Memory, Meaning & Faith

The Creation Order for Man-Woman Relationships: Genesis 1-2

By Richard M. Davidson

Genesis 1-2 constitutes the foundational biblical passage both for those who support and those who oppose women’s ordination. Does this passage uphold God’s ideal of the full equality of men and women, both in value before God and in egalitarian (non-hierarchical) male-female interrelationships, as those who support women’s ordination claim? Or does this passage present a creation order of ontological equality (in value before God) but of functional hierarchy (different roles involving female submission to male headship), as opponents of women’s ordination insist? In this blog, distilling some 30 years of personal research on this passage, I argue that Genesis 1-2 presents Adam and Eve not only as equal in worth before God (ontologically), but as equal partners without hierarchy (functionally).[1]

A.  Genesis 1 teaches us that male and female participate equally in the image of God, both ontologically and functionally.  “So God created man [Heb. ha’adam ‘humankind’] in His own image, in the image of God created he Him; male and female created He them” (Gen 1:27).

This foundational passage (and its surrounding context) gives no hint of a divine creation hierarchical order in the relation of man and woman. Here man and woman are fully equal, with no subordination of one to the other. Both man and woman together are blessed and given the mandate to be fruitful, multiply, and subdue the earth; both together are given dominion over the earth, not the man dominion over the woman (Gen 1:28).

Women’s Ordination and the Concept of Present Truth

By David Penno

The concept of present truth is a key part of Seventh-day Adventist theology. Our belief is that God continually reveals new light and understanding as we act on truth that we already understand. So in the 1830s and 1840s the Millerite movement built on the truths that were established in the Reformation and increased the understanding and knowledge of God’s will as revealed in the Bible.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church was born of a group of Millerites who continued to study and think and pray, and received “new light” on issues such as the Sabbath, the state of the dead, etc. Even though Uriah Smith and others did not believe in the full divinity of Christ, continued study and dialogue in the church, and the influence of Ellen White in books such as the Desire of Ages, we came to the point where the church officially accepted this understanding.

There have been times when the church reversed its teaching in a certain area, as new understanding became clearer. The eating of pork and unclean food is just one example of this change in thinking and practice.

The Principle of Present Truth

Today, the attempt to defend historic Adventism is often practiced improperly. The idea that what Adventists believed and practiced a hundred and fifty years ago is exactly what we should believe and practice today is actually a denial of the concept of present truth. Our pioneers were driven by the idea that there is more to learn, that our living out of the Word of God is in constant development and improvement.

A Short History of Ordination (Part II)

By Darius Jankiewicz

In the Part I, I explored the origin of the word “ordination” and how its pagan undertones began to influence Christian thinking on ministry during the second century of the Christian era. Most importantly, I noted that already by the second part of the second century it is possible to detect growing clericalization of the Church (i.e., separation between clergy and laity), something not present among the early New Testament Christians.[1] At the same time, the Christian minister became a priest.[2] Ironically, this understanding of Christian ministry arose from a sincere desire to protect the church from heresies and guard its unity. In the end, notes historian Pierre Gy, Christian pastors assumed the role of the ancient Roman ordo senatorum.[3] Other developments followed during the third century.

Hippolytus (ca. 170‒ca. 235 AD) and Apostolic Tradition

While no Christian thinker from the first or second century mentions the ministerial laying-on-of-hands ceremony, it is reasonable to assume that Christians practiced the rite during the second century.[4] The first complete description of the Christian ceremony of ordination appears at the beginning of the third century and is found in the Apostolic Tradition, a work attributed to Hippolytus of Rome.[5] In this work, we find a detailed description of early Christian ordinations, complete with a detailed theology of ministry and the liturgy to be followed in the ordination service.[6]

All three orders of ministry— bishop, elder, and deacon—had their own ordination services through the laying-on-of-hands and a separate set of prayers; each order of ministry now required a higher order to place hands upon the lower order.[7] This is probably the root of the common Christian practice, both Catholic and Protestant, of only ordained clergy ordaining candidates for ministry

Junia the Apostle

By Nancy Vyhmeister

  “Greet Andronicus and Junia, my countrymen and my fellow prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me.” (Romans 16:8 NKJV)

The Name: Junia

The name of this woman, Junia, appears only once in the New Testament, in a list of friends and co-workers in Rome, to whom Paul sent greetings in Romans 16. Through the years, questions have been raised about her identity, especially her gender since original Greek manuscripts did not distinguish between the similar masculine and feminine forms of the name.  This essay will review some of the evidence found in ancient manuscripts and writings of the early Church fathers.

The Name in Antiquity 

 Junia was a commonly used female Roman name, meaning “youthful.” It derived from the goddess Juno and appears more than 250 times in Rome alone in records of the first century. The name also appears in inscriptions in Ephesus, Didyma, Lydia, Troas and Bythinia.  Were the name masculine, it should have been Junias in Greek or Junius in Latin. The masculine name Junius is well attested. According to Linda Belleville, there is, however, no attestation for the spelling Junias in any “inscription, letterhead, piece of writing, epitaph or literary work of the New Testament period.”[i]