Ty’s presentation on his website, as well as the video of David Asserick (sp). I held these two men in such high esteem. I realize now that I made a God of them in a way and I have wept bitterly about their apparent position of ‘adultery’ to Christ. They no longer accept a clear ‘thus saith the Lord’ from His inspired scriptures. They have compromised their faith and sided with Satan’s views of rebellion against God. I can no longer trust or support their ministries. Just what type of literature are they shipping all around the world? Is their literature truly reflective of God’s remnant church beliefs? I am so depressed about what is happening in the supposed remnant church. How did all of these false doctrines get a footing in the church? I can see false doctrines being introduced, but how is it that the leadership has NOT rooted it out as soon as it becomes apparent? The sabbath school lessons quarterlies are tainted with heresy to the beliefs, pastors are being instructed in the SDA seminaries with doctrines of the satan. The laity must awake out of slumber and organize something so the various divisions, unions, conferences and GC are made aware of our righteous indignation against all of the apostasy currently being allowed in God’s remnant church by their lack of righteous leadership. Stand up people! We will be counted as guilty as they if we don’t. We must defend God’s Word and the precious doctrines given to the Adventist movement. We have been honored with God’s TRUTH and must defend it at all cost and carry out His commission. We have become Israel all over again. How can we be blessed by God to complete His work if the rampant apostasy isn’t excised? We have the privilege of giving God’s end time message and we were given the spirit of prophecy! God will have no choice but to spew us out and raise up a remnant from stones.
I am not surprised. Ty and Asserick? They are human. They can be deceived. The point is we must now each take charge of our own lamps and make sure we have enough understanding of truth purchased by a sufficient investment of time in reading the word and knowing what it says and establishing conviction for ourselves. The night is here and every one of us will need our own lamps to burn bright in our own souls. I have seen enough to convince me that we can never adopt the papal attitude towards the clergy and not smart for it. God expects it.