2015 General Conference vote on Women's Ordination

[LindaRS]

The general conference session is now less than 2 months away, running from July 2 to 11.  For the first time ever, the agenda has been made available to everyone, whether a delegate or not. It can be found and downloaded here.  The agenda regarding the theology of ordination and WO begins on page 64 to page 69.

[LindaRS]

According to an article at AR, the vote of WO will take place during the business sessions on Wednesday, July 8. Your Guide to the GC Session Agenda

[colporteur]

According to an article at AR, the vote of WO will take place during the business sessions on Wednesday, July 8. Your Guide to the GC Session Agenda

At least it is coming down to a vote. I wish we could know how each conference votes. We expect it to be voted down. If this is so, I expect at the GC some kind of incident from some of the pro WO people.

[Richard Myers]

A "yes" vote is "no".



When No! is Yes!

C. Raymond Holmes, D.Min.
2015-05-29

No one regrets more than I that it has been women’s ordination that has forced to the surface of our consciousness the fundamental issue of how we read, understand, and apply the principles of God’s Word. But something had to get our attention and evidently in God’s plan and timing this was it, as painful and distressing as it has been. The event can be compared to that of Moses and the burning bush (Exodus 3). God had something to say to him as well as something important for him to do, and while he was busy tending sheep got his attention in an
unmistakable and dramatic way.

God has something to say to the Seventh-day Adventist Church in the midst of Protestantism’s gradual abandonment of the Reformation and it’s basic principle of sola scriptura, the Bible and the Bible alone for faith and life. The great controversy struggle at the time of the Reformation was between the authority of the Bible and church tradition. Today, 500 years later, the great controversy struggle is between the Bible and secular culture. The time is short and the Remnant Church cannot afford to cave-in to the demands of secular culture and its ever-changing human tradition. It is the Word of God, not time and culture, that defines right action for the church.  Read More

[John Erickson]

I know this is the question of the hour and no one has a definitive answer on the subject, but do any of you have an educated guess as to whether WO will be voted up, down, or (more likely), the third option? I noticed the article in Spectrum showed that 87% of the delegates are male with 83% being age 40 or above. I would think that this would indicate a strong "No" vote. However, I could see WO sneaking in by a small margin if the third option was voted on. What do you all think? I have a hard time thinking that the "Africa's" of the world can be swayed. Maybe I am naive?

[JimB]

John, someone may end up correcting me but as I understand it the proposal that the NAD is going to bring to the GC is more-or-less the "third option". Giving conferences the ability to approve or disapprove as they see fit.

However, as I also understand things the pro WO crowd doesn't like the "third option" much better than those who oppose WO. I also could be wrong on this but I think it was worded this way carefully because I think some believe this might pass easier than an all or nothing vote. I'm prayerfully optimistic that this will voted down.

[John Erickson]

Thanks, Jim. I am a little out of the loop as I have taken an extended break from the topic due to burnout. I think you are right that the third option or some carefully worded variant of it will be voted upon. The last vote in 1995 was voted down with 67.8% "No" votes.  This was basically the third option as well. However, since 20 years has passed and the church and the world has become more rampantly worldly, I am wondering if the percentage will go down. The worst case scenario I can think of would be an almost 50-50 split. Neither side of the issue would have an emphatic decision, but further divisiveness could occur on both sides in that scenario. Best case scenario would be to vote it down with a similar margin to 1995. Even voting it UP would be "better" than a 50-50 split in my opinion, although I certainly hope it is voted down. The 50-50 split would give the devil a double play and I hope for the sake of our church that doesn't happen.

[Richard Myers]

Hello John! So good to see your post.

We all would like to know the answer, but soon enough we shall know. My concern  is for the election of officers.  There is a very deep dislike of some in office and there will be a concerted effort to remove them. There is rebellion in the air. How may delegates will be influenced by the NAD, Europe, and Australia, we do not know. There are faithful throughout the world.

Even if the vote continues to say no to making women leaders over men, we have a most serious problem that will not go away. Those in rebellion, not those who  are just misled by the doctrine, will not cease their rebellion when the vote is cast against them. The issue has already been voted on twice including saying no to allowing divisions do what they want. This is the most serious problem the Seventh-day Adventist Church has ever faced. Rebellion is seldom cured. "{Korah, Dathan, and Abiram} complained and influenced the people to stand with them in rebellion, and even after God stretched forth His hand and swallowed up the wrongdoers and the people fled to their tents in horror, their rebellion was not cured." CTr 125.

     The sin of Israel is again presented in the rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram. By their representations of matters they influenced men in a course of evil. "And they rose up before Moses, with certain of the children of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, famous in the congregation, men of renown." (Read the history in Numbers 16.) 
     "And the earth opened her mouth, and swallowed them up, and their houses, and all the men that appertained unto Korah, and all their goods. . . . And all Israel that were roundabout them fled at the cry of them: for they said, Lest the earth swallow us up also. And there came out a fire from the Lord, and consumed the two hundred and fifty men that offered incense."   
     But after this terrible exhibition, after hearing the horrible cries of those who went down into the bowels of the earth, after seeing the 250 men consumed by fire, we would suppose that rebellion would have been cured. But history records the fact that the congregation murmured against Aaron and Moses, saying, "Ye have killed the people of the Lord." Does not this show us the great danger of murmuring and rebellion? It seems that rebellion is next to incurable. If all the evidence that God gave them did not convince them of the sin of accusing the chosen of the Lord, what power could be brought to bear upon them to correct their unjust charges and accusations? They saw the earth open, they saw the men swallowed up, they heard their cries of terror, they saw the 250 consumed by fire, all famous in the congregation, and men of renown; but where was their remorse and repentance? On the morrow it was evident that their principles and sentiments were unchanged. They had still a charge to make against the chosen instrumentalities of the Lord. And they said to Moses and Aaron, "Ye have killed the people of the Lord." They were so enraged against them that they would not have hesitated to kill Moses and Aaron.  RH, October 10, 1893.  .

There are 162 "princes" in the NAD that voted against the world church and Scripture in 2011 at the NAD year end meeting to allow women to be rulers over men. "October 31, 2011 vote from NAD

According to the General Conference’s Office of General Counsel, the vote numbered 162 in favor of the affirmation and 61 against it.

Prior to the discussion of this policy, Dan Jackson, president of the North American Division, led the congregation through the hymn “Have Thine Own Way Lord” and asked for the Holy Sprit’s leading in the discussion. Also, attendees separated in small groups (about three times) to pray about the proceedings. “My desire is that at the end of this discussion everyone present says in their own mind ‘I was in the presence of the Spirit of God,’” said Jackson. - Adventist News Network. This was rebellion and the NAD continues to follow the same path. Some have the very same spirit described in the above quote. We see this in the NAD's refusal to allow CAP to have a booth at the San Antonio session. 

[Immanuel]

The question that will be posed to the delegates at the General Conference session is: “After your prayerful study on ordination from the Bible, the writings of Ellen G. White, and the reports of the study commissions, and; after your careful consideration of what is best for the church and the fulfillment of its mission, is it acceptable for division executive committees, as they may deem it appropriate in their territories, to make provision for the ordination of women to the gospel ministry? Yes or No.” Source.

[Richard Myers]

Thank  you for re-posting this, Pastor Immanuel.  This is the very same question voted on at Utrech in 1995.  As time moves on, the numbers increase in favor of making women rulers over men. The culture in America is to make women generals in the army and Air Force leaders even if they have never flown a plane. That culture has infected God's church. There  is now a need to meet the rebellion. A no vote  will not end the problem any more than it did in 1990  or 1995.

Closely aligned with the vote on making women leaders of men will be the election of division and General Conference officers. We have been blessed  for the last five years with Elder Wilson's strong stand on the Bible. The rebellion intends to remove him just as Korah, Dathan, and Abiram wanted Moses gone.

It is time for those who have remained silent to voice their support of the church leaders who have been faithful. Amongst those we find many  in the Michigan Conference in the NAD. 

[John Erickson]

Yes, Richard, I agree that the "problem" is not the "problem" and won't go away with a "No" vote. The problem is how Scripture is interpreted--to fit culture or to follow the Bible as it reads? The even deeper problem as has been discussed here ad nauseum is rebellion. My question is this (and I know it has been posed before), if the church votes "Yes" to WO does that nullify the two "No" votes? It would seem so, in the minds of many. Was God speaking one way in 1990 and 1995 through the GC in session and now choosing to speak another way in 2015? No, that is not the God that I know (unless He is simply giving us quail).

Also, I find hope in the wording of the question to be posed to the delegates. Notice the last phrase, "to make provision for the ordination of women to the gospel ministry. Note that this would mean that individual churches would not automatically have to accept a woman pastor/elder. That's how I read it anyway. However, if voted down, the wording makes it clear that NO provision can be made for the ordination of women to the gospel ministry. "Provision" is not the same as "Compelled" to accept WO in one's local church. However, even if my interpretation is correct (I would welcome all of your interpretations to see if I am off base), it will still lead to greater confusion and division. Because one church will say, "You MUST allow this woman to be assigned as pastor of our church." While another church will say, "We are under no obligation by Scripture or the church to accept this woman pastor being assigned to us." This will lead those on the pro side to accuse those on the con side of not following the "Voice of God." And those on the "No" side can maintain that the voted measure stated only that "provision" is to be made for women pastors, and not that each church must accept a woman pastor.

Am I overthinking this? Does any of this make sense?

[colporteur]

 I too believe and hope that the vote will be a decisive "no." However, I never underestimate the enemy's ability to pull off a fast one. One would think that with the tremendous build up for this that those opposing WO would not be caught sleeping.

As has been more or less stated the best we can hope for is a bad situation. A "no" vote will still leave a bad situation. A "yes" vote for the third option would be a worse situation. The worst situation would be a "yes" vote and the voting in of a new liberal president.

If the vote is "no" and yet a large number of influential pro WO people are voted into office or re elected in the NAD then it remains to be seen how or even if they will be dealt with by the world church when they continue to ordain women as elders/pastors.

I am thinking and hoping that along with a "no" vote Ted Wilson will be re elected. While I would not give him a 10 as president he is so far above our last president so as not to be comparable. Someone on Spectrum said something about Dan Jackson desiring the office of GC president. Banish the thought !
 Not only is the WO vote important but almost as important are those voted in who would play a large role in how the ruling would be upheld. A rule/law is only as good as those who uphold it.

[Richard Myers]

John's question about local churches is a concern. I don't see that the word "provision" has any good connotations in that respect. The conferences will do as they please. They are in control and if the measure were to pass, then the unions and local conferences may place women pastors anywhere they want. The illegal action  by ADCOM allowing women elders made  provision for churches not wanting them, but that is not in this measure in any manner. The NAD and Europe are infected by modern culture that dictates making women equal in all respects except disbanding women sports and making them play with the men as they have done in the army. 

[John Erickson]

Well, I'm probably wrong on the word "provision," but I hope I am right this time! Even if I was correct, the conference will probably still bring the heat on the local churches who take that position on the wording.

[Richard Myers]

Let's pray the church delegates have spiritual discernment and the vote is in harmony with  the Bible, then we can stand on Scripture and church law. It does not mean  we will not be in trouble with our conferences if they are in rebellion as is mine and a number of others who reject the voice of God as voted by the 1990 and 1995 GC Sessions which is in line with Scripture. It is so much better to know that we are following both Scripture and the church when we stand against those in rebellion.

[colporteur]

 Some people persist in saying that this not a theology issue but one of culture. Even that position is intensely problematic.
According to the Bible does the "culture" improve as we near the end or is it a wicked generation ? When after several thousand years a controversial change in the church is made to accommodate a "culture" that is morally bankrupt that in itself ought to scream out " HELLO!"   " NO BRAINER !" 

Ok, some are saying " but we are told there would be reformation in the SDA church near the end." Well, then the Episcopalians, Methodists,  Presbyterians, Lutherans, etc.etc. are all  reforming?" Right ?

We are told in Scripture that the SDA church is the remnant church. That means that it is part of the original. Did the original church ordain women as pastors/elders ? oops.

We know that this exact same argument will be used to support the Sunday law. If one can ignore all that the Bible has to say on this not to mention the precedence of Jesus  Himself  in order to follow a wicked culture , he can certainly ignore what the Bible says about the true Sabbath as well.

The word " provision" is a green light for pro WO people. Surely those opposed can see that.

[ejclark]

Some people persist in saying that this not a theology issue but one of culture. Even that position is intensely problematic.
According to the Bible does the "culture" improve as we near the end or is it a wicked generation ? When after several thousand years a controversial change in the church is made to accommodate a "culture" that is morally bankrupt that in itself ought to scream out " HELLO!"   " NO BRAINER !" 

Ok, some are saying " but we are told there would be reformation in the SDA church." Well, then the Episcopalians, Methodists,  Presbyterians, Lutherans, etc.etc. are all  reforming?" Right ?

We are told in Scripture that the SDA church is the remnant church. That means that it is part of the original. Did the original church ordain women as pastors/elders ? oops.

We know that this exact same argument will be used to support the Sunday law. If one can ignore all that the Bible has to say on this not to mention the precedence of Jesus  Himself  in order to follow a wicked culture , he can certainly ignore what the Bible says about the true Sabbath as well.

The word " provision" is a green light for pro WO people. Surely those opposed can see that.

I mentioned in Sabbath School last month when the lesson opened the discussion, "Since when did culture dictate God's decisions and choices in scripture?"

[colporteur]

".... Summoning Timothy before the bar of God, Paul bids him preach the Word, not the sayings and customs of men; to be ready to witness for God whenever opportunity should present itself, before large congregations and private circles, by the way and at the fireside, to friends and to enemies, whether in safety or exposed to hardship and peril, reproach and loss." Gospel Workers page 30.

It sounds like Paul was saying to Timothy not to follow culture.

[colporteur]

 I talked to a friend today that I have not spoken to for a few years. He has been in ministry for a number of years. He doesn't understand why there is so much fuss about WO. I'm concerned when our people do not seem to think it matters one way or the other.

[Richard Myers]

There is little spiritual discernment when the issue is not understood. Not the least of which  is a division that has rejected the authority  of the General Conference in Session. How could your friend not understand the concern about rebellion?