Day of Atonement

George MacDonald describes this white stone as that “which expresses the character, the nature, the being, and the meaning of the person who bears it. It is the man’s own symbol, his soul’s picture, in a word, the sign which belongs to him and to no one else.” It is given by God and reveals “his own idea of the man, that being whom he had in his thought when he began to make the child,

All men have a common God. In Acts 17:28 Paul says that “in Him we live and move and have our being.” If this is really true, then all men experience God. She is within us, holds us together, and speaks to us. I think this is rather inclusive. I have talked to people that didn’t believe in Jesus, but we could still agree on this this phenomena called conscience. 

As if that weren’t enough, Paul goes further in Romans 1:20, saying that “since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.” 

In the common experience of nature and conscience we can experience and worship God

The power of Satan is best represented in this world by his system of reward and punishment. In this ranking system, addressed by Jesus in Mark 10:42, you are (seemingly) fine until you break the rules, and then your punishment always embodies the threat or act of violence (an act offensive to God).

Hierarchy originated in this Jekyll and Hyde system of contrasted good and evil, where value and freedom depend on one’s success at dominating others or on whether one is naughty or nice (by the arbitrary standard of those in power).

God abhors Satan’s divided hierarchical system because it is totally antithetical to His undivided government of indiscriminate, unconditional, and self-sacrificing (agape) love. God always treats His creatures the same whether they are good or bad.

The pastor raises his Bible and reminds you for the thousandth time that moral maturity means you must stand by a plain “thus saith the Lord.”

Similar cries and pleas inundate you from all sides:

“Hold the standard high!”

“Stand by the old waymarks!”

“We need to define our doctrines more clearly.”

“Cry aloud and spare not!”

These cries seem foreign to your ears and even a bit confusing. What “thus” is the Lord saying to His people? What should you cry aloud, and whom should you not spare?

How do you define morality, and why do you need to?

Timothy R. Jennings brings significantly more understanding to these quandaries with his seven levels of moral development. He clearly explains how our level of moral development is a marker of our maturity in Christ and

There was time, not long ago, when I unreservedly advocated the new headship theology in the Seventh-day Adventist church and apposed women’s ordination. That time is past. It is hard to lay aside bias and see with new eyes, but in this case it has been worth it one hundred times over!

I’ve Been On Both Sides of Women’s Ordination Now

I understand headship theology from both sides now, and have come to the place where my position against it isn’t just arguably true for me, but true beyond all argument. The theory is an attack on the very heart of God’s love and character and is repulsive to me.

The Evidence Is Overwhelming

I believe that the weight of evidence against headship theology is so broad as to be overwhelming. It

I was listening to an Anchors of Truth sermon by Lee Venden, and I was shocked as I realized that many of our leaders in Adventism are making a serious mistake. Lee quoted Ellen White in Early Writings:

“I was shown that it [the shaking] would be caused by the straight testimony called forth by the counsel of the true Witness to the Laodiceans.”

Then Lee went on to say:

“The counsel of the true witness is shown to be Jesus working in us through a close relationship with Him [represented in Revelation 3 as gold, white raiment, and eye salve]. The interesting part of this is that the shaking is not brought on by rebuke or raising standards, but by the counsel of the true witness. This is other way of saying

I recently read an article that contains the only reasonable solution I have seen to the problem before the Seventh Day Adventist church concerning women’s ordination. I am convinced that even though we disagree sharply the church will not split. We will only hammer out a better policy just as the early church did with circumcision.

Force Is Not the Answer

Even though a vote on a non-fundamental issue like this should not even be before the General Conference, I think it will help us to face our differences and live with them in peace. As Christians we should not force each other on issues like this. That is the outworking of a spirit of another type. God’s Spirit never coerces.

The truth is that we cannot define biblical ordination

“He drew a circle that shut me out-
Heretic, rebel, a thing to flout.
But love and I had the wit to win:
We drew a circle and took him In!”
– Edwin Markam, from his poem Outwitted

For years Seventh Day Adventists have debated whether women should or should not be ordained. However, somewhere in the discussion, we have overlooked some key realities regarding this issue, realities that should bring us together regardless of our polarized positions. What follows will underscore these.

A Matter of Semantics

The decision before the SDA church on women’s ordination is operational and ecclesiastical. Our modern system of “ordination” bears little resemblance to the biblical practice (see Ty Gibson’s article on this, linked in the next quote).

“Many well-meaning, modern Seventh-day Adventists assume