I was reading a article on the shaking of Adventism and it seems there are more than one issue or event which will cause many to leave the Adventist church. Here is what was said in the article...

"Is the Seventh-day Adventist Church being "shaken up" by a crisis of "identity and authority," as an article in.. Christianity Today seems to assert?

The "Shaking Up of Adventism," writer Ed Plowman, a Christianity Today editor, explains, involves "recent developments that are plunging the Seventh-day Adventist Church into a serious crisis of identity and authority." ...

Also in ferment, the Christianity Today editor suggests, are "the issues of authority and ecclesiology," issues, our readers will be aware, that are making headlines in churches ranging from Roman Catholic through evangelical to Mormon. ...

Even the assertion that early in Seventh-day Adventist history "many of the church's members placed Mrs. White's teachings on a level equal with Scripture, and they tended to require the Bible to square with her views, a practice that persists among some Adventists today" hardly seems likely to register an upheaval of earthquake proportions on an ecclesiastical Richter scale. Ellen White herself, as most Adventists can document by a quick trip to their bookcase, ever pointed church members to the Bible for their authority and teaching (as Plowman also notes).

More worthy of concern is the article's identification of the current situation as a continuing plea "for the church to repent and to embrace Christ's finished work on the cross"—....

Certainly one could document the church's belief in the "finished work of Christ on the cross" throughout its history. Two recent sources would be Questions on Doctrine, a 1957 book that deals comprehensively with issues raised by a group of evangelical scholars who studied Adventist concepts at some depth, and Dr. L. E. Froom's monumental work, The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers (1954).

Nevertheless, Plowman quotes from the book The Shaking of Adventism (with its self-evident contribution to his article) as concluding that it is this truth—the finished work of Christ on the cross—that is shaking Seventh-day Adventism "right down to its foundation."

Interesting to say the least, especially when it is not Womens Ordination but Desmond Ford who is the focus of the writer...

https://www.ministrymagazine.org/archive/1980/05/the-shaking-up-of-adventism

I do believe WOPE and other issues will prepare God's people for the shaking, but, I personally believe that the Sabbath will be the issue that will separate the wheat from the tares.

Now you can see the separation in the comparison of , "two soap bubbles with minimal connection" in this article in Adventist Today...

http://atoday.org/womens-ordination-in-adventism-unity-vs-culture.html

It seems like Black African and Black Caribbean Adventists are the moral strength of the SDA Church right now.

That is for those in Babylon when the National Sunday laws come, not those in the church. We have the rejection of the SOP, the IJ, and many other issues that are happening now, we need to be spiritually aware...

Well, even though they consider the island my family comes from to have been populated by black slaves, most are British descendants and like me can be called fair skinned white for all intents and purposes. So there are many demographics from the islands who believe in the solid pillars of Adventism, but that includes most Latins too as they tend to have been converted from conservative Catholic backgrounds which carries over.


"Roatan?s Permanent Settlers
It wasn?t until 1797, when English soldiers relocated 3,000 black Carib-African Indians from St. Vincent to Roatan, that the Bay Islands received the first permanent settlers.

Today, the descendants of these early settlers are known as the Gar?funa, and while most of the original Gar?funa resettled in the mainland town of Trujillo, Roatan?s town of Punta Gorda remains the first home of the Garifuna.

In 1830, immigrants and freed black slaves arrived from the Cayman Islands. They first arrived in Utila and eventually spread to the other Bay Islands.

Today, the descendants of these immigrants consider themselves the original islanders and speak a unique version of Caribbean English, which is still predominately spoken."
https://www.roatanlife.com/history-of-roatan/

Yes, Seventh-day Adventist Church is being shaken by crisis of identity and authority, but it's not about which human has authority and what humans think of as "identity".

The shaking is about Who do we place as our authority? Is it our Creator God, Law Giver, and Savior? is He the authority of our lives? Is He the One we follow where ever He leads?
And what is our identity as a church, is it the one given us by God as to why He raised us up as the church to "prophesy again before many peoples, and nations, and tongues, and kings", with the last message of Revelation 14.

It's Satan's scheme to cause friction and division when humans fight over which human's have the authority to subjugate other human beings, and it is he that brings in conflicts that really have nothing to do with the last great message of the three angels.
He loves to get the church all riled up over interpretations that really are NOT the last test at all, but a strong emotional tangle that gets people's minds off the real issues and the real message.

Culture does play a large part in understanding why certain things are written, and we need to dig for the principle why it was written, not get all dogmatic about absolute literal application in all conditions.
How much in the Bible do we say was given by God to make life easier, a little more bearable, under obsessive cultural conditions, yet we know those cultural conditions were not God's plan for mankind's existence. Yet people think God was condoning those cultural conditions -- slavery, polygamy, concubines, divorce, kidnapping young women as war trophies, forcing them to be wives and concubines, etc., because there are Biblical rules as to how to do these things.

In a culture where Israelite men had morning prayers thanking God they weren't born a woman, or a slave, it probably would have raised eyebrows and turned away all those Israelite men had women been given prominent speaking positions in church. So, for the sake of the gospel, it was the better part of wisdom not to let them have speaking positions in church.

Adventists, in contact with Baptists, will often face condemnation for following a "woman", whom Adventists allowed to preach and tell men how to run the church. That is a "proof" for a Baptist that we are not a true Biblical church. We, on the other hand, back peddle on our stand against giving women church authority, and say, she was a prophet therefore she was allowed to preach and teach and exercise a certain amount of authority over men. The Baptist simply says, she was a woman, and if you believe the Bible then you know she was not supposed to be teaching men or preaching.

How do you (those who think WO constitutes the shaking) know for sure, that God did not send women prophets to break through the age old culture that women must be held in subjection and cannot be leaders or exercise any authority in God's church? Are you so sure it wasn't God nudging His church to support true Christian women to take hold of responsible spiritual leadership?
Now it's true, EGW never received ordination from men, but she did claim to be ordained by God Himself, which is a higher ordination than what men can offer. Thus she was ordained.

So do you (those who think WO constitutes the shaking) know for sure this is so against God's will that it will shake people out of the church and cause them to be lost?
Well -- it may cause those who get so angry at the church for ordaining women that they will leave. But that wasn't the test, they had set up a false test and let it take them out of the church.

Why are people so ready to make this the deciding test of the last days?
Why would they think this is the message of the "true witness" that will cause the shaking?
No, it's not the deciding test.
The the straight testimony called forth by the counsel of the True Witness is the message to the Laodiceans, it includes a lack of faith, a self sufficient attitude, a "we are doing just fine, we don't need anything more" attitude, and is all based on a huge lack of personal relationship with Christ and His transforming power.

It's not about WO.

There are good, Christian women leading people to Christ,
and there are deceived women seeking praise and not modeling true Christian womanhood.
There are good Christian men leading people to Christ,
There are also deceived men, self sufficient, seeking authority and not modeling true Christian manhood.

The test is Who are they serving when they stand before the people? To Whom are they leading the people? Are they leading them to themselves, or to Christ? Who is the authority of their lives?
There are countries, like China, where it is the women who have kept the church alive, a very high percentage of pastors are women over there, and they have led many to Christ.
There are countries, like black Africa, where the culture fought for polygamy, child marriage, etc. things are changing there with women getting more privileges, but the old culture is still there as well.
Are we so sure, those from that culture are motivated to vote against WO on moral principles or on centuries of ingrained cultural principles?



Since many leaders (which at present are mainly men) will leave the church when persecution strikes, and God will raise many humble ones who have dedicated themselves to Him, to take the church through to the end, (See 5T 80) are you sure some of those won't be women?

God chooses whom He will. Why limit God?

Our duty is to submit ourselves to Him, and be ready to "go" where ever He leads, and be His witnesses, whether you are a man or a woman.

Women's Ordination is not mentioned as part of the 2025 agenda at the General Conference.
The information on the links in posts above come from 2015.

Wilson told delegates at the 2015 General Conference session in San Antonio, Texas, that the vote simply barred the church?s world divisions from making decisions on the ordination of women.
Furthermore, he said, the vote was not related to commissioned ministers, who can be male or female under the church?s policy. (ANN News)

God is looking for people who are teachable; not people who know it all.

Too many who oppose women's ordination have an attitude that they are the ones faithfully following the Bible; while those who are for women's ordination are people who are purposely not following the Bible.

Now, there are Biblical minimalists who don't care what the Bible says. Those who oppose women't ordination are willing to quote these people to argue "See, we are the true Bible followers, those who support women's ordination don't care about the Bible."

Yet, it is not ONLY the Biblical minimalists who support women's ordination. There are those of us who are commited to the Lord, and love the Bible, and believe in submitting to the Bible who understand the Bible to teach women's ordination. That those who oppose women's ordination are filtering the words of the Bible through the eyes of tradition and read tradition into the text. There is evidence that the "proof texts" in opposition to women's ordination should be understood in different ways. than the traditions that those opposed to women's ordination read into the texts.

Many of those who oppose women's ordination put God into a higharchy. While these fits well with the ideas of Islam, and Calvinism and other Augustinians, and churches strongly affected by their thought, Seventh-day Adventism teaches that God's law is self sacrificing love. Self renousning love. This is broken down into the two great principles of loving God supremely and our neighbors as ourselves*. How this is done is expanded into the 10 commandments. Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heshel points out that the Exodus 20 version of the 10 commandments, especially in the Hebrew, breaks into three equal thirds. This really caught my attention as a Seventh-day Adventist as Mrs. White's philosophy is very focused on the number 3. The three aspects of the trinity. The three deceptions of Satan, one towards each member of the Godhead, and how these are reflected all through the Bible and her writings, and fully answered in the three angel's message. Looking at the three thirds of the presentation of the commandments in Exodus 20, we find the first third consists of three commands on how to love God supremely, and is a reflection of the role of God the Father. The last third consists of six commands on how to love our neighbor as ourselves. This also reflects the role of the Holy Sprit into changing us into loving and lovable people. The middle third, the very heart of the 10 commandments ties the two ideas together in only ONE command, the one that says that the only way we can love God supremely and our neighbors as ourselves in through resting in a relationship with this wonderful God. This command is the Sabbath command, which is also a reflection of the role of God the Son. After this we find different everyday applications, and while too many people have driven themselves crazy in trying to keep all of these, we see in them a principle that while the law of God is abolute, these applications are not absolute.

*God's law is based on a oneness of mutual submission and equality. To God the neighbors are the other members of the trinity. However, we have too many people who want to have God the Father as being exempt from this everlasting law of self renousing love. That everyone else must submit to each other, except to God the Father who everyone simply submits to. God is God, we are creatures, so all creatures would naturally submit to God. But among the trinity, we find mutual submission to each other. Yet, too many make, according to Mrs. Whtie and Adventism's understanding of the law, God the Father a law breaker. Doesn't this make God the Father a sinner? Yet, many of those who oppose women's ordination starts out with this picture of God the Father, and that makes me very uncomfortable. Again, it makes sense under the thought form of Islam, Augustine, including Calvinism. But I do not see how it can fit the thought form of Mrs. White and Seventh-day Adventism's understanding of the nature and purputuity of God's law, and how this law reflects God's character, and how the three members of the trinity keep God's law, and live out their character, who they are, thought mutual submission to each other.

Genesis 3:15 and 16 contain the gospel. The whole section includes all the elements of the 3 angel's message (The creator God is in judgment, the serpent, the power behind Babylon is fallen...) In Genesis 3: 15 and 16 we have the story of "HE" Genesis 3:15 is how "HE" relates to Satan and the lost. In Genesis 3:16 we find the history of the world. Due to carrying children for about 9 months, the woman tends to have a connection to her children that others tend not to have. Both enjoying their joys more, and feeling their pain more. And living in a sinful world, there would most likely be more pain. Women could avoid the pain by not having a family, but the desire for the husband,the desire for the family will cause this cycle of pain to continue. The hope for this dysfunctional family is for the family: the children, the woman and her husband to allow "HE" to rule over them. Jacques Dukhan points out that in the Hebrew poetry structure, that the "HE" in Genesis 3:16 is the exact same "HE" as Genesis 3:15. Right there at the very start of the sin problem, the promised seed is not some pie in the sky in the sweet by and by, someday far in the future, hopefully. But "HE" is already there. Right from the very start the only hope for this dysfunctional family is to choose to allow "HE" to rule them. Our problems come from replacing the true "HE" from the poetic structure into someother "he" or a "she" or a "me".

People on both sides need to respect that we are Seventh-day Adventists who love the Lord, and who are trying to follow the Bible to the best of our understanding; and to be willing to study to add to our understanding.

God set man how He did for a reason, we may not grasp it all, but may have to wait till we see Him to ask the reasons.