Actscelerate.com Forum Index Actscelerate.com
Open Any Time -- Day or Night
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
r/Actscelerate

Ordination of women
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
   Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Feature Presentations This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Message Author
Post Ordination of women roughridercog
I look for a large heated debate but look for it to be narrowly defeated if it comes up at GA.

Your opinions?
_________________
Doctor of Bovinamodulation
Acts Mod
Posts: 25306
1/18/14 4:06 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post If they bring it up again, they ought to be censured. Aaron Scott
I'm serious.

Whether you are for it or not, it is wrong, wrong, wrong to keep ramming it down the throat of the General Assembly until you DO get your way. At the very least, a measure that is defeated in one Assembly should have to at least skip the next Assembly before it can be brought back up.

Worse, many good and worthwhile proposals likely never get out of the Council of 18 to make it to the Assembly. To allow a pet proposal to keep skipping to the head of the line time after time is to show disrespect, in my opinion, for the wishes of the General Assembly...AND to show disrespect to many other worthwhile proposals that didn't make the cut so that a pet proposal could once again go through.

If it does come up, I hope someone adds the amendment that "if this proposal is not passed by the General Assembly, it cannot be presented to the General Assembly for at least eight years."

Enough is enough.
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
1/18/14 4:15 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post Quiet Wyatt
I guess that's just how it is when the top leaders in the denomination have the final say on what is placed on the agenda each time. [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 12784
1/18/14 4:53 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Ordination of women Poimen
roughridercog wrote:
I look for a large heated debate but look for it to be narrowly defeated if it comes up at GA.

Your opinions?


In as much as women are called of God to minister, as attested by Scripture, they should be ordained accordingly. Ordination is the setting in order or place of something or someone, the putting into office, or appointing for or to a task. All ministers then should, and are to be, ordained in one form or another -- women and men. So then, ALL should hold an ordained status IMO.

Now, if you are asking if women should be bishops, or serve in headship/oversight roles, that is a different matter.
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay."


Last edited by Poimen on 1/18/14 5:10 pm; edited 1 time in total
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
1/18/14 5:07 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Reply with quote
Post Re: If they bring it up again, they ought to be censured. Poimen
Aaron Scott wrote:
I'm serious.

Whether you are for it or not, it is wrong, wrong, wrong to keep ramming it down the throat of the General Assembly until you DO get your way. At the very least, a measure that is defeated in one Assembly should have to at least skip the next Assembly before it can be brought back up.

Worse, many good and worthwhile proposals likely never get out of the Council of 18 to make it to the Assembly. To allow a pet proposal to keep skipping to the head of the line time after time is to show disrespect, in my opinion, for the wishes of the General Assembly...AND to show disrespect to many other worthwhile proposals that didn't make the cut so that a pet proposal could once again go through.

If it does come up, I hope someone adds the amendment that "if this proposal is not passed by the General Assembly, it cannot be presented to the General Assembly for at least eight years."

Enough is enough.


I think there is sound, practical wisdom in this suggestion.
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay."
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
1/18/14 5:08 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Reply with quote
Post Change Agent
One of the major problems with the COG is that the top leadership cannot push change without presenting that change to the GA. In my opinion the GA elects them and they should be able to lead in areas where change is needed. Even at the GA they cannot get up and speak their opinions on an agenda item and push for that item to be implemented. Letting an important item come back again is their only way that they can hope to get needed change for the organization.

Most of the top leaders in the COG are highly educated with theology degrees where most of the OB's voting at the GA have no degrees. If the elect of the COG feel that women should be OB, in my opinion other OB's should pay attention.

COG leaders remind me of Joe Biden. Why are they needed if no one is paying attention to them?
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
1/18/14 5:23 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Ernie Long
Change Agent wrote:
One of the major problems with the COG is that the top leadership cannot push change without presenting that change to the GA. In my opinion the GA elects them and they should be able to lead in areas where change is needed. Even at the GA they cannot get up and speak their opinions on an agenda item and push for that item to be implemented. Letting an important item come back again is their only way that they can hope to get needed change for the organization.

Most of the top leaders in the COG are highly educated with theology degrees where most of the OB's voting at the GA have no degrees. If the elect of the COG feel that women should be OB, in my opinion other OB's should pay attention.

COG leaders remind me of Joe Biden. Why are they needed if no one is paying attention to them?


I've got a pen and a phone! Rolling Eyes

I hope our leadership has more sense than this.
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1050
1/18/14 5:26 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Poimen
Change Agent wrote:
One of the major problems with the COG is that the top leadership cannot push change without presenting that change to the GA. In my opinion the GA elects them and they should be able to lead in areas where change is needed. Even at the GA they cannot get up and speak their opinions on an agenda item and push for that item to be implemented. Letting an important item come back again is their only way that they can hope to get needed change for the organization.

Most of the top leaders in the COG are highly educated with theology degrees where most of the OB's voting at the GA have no degrees. If the elect of the COG feel that women should be OB, in my opinion other OB's should pay attention.

COG leaders remind me of Joe Biden. Why are they needed if no one is paying attention to them?


Did you really just play the higher education AND the leader's know best cards, together???

Why not just scrap the assembly then and only let men with theology degrees serve as top leaders and issue opinions and rulings to the COG instead? Let them be a magisterium?

In fact, why not just let the GO speak infallibly ex cathedra?
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay."
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
1/18/14 5:29 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Reply with quote
Post Bro Bob
One thing I observed from my recent study of the book of Job...

In Job 38:1 God ceases to be silent. Elihu has been on a long ramble and God just interrupts. The same God that bragged to Satan about Job comes into the discussion at last. And what, pray tell, did he have to say?

He dresses Job down royally. "Who is this that darkens counsel by words without knowledge?" He literally begins His own rant and it goes for a while. The summation is this: Unfair? You think I am unfair? If you get to judge God as unfair, then you are higher than He is.

Folks, He has no record of sharing his authority gladly.

Outside the church, it happens. How can God make me the way I am and then send me to hell because of it? How is it wrong that I love another person? Do Not JUDGE me! Don't tell me what God says, I am more moral than your God!

And inside the church it happens. Surely God understands that my wife and I are actually incompatible. And we understand it. In fact, we have both prayed and God has given each of us a more suitable replacement.

And these rules about the traditional roles of men and women. That was a different day, a different time. They were not as enlightened as we are today. Surely God would not only approve, but would expect us to behave differently as our knowledge has increased!

I am telling you, helping God out by changing his clear instructions is not helping God out and He doesn't need it, nor does He appreciate it.

If He were to show up at the General Assembly, step right out of a whirlwind, it would sound a whole lot like Job 38. If y'all are so brilliant, perhaps you can tell me where YOU were when the Angels rejoiced as I made everything there is!

'Husband of one wife' somehow has come to mean two is OK, and with special permission, we might work in the third one. Did this pass at the first Assembly it was brought up at? Now that it has passed, does it ever come up for reconsideration? Well it was wrong then and it is still wrong. If we are going to bring something back up, let's bring that one back up.

If this is what General Assemblies are for, (since at the local level they don't even know it is happening or that there ARE MINUTES, much less abide by them,) then why don't we just stop having assemblies?

We all know you are going to do it. Just take a cue from Reed and Pelosi, go into a back room someplace and just do it. Being a Christian shouldn't be so cotton-pickin' embarrassing to you. I get it.

edit: Even while I was typing, changeagent was actually proposing it. Give us a King... everybody else has a King, we demand a KING. I fight a losing battle. But fight it I will.
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3945
1/18/14 5:46 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Change Agent
Bro Bob stated:

"edit: Even while I was typing, changeagent was actually proposing it. Give us a King... everybody else has a King, we demand a KING. I fight a losing battle. But fight it I will."

Bro Bob, If we are going to elect Kings, lets at least give them a little power and authority and the right to speak their piece. As far as I am concerned we can do away with the Kings if they are serving no purpose and carry no weight.

If the Kings can get elected by political means you need to let them do a little politicing while they are in office.
Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
1/18/14 6:00 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post caveator
Change Agent wrote:
Even at the GA they cannot get up and speak their opinions on an agenda item and push for that item to be implemented.


That is not accurate. According to Robert's Rules of Order, every member of the ordained council, except the moderator, is able to speak to the motion.
Acts-celerater
Posts: 586
1/18/14 6:05 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Bro Bob
You are not following me changeagent. They are not Kings, they are servant leaders.

The highest governing body in the Church of God is its members in General Assembly. The governing body in the local church is ITS members in conference.

You know why that is? Because that is who will be held to account by almighty God. Each member. Not one person will be able to stand before him and excuse himself by saying the overseer or the pastor told me to. Not one.

(And caveator is correct as well. If the chair wants to speak for or against, he must yield the chair to someone else. Every other member of the body has a right to be heard.)
Golf Cart Mafia Underboss
Posts: 3945
1/18/14 6:38 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post DHDRabbi
caveator wrote:
Change Agent wrote:
Even at the GA they cannot get up and speak their opinions on an agenda item and push for that item to be implemented.


That is not accurate. According to Robert's Rules of Order, every member of the ordained council, except the moderator, is able to speak to the motion.


And the moderator can step down from his (one day, her) position and discuss it. I felt that that SHOULD have been done last time when the GO was asked his opinion as the leader of the COG and he didn't do it. The leader should speak their opinion on all matters. BTW, I have no idea which side the GO was on and it doesn't matter. The leader should lead.


Last edited by DHDRabbi on 1/18/14 8:12 pm; edited 1 time in total
[Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13684
1/18/14 6:53 pm


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Changeagent.... Aaron Scott
Quote:
One of the major problems with the COG is that the top leadership cannot push change without presenting that change to the GA. In my opinion the GA elects them and they should be able to lead in areas where change is needed. Even at the GA they cannot get up and speak their opinions on an agenda item and push for that item to be implemented. Letting an important item come back again is their only way that they can hope to get needed change for the organization.

First, as good as the men in leadership are, they are there mainly because of name recognition. They were not elected because they are superior to all the mental firepower in the Church of God (though I would think that Mark Williams would definitely be on the leading edge there, too). We elect the men we've heard of. We might not know a thing about them, might not so much have even shaken their hand, yet because we've heard that name before, we vote for them. Fair enough. After all, that's about all we have to go on. But that doesn't in and of itself guarantee that their decisions are correct.

Moreover, I quick look at some other denominations will show, over and over, that the leadership of churches (and unions, for that matter) is often far more liberal than the masses. Thus, you have churches advocating, say, gay marriage, and in doing so, breaking their denomination in pieces.

I believe we have men of God serving. I truly do. But a theology degree means absolutely ZILCH to me when it comes to leading the church. It is the Word of God--period--that matters. It is when something is more important than the Word--say, current cultural trends--that churches stray.






Most of the top leaders in the COG are highly educated with theology degrees where most of the OB's voting at the GA have no degrees. If the elect of the COG feel that women should be OB, in my opinion other OB's should pay attention.

Education schmeducation. I have plenty of it--and so do many others on this board. What I need is WISDOM. More than that, we must have the wisdom that descends from above.

If you were correct, then we need to simply go over to Lee University and the Seminary, look up the men with the most education, and let them lead the church.

Education is great in that it exposes you to many different perspectives. Education is dangerous in that it exposes you to many different perspectives. At some point, you can come to think that your beliefs are no better than any one else's--perhaps even inferior. It can cause you to accept what once you would have rejected. That can be a good thing. That can be a deadly thing.

Which brings us back to wisdom.




COG leaders remind me of Joe Biden. Why are they needed if no one is paying attention to them?

Finally, it comes down to this: the General Assembly IS the leadership of the Church of God. That's why it has the final yea and nay.

Now, if we want to go back to AJT times, I'm all for it, so long as it's God's man. But if we are going to play at democracy, then we need to abide by the rules.











Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 6027
1/18/14 8:03 pm


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Reply with quote
Post What does the Word of God say. 4golf
Women were prophetess and teachers. They were not Apostles! They were not Pastors of Churchs! To say it is ok to ordain women is against scripture to be able to Pastor churchs is against the Word of God. Does it say in the pastor Epistles a wife of one husband? No! The Word of God says that a women is to be over man. Some people need to learn to read the Word of God! The scripture stands for it self.If you are a child of God He commands, yes, commands us to follow the Word to the tee!
_________________
Ronnie Lingerfelt A/K/A 4 golf.
Bound By Beaulah
Posts: 1003
1/18/14 8:13 pm


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Ordination of women Link
[quote="PoimenNow, if you are asking if women should be bishops, or serve in headship/oversight roles, that is a different matter.[/quote]

Why call it 'ordination' if they aren't being 'ordained' for something the Bible uses 'ordained' for?

I know about ordaining elders in every church. Is there some other ministry role for which women were ordained?

I see a good strong case for women deacons. For the role of overseer (Biblically speaking) in the local church, the Bible specifies that the overseer is to be an 'aner'-- a man. A woman is not an 'aner.' Sorry, surgical enhancement doesn't cut it.
_________________
Link
Acts-perienced Poster
Posts: 11846
1/19/14 4:18 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Re: Ordination of women Poimen
Link wrote:
[quote="PoimenNow, if you are asking if women should be bishops, or serve in headship/oversight roles, that is a different matter.


Why call it 'ordination' if they aren't being 'ordained' for something the Bible uses 'ordained' for?

I know about ordaining elders in every church. Is there some other ministry role for which women were ordained?

I see a good strong case for women deacons. For the role of overseer (Biblically speaking) in the local church, the Bible specifies that the overseer is to be an 'aner'-- a man. A woman is not an 'aner.' Sorry, surgical enhancement doesn't cut it.[/quote]

I'm simply pointing out that various terms are used to speak of ministers being "set or placed" in their ministries -- such as ordained, appointed, authorized, sent, etc.
_________________
Poimen
Bro. Christopher

Singing: "Let us then be true and faithful -- trusting, serving, everyday. Just one glimpse of Him in glory will the toils of life repay."
Hon. Dr. in Acts-celeratology
Posts: 5657
1/19/14 5:08 am


View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address Yahoo Messenger MSN Messenger
Reply with quote
Post DHDRabbi
I'm sure that all the men will debate it and come up with some solution that will suit them. Some will even go to the "Word of God" and say it's a simple solution but it's not because the "Word of God" also says for the women to remain silent in church and wait until they get home to ask their husband if they have a question. So, which "Word of God" are you gonna go by? I know, the few scriptures that suit you. Have fun debating! [Insert Acts Pun Here]
Posts: 13684
1/19/14 7:07 am


View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Reply with quote
Post Change Agent
I stand corrected about members in leadership being able to speak into issues in the GA. The ones that I have attended or the ones I have viewed online, not one of them spoke for or against an issue. If leaders are going to keep sending the women OB issue back again and again they should get up and state why. Also I think the leaders as a group should have items that they bring up at the GA in order to get needed change in the COG organization. Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
1/19/14 10:03 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Post Aaron Scott Change Agent
Maybe we need to stop electing these liberal educated leaders to the GO & EC positions and start electing uneducated conservative Good Old Boys that can represent us other Good Old Boys well. We could even do away with women being ordained with leaders with the right view of scripture. Laughing Acts Enthusiast
Posts: 1449
1/19/14 10:10 am


View user's profile Send private message
Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:   
Actscelerate.com Forum Index -> Feature Presentations This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.   This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Acts-celerate Terms of Use | Acts-celerate Policy
Contact the Administrator.


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group :: Spelling by SpellingCow.