At 35:04 a WO proponent rudely interrupts the president of the World Church asking him to shut up and take his seat. These people have no respect for leadership and those in authority.
see the rude interruption as 35:04
Christ like? WO proponents are those who want to lead?
They want power for power's stake. It has nothing to do with Jesus.
Christ's mission was about self sacrifice. WO is about self promoting. that would tell us where it come from.
There are enough supporters of WO who do and will categorically and uncompromisingly object to any disrespect showed to the GC president for whatever reason.
ZJ what is the goal of ordination. John the Baptist was an outcast of the establishment of his day and he was declared THE prophet by Jesus for that time. We claim EGW as the prophet for our time who meets all the 12 requirement for a prophet. Were either ordained and does it matter? Who is doing the work (self supporting ministries thats who) and who is giving Interpretive Gymnastics on Bible?
Hey Raymond are you sure you gave us the right link.
I saw no rude interruption. And it seems none of them saw one either. Also the woman did not say "shut up and take your seat", so the Original post is a bit misleading.
view the entire video
I did. Here is what the said in the "interruption".
"Point of Order. We have a lot on the agenda. We have to stick to. We'd like to get to our business."
It was then mentioned that "A point of order according to the General Conference rules of order by which we operate thus allow for interrupting a speaker."
So it wasn't a "rude" interruption, but a legitimate one. Even Ted Wilson said he respects her point of order.
Now for the record I am not pro WO. But I believe in being fair and truthful. The woman did not act in a rude manner. Nor did she tell Ted Wilson to "Shut up" or to "take his seat".
anyone can see this was rude: she interrupts the President of the world's Church... these were not her exact words but the same meaning
I disagree. She used a legitimate Point of Order that is part of the way business was conducted. Now you can say you didn't like her agenda, but it's not rude as it is a legitimate point of order.
Second of all, those words do not have the same meaning. That may be what you thought she meant to say, but it is in no way what she said. Ted Wilson pointed out that he asked for permission to talk about the topic, which means Ted realizes that her point about time and agendas was a legitimate one.
Again we can say that we don't like her agenda, or that she interrupted a topic that we felt was correct, or that she shouldn't have interrupted the leader of the world church. But let's not put words into her mouth that she never uttered.